Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
BATCH - Supplemental - 0010 Dorset Street
south'' is PLANNING & ZONING July 30, 2018 VIA EMAIL Jory Curran Greer Family, LLC 81 Maple Leaf Farm Road Underhill, VT 05489 Re: New Tenant — Total Fitness Equipment — 10 Dorset Street Dear Ms. Curran: This is in response to your letter of 07/27/18 requesting approval under your umbrella permit for a new tenant, Total Fitness Equipment; as a new tenant at 10 Dorset Street. It is my understanding that this new tenant is retail use and would be occupy 4,488 sq. ft. which was previously used also for a retail use (Needleman's Bridal). Since this tenant change does not result in a change in use, a zoning permit is not required and the new tenant is approved. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincere ,? r i R nd J. Bel Administrative Officer 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com July 27, 2018 City of South Burlington Planning and Zoning Mr. Ray Belair Dear Ray Belair, I am requesting a change in tenant for our building at 8 Dorset Street. Total Fitness Equipment would like to lease 4488sf, they are a retail store selling home and business fitness equipment. This space of 4488sf would remain a retail space as the previous tenant was Needleman's Bridal. The 4488sf is located in the northwest portion of the building. Sincerely, Jory Curran November 16, 2017 Aaron Martin P.E. Public Works Department Town of Essex 81 Main Street Essex Jct., VT 05452 RE: 6A Susie Wilson Road Trip generation data Dear Aaron, We are writing on behalf of VT Pool and Bar regarding the existing and proposed trip generation for the two existing buildings located at 6A Susie Wilson Road. This site was previously approved for an indoor roller skating rink and go kart track in Building A, and an indoor climbing wall in Building B. The weekday trip generation estimatesfor this project, taken from a letter from our office dated April 20, 2013, are summarized below. Approved Weekday PM Peak Hour Trip Generation (vte/hr) Climbing Roller ; Go kart ""Wall Skating Track Total Enter 32 ` 4 6 42 Exit 16 5 11 32 Total " 48 9 17 74 The roller skating use has ceased operations. VT Pool and Bar proposes to occupy 8,000 SF of space in Building A, a portion of the space previously occupied by the roller skating use. VT Pool and Bar is a pool hall, with other gaming (darts, Ming pong) and a bar, presently located at 55 San Remo Drive in South Burlington. Their lease is expiring, and they desire to relocate to this site. Since there is no corresponding land use category in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, their trip generation was determined from a count performed by this office on Tuesday, November 14, 2017 from 4 — 6 pm at their existing South Burlington location. The current location was observed to generate 6 pm peak hour trips. This observed trip generation was factored proportionally to reflect the increase from their current space of 5,500 sf to the proposed 8,000 sf occupancy at 6A Susie Wilson Road. The resulting estimated PM peak hour trip generation for VT Pool and Bar, based upon 8,000 sf, is 9 trips. Aaron Martin, P.E. November 16, 2017 Page 2 The trip generation for the current uses (go karts and climbing wall) at 6A Susie Wilson Road were also counted in order to estimate the proposed total PM trips with the addition of VT Pool and Bar. This count was performed by this office on Wednesday, November 15, 2017 from 3 — 6 pm. The proposed pm peak hour trip generation for 6A Susie Wilson Road based upon the existing climbing wall and go kart uses, plus the proposed VT Pool and Bar use, is summarized below: Use Peak Hour Peak Hour Trips (vte/hr) Enter Exit Total VT Pool and Bar 5:00 — 6:00 pm 9 0 9 Climbing Wall & Go Karts 5:00 — 6:00 pm 43 25 68 Total 52 25 77 With the addition of the VT Pool and Bar use, the total trip generation for the site will be within 4% of the previously approved total. However, 1?,000 SF in wilding A remains unoccupied, with no tenant or use currently identified for this space. The additional trip generation associated with the 17,000 SF of unoccupied space will need to be identified in the future, Tong With any corresponding traffic analyses based upon the new total trip generation for the project. Enclosed are the detailed count results for each day. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. , Sincerely, Roger Dickinson, PE, PTOE c: Jeff Santoro AI Senecal P \2017\17089 Vr Pool & Bar\Traffic\Martin 11-16-17 doc /'� . ' ` . / ��. -~~- '`~/. ` ' �� ' /' / ' /7� // -�� '' ' � � '~ r , ��'n/ . /` , +°- ' ' /,^` ' ' ~' � /` . ~- ) _� ` / � ' `/ / ' � �'_-_�-�� -_ - ' � '� � � ^ ^� ' � / � / /' ' '`` - . � r �-�� ` /. / `-�� ^ !/ \ // ( / O` ' , `/ ' ~ � /^ / /. ' ` � /'� // / ^ -_ � ' ''` ' (7 /^ � ' � �-- � / ` ` � . /'� �'' ` _ � / /*�/ / /- »"/ ,/ ` �/ � CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN Former Greer's House of Dry Cleaning 8-10 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont SMS Site # 2005-3395 Prepared for: Greer Family, LLC c/o Ms. Jory Curran 81 Maple Leaf Farm Road Underhill, Vermont (802) 363-3344 December 23, 2009 Prepared by: John R. iego Senior Associate J&t�— Affirmed by: Frank Getchell, T3G Principal ROLAND LUXENl3ERG -o NO. 5262 NAL Roland Luxenbevj, PE LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. Professional Groundwater & Environmental Engineering Services 76 Pearl Street, Suite 203 Essex Jct., Vermont, 05452 TABLE OF CONTENTS PUBLICNOTICE.........................................................................................................1 1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................... 2 2.0 BACKGROUND..................................................................................................... 2 2.1 INITIAL SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATIONS..........................................................................................2 2.2 ADDITIONAL SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATIONS..................................................................................2 2.3 SUPPLEMENTAL GROUNDWATER & SURFACE WATER MONITORING.............................................3 3.0 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL............................................................................. 3 3.1 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION.................................................................................................3 I 3.2 SITE LAND USE............................................................................................................................... 3 3.3 GEOLOGICAL & HYDROGEOLOGICAL SETTING..............................................................................3 3.4 CONTAMINANT DISTRIBUTION........................................................................................................4 3.4.1 Groundwater Quality............................................................................................................... 4 I 3.4.2 Surface Water Quality.............................................................................................................. S 3.4.3 Soil Quality 3.4.4 Soil Vapor Quality................................................................................................................... 6 3.5 SENSITIVE RECEPTORS................................................................................................................... 6 4.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION FEASIBILITY INVESTIGATION ............................. 6 4.1 SVE/AS PILOT STUDY.................................................................................................................... 6 I 4. L I Pilot Study Well Installations................................................................................................... 7 4. L 2 Pilot Study Procedures............................................................................................................. 7 4.1.3 Pilot Study Results................................................................................................................... 9 I 4.2 STORM DRAIN STUDY................................................................................................................... 11 4.2.1 Storm Drain Flow Study Procedures......................................................................................12 4.2.2 Storm Drain Flow by PCE Measurements.............................................................................12 4.2.3 Storm Drain Flow Study Results............................................................................................13 I 4.3 SLUG TESTING.............................................................................................................................. 14 4.3.1 Slug Testing Procedures........................................................................................................14 4.3.2. Slug Testing Results..............................................................................................................1 S 5.0 REMEDIAL PROGRAM.....................................................................................15 5.1 REMEDIAL GOAL AND OBJECTIVES.............................................................................................. 15 I 5.1 EVALUATION OF THE CAFI AND TECHNOLOGY SCREENING MATRIX .......................................... 16 5.2 PERMITS AND COMPLIANCE.........................................................................................................16 5.3 EXTRACTION WELL, SPARGE WELL AND AIR CHIMNEY INSTALLATION ::::...............................16 5.4 CONVEYANCE PIPING... .. 18 I 5.5 REMEDIAL COMPOUND AND TREATMENT EQUIPMENT................................................................. 19 5.5.1 SVE System............................................................................................................................19 5.5.2 Air Sparge System................................................................................................................. 20 I 5.5.3 Liquid Treatment System...................................................................................................... 20 5.5.4. Remedial Compound............................................................................................................. 20 5.6 SYSTEM STARTUP AND SHAKE DOWN..........................................................................................21 5.7 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.................................................................................................. 22 I 5.8 SYSTEM MONITORING................................................................................................................ 22 5.9 GROUNDWATER MONITORING.......................................................................,..............................23 6.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE AND COORDINATION ....................:......................... 23 I 6.4 DISPOSAL OF WASTE....................................................................................................................24 6.5 COST ESTIMATE........................................................................................................................... 24 6.6 SCHEDULE....................................................................................................................................24 I 6.7 SUBCONTRACTORS........................................................................................................................24 Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. i FIGURES In -Text Figures 3.4.2-1. Comparison of PCE Concentration to Outfall Discharge 4.1.3-1. Pilot Study PID Measurements Over Time Supplemental Figures 1. Site Location Map 2. Site Plan and Cross Sections 3. Proposed Site Plan 4. Specifications TABLES In -Text Tables 4.2.3-1. Underdrain and Catch Basin Water Quality Data 4.2.3-2. Storm Drain Flow Rates 5.7-1. Operation and Maintenance Schedule Supplemental Tables 1. Adjacent Properties 2. Pilot Study Field Data 3. Pilot Study Air Quality Data 4. Subcontractors 5. CAP Schedule 6. CAP Cost Estimate APPENDICES 1. Subsurface Investigations Executive Summaries, prepared by LBG 2. Northern Catch Basin (CB-N) Photograph 3. Groundwater Elevation and Contaminant Trends Over Time 4. Health and Safety Plan 5. Treatment Process and Instrumentation Diagrams ATTACHMENTS 1. Initial Site Investigations Executive Summaries, prepared by Verterre 2. Pilot Study Air Quality Data Laboratory Report 3. Storm Drain Flow Study Water Quality Data Laboratory Report Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. ii PUBLIC NOTICE Environmental Remediation Project Former Greer's House of Dry Cleaning 8-10 Dorset Street So. Burlington, Vermont The professional hydrogeologic and environmental consulting firm of Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. (LBG) is preparing a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) for the Former Greer's House of Dry Cleaning, located at 8-10 Dorset Street, in South Burlington, VT (the Site). The CAP is being prepared on behalf the Site owner, Greer Family, LLC, to reduce volatile organic impacts to soil and groundwater from the former use as a dry cleaning facility using the solvent tetrachloroethylene (PCE). Dissolved PCE and ganglia is present on -Site. The CAP is a remediation program that will use soil vacuum extraction coupled with air sparging to remove and treat PCE contaminated vapors. The program will also include a groundwater containment system to mitigate the discharge of PCE-contaminated water through the storm drain system. Water conveyed from the underdrain will be treated via activated carbon filtration. Soil vapors removed from the ground will be treated via carbon absorption. Moisture accumulated through soil vapor extraction will also be treated with the water phase treatment. Groundwater and soil vapor will undergo separate treatment processes before being discharged to the on -Site stormwater catch basin and the atmosphere, respectively. The vacuum extraction system is estimated to operate for a period of approximately 20 months. Throughout the remediation program, LBG will monitor the effects of the remediation efforts by collecting groundwater, surface water and vapor samples on a tri-annual basis. Additionally, the treated water and air will be monitored to ensure that the treatment systems are working properly. The goal of the CAP is to achieve acceptable water quality with respect to PCE concentrations at the first sampling station in the unnamed tributary that receives water from the storm drain system. LBG will continue to monitor groundwater and surface water quality for at least one year to ensure that PCE concentrations remain low. The Sate of Vermont Sites Management Section (VT SMS) will evaluate LBG's progress and monitoring results throughout the project. Copies of the CAP will be available to the public at the VT SMS offices in Waterbury, VT. Mr. Michael B. Smith can be reached at 802-241-3879 or michael.b.smith@state.vt.us for questions or copies of the CAP. Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 1.0 INTRODUCTION The professional hydrogeological and environmental consulting firm of Leggette, Brashears and Graham, Inc. (LBG) has prepared this Corrective Action Plan (CAP) on behalf of the Greer Family, LLC for the Greer's House of Dry Cleaning property located at 10 Dorset Street in South Burlington, Vermont (the Site). The Site has been identified on the State of Vermont's hazardous sites list as Sites Management Section (SMS) # 2005-3395. A Site Location Map and Site Plan are provided as Figure 1 and Figure 2, respectively. LBG recommended preparation of a CAP following the submittal and approval of a Corrective Action Feasibility Investigation (CAFI) dated January 28, 2009. 2.0 BACKGROUND The Site was previously occupied by a carwash and was later purchased by the Greer Family and occupied by Greer's House of Dry Cleaning and Mills and Greer's Sporting Goods. Currently the property is owned by the Greer Family LLC., and is occupied by Mills and Greer's Sporting Goods, Greer's Laundromat and The PhotoGarden. A portion of the space is unoccupied and available for lease. Currently there are no dry cleaning operations at the Site. 2.1 Initial Subsurface Investigations A subsurface investigation was conducted in August 2005, to determine if chlorinated solvent contamination was present at the Site. Laboratory analysis confirmed the presence of chlorinated volatile organic compounds (CVOCs), particularly tetrachloro ethylene (PCE), in the soils and groundwater beneath the Site. The State of Vermont SMS was notified. Copies of executive summaries from the August 12, 2005 Supplemental Site Investigation Report prepared by the Verterre Group, Inc. (Verterre) and the October 18, 2005 Source Area Investigation Report prepared by Verterre are provided in Attachment 1. Following this investigation additional work was done to locate and remove a relic carwash sediment tank that contained approximately 10 tons of sludge contaminated with PCE. 2.2 Additional Subsurface Investigations Additional subsurface investigations on the east side of Dorset Street within two grass medians and within the median in the center of Dorset Street were completed by LBG in 2006 and 2007. Several soil borings were advanced using Geoprobe® direct push technology while continuously screening the soils for VOCs using a membrane interface probe (MIP). The MIP was connected to a Hewlett Packard 5890 Gas Chromatography (GC) Instrument equipped with an Electron Capture Device (ECD), a Photoionization Detector (PID) and a Flame Ionization Detector (FID). Findings from the investigations included identification of sediment contamination exceeding the US EPA Region 9 Preliminary Remedial Goals for industrial properties within the lateral pipe between the Site manhole and Dorset Street catch basin; the presence of a clay layer at a depth of 13 to 14 feet below grade; Dense Non Aqueous Phase Liquid (DNAPL) present in well MW-203 appears to be localized; contamination to the north of MW-203 appears to peak at depths of approximately 15 feet below ground surface (bgs) and the depth of contamination appears to Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 2 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 diminish with increasing distance from MW-203; contamination to the south of MW-203 is found at shallow depths as well as at the deeper horizon; and the MIP responses from detectors measured along the center of Dorset Street were much lower indicating that no significant contamination was detected in this study area. Copies of the executive summaries from LBG's Groundwater Monitoring & Additional Investigation Report, dated October 20, 2006 and LBG's Additional Investigation Report, dated July 27, 2007 are provided in Appendix 1. Cross sections of the Site are provided in Figure 2, Site Plan. 2.3 Supplemental Groundwater & Surface Water Monitoring Based on LBG's observations, recent analytical data and the results of CAFI testing contaminated groundwater is entering the municipal storm drain system through the Dorset Street underdrain and discharging at the storm drain outfall located northwest of the Site, adjacent to the Interstate-89 north -bound access ramp. Quarterly groundwater monitoring at the Site is on -going with the most recent event taking place in September 2009. Results of this groundwater monitoring event will be submitted under separate cover. 3.0 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL 3.1 Site Location and Description The Site is located in a commercial area of South Burlington and is located on the USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map Series Burlington, Vermont Quadrangle. Adjacent properties include a Shell gasoline station, Friendly's Restaurant, University Inn and Suites, Double Tree Hotel, and a shopping plaza. A complete list of adjacent properties and their owners can be found in Table 1. The on -Site building is heated with natural gas and is a single story structure of slab on -grade construction. The facility is served by the City of South Burlington municipal sewer and water. Asphalt parking areas connect the Site to Dorset Street. The Site is relatively flat; however, the western portion of the property slopes gently beyond Dorset Street and the University Inn and Suites toward Interstate-89. Surface water from the Site flows into catch basins on the southern and northern portions of the property, which are connected to the City's storm drain system. 3.2 Site Land Use The Site was originally occupied by a carwash and was later purchased by the Greer Family and occupied by Greer's House of Dry Cleaning and Mills and Greer's Sporting Goods. Currently the property is still owned by the Greer Family and is occupied by Mills and Greer's Sporting Goods, Greer's Laundromat and The PhotoGarden. 3.3 Geological & Hydrogeological Setting The subsurface primarily consists of fine sand and in some locations fine sand with traces Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 3 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 of silt. Geologic logs from monitor wells and soil borings advanced on -Site can be found in reports previously prepared by LBG, the Verterre Group, and Heindel and Noyes. The Site appears to be underlain with gray clay identified in wells MW-101, MW-102D, MW-103, MW-105, MW-202, MW-301, MW-302 and MW-303. The clay layer identified in the geologic logs of wells MW-301 through MW-303 correlates well with the previously identified "silt" layer at a depth of 13 to 14 feet below grade from the first and second EC/MIP study areas. Soil boring 501 was advanced in March 2008 for the purposes of determining the thickness of the clay which was determined to be at least 26 feet. The boring was advanced to a depth of 40 feet bgs and the clay layer extended from 14 feet bgs to 40 feet bgs. During the relocation of the on -Site storm drain structures in 2007, LBG determined that an eight -inch diameter corrugated and perforated road underdrain system exists in front of the Site. These perforated drains enter various catch basins within Dorset Street, controlling groundwater elevations proximate to the street. During this evaluation, the perforated drain that enters the north catch basin was underwater within the structure. A photo of this structure is provided in Appendix 2. This observation indicates that storm water may be a source of recharge to the groundwater - bearing formation in the Site area during and following precipitation events. Conversely, groundwater flowing off -Site towards Dorset Street enters the storm drain system through the perforated underdrain. This observation may also clarify the existence of the electrical conductivity peak identified during earlier membrane interface profiling at depths consistent with the groundwater table. Geoprobe's EC probe typically does not recognize a change in conductivity due to groundwater. However, the electrical conductivity of the groundwater may be influence by road salts and other solutes. Groundwater quality throughout the Site is summarized in Figure 3, Groundwater Contours and PCE Distribution. DNAPL in the form of ganglia was identified in well MW-203 and appears to be localized to this area. Product characterization analysis showed the DNAPL consisted of 73% PCE. The aqueous sample analyzed from MW-203 also shows PCE breakdown compounds in addition to other compounds, which may be either impurities in the PCE solvent or compounds from dry cleaned materials. Groundwater elevations at the Site are summarized in Figure 3, Groundwater Contours and PCE Distribution, and Appendix 3, Groundwater Elevation and Contamination Trends Over Time. The groundwater flow direction is to the west based on groundwater elevations measured in the shallow monitoring wells. Measurements from the deeper wells show a northerly flow component. A downward flow component is also apparent between the two zones. 3.4 Contaminant Distribution 3.4.1 Groundwater Quality A history of groundwater quality in the monitoring well network at the Site is summarized in Appendix 3, Groundwater Elevation and Contamination Trends Over Time. Groundwater contamination exceeding the Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standards (VGES) of 5.0 micrograms per liter (µg/L) for PCE is consistently measured in MW-I, MW-2, Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 4 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 MW-103, MW-201, MW-202, MW-303 and MW-401. PCE contamination in MW-102S and MW- 102D frequently exceed the VGES. These wells are all located on -Site. PCE concentrations in the existing monitor well network are generally stable or declining. Analytical results consistently show little to no evidence of natural PCE degradation by way of reductive dechlorination to PCE daughter compounds. Laboratory reports can be found in the previously submitted groundwater monitoring reports. 3.4.2 Surface Water Quality Analytical results from water samples collected within the storm drain system and the surface water down gradient of the storm drain outfall indicate that storm water leaving the Site is contaminated with PCE at concentrations that exceed the Vermont Water Quality Standard (VWQS) of 8.85 µg/L. PCE enters the storm drain system by way of a perforated underdrain running parallel to Dorset Street. PCE-contaminated water from within the storm drain is being discharged to the ground surface off -Site at concentrations as high as 200 µg/L at the Outfall. PCE has been measured as high as 490 µg/L in storm water catch basin CB-N. PCE contamination in storm water and surface water down -gradient of the Site appear to be loosely linked to outfall discharge rates, as was reported in the April/May 2008 Groundwater Monitoring Report, dated June 25, 2008. Below, Figure 3.4.2-1 depicts the relationship between storm drain discharge rates at the outfall and PCE concentrations at the outfall and in the northern storm water catch basin (CB-N). A limited number of data points suggest that increased storm water discharge rates correspond to lower PCE concentrations at the storm water outfall, while PCE concentrations in the northern storm water catch basin are elevated. Figure 3.4.2-1. PCE concentrations in the storm drain outfall and the northern catch basin are compared to storm drain discharge rates. [PCE] v. Discharge } Outfall t CB-N �- Discharge 600 50 500 40 400 a 30 300 21 L a 200 20 H 100 10 0 0 3/13/08 6/21 /08 9/29/08 1 /7/09 4/17/09 7/26/09 Date 3.4.3 Soil Quality Subsurface investigations conducted by Heindel and Noyes, the Verterre Group and LBG indicate that soil PCE contamination is present. Soils consists of fine brown silty sand over a soft, Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 5 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 plastic, gray clay that was encountered at approximately 14 feet below ground surface throughout the study area. The clay layer is at least 26 feet thick. Soil PCE contamination on -Site is most significant along the western portion of the property, between the building and Dorset Street. Soil screening for CVOCs by the Verterre Group and LBG during the advancement of soil borings suggest that soil PCE contamination is found at a range of depths, with contamination being greatest at approximately 14 feet below the ground surface (bgs), at the top of the underlying gray clay. 3.4.4 Soil Vapor Quality In 2005 Verterre conducted soil gas studies around the building. Vapor concentrations reported in these studies range between <1.0 ppmv and 538 ppmv as measured by a PID. Headspace vapor concentrations measured from various soil borings ranged from <0.1 ppmv to >1483 ppmv as measured by a PID in MW-203, where DNAPL ganglia was observed. 3.5 Sensitive Receptors Sensitive receptors at risk from petroleum contamination on -Site include the soil and groundwater underlying the Site and the storm water being discharged to the ground surface off - Site. Vapor intrusion into the building is possible but has not been assessed. Previous use of the building as a dry cleaner would mask the ability to determine if indoor air quality is impacted by vapor intrusion. Potential vapor impact to the building will be mitigated during the SVE activities proposed herein. 4.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION FEASIBILITY INVESTIGATION The CAM identified SVE/AS as the most viable technology available for PCE remediation at the Site based upon a paper study of remedial technologies, Site conditions and Site limitations both above and below ground. The CAFI also recommended that a containment program be established to convey PCE-impacted groundwater migrating off -Site through the Dorset Street underdrain and treat the water before it re-enters the storm drain system. A Pilot Study was conducted to assess the feasibility of SVE/AS and to evaluate its effectiveness at reducing the mass of PCE contamination present on Site. A Flow Study and Slug Test were also conducted to provide data with which to estimate the quantity of PCE-impacted groundwater migrating off -Site. 4.1 SVE/AS Pilot Study The SVE/AS Pilot Study was conducted on August 12, 13, 14 and 24, 2009. A small network of soil vapor extraction wells, sparge points and vapor monitoring points were installed by LBG prior to commencement of the Pilot Study. The Pilot Study utilized a regenerative blower, a rotary vane air compressor, vapor -phase granular activated carbon and various field monitoring instruments. Further detail about Pilot Study well installations, the Pilot Study and Pilot Study results are provided in the subsequent sections. Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 6 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 4.1.1 Pilot Study Well Installations The well network installed for the Pilot Study consisted of two vertical 2-inch diameter soil vapor extraction wells, two horizontal 2-inch diameter soil vapor extraction vent legs manifolded together, three 1-inch diameter vapor monitoring wells, and three Geoprobe sparge points with 1/ -inch diameter polyethylene tubing. The locations of all newly -installed wells are shown on Figure 2. Their locations were selected to target highly contaminated areas of the Site and obtain as much information as possible about radii of influence and the potential for short circuiting of air along underground utilities in the vicinity. The vertical soil vapor extraction wells were installed by coring a 10-inch diameter hole in the asphalt with a core drill. Variable length sections of 4-inch steel casing were driven to a depth of 8 feet below grade (nominal top of groundwater table) using Geoprobe tools. The extraction screen (2.5 feet of 2-inch diameter machine slotted PVC) and 5 feet of riser was placed into the borehole. A No. 0 sand pack was placed around the screen, with a bentonite seal above the sand pack. The well was completed with an 8-inch diameter flush -mounted road box backfilled with asphalt patch. Although only one vertical soil vapor extraction well was proposed in the CAFI, the VT SMS requested that a second vertical venting well be installed upon review of the pilot test plan. The legs of the horizontal soil vapor extraction vent were positioned within the relic carwash tank grave when the tank and its contents were removed from the Site in 2005. The asphalt in front of 8-10 Dorset Street was saw cut in the vicinity of the relic carwash tank to expose the buried 2-inch diameter PVC vent. The vent leg was inspected for integrity and covered by an 8-inch diameter road box. The disturbed area was repaired with asphalt patch. Three air sparge injection points were installed to the north of the central soil vapor extraction well (VE-1) at varying distances. Air sparging points were installed by coring an 8-inch diameter hole in the asphalt with a core drill and advancing 1'/ -inch diameter Geoprobe® rods with an expendable drive point connected to a Geoprobe® sparge implant to a depth of 14 feet below grade (nominal top of clay). The sparge implants were connected to '/ -inch diameter polyethylene tubing and backfilled with glass beads above the screened section followed by bentonite/bead mix to grade. The sparge points were completed with a 5-inch diameter flush - mounted road box, which was backfilled with asphalt patch. The vapor monitoring wells were installed by coring an 8-inch diameter hole in the asphalt with a core drill and advancing a 2-inch diameter Macrocore® to approximately 7.5 ft bgs. 2.5 feet of 1-inch diameter PVC slotted screen and 5 feet of 1-inch diameter solid PVC riser were installed in the borings. The borings were backfilled with a No. 0 sand pack overlain with a bentonite seal. The vapor monitoring wells were completed with 5-inch diameter flush -mounted road boxes backfilled with asphalt patch. Vapor monitoring well locations were positioned at 5, 10 and 15 feet to the south of VE-1. 4.1.2 Pilot Study Procedures Upon arrival on Site during each day of the Pilot Study (prior to the initialization of pilot Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Ina 7 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 testing activities), groundwater elevation and dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations were measured in the surrounding groundwater monitoring wells, and organic vapor concentrations were measured in the soil vapor monitoring wells. The groundwater table was measured with a Solinst electronic interface probe and DO was measured using a YSI 550A. Headspace volatile organic compound (VOCs) concentrations were measured in soil vapor extraction wells, groundwater monitoring wells, and vapor monitoring wells with an IonScience PhoCheck 1000 photoionization detector (PID). A 1.0 horse power (hp) Fuji VFC40 regenerative blower (approximate rating of 98 cfin at 0 inches water ("H20), and 84 cfm at 20 "H20) was used to draw vacuum on the vadose zone beneath the Site. The blower was connected to the soil vapor extraction wells by 2-inch diameter reinforced flexible hoses. Extracted air was routed through a knock -out drum to remove any water. Blower exhaust was routed through a 55 gallon drum filled with vapor -phase granular activated carbon (GAC) to remove VOCs from the air prior to its discharge to the atmosphere. Extracted air flow was measured using a vacuum gauge on the blower inlet and velocity readings taken with a TSI 9555 multiparameter probe. The test was initiated on August 12, 2009 by drawing low vacuum on VE-1 at a low flow rate. Air velocity, applied vacuum, temperature, barometric pressure and VOC concentration were monitored within the SVE system while induced vacuum was measured in the vapor monitoring points and soil vapor extraction wells disconnected from the SVE system. Temperature, velocity and applied vacuum were measured with a TSI 9555 multiparameter probe. A vacuum desiccator and Tedlar bag were used to measure VOC concentrations with a PID and induced vacuum was measured using magnehelic gauges. Results from the Pilot Study are discussed in Section 4.1.3 and field data is tabulated in Table 2, Pilot Study Field Data. Calculated parameters, such as air flow rates and PCE removal rates are also provided in Table 2. Incremental adjustments were made throughout the day on August 12, 2009 to the applied vacuum placed on VE-1 and the resulting air flow velocity. Monitoring data was recorded during each isolated flow and vacuum setting in order to determine the optimal operating conditions to maximize the radius of influence and VOC concentrations in the extracted air stream. Maximized VOC concentrations were assumed to correlate with maximum PCE removal rates. Monitoring data was used to establish the three applied vacuum levels, Level 1, 2 and 3, referenced throughout the remainder of the Pilot Study. Monitoring data was also used to understand the time frame over which Site parameters responded to SVE system adjustments. This information enabled LBG to be more efficient at experimenting with SVE system settings, allowing a greater number of settings to be evaluated. On August 13, 2009 vacuum was systematically applied to various combinations of all three soil vapor extraction wells at different applied vacuum levels. Again, field parameters such as applied vacuum, air flow velocity, induced vacuum, VOC concentrations, and temperature were recorded and are summarized in Table 2. The TSI 9555 was adjusted to display measurements averaged over the previous 30 seconds in an effort to minimize fine -scale fluctuations within the field data, an effect likely caused by air flow turbulence. An air quality sample was collected from the SVE system at 15:48 on August 13, 2009 Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 8 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 using a mini Summa canister provided by EMSL Analytical of Westmont, NJ for analysis by U.S. EPA Compendium Method No. TO-15. The sample was collected in the same manner as all other PID measurements; by using a vacuum desiccator to fill a Tedlar bag with air from the SVE system. The sample was then collected from the Tedlar bag. A simultaneous PID measurement was also taken in order to verify the VOC concentrations being monitored in the field with the PID. On August 14, 2009 the SVE system was started and afore -mentioned field measurements were collected. A one horse power (hp) rotary vane air compressor (approximate rating of 10 cubic feet per minute (cfin) at 5 pounds per square inch (psi)) and 'h-inch diameter polyethylene tubing were used to inject air into the subsurface by way of sparge points set to roughly 13.5 feet below the ground surface (bgs), just above the clay layer that underlies the Site at 14 feet bgs. A pressure gauge on the air compressor was used to estimate air injection rates into the subsurface. The SVE system remained active during sparging and field data was collected while SVE/AS was applied to various combinations of soil vapor extraction wells and sparge points. To monitor the effects of air sparging on the Site, depth to groundwater and DO were measured in surrounding groundwater monitoring wells, MW-201, MW-303 and MW-401, using an interface probe and YSI 550A. Induced pressure was measured in sparge points disconnected from the air compressor with magnehelic gauges. Air flow in the SVE system was monitored closely to observe any changes in VOC concentration as a result of air sparging at the clay surface. A second Summa canister sample was collected by the method described above in order to provide correlative data over a range of PID and total VOC values. The Pilot Study was extended on August 24, 2009 after review of the data collected on August 12, 13 and 14, 2009 revealed that air sparging was operated for an insufficient duration of time to observe the technology's effects on the Site. Only the first phase of a two-phase response to sparging was observed (Suthersan 1996). Similar procedures to those described August 14, 2009 were followed on August 24, 2009. Air was continuously injected into SP-2 at various pressures until depth to groundwater and DO values were thought to be indicative of steady-state air sparging conditions. Decreasing groundwater elevation in piezometers surrounding SP-2 following a period of groundwater mounding and a sharp increase in DO concentrations were used as indicators of steady-state sparging conditions. Site conditions during sparging were monitored closely in MW-401 (depth to groundwater and DO) and SP-1 (induced pressure) given the proximity to SP-2. All field data is summarized in Table 2. 4.1.3 Pilot Study Results Field data collected during the Pilot Study is summarized in Table 2. Field data calculations such as SVE air flow rate and PCE removal rates are also presented in Table 2. Air quality analytical data is summarized in Table 3 and a complete laboratory report is provided in Attachment 2. Based upon Pilot Study data and observations SVE/AS appears to be a viable technology for PCE remediation at the Site. The most notable Pilot Study observations are summarized below: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 9 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 ■ As indicated by PID measurements (as high as 1,391 ppmv) made within the SVE system, the technology successfully removed PCE vapors from the subsurface on -Site. ■ Generally PID measurements were highest upon commencement of the Pilot Study and decreased during the three consecutive days of SVE. PID measurements rebounded by August 24, 2009. ■ Induced vacuum was measured as far as 20 ft from an extraction well under vacuum. AS resulted in significant groundwater mounding in MW-401 and to a lesser degree in MW-303. ■ DO concentrations increased significantly in MW-401 while sparging. ■ The two-phase response to AS presented by Suthersan (1996) was observed on August 24, 2009. ■ Induced pressure was consistently observed 5 ft from the active sparge point. Induced pressure was observed 10 ft from an active sparge point to a lesser extent. ■ An increase in PID concentration was observed on August 24, 2009 after approximately 30 minutes of sparging. ■ Increased air flow from the air compressor did not correspond to more optimal SVE/AS conditions. Air compressor pressures greater than 4 psi appeared to result in more severe channeling of air flow within the subsurface, reducing sparge efficiency. ■ No breakthrough of the granular activated carbon was observed, as PID measurements taken from the effluent of the first and second 55-gallon drum never increased significantly from those measured at the time of SVE start up on August 13, 2009. ■ PID measurements made during the Pilot Study correlate well to VOC analytical data from air quality samples collected simultaneously. Water table mounding, caused by the displacement of water by injected sparge air, is of lesser concern in the presence of DNAPL than LNAPL. In fact, the horizontal air channeling that was observed may be more effective with a contaminant, like PCE, that forms ganglia along the surface of an impeding layer. The air sparge system was capable of increasing the dissolved oxygen from 0.43 to 3.86 mg/L over the course of 4.6 hours of sparging. PID measurements and air flow velocity from within the SVE system were used to calculate the rate of PCE removal on August 24, 2009. Air flow velocity, feet per minute (fpm), was first converted to air flow rate, standard cubic feet per minute (SCFM), taking into account temperature and barometric pressure. Since air flow velocity was not monitored as closely as PID measurements, air flow velocities were extrapolated for some PID measurements made on August 24, 2009. PID measurements, ppmv, were converted to concentration, mg/m3. In order to address the question of PCE removal rates by the SVE/AS system, LBG made the assumption that all VOCs measured by the PID were PCE. This assumption was validated by analytical air quality data in which PCE accounted for 97.3% and 99.5% of all VOCs detected in the first and second Summa canister samples, respectively. PCE concentration, mg/m3, and air flow rate were combined to obtain PCE removal rates from the subsurface by the SVE/AS system on August 24, 2009. The average removal rate was 11.83 pounds of PCE per day, lbs/day. Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 10 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 LBG does not expect to maintain such aggressive PCE removal rates throughout the duration of a full-scale SVE/AS remedial program. As evidenced by the declining trends in PID measurements over the course of the Pilot Study, VOC concentrations are expected to be reduced during continual operation of an SVE/AS system on -Site. A linear best -fit line was plotted through the August 24, 2009 PID measurements and is depicted below in Figure 4.1.3-1. Figure 4.1.3-1. PID measurements made from within the SVE system on August 24, 2009 were plotted with a linear best -fit line to predict the trend of PCE removal over time. PID Measurements Over Time • PID — Linear (PID) 1000 E y =-1753.4x + 1918.7 • • a 600 a 400 • 200 0 12:00 13:12 14:24 15:36 16:48 18:00 August 24, 2009 Our experience indicates that the long-term removal rate of a contaminant will be equivalent to roughly 10% of the start up removal rate. As such, LBG anticipates that long-term PCE removal rates will be on the order of 1.0 lbs PCE/day, although increased concentrations will be noticed during sparging. Based upon the best -fit line equation presented above, in Figure 4.1.3- 1, PCE removal rates will stabilize at roughly 10% of the startup removal rates within approximately one week of continual SVE operation. 4.2 Storm Drain Study The Storm Drain Study was conducted on August 24, 2009 to determine the flow rate of PCE-impacted water in the storm drain and its outfall downgradient of the Site. The goal of the storm flow study was to gather the necessary data with which to design a containment system that will capture the majority of PCE-contaminated groundwater migrating through the storm drain, minimizing PCE discharged to surface water at the outfall. The objective of the study was two fold. The first component of the Storm Drain Flow Study was to determine the volume of water flowing through the northern catch basin (CB-N) and how much of this water was entering from the perforated underdrain versus the storm drain. The volume of water requiring treatment is an essential piece of information for the design of an efficient, effective conveyance and treatment system. The second component of the study was designed to confirm that PCE is indeed entering CB-N through the perforated underdrain and to get a sense of where along the perforated drain PCE concentrations were highest. A pump and treat containment system is an important Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 11 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 component of PCE remediation at the Site to prevent continued migration of the plume off -Site into adjacent surface water while active remediation is implemented. 4.2.1 Storm Drain Flow Study Procedures To measure flow at various points in the storm drain system, LBG used a constant injection of fluorescent Rhodamine WT dye in a non -visible strength, along with a fluorometer to measure the resulting dye concentrations. Dye was injected over a period of 3 hours to insure stable dye concentrations. An 80 mg/L dye solution (made by mixing 80 mis of 4000 mg/L dye solution into 4 liters of water) was injected at a rate of 0.023 liters per minute (lpm, determined using a graduated cylinder and stopwatch) using a 12V positive displacement pump (FMI) into the South catch basin. The resulting concentrations are tabulated below. Water samples taken before dye injection showed < 0.1 ug/L of apparent dye concentration, and do not need to be considered in the analysis. Water samples were collected from the catch basins and the outfall for fluorometric analysis. Catch basins were sampled with dedicated, weighted polyethylene bailers and the outfall was sampled directly from water discharging from the storm drain into the drainage ditch. Prior to dye injection, samples were collected at CB -Mid, CB-N, CB-W, and the outfall to quantify any apparent dye concentrations. Collected water was poured into plastic containers and stored in a cooler. Approximate dye concentrations at the sample points were measured in the field to verify that appropriate concentrations were obtained. Since dye fluorescence is temperature dependent, precise dye concentrations were made after samples, calibration solutions, and dilution water equilibrated to room temperature. Flow at each sample point (Q) was calculated by the following conservation of mass equation: Q x c = q x C Where Q = the sample point water flow (to be calculated), c = sample point dye concentration (measured using a fluorometer calibrated with storm water from the site), q = injection rate water flow (set using injection pump and directly measured), and C = injection dye concentration (set using stock dye solution, non -chlorinated dilution water, and volumetric flasks). C, q, and c values used to calculate flow rates were those measured during the Storm Drain Flow Study. The calculated flow rates were verified by volumetric flow rates measured at each of the three outfall pipes along the I-89 Exit 14E northbound access ramp. Measurements were made using a calibrated bucket and stopwatch. 4.2.2 Storm Drain Flow by PCE Measurements Analytical PCE data from the perforated underdrain and the storm drain system were used to calculate an alternate storm drain flow rate using the equation above. Water samples were collected from the perforated underdrain by inserting '/ -inch polyethylene tubing into the underdrain as far as possible and collecting samples from various locations within the underdrain using a peristaltic pump as the tubing was removed. Water samples were also collected from CB- Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 12 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 N, CB-W and the outfall. Samples collected from the underdrain and CB-N were sampled on August 24, 2009, while CB-W and the outfall were sampled on September 3, 2009. All samples were analyzed for VOCs by U.S. EPA Method No. 8260 by AMRO Environmental Laboratories of Merrimack, New Hampshire. 4.2.3 Storm Drain Flow Study Results Analytical data of water samples collected from the perforated underdrain are summarized in the following table, Table 4.2.3-1. Complete laboratory reports are provided as Attachment 3. Table 4.2.3-L Water samples were collected from within the Dorset Street perforated underdrain adjacent to the western edge of the Site and from catch basins within the storm drain network. Samples were analyzed for VOCs by AMRO Environmental Laboratories by U.S. EPA Method No. 8260. Samples were collected in August and September 2009. Sample Collection Compound (Ng/ID Date Location cis-1,2-DCF- Chloroform TCE 'PCE MTBE UD-76 8/24/2009 76 ft. south of 7.1 4.8 2.8 2,500 ND CB-N UD-56 8/24/2009 56 ft. south of 2.3 5.6 ND 1,100 ND CB-N UD-32 8/24/2009 32 ft. south of 5.4 3.8 2.5 2,200 ND CB-N UD-19 8/24/2009 19 ft. south of 3.8 3.5 2.1 1,600 ND CB-N UD-3 8/24/2009 3 ft. south of 2.9 2.6 ND 1,200 3.2 CB-N CB-N 8/24/2009 Within CB-N ND ND ND 470 ND CB-W 9/3/2009 Within CB-W ND ND ND 540 ND FOut7fall 9/3/2009 Storm Drain ND ND ND 200 ND Outfall Notes: 1. All samples were analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by U.S. EPA Method No. 8260. Underdrain samples were collected with a peristaltic pump; polyethylene tubing was positioned at the desired distances into the underdrain and the tubing was purged of its contents prior to sample collection. Catch basin samples were collected using a dedicated polyethylene bailer. The outfall sample was collected directly from the stormwater discharge. 2. UD - underdrain; CB-N - northern catch basin; CB-W - western catch basin; ft. - feet; ND - not detected above analytical method detection limits pg/L - micrograms per liter. Based upon the fluorometric and PCE data collected during the Storm Drain Flow Study the following flow rates have been calculated using the conservation of mass equation presented above. Flow was calculated from dye measurements using 80 mg/L x 0.023 1pm/observed dye concentration in mg/L (e.g. calculated flow at CB-N = 80 mg/L x 0.023 1pm/0.127 mg/L = 15 liters per minute). Flow was calculated from PCE data using outfall PCE concentrations measured in ug/L x 10 gpm divided by observed PCE concentration in ug/L (e.g. calculated flow at CB-N = 200 ug/L x 10 gpm/470 ug/L = 4 gpm) Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 13 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 Table 4.2.3-2. Storm drain flow rates were calculated using fluorometric data from the Rhodamine dye study and PCE data from samples collected within the storm drain system. Sample Location Rhoda [no PCE Concentration Flow Concentration Flow ugtL I m 9PM jigtL 9PM CB -Mid 170 11 3 NM NM LID NM NM NM 1200 2 CB-N 127 15 4 470 4 CBM 58 32 8 540 4 Outfall 45 41 11 200 10 Notes: 1. CB-N - northern catch basin; NM - not measured; pg/L - micrograms per liter; Ipm - liters per minute; gpm - gallons per minute; UD - underdrain. Volumetric flow measurements made on August 24, 2009 and September 3, 2009 found the outfall flowing at 11 and 10 gpm, respectively. An additional volumetric flow measurement made on September 15, 2009 was found to be 8 gpm. All flow measurements occurred during a period of light (late August) to no rainfall (early to mid September). With the exception of the flow calculated in CB-W using PCE data, the data is fairly consistent and suggests that the flow contribution from contaminated groundwater entering the storm drain system during base flow conditions is less than or equal to 5 gpm, or 7,000 gpd. 4.3 Slug Testing To confirm the estimate of groundwater flowing off -Site through the underdrain and storm drain system, slug testing was performed in two wells, MW-303 and MW-401, located within the PCE plume to calculate aquifer permeability (k, feet/minute). MW-303 and MW-401 were selected for slug testing because of their larger diameter, 2- and 4-inches, respectively. 4.3.1 Slug Testing Procedures A data logging pressure transducer connected to a hand held digital display unit was positioned at the bottom of the test well. A solid "slug" was submerged in the tested well and the groundwater level within the well was monitored every 20 seconds (manually with an electronic interface probe) or 30 seconds (by the data logging pressure transducer) to assess the hydraulic conductivity, K, of the aquifer. Two slugs with different volumes (0.23 gallons and 0.34 gallons) were used in MW-303, while only the 0.23 gallon slug was used in MW-401. Change in pieziometric surface within the wells was measured upon insertion and removal of the slugs from each well in order to obtain as much information as possible about the hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer. K was calculated using the equation K=A/FT Where K is the hydraulic conductivity, A is the cross sectional area of the bore hole, F is the shape factor and T is the basic lag time. A/F was calculated using the equation Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 14 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 A/F = d2 • In (L/D + �(1 + (L/D)2) / 8•L Where d is the well diameter, D is the auger or casing diameter and L is the screened length of the well. The volume of water migrating off -Site was then calculated using the observed hydraulic gradient, i, aquifer width w, and aquifer depth, d, using the following equation: Q, gpm = 7.48 gal/ft3 x k x I x (w x d) 4.3.2. Slug Testing Results Field data collected manually and with the pressure transducer was applied to the hydraulic conductivity and discharge equations presented in the previous section. Hydraulic conductivity was found to range between 1 and 11 ft/day in MW-401 and MW-303, respectively. The hydraulic conductivity of 11 ft/day reported for MW-303 was obtained from averaging the 4 K values obtained from the Slug In and Slug Out data for both slugs. The hydraulic conductivity of 1 ft/day reported for MW-401 was calculated from the Slug Out test. The calculated K values are consistent with those typical of fine — medium sands, the predominant geologic material at the Site. Flow of groundwater migrating off -Site was calculated to range between 80 gpd to 900 gpd assuming an aquifer depth of 6 ft, a hydraulic gradient of 0.0079 ft (calculated from groundwater elevations measured on September 3, 2009) and an aquifer width of 230 feet. Contaminated groundwater from within the PCE plume (using a width of 100 feet) contributes between 35 gpd and 390 gpd of the daily total volume of water migration off -Site. As such, approximately 40% of all groundwater migrating off -Site (as calculated from Slug Testing data) is contaminated with PCE. Groundwater discharge off -Site as calculated from Slug Test data predicts that the PCE contaminated groundwater flow is a small percentage (perhaps 10%) of the underdrain flow calculated from the Storm Drain Flow Study. For practical design purposes, the underdrain flow calculated from the Storm Drain Flow Study (5 gpm, or 7,000 gpd) will be used. 5.0 REMEDIAL PROGRAM 5.1 Remedial Goal and Objectives As directed by the Vermont Groundwater Protection Rule and Strategy, the ultimate goal of this CAP is to reduce PCE and its degradation products in groundwater beneath the Site to concentrations below the VGES. The immediate goal of the CAP is to reduce the migration of PCE and its degradation products off -Site through the Dorset Street underdrain and an unnamed tributary to wetlands adjacent to the Winooski River to concentrations below the VWQS. The overall objective of active remediation by way of SVE/AS is to reduce the mass of PCE-related contamination on -Site. Meeting this objective will reduce potential risk to human health and the Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 15 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 environment both on and down -gradient of the Site. Meeting this objective may also allow the Site to be closed with a Notice to Land Records despite persistent exceedence of the VGES by VOCs in groundwater at the on -Site compliance points. 5.1 Evaluation of the CAFI and Technology Screening Matrix Considering data and information from the Site investigations and CAFI LBG recommends implementing a soil vapor extraction system coupled with an air sparging component to reduce PCE concentrations in soil and groundwater throughout the source area. In addition, the remedial program will also convey groundwater from the Dorset Street underdrain to a liquid treatment system and return treated water back to the underdrain structure. LBG proposes to combine the use all three technologies at the Site to produce the most cost effective and timely solution to reduce PCE contamination in the vadose zone and shallow aquifer while containing the PCE plume from discharging to the storm sewer outfall. The planned sequence for implementing remedial technologies is as follows: 1. Install and operate a soil vapor extraction system to significantly reduce on -Site vapor phase PCE above the groundwater table. 2. Install conveyance piping within the Dorset Street underdrain to extract PCE-contaminated groundwater and filter the water through granular activated carbon before being discharged back into the underdrain structure. 3. Operate the soil vapor extraction system until declining PCE concentrations are established. Begin air sparging into shallow sparge wells and evaluate the effectiveness of the sparging effort in the saturated zone. 4. Initiate air sparging in deeper sparge wells located atop the clay layer by pulsing the sparge air into the area of concern to optimize mixing. Pulsing will allow air channels to collapse so that new channels are created. Implementing Site remediation in this manner will combine the benefits and minimize the limitations of each technology to provide efficient and timely Site remediation. The specifics regarding the proposed Site locations and equipment are presented below. 5.2 Permits and Compliance A health and safety plan as required under the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA), has been updated for remedial system construction and monitoring activities at the Site (refer to Appendix 4). A General Discharge Permit No. 3-9004 will be sought from the Waste Water Management Division which is required for discharging the extracted and treated groundwater during remedial system operation. Electrical service to the building already exists. 5.3 Extraction Well, Sparge Well and Air Chimney Installation Based on the Pilot Study conducted in August 2009 the effective radius of influence (ROI) Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 16 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 for SVE wells was determined to be greater than 20 feet. As such a design ROI of 18 feet was selected. A total of 12 SVE wells will be installed between the Site building and Dorset Street. Locations are shown on Figure 4 and a detailed schematic of extraction well assembly is shown in Figure 5. Each SVE well will be constructed according to the following specifications: • 2-inch diameter schedule 40 PVC riser, • Schedule 40 PVC 0.01-inch machine slotted screen, • Screen interval from 4 ft bgs to 8 ft bgs, • No. 0 sand pack from the bottom of the well to 6 inches above the well screen; and, • Bentonite/Portland cement well seal, minimum 6 inches thick, atop sand pack. A total of 15 air sparge wells are proposed to be installed within the PCE plume between Dorset Street and the building. Locations are shown on Figure 4 and a detailed schematic of sparge well assembly is shown in Figure 5. 11 of the 15 sparge wells will be installed atop the impeding clay layer. The remaining four sparge wells will be screened halfway between the impeding clay layer and the top of the static groundwater table. Each air sparge well will be constructed as follows: • 1-inch diameter schedule 40 PVC riser, • Schedule 40 PVC 0.01-inch machine slotted screen, screen interval for the deep sparge wells will be 13 to 14 ft below grade and the shallow sparge wells will be screened between 11 and 10 It below grade, • No. 0 sand pack will be used from the bottom of the well to 6 inches above the screen, • Bentonite/Portland cement grout mix well seal, minimum 12 inches thick, atop sand pack to a depth of 3 ft below grade. Due to the lateral dispersion of sparge air that is expected LBG will install a network of air chimneys to mitigate the potential for any PCE or its degradation products to be displaced from their original location and form during the process of sparging beneath the Site. Air chimneys will help to protect the building and other utility conduits from new PCE contamination by intercepting the lateral migration of sparge air and allowing the air to migrate upward through the air chimneys into the vadose zone, which will be under induced vacuum from the SVE system. Maintaining low levels of vacuum within the air chimneys will be central to their function, as vacuum will ensure that VOCs intercepted by the air chimneys are drawn back towards the treatment system rather than escaping from the treatment area. Vacuum in the air chimneys will be accomplished either as induced vacuum from soil vapor extraction wells in the vicinity, or by the direct application of vacuum to the chimneys, if necessary. Magnehelic gauges will be used to monitor the presence of induced vacuum in the air chimneys. A PID will be used to assess the presence of VOCs in the head space of the air chimneys. Under circumstances where positive pressure is produced from the air chimneys (i.e. during the first transient phase of sparging) applied vacuum may be required. We expect that the SVE wells will provide sufficient vacuum to overcome any positive pressure exerted by the sparge wells and conveyed through the air chimneys during normal operation. Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 17 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 45 air chimneys are proposed to surround the contaminated area. Locations are shown on Figure 4 and a detailed schematic of air chimney assembly is shown in Figure 5. The air chimneys will be spaced 10 feet apart on the northeastern and southern sides of the treatment area. Air chimneys will be spaced 5 feet apart along the western edge of the treatment area, parallel with the Dorset Street underdrain. Due to the large number of air chimneys proposed in the CAP, sections of adjacent air chimneys will be plumbed together. If necessary, vacuum can be applied to multiple chimneys while occupying only one port on the SVE influent manifold. Four of the air chimneys will act as "air detectors" which will be used to observe air flow patterns. These air detectors will be placed within the contaminant plume and will be used to monitor changes in VOC concentration during air sparging. Each air chimney and detector will be constructed as follows: • 1-inch diameter schedule 40 PVC riser, • Schedule 40 PVC 0.01-inch machine slotted screen, screen interval will be from 4 to 14 ft below grade, • No. 0 sand pack from the bottom of the well to 6 inches above the screen • Bentonite/Portland cement grout mix well seal of six inches atop sand pack to a depth of 3 ft below grade. All wells will be installed using direct push technology. 3.25-inch diameter casing will be used to install 1-inch diameter wells to minimize the amount of drill cuttings. 4-inch diameter casing will be driven to install the 2-inch diameter SVE wells. 5.4 Conveyance Piping Conveyance piping from the wells described in Section 5.3 to the remedial treatment compound will be as follows: SVE wells will be solvent welded to an individual conveyance pipe buried underground terminating beneath the remedial compound. SVE wells will be cut to the proper elevation to allow each individual SVE well conveyance line to drain back into the well. The conveyance piping will include schedule 40 PVC pipe and fittings. The use of two 45' elbows will be used in lieu of a 90' elbow whenever possible. Conveyance piping for the sparge air to each individual sparge well will include %- by '/- inch diameter low density polyethylene tubing (LDPE). The LDPE tubing will be sleeved in '/- inch high -density polyethylene (HDPE) tubing for protection. The air chimneys will include conveyance lines to every other air chimney along the north, west and south borders. The conveyance lines will include %- by %-inch diameter LDPE tubing manifolded together with the use of barbed fittings so that a total of four circuits, each consisting of four to six air chimneys will be conveyed to the treatment compound. The air chimneys along the eastern edge of the contaminant zone will not be equipped with conveyance piping. The conveyance piping will be buried below grade to a depth of approximately 3 feet Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 18 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 beneath the top of the existing asphalt surface. After the installation of all wells trenches will be excavated along the wells as depicted in Figure 4. A detailed schematic of conveyance pipe trench assembly is shown in Figure S. The trenching will accommodate as many conveyance lines as possible to minimize the amount of excavation. SVE conveyance piping will be covered with 4 inches of polystyrene rigid installation to provide additional frost protection. Soils will be backfilled and compacted to allow 3 inches of asphalt patch. Excavation in a grassy area between the parking lot and the Dorset Street sidewalk will be seeded and mulched. In order to excavate a trench along the northern side of the building existing shrubs will have to be temporarily removed and then replanted following completion of the trenching. The width of the trench along the north side of the building will be approximately 4 feet wide to accommodate all of the conveyance piping. Conveyance piping will be terminated beneath the location of the remedial compound. Conveyance of groundwater from the Dorset Street underdrain system will include 3/-inch diameter HDPE pipe insulated with AP/Armaflex foam insulation and sleeved inside a 2-inch diameter HDPE pipe. Continuous length of pipe is required in order to install the line into and through the existing storm drain that runs from the northern Dorset Street catch basin (CB-N) to a catch basin at the northeast corner of the building proximate to where the remedial compound will be located. The 3/-inch diameter pipe will be inserted up into the horizontal underdrain to approximately 3 feet. The pipe inlet will be equipped with a strainer. 5.5 Remedial Compound and Treatment Equipment 5.5.1 SVE System The 12 2-inch diameter SVE conveyance lines will be plumbed into the remedial compound and through a pipe manifold. The manifold will allow for independent adjustments to vacuum levels for each individual SVE well while the manifold will also allow for measurements of flow rate and collection of vapor samples. The manifold will be connected to an air -water separator where the water or moisture will drop out into a knockout tank and the air will proceed through a 400 CFM regenerative blower. Liquids will be pumped by a progressive cavity pump through a bag filter and liquid phase carbon system discussed below, in Section 5.5.3. The air leaving the blower will be cooled by a heat exchanger prior to entering the vapor phase carbon absorbers. Air leaving the vapor -phase carbon adsorbers will be exhausted to the atmosphere. In order to ensure that treatment of the vapor waste stream is optimized from environmental and economic perspectives, a flexible carbon vessel program will be used to treat vapors passing through the SVE/AS system. A flexible carbon vessel program will involve utilizing a variety of carbon vessels throughout the remedial program. During the startup phase of the remedial program, when VOC concentrations are expected to be highest, two 2,000-pound vapor -phase carbon adsorbers will be placed on-line. After VOC concentrations begin to decline the 2,000-pound vessels will be replaced by a series of 55-gallon drums filled with vapor -phase carbon. Larger carbon vessels will afford better detection of VOC breakthrough, which will be important during the initial startup period, when VOC concentrations are highest and metrics to predict carbon usage are being developed. Once carbon consumption rates can be accurately Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 19 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 predicted based on influent vapor VOC concentrations and once VOC concentrations begin to decrease, the 2,000-pound carbon adsorbers will be replaced by 55-gallon vapor -phase GAC drums. Four 55-gallon drums will replace each of the two 2,000-pound carbon adsorbers because each 55-gallon drum holds approximately 150 pounds of carbon and can accommodate 100 CFM of air flow. Methods for monitoring vapor- and liquid -phase VOC breakthrough is discussed in Section 5.6, System Startup and Shakedown. 5.5.2 Air Sparge System The air sparge system will consist of a rotary vane air compressor capable of applying 8 psi and up to 91 scfm through a manifold to each individual sparge point. The 15 line manifold will be equipped with flow meters and valves to regulate flow and pressure to each individual sparge point. 5.5.3 Liquid Treatment System Based on the observed flow expected from the Dorset Street underdrain system determined from the recent Rhodamine dye flow study conducted concurrently with the Pilot Study, the design flow rate range will be 5 to 10 gallons per minute. Water will be conveyed from the underdrain through the conveyance piping to the remedial compound with the use of a dual diaphragm pump. The dual diaphragm pump will be powered by a dedicated air compressor unit. The air compressor will be a 15 hp rotary screw compressor that is capable of providing 53 CFM and 60 PSI. To allow constant air supply to the diaphragm pump the compressor will be equipped through an air dryer and particulate filter to provide clean air to the pump. Water discharged from the dual diaphragm pump will feed directly into a 120-gallon collection tank, which will be equipped with floats and will activate a transfer pump to remove water from the tank to be pumped through the bag filters and into the carbon. Water quality passing through the liquid treatment system will monitored under General Discharge Permit No. 3-9004. 5.5.4. Remedial Compound The remedial compound will include an enclosed trailer that will consist of two rooms. One room will be the control room and the second room will be a process room containing the vapor and liquid treatment system. The control room will contain the air compressor to run the diaphragm pump and also the air sparge system. An electrical main fuse disconnect will be mounted on the outside of the trailer to allow connection to an existing electrical meter socket at the rear of the Greer's building. The trailer will be approximately 34 feet long, 8 feet wide and 9 feet tall. The trailer will be insulated for winter operation and will contain heaters with thermostats and fans to ventilate the trailer as necessary. Passive louvers will also be installed to allow air into the trailer. Depending on the exact location of the remedial compound a chain -link fence with privacy screening will be installed to shield the trailer from the retail portion of the Site. A schematic drawing of the treatment compound and a process and instrumentation diagram can be found in Appendix 5. Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 20 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 5.6 System Startup and Shake Down Following installation of all wells and the conveyance network the SVE system will be started and balanced to maximize air flow and PCE removal efficiency. Induced vacuum and depth to water measurements in nearby wells, air chimneys and air detectors will be measured to observe the radius of influence of the SVE system. Routine Site visits will be made during the first two weeks of operation to make adjustments to the system as required and to ensure steady, continuous operation of the SVE system. When performance is demonstrated to be satisfactory and troubleshooting is complete LBG will prepare and submit a startup report including as -built construction details and startup data. In order to prevent vapor- and liquid -phase carbon breakthrough LBG will use a combination of theoretical calculations of the carbon adsorption capacity for PCE and its degradation compounds, data from air and water samples colleted for laboratory analysis, and field monitoring instruments. Adsorption capacity calculations will provide an estimate for the volume of contaminants that can be treated by the carbon vessels. Analytical data will provide insight into the actual contaminant concentrations passing through each carbon vessel, which will allow us to detect breakthrough and calculate the actual volume of VOCs treated by the carbon. Field instruments, such as a PID, will provide real-time estimates of VOC concentrations passing through the treatment system, providing data that can be used in theoretical calculations of carbon consumption. An IonScience PID and ppbRAE PID equipped with 10.6 eV lamps will be employed to monitor contaminant concentrations in the vapor waste stream. The instruments have detection limits of 0.1 ppm and 1 ppb, respectively. Utilizing both PIDs will allow LBG to monitor a wide rage of VOC concentrations in the vapor waste stream. PID measurements should be made as often as daily during the initial days of the startup phase of SVE/AS at the Site. As LBG's ability to predict carbon consumption improves the frequency of VOC monitoring will be significantly decreased. Air quality samples will also be collected using Tedlar® bags from sample ports at the influent, mid -stream and effluent stages of the vapor -phase carbon treatment system. Tedlar® bags afford a quick turn around while minimizing undue costs associated with rush TAT due to their 48 hour hold time. Endyne, Inc. will be used to analyze Tedlar® bag samples in order to perform analyses within the allotted hold time. Tedlar® bag air samples will be analyzed by a modified U.S. EPA Method No. 8260B procedure, which affords a VOC detection limit of 10 µg/m3. As with PID measurements, air quality sample collection will occur at a higher frequency during the initial startup period. Confidence in predicting carbon consumption (and estimating breakthrough) or a reduction in VOC concentrations to levels below the method detection limit will serve as a guide for adjusting the frequency of Tedlar® air bag sample collection. The liquid waste stream will be monitored according to General Discharge Permit No. 3- 9004. Water samples will be collected by standard U.S. EPA 8260B procedures, using 40 mL glass vials preserved with hydrochloric acid. In order to obtain data in a useful period of time for detecting carbon breakthrough, a rush TAT may be requested. Samples may also be hand -delivered Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 21 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 to a local laboratory (i.e. Endyne Inc.) to reduce the TAT by a day that would otherwise be involved with shipping samples to an out-of-state laboratory. A VOC detection limit of 1 µg/L will be obtained by this method. 5.7 Operation and Maintenance A general operation and maintenance schedule for the SVE system is presented below, in Table 5.7-1. Tohlo S_ 7-1_ nnomtinn r& Mnintnnnnr& Srhedule_ Tri Task Weekly Bi-Monthly Monthly Notes Annually Electrical Meter Reading Groundwater Monitoring PID Reading Depth To Groundwater Induced Vacuum O&M Report g Download Data Inspect Well heads Discharge Monitoring Clean Knock As Needed Out Tank Change GAC As Needed Change Bag As Needed Filters Air Sampling Inspect Wye As Needed Strainer Monitoring of the SVE/AS and containment system will involve inspecting plumbing, hardware, pumps, tanks, filters, and electrical connections for integrity. Please refer to the ProAct Services Corporation Operation and Maintenance Manual for a schedule of Preventative Maintenance. Monitoring of vapor- and liquid -phase waste streams will continue throughout the duration of SVE/AS activity at the Site. Data collected during these monitoring events will be utilized to revise carbon usage estimates to optimize carbon efficiency while preventing VOC breakthrough. 5.8 System Monitoring The SVE system will initially be monitored thoroughly on a weekly basis, with the potential for vapor quality monitoring to occur more frequently if LBG is concerned about VOC Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 22 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 breakthrough. As system performance warrants frequency of the monitoring will be increased or decreased. Air quality, vacuum levels, flow rates temperatures, and vapor concentrations will be measured during routine system monitoring visits. Induced vacuum levels will be measured in the nearby air chimneys to evaluate the effective radius of influence of the system. At least one complete round of monitoring data will be collected and submitted for each month of SVE system operation. Operation and Maintenance Reports will be submitted on a tri-annual basis and an Annual Report will be submitted including pertinent data and a system performance evaluation. Vapor samples will be collected during the initial startup and submitted for laboratory analysis for PCE and other volatile organic compounds this data will be compared to concurrent PID measurements to obtain a correction factor for determining mass removal rates. Routine sampling of the liquid treatment system will be performed according to the discharge permit. The introduction of sparge air will begin following steady-state operation of the SVE system after a noticeable decline in PID concentrations has been observed. Initially sparging of shallow wells will be implemented and monitored to determine the effectiveness of the sparging. Subsequently deeper sparge points will be introduced and monitored to determine the effectiveness of the sparging. Introduction of sparging should eventually provide an increase in dissolved oxygen, a rise in the groundwater table and subsequently an increase in SVE concentrations. However, a pulsed sparging cycle is recommended as sparging tends to create air channels in the subsurface. Pulse sparging will allow air channels to collapse and then be re-created when sparging is reactivated, improving the surface area of contact between sparge air and contaminated soil and groundwater. 5.9 Groundwater Monitoring Dissolved PCE distribution downgradient of and within the source area appears to be well defined by the current groundwater monitoring well network and storm drain and surface water monitoring. Groundwater monitoring and outfall sampling should be conducted on a tri-annual basis, in April, July and November. Laboratory reports should be included with the Operation and Maintenance Reports. There are a number of groundwater monitoring wells currently in the monitoring well network that could be removed from the groundwater sampling program. The recommended groundwater monitoring should include the following wells and storm drain / surface water locations: MW-1, MW-2, MW-102S, MW-201, MW-202, MW-302, MW-303, MW- 401, CB-N, and the Outfall. MW-102S, MW-202 and MW-401 represent the source area wells, while the remaining wells will be regarded as perimeter wells. Depth to groundwater will be monitored in all accessible groundwater monitoring wells at the time of groundwater sampling. LBG also recommends sampling CB-S, Sta-1, Sta-2 and Sta-3 after 12 months of SVE/AS operation to confirm that the effects of PCE remediation at CB-N and the Outfall are representative of the upstream and downstream effects. 6.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE AND COORDINATION A list of anticipated subcontractors to be involved with the project is included in Table 4 Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 23 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Rev. 1.0 LBG will initiate the project following the mandatory two -week public comment period. During the course of the project updates will be presented verbally and in tri-annual Operation and Maintenance Reports and an Annual Report. A schedule of events has been developed and is provided as Table S. 6.4 Disposal of Waste LBG will use direct push methods to install the wells which will eliminate waste associated with drill cuttings. Spent carbon will be transported and disposed of by Environmental Products and Services of Vermont, Inc. (EPS). A carbon recycling program may be used to reduce the amount of waste requiring off -Site disposal. Excess soil from the conveyance pipe trenching will be segregated and screened for disposal options. Efforts will be made to backfill all PCE contaminated soil and to dispose of non contaminated soil of -Site. 6.5 Cost Estimate The detailed opinion of probable cost to construct, operate and maintain the remedial system for up to 20 consecutive months is shown on attached Table 6. We have estimated a carbon budget of $65,000 for the proposed remedial time period. The actual volume of carbon consumed will ultimately depend on the mass of PCE and its degradation products removed from the Site, as well as carbon adsorption effiency. Our carbon monitoring and management plan is designed to maximize carbon adsorption capacity while preventing VOC breakthrough, thereby optimizing carbon use at the Site. 6.6 Schedule A CAP schedule depicting the anticipated timing of various CAP components is provided on attached Table S. The construction of the wells and conveyance system should be done in the spring of 2010. Currently half of the retail space facing Dorset Street within the Site Building is unoccupied and available for lease. It will be desirable to complete the most intrusive portion of this remedial plan prior to a tenant occupying the space. The lead time for the treatment system is approximately 10 weeks which can be done during the winter months and be ready for start up in the Spring of 2010. 6.7 Subcontractors A list of subcontractors and suppliers used for this project is provided in Table 4. Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 24 p ty • .� * # #� it fi • li -�,., � � � '� • sh r so , • • � • J 4% , • r • % ■ • •• 4 outh SIT • E3 u/ington f I, LOCATrill grt ' ic"Ountry Club w as so so �� +�� ,,•r�' ! � � I � r • �t� �.�-'~ � � • � JIB M� I• t u ' •s r ' ` ` COPY_41GHT (C) MAMN, INC. (978) 79211Aoe � - t SOURCE: UNITED STATES GEOGRAPHICAL SURVEY 7.5 MINU7E TOPOGRAPHIC MAP FOR THE BURLINGTON, VT QUADRANGLE. N 0 1,000 SCALE IN FEET F GREERS HOUSE OF DRY CLEANING 10 DORSET STREET SO. BURLINGTON, VT SITE LOCATION MAP PREPARED BY: Jam; LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. o Professional Ground -hater and &Yironmental Services 76 Pearl Street; Suite 203 r Essex Junction, VT 05452 (802) 286-9600 DATE: 7 17 06 UERS 1DRAWN BY: DID ICHEMD BY. JRD FIGURE: 1 li 4 1 I WA I 2 G O SB- 1 N � MW-1 = EXISTING MONITORING WELL (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) Sd STORM DRAIN (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) ® CATCH BASIN (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) Ing NATURAL GAS LINE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) P ELECTRIC LINE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) S SEWER (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) FIBER OPTIC LINE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) VAPOR POINT TO BE REPLACED SPARGE POINT TO BE REPLACED GRAPHIC SCALE 0 10 20 40 ( IN FEET ) REFERENCES: 1 inch = 20 ft. THIS PLAN REFERENCES PLAN PREPARED BY THE VERTERRE IGROUP, INC. ENTITLED "SITE PLAN" AUGUST 4, 2005, PROJECT NUMBER 05045, AWNING TRENCH TO TREATMENT SYSTEM VACANT (FORMERLY MILLS GREER SPORTING STORE ORIGINAL DRY MACHINE (APPI OLD DRAIN REMOVED — AW-201 PHOT RDEN (FOR LY EER'S ANING) CARWASH TRACKS 2D LAU N DRO MAT GAS REGULATOR LEGEND N N SPARGE POINT I SPARGE MONITORING POINT (EXISTING OR PROPO: SHALLOW SPARGE POINT/ SHALLOW SPARGE MONITORING PO. (PROPOSED) o 1 VAPOR POINT / VAPOR MONITORING POINT (VADOSE ZONE) (EXISTING OR PROPOSED) 6M EXTRACTION WELL (EXISTING OR PROPOSED) .I SPARGE AIR CHIMNEY OR AIR DETECTOR (PROPOSED) PROPERTY LINE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) O APPROXIMATE RADIUS OF INFLUENCE GREERS HOUSE OF DRY CLEANING 10 DORSET STREET SO. BURLINGTON, VT PROPOSED SITE PLAN PREPARED BY: LEGGEM, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. _ ;•al Proleavonal Groundwater and Rovironmental Services M^ 76 Pearl Street; Suite 203 Essex Junction, VT 05452 (802) 288-9600 DATE: l .. 9 Q.�G�s DRAWN BY: DDR CHECI�D BY: JRD FIGURE: 4 TYPICAL BURIED PIPE TRENCH FINAL GRADE 24" - 36" APPROVED NATIVE BACKFILL TO FINAL GRADE (COMPACTED IN 8" LIFTS +/-) 3/8" ID LDPE TUBING ENCASED I IN 3/4" ID BLACK HDPE TUBING 33.5 36" 2" THICK POLYSTYRENE INSULATION _ 0 0 0 0 0 2 LAYERS 0000 4"+/- SAND 2" SCH 40 PVC PIPING FOR SVE LINES -MINIMUM SPACING - N.T.S. 2 PIPE DIAMETERS NOTES: 1. MANIFOLD PIPING SHALL SLOPE BACK TOWARD THE WELL. 2. PVC PIPING SHOULD NOT BE CONNECTED DIRECTLY TO THE AIR COMPRESSOR. 9. AN OIL -FREE COMPRESSOR OR STANDARD COMPRESSOR WITH DOWNSTREAM COALESCING PARTICULATE FILTERS SHALL BE USED. TYPICAL SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL DETAIL --FINAL GRADE TYPICAL SPARGE POINT DETAIL STAINLESS STEEL BAND 3/4" MALE X 3/8" BARB ADAPTER TRENCH 90° SCH 40 PVC ELBOW GROUT - 1 " SCH 40 PVC -- 40 SARD �i '0 PVC 0.010 • POINTWELL TYPICAL AIR CHIMNEY DETAIL AERIAL VIEW 3' 90' SCH 40 PVC ELBOW / TRENCH i I TO SVE BLOWER `2" SCH 40 PVC 90' SCH 40 PVC ELBOW STAINLESS STEEL BAND • 6" BENTONITE SEAL 3/4" MALE X 3/8" BARB ADAPTER #0 SAND r WYE 3/8"X1/2" LDPE TUBING 2" SCH 40 PVC 0.010 SLOT 4' (? ; WATER TABLE SS TO REMEDIAL 5TRAILER WELL POINT A N.T.S. N.T.S. NOTES: I. MANIFOLD PIPING SHALL SLOPE BACK TOWARD THE WELL. 2. FILTER PACK MATERIAL AND SCREEN SLOT SIZE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE GRAIN SIZE OF SURROUNDING SOILS. El N.T.S. INAL GRADE 3/8"X1/2" LDPE ^TUBING TO REMEDIAL -s TRAILER _3/4" ID BLACK HDPE TUBING 0 WATER TABLE TABLE 1 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning Adjacent Properties Adjacent Property Property Owner Friendly's Restaurant Larkin Tarrant Hoehl Partnership 1 Dorset Street c/o Robert & Diane Smith So. Burlington, VT 23 Concord Street Plattsburgh, NY 12901 University Inn & Suites Larkin Tarrant Hoehl Partnership 5 Dorset Street 410 Shelburne Road So. Burlington, VT So. Burlington, VT 05403 Shopping Plaza Tekram Partners 100 Dorset Street 2 Market Street So. Burlington, VT So. Burlington, VT 05403 Shell Station Champlain Oil Company, Inc. 1055 Williston Road 45 San Remo Drive So. Burlington, VT So. Burlington, VT 05403 Vermont Gift Barn Charles & Janet Perkins 1087 Williston Road 80 South Cove Road So. Burlington, VT Burlington, VT 05407 Leggette, Brashears Graham, Inc TABLE 2 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning SVE/AS Pilot Study Field Data August 12, 2009 Personnel: JD, DR & KC Barometric pressure: 29.74 in. Hg Relative Humidity: 56.5% H€AD$PACE Time Vapor Monitoring Locations VP-1 VP-2 VP-3 VP-4 VE-2 �VE-3 Notes in. H2O ppmv in. H2O ppmv in. H2O ppmv in. H2O ppmv in. H2O ppmv in. H2O ppmv 11:52 0 1.081 0 1.177 1 0 246.2 0 22.3 -- 145.8 -- 2.472 -- VE-1 Time Extraction Well: VE-1 Vapor Monitoring Locations GAC Treatment Vac. Velocity** Temp PID Flow VP-1 VP-2 JVP-3 VP-4 IVE-2 VE-3 Inf PID mid PID Eff PID in H2O fpm C ppmv SCFM in. H2O in. H2O in. H2O in. H2O in. H2O in. H2O ppmv ppmv ppmv Notes 13:48 -0.007 26 87.8 648 1.22 0 0.015 0.085 0.005 0 0.005 648 0.9 0.7 Vacuum at Level 1 14:18 -0.002 18 90 308* 0.84 0.005 0.025 0.085 0.015 0.015 0.015 308* -- -- -- 14:48 -0.001 50 84.7 730 2.35 0.005 0.025 0.085 0.015 0.015 0.015 730 - -- -- 15:07 -0.002 102 84.6 1,058 4.79 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1,058 -- -- Increased vacuum to Level 2 15:22 0 55 86.9 1,048 2.58 0.05 0.09 0.3 0.05 0.03 0.035 1,048 2.7 0.7 -- 15:37 2t -- -- 1,131 - 0.045 0.08 1 0.3 0.45 0.45 0.35 1,131 1-- -- -- 16:07 -0.002 160 89.7 -- 7.51 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Increased vacuum to Level 3 16:14 101 -- -- 1,306 -- -- -- - -- -- -- 1,306 1.7 0.1 -- 16:22 -- -- -- 1,391 -- 0.16 0.45 1.25 0.25 0.185 0.185 1,391 -- -- -- 16:37 0.002/10t 190 85.7 1,286 8.91 0.155 0.45 1.25 0.25 0.185 0.185 1,286 -- -- -- 16:47 -- -- -- -- - - -- - -- -- -- I -- -- -- Shut down SVE 16:49 -- -- -- -- -- 0.01 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 -- -- -- 16:54 -- -- -- -- -- 0 1 -- -- -- -- I -- -- -- -- -- Notes: 1. Applied vacuum, velocdy, barometric pressure and temperature measurements were made using a TSI 9555 instrument calibrated by Pine Environmental unless otherwise noted. Influent PID measurements were taken from a Tedlar bag filled within a vacuum desiccator, using a PhoCheck 1000 calibrated to 100 ppmv isobutylene; Mid -stream and effluent PID measurements were made by directly inserting the PID into the air stream. Induced vacuum measurements were made using magnehelic gauges; Headspace PID measurements were made directly with the PhoCheck 1000 unit. 2. In. Hg - inches of mercury; VE-1 - vapor extraction well # 1; vac. - applied vacuum; in. H2O - inches of water; fpm - feet per minute; temp - temperature *C; VP-1 - vapor monitoring point # 1; ppmv - parts per million by volume; GAC - granular activated carbon; PID - photoionization detector; inf - influent; mid - mid -stream; eff - effluent; SVE - soil vapor extraction; psi - pounds per square inch; SP-1 - sparge point # 1; SCFM - standard cubic feet per minute. 3. Calibrated temperature gauge with the TSI 9555 at 13:48. 4. * PID measurement made without simultaneously squeezing the Tedlar bag; PID measurement is likely biased low. 5. t Applied vacuum was measured with a Pitot tube and magnehelic gauge. 6. ** Velocity measurements made with the TSI 9555 on 8/12/09 are suspect due to the presence of air leaks around the probe insertion point into the SVE air stream. Leggette, Brashears Graham, Inc. GREER'S PILOT STUDY August 13, 2009 Personnel: JD, DR & KC Barometric pressure: 29.83 in. Hg Relative Humidity: 47.2% HEADSPAGE Time Vapor Monitoring Locations VP-1 VP-2 VP-3 VP-4 VE-1 VE-2 VE-3 in. H2O ppmv in. H2O ppmv in. HZO ppmv in. H2O ppmv in. H2O ppmv in. H2O ppmv in. H2O ppmv Notes 9:51 0 111.1 0 389.6 0 407.2 0 1 500.6 1 0__t 694.2 0 168.2 0 1,417 -- VE-1 Time Extraction Well: VE-1 Vapor Monitoring Locations GAC Treatment Vac. Velocity Temp PID Flow VP-1 VP-2 VP-3 VP-4 VE-2 VE-3 Inf PID mid PID Eff PID Notes in. H2O fpm C ppmv SUM in. H2O in. H2O in. H2O in. H2O in. H2O in. H2O ppmv ppmv ppmv 11:38 -0.003/10' 300 79.1 1,366 14.38 0.165 0.45 1.25 0.25 0.15 0.17 1,366 7.5 0.3 Applied vacuum at Level 2 11:53 -0.003 300 80.8 1,174 14.38 0.165 0.425 1.15 0.25 0.17 0.175 1,174 -- -- -- 12:13 - __ 340 -- - -_ 16.29 -- -- _- - -- -- 12:18 -0.004 700 85.4 1,212 33.55 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Increased vacuum to Level 3 12:33 -0.003 622 85.4 960$ 29.81 0.5 1.0 3.0 0.65 0.45 0.55 9W -- -- 12:48 -0.003 651 86.6 907 31.20 0.5 1.0 3.0 0.65 0.45 0.55 907 4.5 -- -- 13:11 1 Reduced vacuum to Level 2 13:26 -0.003/101 510 89.4 968.2 1 24.44 1 0.19 0.5 1.3 0.3 0.17 0.19 968.2 2.7 0.3 1-- VE�1 AND VE-2 Time Extraction Well: VE-1 & VE-2 Vapor Monitoring Locations GAC Treatment Vac. Velocity Temp PID Flow VP-1 VP-2 VP-3 JVP-4 VE-2 IVE-3 Inf PID mid PID Eff PID in. H2O fpm C ppmv SUM in. H2O in. H2O in. H2O in. H2O in. H2O in. H2O ppmv ppmv ppmv Notes 14:05 -0.001/111 200 85.5 82.5 9.58 -- -- -- -- -- -- 82.5 2.0 0.5 Added VE-2 online 14:20 -0.001 /11 t 230 1 89.6 712 11.02 0.175 0.5 1.25 1 0.4 1 0.19 712 -- -- -- Time Extraction Well: VE-2 Vac. Velocity in. H2O fpm Temp C PID ppmv Flow SUM VP-1 in. H2O VP-2 in. H2O VE 2 Vapor Monitoring Locations VP-3 VP-4 VE-2 in. H2O I in. H2O in. H2O VE-3 in. H2O GAC Treatment Inf PID mid PID Eff PID Notes ppmv ppmv ppmv 14:33 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- VE-1 -- -- -- -- Removed VE-1 from vacuum 14:48 141 485 88.2 535 23.24 0 0.015 0.035 0.115 0.1 0.005 -- -- -- -- 15:05 13.51 395 89.7 520 18.93 0 0.015 0.04 0.1 0.1 0.0051 520 4.2 0.3 -- 15:48 -- -- -- 537.8 -- -- I -- -- -- -- -- I -- -- -- Compare PID to summa # 1 Time Extraction Well: VE-3 Vac. Velocity in. H2O fpm Temp C PID ppmv Flow SUM VP-1 in. H2O VP-2 I in. H2O VE2 Vapor Monitoring Locations VP-3 VP-4 VE-1 in. H2O in. H2O in. H2O VE-2 in. H2O GAC Treatment Inf PID mid PID Eff PID Notes ppmv ppmv ppmv 15:55 5t 620 88.8 1,165 29.71 0.7 1.1 1.375 1.15 1.15 0.2 1,165 -- -- Replaced VE-2 with VE-3 16:05 -- -- -- 836 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 836 -- -- -- 16:10 5t 760 90.7 -- 36.42 0.65 1.1 1.4 1.2 1.15 0.2 -- -- -- -- 16:19 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Increase vacuum to Level 3 16:34 9t 1,009 89.1 1 666.E 1 48.35 1.1 1.75 2.25 1.85 1.85 0.25 1 666.6 3.5 1 0.2 -- Notes: 1. Applied vacuum, velocity, barometric pressure and temperature measurements were made using a TSI 9555 instrument calibrated by Pine Environmental unless otherwise noted. Influent PID measurements were taken from a Tedlar bag filled within a vacuum desiccator, using a PhoCheck 1000 calibrated to 100 ppmv isobutylene; Mid -stream and effluent PID measurements were made by directly inserting the PID into the air stream. Induced vacuum measurements were made using magnehelic gauges; Headspace PID measurements were made directly with the PhoCheck 1000 unit. 2. In. Hg - inches of mercury; VE-1 - vapor extraction well # 1; vac. - applied vacuum; in. H2O - inches of water; fpm - feet per minute; temp - temperature °C; VP-1 - vapor monitoring point # 1; ppmv - parts per million by volume; GAC - granular activated carbon; PID - photoionization detector; inf - influent; mid - mid -stream; eff - effluent; SVE - soil vapor extraction; psi - pounds per square inch; SP-1 - sparge point # 1; SCFM - standard cubic feet per minute. 3. Calibrated temperature gauge with the TSI 9555 on 8/13/09 at 13:48. 4. * PID measurement made without simultaneously squeezing the Tedlar bag; PID measurement is likely biased low. 5. t Applied vacuum was measured with a Pitot tube and magnehelic gauge. 6. $ PID measurement was taken directly from SVE system. 7. Summa canister sample # 1 was collected from a Tedlar bag filled from the GAC influent within a vacuum desiccator. 8. Adjusted TSI 9555 velocity measurements to reflect a 30 second average at 12:13; greater stability in velocity readings was observed henceforth. Leggette, Brashears Graham, Inc. TABLE 2 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning SVE/AS Pilot Study Field Data August 14, 2009 Personnel: JD & KC Barometric pressure: 29.89 in. Hg Relative Humidity: 40.9% HEADSPADE Time Vapor monitoring locations VP-1 VP-2 JVP-3 VP-4 VE-1 VE-2 IVE-3 Notes in. H2O ppmv in. H2O ppmv in. H2O ppmv in. H2O ppmv in. H2O ppmv in. H2O ppmv in. H2O ppmv 9:51 0 45.6 0 1 213.6 0 206.8 0 1 114.7 1 0 328.2 0 1 135.4 0 963.8 -- V 1 ARID VE=2- Time Extraction Well: VE-1 & VE-2 Vapor Monitoring Locations GAC Treatment Vac. Velocity Temp PID Flow VP-1 VP-3 VP-4 VE-2 VE-3 Inf PID mid PID Eff PID Notes in. H2O fpm C ppmv SUM JVP-2 in. H2O in. H2O in. H2O in H2O in. H2O in. H2O ppmv ppmv ppmv 10:25 10 t 274 76.4 720.E 13.13 -- -- -- -- - -- 720.6 1.1 0 Vacuum applied to VE-1 land VE-2 at Level 2 10:45 -- -- -- 890 -- 0.16 0.35 1.2 0.35 0.17 890 0.02 0 -- 15:15 -- -- -- __ -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Re -applied vacuum to VE- 1 and VE-2 at Level 3 15:24 -- 360 - 482 1 17.25 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Time Extraction Well: VE-1 & VE-2 Vac. Velocity Temp PID Flow in. H2O fpm C ppmv SUM Sparge Well: SP-2 Press. psi VE-1, VE-2 AND Sparge Monitoring Locations SP-1 SP-3 psi psi SP 2 GAC Treatment Inf PID mid PID Eff PID ppmv ppmv ppmv Notes 11:00 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- AS malfunction; SVE turned off. 12:40 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Vacuum re -applied to VE-1 and VE-2 at Level 2 12:49 -- -- -- 860 - 5 1 0.01 0.015 -- -- -- AS applied to SP-2 13:00 -- -- -- 806 - 6 0.1$$ -- -- -- -- -- 13:23 -- -- -- 799.8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - 13:41 -0.004 230 1 93.2 1 827 11.02 6 0.005 -- 827 0.8 0 Groundwater discharging to ground surface through SP-3 14:00 -- 380 1 89 640 18.21 lAdjusted vacuum to Level 3; Turned off AS 14:07 -- -- -- --L -- 0 -- 0 -- -- -- -- Time Extraction Well: VE-1 Velocity PID fpm ppmv VE4 AND SP-1 Sparge Well: SP-1 Flow Press. Notes SCFM psi 14:24 400 749.2 19.17 -- Removed VE-2 from vacuum 14:32 -- -- -- 5.25 AS turned on in SP-1 14:35 -- I 765 -- -- -- 14:40 -- 739 -- -- -- 14:50 -- 720 -- -- -- 14:58 1 -- -- -- -- Turned off AS; PID in SP-1 tubing = >2,800 ppmv. VE3 AND SP3 Time Extraction Well: VE-2 Sparge Well: SP-3 Sparge Monitoring Locations Velocity PID Flow Press. SP-2 Notes fpm ppmv SUM psi psi 15:28 -- -- -- -- -- Removed VE-1 from vacuum 15.37 780 523 37.38 -- -- -- 15:40 -- -- -- 3.5 0.25 AS re -plumbed and applied to SP-P 495 -- -- -- -- 16:05 -- 560 -- -- -- Turned off AS; PID in SP-3 tubing = 80.3 ppmv. VE Z AND SP-3 Time Extraction Well: VE-3 PID Notes ppmv 16:15 785 Compare PID to summa # 2 Notes: 1. Applied vacuum, velocity, barometric pressure and temperature measurements were made using a TSI 9555 instrument calibrated by Pine Environmental unless otherwise noted. Influent PID measurements were taken from a Tedlar bag filled within a vacuum desiccator, using a PhoCheck 1000 calibrated to 100 ppmv isobutylene; Mid -stream and effluent PID measurements were made by directly inserting the PID into the air stream. Induced vacuum measurements were made using magnehelic gauges; Headspace PID measurements were made directly with the PhoCheck 1000 unit. 2. In. Hg - inches of mercury; VE-1 - vapor extraction well # 1; vac. - applied vacuum; in. H2O - inches of water; fpm - feet per minute; temp - temperature °C; VP-1 - vapor monitoring point # 1; ppmv - parts per million by volume; GAC - granular activated carbon; PID - photoionization detector; inf - influent; mid - mid -stream; eff - effluent; SVE - soil vapor extraction; psi - pounds per square inch; SP-1 - sparge point # 1; SUM - standard cubic feet per minute. 3. Calibrated temperature gauge with the TSI 9555 on 8/13/09 at 13:48. 4. * PID measurement made without simultaneously squeezing the Tedlar bag; PID measurement is likely biased low. 5. t Applied vacuum was measured with a Pitot tube and magnehelic gauge. 6. $ PID measurement was taken directly from SVE system. 7. Summa canister sample # 2 was collected from a Tedlar bag filled from the GAC influent within a vacuum desiccator. 8. Adjusted TSI 9555 velocity measurements to reflect a 30 second average at 12:13; greater stability in velocity readings was observed henceforth. 9. 1st attempt to start AS system at 11:00 failed due to excessive back pressure on the sparge compressor from 1/4-inch diameter tubing; AS system re -plumbed with 1/2-inch diameter tubing. AS was successfully started at 12:49. 10. tt Almost immediate pressure response in SP-1 after increasing the sparge pressure in SP-2. 11. Back pressure in SP-1 post-sparging caused water to spurt from the tubing following removal of the quick connect. 12. tt Almost immediate pressure response in SP-2 following AS on SP-3. Leggette, Brashears Graham, Inc. TABLE 2 Greens House of Dry Cleaning SVE/AS Pilot Study Field Data August 24, 2009 Personnel: JD, DR & KC Barometric pressure: 29.76 in. Hg Relative Humidity: 61.6% HEADSPACE - Time Vapor Monitoring Locations VP-1 JVP-2 JVP-3 JVP-4 VE-1 VE-2 VE-3 in H2O ppmv in H2O ppmv in. H2O ppmv in H2O ppmv in H2O ppmv in H2O ppmv in H2O ppmv Notes 0 1 35.2 1 0 1 1,478 0 1,556 0 1,235 0 1,272 1 0 557.3 1 0 1 2,079 1 - VE-t AND VE-2 Time Extraction Well: VE-1 & VE-2 Vapor Monitoring Points GAC treatment Vac. Velocity Temp PID VP-1 VP-2 VP-3 VP-4 JVE3 Inf PID mid PID EffPID Notes in Hg fpm C ppmv in H2O n. H2O in H2O j1n H2O in H2O ppmv ppmv ppmv 11:57 0.0008' 600 83.6 815 0.165 0.28 1.1 035 0.25 815 0.6 0.2 SVE at Level 2 12:24 0.0009" 501 86.8 890 0.17 0.4 1.1 0.3 0.25 890 VE-1 ANOVIE-2 Time Extraction Well: VE-1 & VE-2 Sparge Well: SP-2 Sparge Monitoring MW-401 MW-303 Locations Velocity PID Flow Concentration Removal Press. SP-1 SP-3 DTW DO DTW Press. Notes fpm ppmv m3/min mg/m3 Ibs/day psi psi psi ft mg/L ft psi 12:44 - __ 3 0.09 12:45 - - - - 0.13 - - - 12:46 - -- -- - -- -- 0.15 - - - -- - 12:47 - -- -- - - 0.16 - - - 12:48 - - - - 0.16 - - - 12-49 - - - - - 0.155 - - - 12.50 - - - - 0.15 - 7.85 - - - 12:54 501 840 0.68 5,695 12.29 - - 7.8 _ 12-56 - - - - 0.12 1 - 7.76 - 12.59 - - - - 01 - - - 13:01 - - - - - - 0.09 - - - - 13:03 - - - - - 0.07 - 7.7 - 13:06 - - - - - 0.07 - - - - 13:07 - - - - - 7.65 - - 13:09 501 - _9J7=: 0.68 6,199 13.37 - 0.07 - - - 13:12 - - - - - 0.075 - 7.6 - - 13:16 - - - 0.077 - 7.55 - - - 13:18 501 = ==982 == 0.68 6,638 14.32 - 0.085 - - - - 13-20 - - - - - 0.09 - - - - 13:21 - - - -2.4 0.09 7.5 - - - 13:23 - - - - - 0.09 - - - - 13:28 501 0.68 6,598 1423 - 0.095 - 7.45 - - - 1334 - - - - - 0.11 - - - - 13:37 - - - - 0.115 7.4 - - - 13:43 - - - - - 0.12 - - - 13:46 501 -- - 950-- 0.68 6,422 13.85 0.12 - - - - 1351 - - - 0.15 - - - 13:57 501 -----907- - 068 6,131 13.23 - 0.235 - 735 - 14:01 501 w868 0.68 5,868 12.66 - 0.35 - - - - - 14:08 -- - -- -- _ 0.55 7.35 - - 14:12 - - 0.6 0.3 - 14:13 - - - - - 0.75 - - 14:17 501 -884--7 0.68 5,976 12.89 - 0.75 - - - - - 14:20 501 0.68 5,577 12.03 - 0.5 0.005 7.35 - - - 14:27 - - - 0.25 0.005 - - 14:31 501 068 5,935 12.80 0 0.04 7.35 - - 14:38 501 -----887--- 0.68 5,996 12.93 0 0 7.35 - - - 14-42 501 .__845=_. 068 5,712 12.32 - 0 0 7.35 - - 14:56 501 -840-- 0.68 5,678 12.25 - - 7.35 - - - 14:59 501 068 5,543 11.96 - - - - - 15:05 501 --=840= _= 0.68 5,678 12.25 - - - - - 15:15 501 - _ 838_�- 0.68 5,665 12.22 - - - - 15:21 501 8]T 0.68 5,523 11.91 - _ 15-27 501 ----847---- 0.68 5,726 1235 - - - 735 - 15:30 501 =-84:1----- 0.68 5,685 12.26 4 - - - 1533 501 843-.-- 0.68 5,699 12.29 0.2 7.35 - - - Water began bubbling out of SP-3 15.37 - - - - - - 7.3 - - - 15:42 501 --=-839---- 0.68 5,672 12.23 - 0.425 - 7.2 - - 15:44 - - - - - - 0.45 - 7.15 - - - - 15:47 - -- - - 0.45 - 7.1 - - - - 15:49 501 --_825_- 0.68 5,577 12.03 - 0.5 - - - - 15:51 - - - 7.05 - - 1554 501 819-- 0.68 5,536 11 94 0.8 - -- 15:55 - - - - 7 - - - 16:00 - _ - - 08 6.95 - - - 16:02 501 77.4 0.68 5,232 11.29 0.5 - - - - - - 16:09 501 -685 --= 0.68 4,631 9.99 0.425 - 6.9 - - - 16.13 - - - - - - - - - - - SVE on VE-2 only. 1614 501 __ :452-;_-: 0.68 1 3,056 6.59 - 16-17 501 -----698_--. 0.68 4,718 10.18 0 - - SVE on VE-1 only. 16:19 - - - - - - 6.85 - - - 16:23 501 - -723-- 0.68 4,887 10.54 - - - - - 16:32 - - - - 5 - - 0.43 - - 16:34 501 648 -- 0.68 4,380 9.45 - - 6.8 - - SVE on VE-1 and VE-2. 16:39 - -- - - - 4.5 - 6.75 0.58 - 16:42 501 = =658 = 0.68 4,448 9.59 - 9 - - 0.88 - 16-50 - - - - - - 11 - _ - - 1657 501 - "7700=-_= 0.68 4,732 10.21 11.5 - 6.65 1.86 17:08 501 --702---- 0.68 4,746 10.24 - 11.5 - - - - -- 17:12 - - - - - - 6.6 3.27 - - 17:19 - 4 - - 7.36 3.86 - - 17:258.02 0.005 17:50 - - - - - - - 2.69 - - - VE 1 AND VE4 Time MW-401 DO (mg/L) Notes 17:24 3.53° JAS shut off Notes: 1. Applied vacuum, velocity, barometric pressure and temperature measurements were made using a TSI 9555 instrument calibrated by Pine Environmental unless otherwise noted. Influent PID measurements were taken from a Tedlar bag filled within a vacuum desiccator, using a PhoCheck 1000 calibrated to 100 ppmv isobutylene; Mid -stream and effluent PID measurements were made by directly inserting the PID into the air stream. Induced vacuum measurements were made using magnehelic gauges; Headspace PID measurements were made directly with the PhoCheck 1000 unit. 2. In Hg - inches of mercury; VE-1 - vapor extraction well # 1; vac. - applied vacuum; in. H2O - inches of water, fpm - feet per minute; temp - temperature 'C; VP-1 - vapor monitoring point # 1; ppmv - parts per million by volume; GAC - granular activated carbon; PID - photoionization detector; inf - influent; mid - mid -stream, eff - effluent; SVE - soil vapor extraction; psi - pounds per square inch; SP-1 - sparge point # 1; SCFM - standard cubic feet per minute; DO - dissolved oxygen 3. P-ID.measurement was.taken directl�Cfrom"SVEsystem... 4. ° Reduction in DO began immediately after turning off the sparge compressor; DO reading taken 30 seconds after turning off sparge compressor. 5. Sparge compressor disconnected from SP-2 at 17-52; groundwater began bubbling out of SP-2 tubing. 6. ' 0 0008 in. Hg = 0.011 in. H2O 7 " 0.0009 in. Hg = 0.012 in. H2O. 8. SP-3 was disconnected; from the :magnehelicgaugeiand left open to the atmosphere: ,Corresponding decrease;in:PID concentration was likely attributed to difution air entering the,SVEsystem; through SP-3. The p,ID; measureFrie't Was also taken directl�;from the SVbivstem� Leggette, Brashears Graham, Inc. TABLE 3 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning Air Quality Data by U.S. EPA Method TO-15 SVE/AS Pilot Study August 12-14, 2009 Coppund Same. e, I 2-537 p :bVDichlorodifluoromethane Freon 12 440 ND ND Vin I Chloride N8,600 150 ND ND Ethanol 56 30 56 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 500 ND ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 34,000 830 3,300 Chloroform 86 ND ND Trichloroethene 6,500 35,000 1,700 8,900 Tetrachloroethene 560,000 3,800,000 610,000 4,100,000 n-Hexane ND ND 14 49 2,2,4-Trimeth I entane Isooctane ND ND 13 62 Total VOCs 1 575,426 3,870,232 612,587 4,112,367 Notes: 1. Air quality samples were collected from the SVE system using mini Summa canisters and instant grab regulators. Samples were collected over 60-second intervals from a Tedlar bag filled within a vacuum desiccator. 2. ppbv - parts per billion by volume; pg/m3 - micrograms per cubic meter of air; ND - not detected. Leggette, Brashears Graham, Inc. TABLE 4 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Subcontractors Professional Licenses! Company Re istra ions/Certifications Role in Contract Omega Electric 25 Omega Drive Licensed Electrician Electrical Service Connection Williston, VT 05495 802 862-0517 Green Mountain Power Acorn Lane Utility Electrical Service Colchester, VT 05478 888 835-4672 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corporation 111Herrick Ave NELAC Certified Laboratory Merrimack, NH 03054 603 424-2022 T&K Drilling 189 Fitzwilliam Road Licensed Well Driller Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Troy, NH 03465 603 358-5588 Environmental Products & Services Transportation and Waste Commerce Street HazMat Contractor Williston, VT 05495 Disposal 802 862-1212 ProAct Services Corp. 1140 Conrad Industrial Drive Vendor Treatment System Supplier Ludington, MI 49431 231 843-2711 FW Webb 80 Park Ave Vendor Pipe and Fittings Williston, VT 05495 802 879-6018 McMaster -Carr 200 New Canton Way Vendor Misc. Materials Robbinsville, NJ 08691-2343 609 689-3000 Carbtrol Corporation 955 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 5202 Vendor Carbon Bridgeport, CT 06607 203 337-4340 Ferguson Water Works 429 Troy Avenue Vendor Piping and Fittings Colchester, VT 05446 802 655-3505 Leggette, Brashears Graham, Inc. TABLE 6 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Schedule awl ��m 2009 Nov - Dec Install wells Two weeks from CAP approval. Install conveyance pipes 2010 Jan - Mar Construct SVE/AS system off -Site 10 weeks. 2010 Mar Install SVE/AS system on -Site 1 week. 2010 Apr SVE/AS system startup Estimated startup on April 1, 2010. 1st triannual water quality sampling event. 2010 May As Built Report 30 days after startup. 2010 Jul 2nd triannual water quality sampling event. 2010 Aug 1 st triannual O & M Report 30 days after the first 3 months of SVE/AS operation. 2010 Nov 3rd triannual water quality sampling event. 2nd triannual O & M Report 30 days after the first 6 months of SVE/AS operation. 2011 Feb 3rd triannual O & M Report 30 days after the first 9 months of SVE/AS operation. 2011 Apr 1 st triannual water quality sampling event. 2011 May Annual Report 30 days after the first 12 months of SVE/AS operation. 2011 Jul 2nd triannual water quality sampling event. 2011 Aug 1st triannual O & M Report. 2011 Nov 3rd triannual water quality sampling event. 2nd triannual O & M Report 30 days after the first 15 months of SVE/AS operation. 2012 Feb 3rd triannual O & M Report 30 days after the first 18 months of SVE/AS operation. 2012 Apr 1 st triannual water quality sampling event. 2012 Jul 2nd triannual water quality sampling event. 2012 Nov 3rd triannual water quality sampling event. Dismantle SVE/AS infrastructure. Leggette, Brashears Graham, Inc. TABLE 6 Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Estimate of Probable Cost Phase Scope Complete System Design Pilot Study Stormwater Flow Study 001/002 Project Mangement and Coordination CAP Public Notice Posting & Comment Review, meetings Trailer Design Discharge permit System Procurement & Coordination SVE/AS System Mobilization 003 System Construction Remediation Well Installations & Conveyance Piping Remediation equipment startup & shakedown As -Built Report 004 O & M for months 1-12 Tri-Annual Ground -Water Monitoring 10 Locations plus, 2 QA/QC samples Monthly Discharge Reporting Tri-Annual Ground -Water Monitoring & O&M Reporting 005 O & M for months 13-20 Tri-Annual Ground -Water Monitoring 10 Locations plus, 2 QA/QC samples Monthly Discharge Reporting Tri-Annual Ground -Water Monitoring & O&M Reporting 006 Post Remedial Monitoring, 1 year Tri-Annual Ground -Water Monitoring 10 Locations plus, 2 QA/QC samples Tri-Annual Ground -Water Monitoring 007 System Dismantling Subtotal 008 Carbon Cost Budget Toal Budget Cost $35,650.00 $9,300.00 $22, 574.00 $120,386.34 $188,394.76 $120, 663.49 $24, 500.16 $44,001.00 $565,469.75 $65, 000.00 $630,469.75 Leggette, Brashears Graham, Inc. GROUNDWATER MONITORING & ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATION REPORT GREER'S HOUSE OF DRY CLEANING 10 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT Prepared for: Peerless Insurance Company 62 Maple Avenue Keene, NH 03431 Contact: James R. Mitchell VT SMS Site #2005-3395 October 20, 2006 Prepared by: LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. Professional Ground -Water & Environmental Engineering Services 72 Helena Drive, Suite 140 Williston, VT 05495 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. (LBG) has conducted an additional investigation and a round of groundwater quality testing at Greer's House of Dry Cleaning on Dorset Street in South Burlington, Vermont (the Site). Field investigations include the advancement of eight direct push soil probes to measure the soil conductivity and volatile organic compounds using real time gas chromatography methods. Groundwater samples were obtained and analyzed from select on -site monitoring wells. Available information indicates that the groundwater beneath the Site is contaminated with the dry cleaning solvent tetrachloroethene and some of the degradation compounds typically associated with tetrachloroethene. At this time subsurface contamination appears to extend off -site to the west in the direction of Dorset Street. Field observations and analytical data suggest that dense non -aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) may be present in the vicinity of well MW-203. A summary of significant findings are outlined below: ➢ DNAPL was observed in monitoring well MW-203. ➢ Groundwater contamination exceeding the Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standard (VGES) for PCE (tetrachloroethene) was detected in MW-I, MW-2, MW-102S, MW-102D, MW-103, MW-201, MW-202, and MW-203. ➢ Groundwater contamination exceeding the VGES for 1,1-dichloroethene was detected in MW-203. MW-203 is located on the western edge of the Site, along Dorset Street. ➢ Groundwater contamination exceeding the VGES for TCE (trichloroethene) was detected in MW-203 and MW-101. ➢ Sediment contamination exceeding the US EPA Region 9 Preliminary Remedial Goals (PRGs) for industrial properties is present within the lateral pipe between the Site manhole and Dorset Street catch basin. ➢ A continuous silt layer exists in the study area at a depth of approximately six to eight feet below grade and slopes to the west. A second silt layer exists at a depth of 13 to 14 feet below grade but appears to be discontinuous ending near M308 and MW-203. ➢ The groundwater flow direction is to the west based on groundwater elevations measured in the shallow monitoring wells. Measurements from the deeper wells show a northerly flow component. A downward flow component is also obvious between the two zones. Q:' Env. Projects 2006\Greers PCE\0706 Report,doc ➢ DNAPL is present at well MW-203 and appears to be localized to this area. Contamination to the north of MW-203 appears to peak at depths of approximately 15 feet below ground surface and the depth of contamination seems to diminish the further away from MW-203. Contamination to the south of MW-203 is found at shallow depths as well as in the deeper horizon. On the basis of the results of this phase of work, LBG makes the following recommendations: 1. Continuing quarterly groundwater monitoring of the on -Site wells with the next event scheduled for October/November 2006. Additional EC/MIP profiling should be conducted west and south of the previous EC/MIP study area which will involve going off -site and into Dorset Street. 2. Several permanent two inch diameter monitoring wells should be installed following the MIP study to surround the contaminant plume for ongoing monitoring. While some of these well locations can be determined now, LBG recommends waiting until the additional EC/MIP work is completed before finalizing the locations. Varying soil types should be analyzed for the Fraction of Organic Content during the next drilling event. 3. Some of the existing monitoring wells should be removed from the well network including MW-104, MW-1, MW-3 and MW-4. 4. The drain line lateral from the former relic tank to the manhole should be removed. The manhole should also be removed and the drain line that runs under the building should be re-routed to the catch basin on Dorset Street. The abandoned line under the building should be pressure grouted in -place. 5. Well MW-203 should be replaced with a four inch diameter steel well with a short sump at the bottom of the well to allow for the monitoring and or removal of any DNAPL. If DNAPL is recovered, a sample should be analyzed to determine the percent of tetrachloroethene versus other oils and greases that may be present in the waste material. Q:'+Env. Projects 20MGreers PCE\0706 Reporl.doc ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATION REPORT GREER'S HOUSE OF DRY CLEANING 10 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT Prepared for: Peerless Insurance Company 62 Maple Avenue Keene, NH 03431 Contact: James R. Mitchell VT SMS Site #2005-3395 July 27, 2007 Prepared by: LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. Professional Ground -Water & Environmental Engineering Services 72 Helena Drive, Suite 140 Williston, VT 05495 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. (LBG) has conducted an additional investigation at Greer's House of Dry Cleaning on Dorset Street in South Burlington, Vermont (the site). Field investigations include the advancement of eight direct push soil probes to measure the soil conductivity and volatile organic compounds using real time gas chromatography methods, and the installation of three two-inch diameter permanent monitoring wells. Available information indicates that the groundwater beneath the site is contaminated with the dry cleaning solvent tetrachloroethene and some of the degradation compounds typically associated with tetrachloroethene; however, these compounds may just be impurities in the solvent. At this time, the majority of the subsurface contamination appears to remain on the western portion of the site. Based on this investigation, the subsurface contamination does not appear to be within the center of Dorset Street, although it may extend within the eastern side of Dorset Street. Field observations and analytical data show that dense non -aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) continues to be present in well MW-203. A summary of significant findings are outlined below: ➢ DNAPL is present at well MW-203 and appears to be localized to this area. Contamination to the north of MW-203 appears to peak at depths of approximately 15 feet below ground surface and the depth of contamination seems to diminish the further away from MW-203. Contamination to the south of MW-203 is found at shallow depths as well as in the deeper horizon. ➢ Contamination to the north of MW-203 appears to peak at depths of approximately 15 feet below ground surface and the depth of contamination seems to diminish the further away from MW-203. Contamination to the south of MW-203 is found at shallow depths as well as at the deeper horizon. ➢ A silt layer identified in the first study area at a depth of approximately six to eight feet below grade may not be as predominant as first presented based on the soil conductivity profiles. Review of geologic logs from newly installed wells (300 series) and the logs from the 200 and 100 series wells indicate the soils in the entire study area primarily consist of fine sand and in some locations fine sand with traces of silt. ➢ The site appears to be underlain with gray clay identified in wells MW-101, MW- 102D, MW-103, MW-105, MW202, MW-301, MW-302 and MW-303. On the basis of the results of this phase of work, LBG makes the following recommendations: 1. LBG recommends continuing quarterly groundwater monitoring. Q:\Env. Projects 2006`Greees PCE\0407_M1P_Report.doc 2. Implementation of the storm sewer relocation project should be completed during the summer of 2007. 3. A Corrective Action Feasibility Investigation should be implemented at the site focusing on efforts to evaluate remedial technologies and remove the DNAPL that has accumulated proximate to well MW-203. 4. Well MW-203 should be replaced with a four inch diameter steel well with a short sump at the bottom of the well to allow for the monitoring and or removal of any DNAPL. Q:1Env. Projects 2006Creees PCE10407_M[P _Report.doc Greer's House of Dry Cleaning CAP Appendix 2 Photo 1. Drainage pipes entering the northern catch basin, CB-N. The North Parking Lot Storm Drain drains the northern portion of the on -Site parking lot. The Dorset Street Storm Drain runs under Dorset Street, bordering the Site to the west. The CB-N Outlet discharges to the storm drain system outfall, where LBG collects surface water samples. The Perforated Underdrain intercepts and conveys on -Site ground water to the municipal storm drain system. Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. APPENDIX 3 LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. GROUND -WATER ELEVATION & CONTAMINATION TRENDS OVER TIME Greers House of Dry Cleaning Dorset Street, So. Burlington, Vermont M W-1 M 300 3 0 200 " cc L, = 100 0 0 U 3o O� o A� PQ�o��� o�QJ�' Zo O� o o� '0o1 PJ�'� o O�GA���� PQ�ACIO ��J o�P�� Date VOCs PCE ~' DTW Screen 0 v 4 8x 12 16 Contaminant 6/1212005 7128/2005 12/5/2005 8/1012006 12114/2006 414/2007 8/212007 1122/2008 5/2/2008 9/23/2008 1/2012009 5/13/2009 Total VOCs 136 143 52 96 64 239 119 1 74 178 1 54 1 32 1 35 PCE 133 140 52 94 63 236 118 74 46 40 32 34 DTW 6.85 6.40 6.59 6.48 6.75 6.62 6.45 6.43 6.08 6.91 6.84 6.78 Notes: 1 All samples were analyzed via US EPA Methods 8260. 2. All concentrations are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted. 3. ND - not detected above detection limits, VOCs - volatile organic compounds, PCE - tetrachloroethene DTW - depth to water (measured with an interface probe). 4. Thick black lines on the graphs represent the top and bottom of the well screen. 5. Data reported prior to 2006 was collected by others. Q \Env Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\CAP\Trend Graphs LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS GRAHAM, INC. GROUND -WATER ELEVATION & CONTAMINATION TRENDS OVER TIME Greers House of Dry Cleaning Dorset Street, So. Burlington, Vermont M W-2 100 0 80 4 c 60 .2 40 8 4) 20 12 c 0 16 U 0 - o`' Q`O o0 o`O oo A Q`O o0 0 Al 01 0A AA 01 0`� o�' o�' o`� A� oZ oCb Ao � � QQc QJo; 00'`Q�1 QQc Date VOCs PCE . DTW --Screen Contaminant 6/12/2005 7/28/2005 12/5/2005 8/10/2006 12/14/2006 4/4/2007 8/2/2007 1/22/2008 5/2/2008 9/23/2008 1/20/2009 5/13/2009 Total VOCs 16-1 12 17 6 5 6.28 3.97 9.8 90 1.6 NS 7.0 PCE 16 12 6.3 6 5 6.28 3.97 10 4.7 1.6 NS 7.0 DTW 7.37 7.18 7.19 7.11 7.26 7.13 7.12 7.16 6.90 7.41 NM 7.28 Notes: 1. All samples were analyzed via US EPA Methods 8260. 2 All concentrations are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted. 3. ND - not detected above detection limits, VOCs - volatile organic compounds, PCE - tetrachloroethene DTW - depth to water (measured with an interface probe). 4. Thick black lines on the graphs represent the top and bottom of the well screen. 5. Data reported prior to 2006 was collected by others. Q:\Env Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\CAP\Trend Graphs LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS GRAHAM, INC. J GROUND -WATER ELEVATION & CONTAMINATION TRENDS OVER TIME Greers House of Dry Cleaning Dorset Street, So. Burlington, Vermont MW-101 10 8 6 4 2 0 (b o`� o`� o0 00 00 0o d° o0 0A 01 01 0A oA 01 0`5 0�' � o' J� 05 0�mo 'Sy eQ S �.Q 1 1e��f4�C3 Date VOCs PCE DTW Screen 00 4 10 15 20 Contaminant 7/29/2005 12/5/2005 8/10/2006 12/14/2006 4/4/2007 8/2/2007 1/22/2008 5/2/2008 9/9/2008 1/6/2009 4/29/2009 Total VGCs ND 3 9 2 1.55 ND NS NS NS NS NS PCE ND ND 2 ND 1.55 ND NS NS NS NS NS DTW 6.40 6.62 5.95 6.20 6.24 6.02 NM 5.40 NM NM NM Notes: 1. All samples were analyzed via US EPA Methods 8260. 2. All concentrations are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted. 3. ND - not detected above detection limits, VOCs - volatile organic compounds, PCE - tetrachloroethene DTW - depth to water (measured with an interface probe). 4. Thick black lines on the graphs represent the top and bottom of the well screen. 5. Data reported prior to 2006 was collected by others. O:\Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\CAP\Trend Graphs LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS GRAHAM, INC. GROUND -WATER ELEVATION & CONTAMINATION TRENDS OVER TIME Greers House of Dry Cleaning Dorset Street, So. Burlington, Vermont MW 102S 30 0 rn 25 � 120 c 20 4 r 15 ,,' . 6 10 ,1 8 5 10 v 0 12 b��Q h�o,pi �h �a ���.�`� ls�' eq ��0,�6�a�Q'1�.��Q �a�'l SYg�Q ���a�.��S�� ���ag, Date I' ' VOCS PCE - - DTW Screen Contaminant 7/29/2005 12/5/2005 8/10/2006 12/14/2006 4/4/2007 8/2/2007 1/22/2008 5/2/2008 9/9/2008 1/6/2009 4/29/2009 Total VOCs 8 24 13 7 4.35 18.3 11 4.5 4.3 5.0 2.9 PCE 8 24 13 7 4.35 18.3 11 4.5 4.3 5.0 2.9 DTW 7.70 17.72 7.63 7.79 7.67 7.68 7.61 7.59 6.71 7.81 7.77 Notes: 1. All samples were analyzed via US EPA Methods 8260. 2. All concentrations are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted. 3. ND - not detected above detection limits, VOCs - volatile organic compounds, PCE - tetrachloroethene DTW - depth to water (measured with an interface probe). 4. Thick black lines on the graphs represent the top and bottom of the well screen. 5 Data reported prior to 2006 was collected by others. Q \Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\CAP\Trend Graphs LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS GRAHAM, INC. GROUND -WATER ELEVATION & CONTAMINATION TRENDS OVER TIME Greers House of Dry Cleaning Dorset Street, So. Burlington, Vermont MW 102D Z 35 3 30 25 - - 20 15 10 5 c 0 U h 3 h to b �o Co 0 A A '\ '1 'l A 1b �b lb Z �a Q do� g�� gs � A A g�Q�a�Q � � Date VOCs PCE ° DTW Screen 0� 5= 10 15 20 25 Contaminant 7/29/2005 12/5/2005 8/10/2006 12/14/2006 4/4/2007 8/2/2007 1/22/2008 5/2/2008 9/9/2008 1/6/2009 4/29/2009 Total VCCs 16 16 17 22 17.7 1 7.37 30 13 20 4.1 2.3 PCE 6 16 14 22 17.7 7.37 30 13 20 4.1 2.3 DTW 10.43 9.70 8.45 8.59 8.73 8.63 8.42 8.46 8.75 8.82 8.94 Notes: 1. All samples were analyzed via US EPA Methods 8260. 2. All concentrations are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted 3. ND - not detected above detection limits, VCCs - volatile organic compounds, PCE - tetrachloroethene DTW - depth to water (measured with an interface probe). 4. Thick black lines on the graphs represent the top and bottom of the well screen. 5. Data reported prior to 2006 was collected by others. Q.\Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\CAP\Trend Graphs LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS GRAHAM, INC. GROUND -WATER ELEVATION & CONTAMINATION TRENDS OVER TIME Greers House of Dry Cleaning Dorset Street, So. Burlington, Vermont MW-103 0 0 � 600 500 5x c 400 10 300 15 c 200 20 100 25 0 30 0 0 v p0 p0 p0 pp pp pp pp pp p pp p0 p0 p0 p0 p0 10\ Date VOCs PCE DTW Screen Contaminant 7/29/2005 12/5/2005 8/10/2006 12/14/2006 4/4/2007 8/22007 1/22/2008 5/2/2008 9/9/2008* 1/6/2009 4/29/2009 Total VOCs 440 1 350 162 201 161 321 120 85 6.0 28 1 514 PCE 440 1 350 160 1 200 1 160 1 320 120 85 6.0 28 1 510 DT\N 8.78 1 9.04 8.32 1 8.51 1 8.59 1 8.46 8.14 7.84 7.42 8.37 1 8.99 Notes. 1. All samples were analyzed via US EPA Methods 8260. 2. All concentrations are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted. 3 ND - not detected above detection limits, VOCs - volatile organic compounds, PCE - tetrachloroethene DTW - depth to water (measured with an interface probe) 4. Thick black lines on the graphs represent the top and bottom of the well screen. 5. Data reported prior to 2006 was collected by others. * Depth to groundwater was measured on 9/9/2009; Groundwater was sampled on 9/10/2009. Q.\Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\CAP\Trend Graphs LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS GRAHAM, INC. GROUND -WATER ELEVATION & CONTAMINATION TRENDS OVER TIME Greers House of Dry Cleaning Dorset Street, So. Burlington, Vermont MW 104 6 TO I 5 20 a 4 4� .a 3 2 8 1 10 0 0 12 U oSb��`o� Date VOCS PCE DTW Screen Contaminant 7/29/2005 12/5/2005 8/10/2006 12/14/2006 4/4/2007 8/2/2007 1/22/2008 5/2/2008 9/9/2008 1/6/2009 4/29/2009 Total VQCs 2 2 5 NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS PCE 2 ND 1 NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS DTW 6.38 6.60 6.36 6.70 6.58 6.44 6.48 6.13 6.95 NM NM Notes: 1. All samples were analyzed via US EPA Methods 8260. 2. All concentrations are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted 3. ND - not detected above detection limits, VOCs - volatile organic compounds, PCE - tetrachloroethene DTW - depth to water (measured with an interface probe). 4. Thick black lines on the graphs represent the top and bottom of the well screen. 5. Data reported prior to 2006 was collected by others. Q:\Env Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\CAP\Trend Graphs LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS GRAHAM, INC. 1,000 800 0 600 w 400 c 200 c 0 0 v GROUND -WATER ELEVATION & CONTAMINATION TRENDS OVER TIME Greers House of Dry Cleaning Dorset Street, So. Burlington, Vermont MW-201 ,Joao ��o�o ono ,m o1 ��`01��� 1 S�; 1 o� �o Date VOCs PCE : DTW Screen 0 20 4� 6= 8v 10 12 Contaminant 9/30/2005 12/&2005 8/10/2006 12/14/2006 4/4/2007 8/2/2007 1/22/2008 5/2/2008 9/23/2008 1/20/2009 5/13/2009 Total VOCs 768 40 1 42 1 9 5.94 2.38 5.1 111 2.4 9.0 47 PCE 768 40 42 1 9 4.88 2.38 5.1 110 2.4 9.0 47 DTW 8.91 8.61 8.51 1 8.72 8.59 8.51 8.55 8.29 8.01 7.94 7.85 Notes- 1. All samples were analyzed via US EPA Methods 8260. 2. All concentrations are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted. 3 ND - not detected above detection limits, VOCs - volatile organic compounds, PCE - tetrachloroethene DTW - depth to water (measured with an interface probe) 4 Thick black lines on the graphs represent the top and bottom of the well screen. 5 Data reported pnor to 2006 was collected by others. Q:\Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\CAP\Trend Graphs LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS GRAHAM, INC. GROUND -WATER ELEVATION & CONTAMINATION TRENDS OVER TIME Greers House of Dry Cleaning Dorset Street, So. Burlington, Vermont M W-202 300 0 250 2 - 40 200 0 6 ., ....„.... . ro 100 1� 50 12 14 0 16 v o`' o`' po p`O p`O o0 o`O Q5 p1 p� o� p1 ' 01 Z p�o`, Qil oZ' 0 01 �� �o� lac ��c �,�� ��� ��� �o� 'mp lac �,�� �J ��� �o� ���. le ��� �� Date VOCs PCE DTW -Screen Contaminant 9/30/2005 12/5/2005 8/10/2006 12/14/2006 4/4/2007 8/2/2007 1/22/2008 5/2/2008 9/10/2008 1/6/2009 4/29/2009 Total VOCs 247 167 185 63 71.0 79.5 1W 1 87 93.1 200 182 PCE 240 160 180 86 68.3 79.5 130 87 92 200 180 DTW 7.57 7.74 7.25 7.39 7.25 7.17 7.18 7.00 7.51 7.45 7.41 Notes: 1. All samples were analyzed via US EPA Methods 8260. 2. All concentrations are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted. 3. ND - not detected above detection limits, VOCs - volatile organic compounds, PCE - tetrachloroethene DTW - depth to water (measured with an interface probe). 4. Thick black lines on the graphs represent the top and bottom of the well screen. 5. Data reported prior to 2006 was collected by others. Q:\Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\CAP\Trend Graphs LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS GRAHAM, INC GROUND -WATER ELEVATION & CONTAMINATION TRENDS OVER TIME Greers House of Dry Cleaning Dorset Street, So. Burlington, Vermont MW 203 200,000 3 c 150,000 100,000 — 50,000 v 0 o`O oo Q1 0) o� A) 01 R) AZ A; Z o`� 'CO o�' o0 S �I �J (011 �a� �`a� �5�,°Q saw Date VOCs PCE D-M —Screen 00 5 10 15 20 25 Contaminant 9/30/2005 12/5/2005 8/10/2006 12/14/2006 4/4/2007 8/2/2007 1/22/2008 5/2/2008 9/9/2008 1/6/2009 4/29/2009 Total VOCs 93,880 1 180,000 120,507 8,988 42,110 124,280 110,247 NS NS NS NS PCE 93,500 180,000 120,000 8,900 41,800 124,000 110,000 NS NS NS NS DTW 8.52 8.88 9.18 1 8.95 1 8.33 1 8.49 1 8.43 7.39 7.79 7.72 7.07 Notes: 1. All samples were analyzed via US EPA Methods 8260. 2. All concentrations are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted. 3. ND - not detected above detection limits, VOCs - volatile organic compounds, PCE - tetrachloroethene DTW - depth to water (measured with an interface probe). 4. Thick black lines on the graphs represent the top and bottom of the well screen. 5. Data reported prior to 2006 was collected by others Q-\Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\CAP\Trend Graphs LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS GRAHAM, INC GROUND -WATER ELEVATION & CONTAMINATION TRENDS OVERTIME Greers House of Dry Cleaning Dorset Street, So. Burlington, Vermont M W-301 I 120 0 m 100 „ , ,.,.„ „ c 80 60 5 10 c 40 15 20 20 ° V 0 25 O'l O'l O'l 0'1 O'l o'b o`b OW O`b O`b O`b orb Zo O`b O`b o0 (o o0 0°' Zq o°' 00 4� PJ� Date VOCs PCE DTW Screen Contaminant 8/2/2007 1/2212008 51212008 9123/2008 1/20/2009 5/13/2009 Total VOCs 10 1.6 104 30 10 44 PCE ND ND ND ND ND ND 1 DTW 8.09 8.01 7.90 8.15 8.10 8.17 Notes: 1. All samples were analyzed via US EPA Methods 8260. 2. All concentrations are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted. 3. ND - not detected above detection limits, VOCs - volatile organic compounds, PCE - tetrachloroethene DTW - depth to water (measured with an interface probe). 4 Thick black lines on the graphs represent the top and bottom of the well screen. 5. Data reported prior to 2006 was collected by others Q \Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\CAP\Trend Graphs LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS GRAHAM, INC. GROUND -WATER ELEVATION & CONTAMINATION TRENDS OVERTIME Greers House of Dry Cleaning Dorset Street, So. Burlington, Vermont MW-302 12 0 0 12 $ 6 m 4 y 82 2 14 C 0 16 V 01 O-A 01 01 OA O`b O% O% QP O§1 Q%, O`b Z% cit QP O% O% O°b O°b e e e CP O°G �a� �te� �'�� QQi �`�� �J� �J\ PJ°' S°� pG� °, O°G ��� Few �•�� QQ� �`�� Date VOCs PCE DTW Screen Contaminant 8/2/2007 1122/2008 51212008 9123/2008 1/20/2009 511312009 Total VOCs ND 9.8 ND ND ND ND PCE ND 9.8 ND ND ND ND DTVV 7.31 7.30 7.26 7.44 7.45 7.43 Notes: 1. All samples were analyzed via US EPA Methods 8260 2. All concentrations are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted. 3. ND - not detected above detection limits, VOCs - volatile organic compounds, PCE - tetrachloroethene DTW - depth to water (measured with an interface probe). 4. Thick black lines on the graphs represent the top and bottom of the well screen. 5. Data reported prior to 2006 was collected by others. Q.\Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\CAP\Trend Graphs LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS GRAHAM, INC. GROUND -WATER ELEVATION & CONTAMINATION TRENDS OVER TIME Greers House of Dry Cleaning Dorset Street, So. Burlington, Vermont M W-303 40 0 v 35 `- 2 0 30 4 0 25 6._ 20 „,,,, „,,, .. 8a r 15 — 10 10 12 5 14 0 0 16 U ���� oG�A��oo�O�GA�� o� Date VOCS PCE '' DTW Screen Contaminant 8/2/2007 112212008 512/2008 9/9/2008 1/6/2009 4129/2009 Total VOCs 13.6 37 21 35 29 33 PCE 13.6 37 21 35 29 33 DTW 8.01 NM 7.83 8.16 8.11 8.08 Notes: 1. All samples were analyzed via US EPA Methods 8260. 2. All concentrations are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted 3. ND - not detected above detection limits, VOCs - volatile organic compounds, PCE - tetrachloroethene DTW - depth to water (measured with an interface probe). 4. Thick black lines on the graphs represent the top and bottom of the well screen. 5. Data reported prior to 2006 was collected by others. Q:\Env. Projects 20061Greer's PCE\CAP\Trend Graphs LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS GRAHAM, INC. a� 250 200 150 .�L. 100 c 50 c 0 0 0 GROUND -WATER ELEVATION & CONTAMINATION TRENDS OVERTIME Greers House of Dry Cleaning Dorset Street, So. Burlington, Vermont MW-401 o 04' ��� lac PQc Date VOCs PCE „ „ . , DTW Screen 0 20 4 6 8Z 10 12 14 16 Contaminant 1122/2008 5/212008 9/9/2008 1/6/2009 4/2912009 Total VOCs 57 32 217 11 30 PCE 55 31 200 11 30 DTW 7.33 7.34 7.50 7.61 7.55 Notes. 1. All samples were analyzed via US EPA Methods 8260 2. All concentrations are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted. 3. ND - not detected above detection limits, VOCs - volatile organic compounds, PCE - tetrachloroethene DTW - depth to water (measured with an interface probe). 4 Thick black lines on the graphs represent the top and bottom of the well screen. 5. Data reported prior to 2006 was collected by others. Q:\Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\CAP\Trend Graphs LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS GRAHAM, INC. APPENDIX 4 LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN GREER'S HOUSE OF DRY CLEANING 10 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 September 29, 2009 Prepared by: LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. Professional Groundwater & Environmental Engineering Services 76 Pearl Street, Suite 203 Essex Junction, VT 05452 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................... 1 2.0 SITE INFORMATION............................................................................................... 1 2.1 Site Description....................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Site Background...................................................................................................... 1 2.3 Site Activities........................................................................................................... 2 3.0 HAZARD EVALUATION......................................................................................... 2 3.1 Hazardous Substances............................................................................................ 2 3.2 Hazard Evaluation.................................................................................................. 1 4.0 PERSONNEL.............................................................................................................. 4 4.1 Personnel Requirements & Associated Tasks ...................................................... 4 4.2 Key Project Personnel & Contact Information.................................................... 4 5.0 SITE SAFETY............................................................................................................. 5 5.1 Work Zones............................................................................................................. 5 5.2 General Safety Procedures..................................................................................... 5 5.3 Monitoring............................................................................................................... 5 5.4 Decontamination..................................................................................................... 5 6.0 EMERGENCY PROCEEDURES............................................................................. 5 6.1 Emergency Contacts and Procedures................................................................... 5 6.2 Directions to Hospital............................................................................................. 6 6.3 First Aid................................................................................................................... 6 6.4 Accident Reporting................................................................................................. 7 7.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.......................................................................................... 7 Figures 1 Site Location Map 2 Site Plan Appendix 1 Fact Sheets & MSDS Q:\Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\HASPs\HASP 2009 CAP.doc LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. n 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Health and Safety Plan (HASP) has been prepared by Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. (LBG) for use during active remediation at Greer's House of Dry Cleaning at 8-10 Dorset Street in South Burlington, Vermont (the site). The remedial action will include the operation of soil vapor extraction (SVE) / air sparging (AS) remedial system to treat chlorinated solvent -impacted soil vapors beneath the site and a pump and treat containment system to mitigate PCE migration off -site through the adjacent storm drain. The SVE/AS system will utilize a regenerative blower with liquid knock out and an air compressor within in a remedial trailer. The remedial trailer will also house a liquid - phase treatment system involving an air compressor, dual diaphragm pump and granular activated carbon. The purpose of the remedial action is to reduce the mass of chlorinated contaminants on -site in groundwater and soil in order to curtail PCE-impacted groundwater discharge to off -Site surface water through the Dorset Street storm drain network. The purpose of this HASP is to prevent injuries to employees and protect the health of employees by identifying and managing safety and health hazards by defining personnel responsibilities, protection criterion, operating procedures, and emergency response procedures. 2.0 SITE INFORMATION 2.1 Site Description The site was formerly occupied by a carwash and more recently by Greer's House of Dry Cleaning. The Greer family currently owns the property, but dry cleaning operations have been moved off -site. The site is now occupied by Greer's Laundromat, Mills and Greer's Sporting Goods, and the PhotoGarden. The site is located in a commercial area of South Burlington. Adjacent properties include a gasoline station, Friendly's Restaurant, and University Inn and Suites, and a shopping plaza. The Site is depicted on Figures I and 2. 2.2 Site Background A subsurface investigation was conducted in August 2005, to determine if chlorinated solvent contamination was present at the site. Laboratory analysis confirmed the presence of chlorinated solvents, particularly tetrachloroethene (PCE), in the soils and groundwater beneath the site. The State of Vermont Sites Management Section (SMS) was notified and subsequent studies have been undertaken. Review of geologic logs from newly installed wells (300 series) and the logs from the 200 and 100 series wells indicate the soils in the entire study area consist primarily of fine sand and in some locations fine sand with traces of silt. The site appears to be underlain with gray clay at approximately 14 feet below grade identified in wells MW- 101, MW-102D, MW-103, MW-105, MW202, MW-301, MW-302 and MW-303. The Q:\Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\HASPS\HASP 2009 CAP.doc LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. responses from the detectors measured in the March 2007 study along the center of Dorset Street are much lower than those measured in the July 2006 study indicating no significant contamination detected in the second study area. Based on the April/May 2009 groundwater monitoring event, groundwater beneath the site remains contaminated with PCE at concentrations above the VGES and does not extend to the center of Dorset Street. The Dorset Street underdrain located along the eastern side of Dorset Street is influencing contaminant migration and allowing contaminated groundwater to migrate and daylight off -site. 2.3 Site Activities Prior to all work activities, this Health and Safety Plan (HASP) will be reviewed and signed by all LBG personnel and subcontractor personnel. Proposed activities to be conducted include the following: ➢ Installation of air sparge wells, soil vapor extraction wells, and air chimneys; ➢ Excavation of piping trenches; ➢ Installation of manifold piping; ➢ Operation of an SVE/AS system; ➢ Collection of depth to water, well headspace, and dissolved oxygen measurements from wells and other monitoring points; ➢ Collection of routine groundwater samples for lab analysis; ➢ Collection of air samples from the AS/SVE system for field screening for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and lab analysis by U.S. EPA Compendium Method TO-15, and; ➢ Surveying the new well locations. 3.0 HAZARD EVALUATION 3.1 Hazardous Substances Recent groundwater monitoring conducted on -site has indicated the presence of the following: Compound Concentration Tetrachloroethene 1-2% Cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 1.1 ppb Trichloroethene 4.1 ppb Previous groundwater monitoring conducted on -site has also indicated the past presence of the following: Compounds 1, 1, 1,2-Tetrachloroethane 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 1, 1, 1 -Trichloroethane 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 1, 1 -Dichloroethene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Q:\Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\HASPs\HASP 2009 CAP.doc LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. Methyl tertiary butyl ether Acetone Benzene Bromodichloromethane Carbon Disulfide Chlorobenzene Chloroform Dichlorodifluoromethane Ethylbenzene Isopropylbenzene M,P,O Xylenes Toluene Vinyl Chloride The primary substance of concern, tetrachloroethene (PCE), has been detected on the western portion of the site, along Dorset Street; south of the building in MW-1; and north of the site building. Groundwater concentrations from monitoring wells proximate to the north side of the work area range from 7.0 to 180 ppb of PCE and on the south side from 2.3 to 2.9 ppb. Within the central portion of the work area, groundwater concentrations from monitor well range from 510 ppb of PCE to 2-3% PCE. Lower concentrations of degradation products of PCE and other contaminants (potentially impurities in PCE solvent) have been detected on -site. Fact sheets and Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) are provided for tetrachloroethene, cis-1,2-dichloroethene and trichloroethene in Appendix 1. 3.2 Hazard Evaluation Inhalation of hazardous particles from the soil, hazardous vapors from the soil or groundwater, and absorption or direct contact with contaminants in the soils and groundwater are the primary concerns related to hazards. In an effort to prevent inhalation, LBG will conduct air monitoring of the breathing zone with a photoionization detector (PID) and the use of respirators may be required, if necessary. To prevent direct skin contact, personal protective clothing will be worn. The degree of hazard during the installation of sparge wells, SVE wells, and air chimneys will be considered moderate due to the likelihood of encountering contaminated soil and groundwater. The degree of hazard for the excavation of the piping trenches and installation of manifold piping is considered to be moderate to high since elevated soil vapors are expected. Since the operation of the SVE/AS system may involve encountering contaminated media, the degree of hazard associated is moderate. The degree of hazard associated with air sampling, groundwater sampling and the collection of various measurements will also be moderate. The degree of hazard associated with survey activities is expected to be low. If pure product is encountered, the degree of hazard will increase. Pure product may be encountered based on site conditions. Q:\Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\HASPs\HASP 2009 CAP.doc LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. 4.0 PERSONNEL 4.1 Personnel Requirements & Associated Tasks Personnel conducting work on -site that may come in contact with hazardous substances must have completed training in accordance with OSHA regulations in 29 CFR 1910.120. The following personnel are anticipated to work on each task: Task Installation of AS wells, AVE wells & air chimneys Excavation of trenches Plumbing & operating the SVE/AS system Air sampling Groundwater sampling & measurements Survey Contractor/Subcontractor LBG Subcontractor, TBD LBG LBG LBG LBG 4.2 Key Project Personnel & Contact Information Key individuals involved with this phase of work are listed below: Title Project Manager Owner Client Contact Company LBG Greer Family, LLC Liberty Mutual Agency Markets Name John R. Diego Jory Curran Samantha Punch, SCLA Phone Number (802) 288-9600 (802)899-4412 (315)431-6162 The Project Manager is responsible for project activities coordination and overall direction. The Project Manager is also responsible for designating a Health and Safety Officer for this project. The Health and Safety Officer will then be responsible for ensuring that this HASP is followed. The Health and Safety Officer will also keep a field log detailing project activities, conduct any necessary monitoring, ensure decontamination procedures are followed, and ensure work zones are secure. Q:\Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\HASPs\HASP 2009 CAP.doc LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. 4 5.0 SITE SAFETY 5.1 Work Zones Work zones will be established and surrounded by orange work cones and caution tape or other barriers. Personnel within the work zone must wear appropriate PPE. Visitors or unauthorized personnel will not be allowed to cross into the work zone. It is expected that all work will be conducted using level D protective clothing and respiratory protection. It may be required to upgrade to level C protective clothing. All personnel on -site shall have their own safety equipment and protective clothing, be properly trained in the use of PPE, and properly fitted for respirators. 5.2 General Safety Procedures All personnel in the work zone must follow the general safety rules listed below. ➢ All safety equipment and personal protective clothing must be worn. ➢ Steel -toed work boots and safety glasses will be worn. ➢ Eating, drinking, smoking, or practices that increase the probability of hand-to- mouth transfer and ingestion of contaminants is prohibited. ➢ Hands should be washed upon leaving work zone. 5.3 Monitoring Air monitoring during subsurface activities will be conducted by the Health and Safety Officer as necessary. Monitoring will be done with a PID that is properly calibrated at the beginning of each work day and throughout the work day as necessary. The PID will be equipped with a 10.6 eV lamp or greater. Background readings will recorded at the beginning of each work day. If continuous readings in the breathing zone are above OSHA (Time Weighted Average) 100 part per million by volume, then respiratory protection shall be upgraded to level C. 5.4 Decontamination Equipment decontamination will consist of a soap and water wash. Equipment will be decontaminated at the end of the day, between locations, and prior to moving off - site. Subcontractors will be responsible for decontaminating their own equipment and may have different decontamination procedures. 6.0 EMERGENCY PROCEEDURES 6.1 Emergency Contacts and Procedures Q:\Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\HASPS\HASP 2009 CAP.doc LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. Police: Fire Department: Hospital: Poison Control Center: 24 Hour Spill Reporting: National Response Center: 911 911 (802) 847-2345, Fletcher Allen Health Care (800) 222-1222 (800) 641-5005 (800) 424-8802 In the event of a serious incident, those injured will be transported to Fletcher Allen Health Care in Burlington, Vermont. The nearest telephone is located within the Site building. Water is also located on -site within the building. If an emergency occurs and evacuation of the work zone is required by the Health and Safety Officer, all personnel need to move to an area upwind and a safe distance from the work zone as designated by the Health and Safety Officer. 6.2 Directions to Hospital Turn right onto Dorset Street, heading north, turn left onto Williston Road (Route 2) and head west toward Burlington for 1 mile. Turn right onto University Place for 0.2 miles, then turn right onto Colchester Avenue and look for signs. A map, provided by Mapquest, Inc., is presented below. MAPC�/CST . &ookes Ave Pie. � µ�N� Cy 0 99ooti s\et _ 0004k Qa".4 Pearl St Carngan Dr u�e'str490 VaCeyq�e ri.en.. ease PkwY 4 Al1un BJ.deau Ct College SI N.akh c to x Main St n N Maplc St g Cedai Ln lmnRarx;ry p w ox v rmant a w µenderson Ter 3 } N m 2 Chn W, 2 i t N Lhi6vmrzfty DwNngtan M,A � tita,kel Sl Caxntrgr CluB C' 2006 MapOuest. Inc 02006 NAVTEQ 6.3 First Aid Skin Contact: Remove contaminated clothing. Wash immediately with soap and water. Inhalation: Remove from contaminated area and transport to hospital. Q:\Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\HASPs\HASP 2009 CAP.doc LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. 6 IIngestion: Contact the Poison Control Center. 6.4 Accident Reporting IFollowing an incident, an accident report should be prepared. The minimal information required includes: I➢ Name(s) of individuals involved and witnesses ➢ Date and time I ➢ Location ➢ Description of incident ➢ Nature of injury, type of exposure suspected I➢ Corrective actions taken to prevent incident from occurring again 7.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IThis HASP is to be signed by each person to work on the site during this phase of work. By signing below, you acknowledge that you have read, understand, and agree to perform you work in accordance with this HASP. Signature Company Date I I i I Q:\Env. Projects 2006\Greer's PCE\HASPs\HASP 2009 CAP.doc LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. 7 FIGURES LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. . , , . � r,,/ },...r •',, i _{ K 9 1, . _ t +! f rI p + _ i • �M* ! ' ,�* , • �� r ~ r you t } r f /� ` " 11 • BurlZ r Country Cfub� / ,..� \�� if If r . t . - qDP i17' (c) , INc. (ire) 7RZ-4 GREERS HOUSE OF DRY CLEANING SOURCE: UNITED STATES GEOGRAPHICAL SURVEY 7.5 1(INUTE 10 D ORSE T STREET TOPOGRAPHIC MAP FOR THE BURLINGTON, VT QUADRANGLE. SO. BURLINGTON, VT N SITE LOCATION MAP PREPARED BY: LEGGEM, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. 0 1, 000 :'a Prolessional Ground -hater and Environmental Services 76 Pearl Street; Suite 203 s' Essex Junction, VT 05452 SCALE IN FEET -` (800) 288-9600 DATE: 7 17 06 F1LE: Q:�cxselts DRAWN BY: DID CHECKED BY: JRD FIGURE: 1 SEWER LINE MANHOLE (LINE AT A DEPTH OF 17-13 FT BGS) STORM DRAIN HOLIDAY INN ROUTE 2 (WILLISTON ROAD) -ems GRAPHIC SCALE D 20 40 80 REFERENCES: ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 40 ft. THIS PLAN REFERENCES PLAN PREPARED BY THE VERTERRE GROUP, INC. ENTITLED "SITE PLAN" AUGUST 4, 2005, PROJECT NUMBER 05045 TRANSFORMER PROXIMATE LOCATION OF DUMPSTER PPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FORMER 1,000-GALLON UST (CLOSED IN PLACE) ENING CUT IN FORMER UST DURING CLEANING \b AC I -ELECTRIC METERS FORMER DRY -ILL 6 VENT PIPES CLEANING MACHINES SPORTING RLY GREER'S LING) :LEANOUT ca sR\ ---Q `--SEWER LINE STUB LEGEND MW-1 = EXISTING MONITORING WELL tv CABLE TELEVISION (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) O SB-2 = SOIL BORING s SEWER (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) sd STORM DRAIN WATER LINE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) ® CATCH BASIN tele TELEPHONE LINE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) ng NATURAL GAS LINE PROPERTYLINE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) ELECTRIC LINE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) FIBER OPTIC LINE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) SPARGE POINT/ SPARGE MONITORING POINT VAPOR POINT/VAPOR MONITOING POINT (VAOOSE ZONE) FORMER SPARGE POINT FORMER VAPOR POINT EXTRA TION WELL APPENDIX 1 LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. International Chemical Safety Cards (WHO/IPCS/ILO) International Chemical Safety Cards TETRACHLOROETHYLENE Page 1 of 2 ICSC: 0076 TETRACHLOROETHYLENE 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethylene Perchloroethylene Tetrachloroethene C2C14/C12C=CC12 Molecular mass: 165.8 CAS # 127-18-4 RTECS # KX3850000 ICSC # 0076 UN # 1897 EC # 602-028-00-4 TYPES OF HAZARD/ ACUTE HAZARDS/ PREVENTION FIRST AID/ EXPOSURE SYMPTOMS FIRE FIGHTING Not combustible. Gives off In case of fire in the FIRE irritating or toxic fumes (or surroundings: all extinguishing gases) in a fire. agents allowed. EXPLOSION EXPOSURE L TRICT HYGIENE! Incoordination. Exhilaration. Ventilation, local exhaust, or Fresh air, rest. Artificial . INHALATION Dizziness. Drowsiness. breathing protection. respiration if indicated. Refer for Headache. Nausea. Weakness. medical attention. Unconsciousness. Dry skin. Redness. Skin burns. Protective gloves. Protective Remove contaminated clothes. • SKIN Blisters. clothing. Rinse and then wash skin with water and soap. Redness. Pain. Safety goggles, face shield. First rinse with plenty of water • EYES for several minutes (remove contact lenses if easily possible), then take to a doctor. Abdominal pain (further see Do not eat, drink, or smoke Rinse mouth. Do NOT induce • INGESTION Inhalation). during work. Wash hands before vomiting. Give plenty of water eating. to drink. Rest. SPILLAGE DISPOSAL STORAGE PACKAGING & LABELLING Ventilation. Collect leaking and spilled Separated from metals (see Chemical Do not transport with food and liquid in sealable containers as far as Dangers), food and feedstuffs. Keep in feedstuffs. IMO: Marine Pollutant possible. Absorb remaining liquid in the dark. Ventilation along the floor. Xn symbol sand or inert absorbent and remove to R: 40 safe place. S: 23-36/37 UN Hazard Class: 6.1 UN Packing Group: III SEE IMPORTANT INFORMATION ON BACK ICSC' U076 Prepared in the context ofcooperation between the international Programme on Chemical Safety & the Commission of the European Communities a IPCS CEC 1993 International Chemical Safety Cards (WHO/IPCS/ILO) International Chemical Safety Cards TETRACHLOROETHYLENE I M P O R T A N T D A T A PHYSICAL PROPERTIES PHYSICAL STATE; APPEARANCE: COLOURLESS LIQUID, WITH CHARACTERISTIC ODOUR. PHYSICAL DANGERS: The vapour is heavier than air. CHEMICAL DANGERS: On contact with hot surfaces or flames this substance decomposes forming toxic and corrosive fumes (hydrogen chloride, phosgene, chlorine). The substance decomposes slowly on contact with moisture producing trichloroacetic acid and hydrochloric acid. Reacts with metals such as aluminium, lithium, barium, berrylium. OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE LIMITS (OELs): TLV: 50 ppm; 339 mg/m3 (STEL): 200 ppm; 1357 mg/m3 (ACGIH 1992-1993). Boiling point: 121 °C Melting point: -220C Relative density (water= 1): 1.6 Solubility in water, g/100 ml at 20°C: 0.015 Page 2 of 2 ICSC: 0076 ROUTES OF EXPOSURE: The substance can be absorbed into the body by inhalation, through the skin and by ingestion. INHALATION RISK: A harmful contamination of the air will be reached rather slowly on evaporation of this substance at 20°C. EFFECTS OF SHORT-TERM EXPOSURE: The substance irritates the eyes, the skin and the respiratory tract. Swallowing the liquid may cause aspiration into the lungs with the risk of chemical pneumonitis. The substance may cause effects on the central nervous system. EFFECTS OF LONG-TERM OR REPEATED EXPOSURE: Repeated or prolonged contact with skin may cause dermatitis. The substance may have effects on the liver and kidney. Tumours have been detected in experimental animals but may not be relevant to humans (see Notes). Vapour pressure, kPa at 20°C: 1.9 Relative vapour density (air = 1): 5.8 Relative density of the vapour/air-mixture at 20°C (air= 1): 1.09 Octanol/water partition coefficient as log Pow: 2.6 ENVIRONMENTAL 117his substance may be hazardous to the environment; special attention should be given to indoor DATA 11air and water. NOTES of alcoholic beverages enhances the harmful effect. Depending on the degree of exposure, periodic medical iination is indicated. The odour warning when the exposure limit value is exceeded is insufficient. Do NOT use in the city of a fire or a hot surface, or during welding. Technical grades may contain small amounts of carcinogenic Transport Emergency Card: TEC (R)-722 NFPA Code: H2; F0; R0; ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ICSC: 0076 TETRACHLOROETHYLENE ® IPCS, CEC, 1993 Neither the CEC or the IPCS nor any person acting on behalf of the CEC or the IPCS is responsible IMPORTANT for the use which might be made of this information. This card contains the collective views of the LEGAL IPCS Peer Review Committee and may not reflect in all cases all the detailed requirements included NOTICE: in national legislation on the subject. The user should verify compliance of the cards with the relevant legislation in the country of use. International Chemical Safety Cards (WHO/IPCS/ILO) International Chemical Safety Cards Page 1 of 2 TRICHLOROETHYLENE ICSC: 0081 TRICHLOROETHYLENE 1,1,2-Trichloroethylene Trichloroethene Ethylene trichloride C2HC13/CICH=CC12 Molecular mass: 131.4 CAS # 79-01-6 RTECS # KX4550000 ICSC # 0081 UN # 1710 EC # 602-027-00-9 TYPES OF HAZARD/ ACUTE HAZARDS/ PREVENTION FIRST AID/ EXPOSURE SYMPTOMS FIRE FIGHTING Combustible under specific In case of fire in the FIRE conditions. See Notes. surroundings: all extinguishing agents allowed. EXPLOSION Rlsk of fire and explosion (seeIF In case of fire: keep drums, etc., Chemical Dangers). cool by spraying with water. EXPOSURE Dizziness. Drowsiness. Ventilation, local exhaust, or Fresh air, rest. Artificial • INHALATION Headache. Weakness. breathing protection. respiration if indicated. Refer for Unconsciousness. medical attention. Dry skin. Redness. Protective gloves. Remove contaminated clothes. • SKIN Rinse and then wash skin with water and soap. Redness. Pain. Safety spectacles. First rinse with plenty of water EYES for several minutes (remove contact lenses if easily possible), then take to a doctor. Abdominal pain (further see Do not eat, drink, or smoke Rinse mouth. Do NOT induce • INGESTION Inhalation). during work. Wash hands before vomiting. Give plenty of water eating. to drink. Rest. SPILLAGE DISPOSAL STORAGE PACKAGING & LABELLING Ventilation. Collect leaking and spilled Separated from metals (see Chemical Do not transport with food and liquid in sealable containers as far as Dangers), strong bases, food and feedstuffs. IMO: Marine Pollutant possible. Absorb remaining liquid in feedstuffs. Dry. Keep in the dark. Xn symbol sand or inert absorbent and remove to Ventilation along the floor. R: 40 safe place (extra personal protection: S: 23-36/37 self-contained breathing apparatus). UN Hazard Class: 6.1 UN Packing Group: III SEE IMPORTANT INFORMATION ON BACK ICSC,' 0081 Prepared in the context of cooperation between the International Programme on Chemical Safety & the Commission ofthe European Communities ® IPCS CEC 1993 International Chemical Safety Cards International Chemical Safety Cards (WHO/IPCS/ILO) TRICHLOROETHYLENE Page 2 of 2 ICSC: 0081 PHYSICAL STATE; APPEARANCE: ROUTES OF EXPOSURE: COLOURLESS LIQUID, WITH The substance can be absorbed into the body by CHARACTERISTIC ODOUR. inhalation, through the skin and by ingestion. PHYSICAL DANGERS: INHALATION RISK: The vapour is heavier than air. As a result of A harmful contamination of the air can be flow, agitation, etc., electrostatic charges can be reached rather quickly on evaporation of this I generated. substance at 20°C. M P CHEMICAL DANGERS: EFFECTS OF SHORT-TERM EXPOSURE: O On contact with hot surfaces or flames this The substance irritates the eyes and the skin. R substance decomposes forming toxic and Swallowing the liquid may cause aspiration into T corrosive fumes (phosgene, hydrogen chloride, the lungs with the risk of chemical pneumonitis. A chlorine). The substance decomposes on The substance may cause effects on the central N contact with strong alkali producing nervous system. Exposure could cause lowering T dichloroacetylene , which increases fire hazard. of consciousness. Reacts violently with metals such as lithium, D magnesium aluminium, titanium, barium and EFFECTS OF LONG-TERM OR A sodium. Slowly decomposed by light in REPEATED EXPOSURE: T presence of moisture, with formulation of Repeated or prolonged contact with skin may A corrosive hydrochloric acid. cause dermatitis. The substance may have effects on the liver and kidney (see notes). OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE LIMITS (OELs): TLV: 50 ppm; 269 mg/m3 (STEL): 200 ppm; 1070 mg/m3 (ACGIH 1992-1993). Boiling point: 870C Relative vapour density (air = 1): 4.5 Melting point: -73°C Relative density of the vapour/air-mixture at PHYSICAL Relative density (water = 1): 1.5 20*C (air = 1): 1.3 PROPERTIES Solubility in water, g/100 ml at 20°C: 0.1 Auto -ignition temperature: 410°C Vapour pressure, kPa at 20°C: 7.8 Explosive limits, vol% in air. 8-10.5 Octanol/water partition coefficient as log Pow: 2.42 ENVIRONMENTAL This substance may be hazardous to the environment; special attention should be given to water DATA organisms. NOTES Combustible vapour/air mixtures difficult to ignite, may be developed under certain conditions. Use of alcoholic beverages enhances the harmful effect. Depending on the degree of exposure, periodic medical examination is indicated. The odour warning when the exposure limit value is exceeded is insufficient. Do NOT use in the vicinity of a fire or a hot surface, or during welding. Technical grades may contain small amounts of carcinogenic stabilizers. Transport Emergency Card: TEC (R)-723 NFPA Code: 112; F1; R0; ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ICSC: 0081 TRICHLOROETHYLENE ® IPCS, CEC, 1993 Neither the CEC or the IPCS nor any person acting on behalf of the CEC or the IPCS is responsible IMPORTANT for the use which might be made of this information. This card contains the collective views of the LEGAL IPCS Peer Review Committee and may not reflect in all cases all the detailed requirements included NOTICE: in national legislation on the subject. The user should verify compliance of the cards with the relevant legislation in the country of use. Material Safety Data Sheet cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 97% ACC# 97773 Page 1 of 5 Section 1 - Chemical Product and Company Identification MSDS Name: cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 97% Catalog Numbers: AC113380000, AC113380025, AC113380100 Synonyms: cis -Acetylene dichloride. Company Identification: Acros Organics N.V. One Reagent Lane Fair Lawn, NJ 07410 For information in North America, call: 800-ACROS-01 For emergencies in the US, call CHEMTREC: 800-424-9300 Section 2 - Composition, Information on Ingredients CAS* Chemical Name Percent EINECS/EINNCS 156-59-2 cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 97 205-859-7 L- Section 3 - Hazards Identification EMERGENCY OVERVIEW Appearance: Clear liquid. Flash Point: 6 deg C. Warning! Flammable liquid and vapor. Harmful if inhaled. Unstabilized substance may polymerize. Causes eye and skin irritation. May be harmful if swallowed. May cause respiratory tract irritation. Target Organs: Central nervous system, respiratory system, eyes, skin. Potential Health Effects Eye: Causes moderate eye irritation. Skin: Causes moderate skin irritation. May cause dermatitis. Ingestion: May cause gastrointestinal irritation with nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. May be harmful if swallowed. May cause central nervous system depression. Inhalation: May cause respiratory tract irritation. May cause narcotic effects in high concentration. Eye irritation, vertigo, and nausea were reported in humans exposed at 2200 ppm. Chronic: Not available. Some German investigators reported fatty degeneration of the liver upon repeated narcotic doses in rats and L_ Section 4 - First Aid Measures Eyes: In case of contact, immediately flush eyes with plenty of water for a t least 15 minutes. Get medical aid. Skin: In case of contact, flush skin with plenty of water. Remove contaminated clothing and shoes. Get medical aid if irritation develops and persists. Wash clothing before reuse. Ingestion: If swallowed, do not induce vomiting unless directed to do so by medical personnel. Never give anything by mouth to an unconscious person. Get medical aid. Page 2 of 5 Inhalation: If inhaled, remove to fresh air. If not breathing, give artificial respiration. If breathing is difficult, give oxygen. Get medical aid. Notes to Physician: Treat symptomatically and supportively. Section 5 - Fire Fighting Measures 11 General Information: As in any fire, wear a self-contained breathing apparatus in pressure - demand, MSHA/NIOSH (approved or equivalent), and full protective gear. Vapors may form an explosive mixture with air. Use water spray to keep fire -exposed containers cool. Flammable liquid and vapor. Fire or excessive heat may result in violent rupture of the container due to bulk polymerization. Vapors are heavier than air and may travel to a source of ignition and flash back. Vapors can spread along the ground and collect in low or confined areas. Hazardous polymerization may occur under fire conditions. Extinguishing Media: Use water fog, dry chemical, carbon dioxide, or regular foam. Flash Point: 6 deg C ( 42.80 deg F) Autoignition Temperature: 440 deg C ( 824.00 deg F) Explosion Limits, Lower:9.70 vol % Upper: 12.80 vol % NFPA Rating: (estimated) Health: 2; Flammability: 3; Instability: 2 Section 6 - Accidental Release Measures General Information: Use proper personal protective equipment as indicated in Section 8. Spills/Leaks: Absorb spill with inert material (e.g. vermiculite, sand or earth), then place in suitable container. Remove all sources of ignition. Use a spark -proof tool. Provide ventilation. Section 7 - Handling and Storage Handling: Wash thoroughly after handling. Remove contaminated clothing and wash before reuse. Ground and bond containers when transferring material. Use spark -proof tools and explosion proof equipment. Avoid contact with eyes, skin, and clothing. Empty containers retain product residue, (liquid and/or vapor), and can be dangerous. Avoid ingestion and inhalation. Do not pressurize, cut, weld, braze, solder, drill, grind, or expose empty containers to heat, sparks or open flames. Use only with adequate ventilation. Pure vapor will be uninhibited and may polymerize in vents or other confined spaces. Storage: Keep away from sources of ignition. Store in a tightly closed container. Flammables-area. Store protected from light and air. Section 8 - Exposure Controls, Personal Protection Engineering Controls: Use process enclosure, local exhaust ventilation, or other engineering controls to control airborne levels below recommended exposure limits. Facilities storing or utilizing this material should be equipped with an eyewash facility and a safety shower. Ex osure Limits Chemical Name I ACGIH NIOSH OSHA - Final PELs cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 1200 ppm TWA none listed none listed OSHA Vacated PELs: cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene: No OSHA Vacated PELs are listed for this Page 3 of 5 chemical. Personal Protective Equipment Eyes: Wear chemical splash goggles. Skin: Wear appropriate protective gloves to prevent skin exposure. Clothing: Wear appropriate protective clothing to prevent skin exposure. Respirators: Follow the OSHA respirator regulations found in 29 CFR 1910.134 or European Standard EN 149. Use a NIOSH/MSHA or European Standard EN 149 approved respirator if exposure limits are exceeded or If irritation or other symptoms are experienced. 11 Section 9 - Physical and Chemical Properties 11 Physical State: Liquid Appearance: Clear Odor: Pleasant odor pH: Not available. Vapor Pressure: 201 mm Hg @ 25 deg C Vapor Density: 3.34 (air=1) Evaporation Rate:Not available. Viscosity: Not available. Boiling Point: 60 deg C @ 760 mm Hg Freezing/Melting Point:-80 deg C Decomposition Temperature:Not available. Solubility: Insoluble. Specific Gravity/ Density: 1.2800 Molecular Formula:C2H2C12 Molecular Weight:96.94 11 Section 10 - Stability and Reactivity 11 Chemical Stability: Stable under normal temperatures and pressures. This material is a monomer and may polymerize under certain conditions if the stabilizer is lost. Conditions to Avoid: Light, ignition sources, exposure to air, excess heat. Incompatibilities with Other Materials: Strong oxidizing agents, strong bases, copper. Hazardous Decomposition Products: Hydrogen chloride, phosgene, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide. Hazardous Polymerization: May occur. Section 11 - Toxicological Information RTECS#: CAS# 156-59-2: KV9420000 LD50/ LC50: CAS# 156-59-2: Inhalation, rat: LC50 = 13700 ppm; Carcinogenicity: CAS# 156-59-2: Not listed by ACGIH, IARC, NTP, or CA Prop 65. Epidemiology: No data available. Teratogenicity: No data available. Page 4 of 5 Reproductive Effects: No data available. Mutagenicity: No data available. I Neurotoxicity: No data available. Other Studies: Section 12 - Ecological Information No information available. Section 13 - Disposal Considerations Chemical waste generators must determine whether a discarded chemical is classified as a hazardous waste. US EPA guidelines for the classification determination are listed in 40 CFR Parts 261.3. Additionally, waste generators must consult state and local hazardous waste regulations to ensure complete and accurate classification. RCRA P-Series: None listed. RCRA U-Series: None listed. Section 14 - Transport Information US DOT Canada TDG Shipping Name•' DOT regulated - small quantity provisions apply (see 49CFR173.4) 1,2-DICHLOROETHYLENE Hazard Class: 3 UN Number: UN1150 Packing Group: II Section 15 - Regulatory Information US FEDERAL TSCA CAS# 156-59-2 is listed on the TSCA inventory. Health & Safety Reporting List None of the chemicals are on the Health & Safety Reporting List. Chemical Test Rules None of the chemicals in this product are under a Chemical Test Rule. Section 12b None of the chemicals are listed under TSCA Section 12b. TSCA Significant New Use Rule None of the chemicals in this material have a SNUR under TSCA. CERCLA Hazardous Substances and corresponding RQs None of the chemicals in this material have an RQ. SARA Section 302 Extremely Hazardous Substances None of the chemicals in this product have a TPQ. Section 313 No chemicals are reportable under Section 313. Clean Air Act: This material does not contain any hazardous air pollutants. This material does not contain any Class 1 Ozone depletors. This material does not contain any Class 2 Ozone depletors. Clean Water Act: None of the chemicals in this product are listed as Hazardous Substances under the CWA. Page 5 of 5 None of the chemicals in this product are listed as Priority Pollutants under the CWA. None of the chemicals in this product are listed as Toxic Pollutants under the CWA. OSHA: None of the chemicals in this product are considered highly hazardous by OSHA. STATE CAS# 156-59-2 can be found on the following state right to know lists: Pennsylvania, Massachusetts. California Prop 65 California No Significant Risk Level: None of the chemicals in this product are listed. European/International Regulations European Labeling in Accordance with EC Directives Hazard Symbols: XN F Risk Phrases: R 11 Highly flammable. R 20 Harmful by inhalation. R 52/53 Harmful to aquatic organisms, may cause long-term adverse effects in the aquatic environment. Safety Phrases: S 16 Keep away from sources of ignition - No smoking. S 29 Do not empty into drains. S 7 Keep container tightly closed. S 61 Avoid release to the environment. Refer to special instructions /safety data sheets. WGK (Water Danger/Protection) CAS# 156-59-2: No information available. Canada - DSL/NDSL CAS# 156-59-2 is listed on Canada's NDSL List. Canada - WHMIS WHMIS: Not available. This product has been classified in accordance with the hazard criteria of the Controlled Products Regulations and the MSDS contains all of the information required by those regulations. Canadian Ingredient Disclosure List Section 16 - Additional Information MSDS Creation Date: 2/09/1998 Revision *5 Date: 3/16/2007 The information above is believed to be accurate and represents the best information currently available to us. However, we make no warranty of merchantability or any other warranty, express or implied, with respect to such Information, and we assume no liability resulting from its use. Users should make their own investigations to determine the suitability of the information for their particular purposes. In no event shall Fisher be liable for any claims, losses, or damages of any third party or for lost profits or any special, indirect, incidental, consequential or exemplary damages, howsoever arising, even if Fisher has been advised of the possibility of such damages. 48" DOOR 18" VENT LIGHT SWITCH/ PLUG ---- TRANSFORMER TEMP SENSOR—y TEMPSENSOR—i ES FAN CONTROLPANEL�- 15HP KEISERAC HEATERS CIRCUT PANEL IR 240V 3ph 200emp Disconnect VENTED OUTSIDE AAA TRAILER I I 15 WELL SPARGE MANIFOLD SIZE SHEET DRAWING BY REV PLAN B 1 GERARD SMIDDY ; 1 TITLE SCALE NTS UNIT NUMBER JOB NUMBER DATE 9/28/09 LBG GREER SITE FOR PROACT USE ONLY PROAP SERVICES CORPORATION MANIFOLD SIRING HEADER \ el"6S PIPE o PV 2„ • 1,. QCO F i >vc-CFM 1 2 /TRAILER WALL BF e ANALOG INPUT VACUUM TRANSDUCER BAO FILTER HOUSING DI DISCRETE INPUT DI DIFFE�=AL PRESSURE LIQUID CARBON VESSEL 8001W EA PROCESS LINE PV PROCESS VALVEDESIONATION AO - ELECTRICAL LINE ANALOG OUTPUT M e PRESSURE INDICATOR OVAP* FLOW CAPTOR PT PRESSURE TRANSDUCER UNIO� VACUUM INDICATOR M❑ M R A PV Solberg CSL-239-400C VT FILTER 4" OS PIPE/ HOSE 2" VI URAI 59 w/ 20HP' PF An __... FLOAT M93823e e 120 Galion LSHffiI Knock Out LSHI 1 nk e LSL (PR) 'L 2"PV o, t/2"1VBE l" O O E 1/2" TUBE AIR LINE IN HLV 1., 2EA INFLUENT LINE LSHIH N3823e FLOAT LSHI LSL THREE WAY BALL VALVE 6' VACUUM/PRESSURERELIEFVALVE Q SIORTBUBBLE BASKETSTRAINER i1 BUTTERFLY VALVE BALL VALVE ISIS SAMPLEPORT 101 DRAIN VALVE D FEMALE CAM CONNECTION F MALE CAM CONNECTION 20-180'H20 PRV 11/, v HEAT 4" AIR STRIPPER!EFFLUENT TRAILER WALL 1 AIR STRIPPER AIR INFLUENT I"BAG FILTER DRAIN ASSIST HOSE t" 1/ D C� 1 0 C UC CAMLOCKCAP CFM CUBIC FEETPER MINUTE C.S. CARBON STEEL ® FURNCO CSO LIQUID FLOW METER ESD EMERGENCY SHUTDOWN F FILTER Q.S. OALVENIZED STEEL AIIt FLOW METER AUTO AIR BLEED LS LIGHT SWITCH LSHI LIMIT SWITCH HI { it BUTTERFLY VALVE OTEMPERATURE INDICATOR 0 - 25OF LSHIHI LIMIT SWITCH HIGH HIGH fo-I YSTRAINER ISL LIMIT SWITCH LOW OTEMPERATURE TRANSDUCER L-1 CHECK VALVE PRV PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE VAPOR CONTROL VALVE }J PROCESS FLOW DIRECTION PVC POLY-VETYL CHLORIDE SCH SCHEDULE PRESSURE REGULATOR O FLOOR SUMP W/HIHHS SS. STAINLESS STEEL > CONTROL VALVE NONXPLIGHT VRV VACUUM RELIEF VALVE XP EXPLOSION PROOF LSUHU e LSHI e r.SL TRAILER WALL EFFLUENT LSHffiI FLOORSUMP—T PT PI PI it 3 iH PV PV A 2" SCH 80 PVC PIPE---,,., Ce El/4" PI PI F BLv 1^ 4urz TP #2 e Y 1"BLANCETT I/4" S �OJ VACUUMBREAKER ANTI SYPHON VALVE ltmla Wall {lE _ 2" M-CAM EFFLUENT SIZE SHEET DRAWING BY REV PIS B 2 GERARD SMIDDY TITLE - - SCALE NTS UNIT NUMBER JOB NUMBER DATE 9/,Z8/09 L B G G R E E R SITE PROAcr SERVICES FOR PROACT USE ONLY CORPORATION BECKER KDT ZGE MANTOLll S IKIN Ci 1 JI;A SIZE I SHEET DR,4WING BY REV SPARGE PID B 3 GERARD SMIDDY 1 TITLE SCALE NTS UNIT NUMBER JOB NUMBER DATE 9/28/09 LBG GREER SITE PROACT SERVICES FOR PROACT USE ONLY CORPORATION 1 THE VERTERRE GROUP, INC Nvironmentat Sc(ef tAh and £nginrere Phase check one Type check one ✓ Site Investigation 0 Work Scope ❑ Corrective Action Feasibility ✓ Technical Report Investigation 0 PCF Reimbursement Request ❑ Corrective Action Plan ❑ General Correspondence ❑ Corrective Action Summary Report ❑ Operations & Monitoring Report SUPPLEMENTAL SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT Date Submitted: August- I�, 2005 Greer's Dry Cleaning 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont Verterre Project #05-045 Report Prepared for: Mr. Dennis Curran Ms. Jory Curran Greer Family, LLC 81 Maple Leaf Farm Road Underhill, Vermont 05489 Written By: Richard S. Vandenberg, CPG, P> ct Manager Reviewed By: JoSn R. Diego, Project Manager Copyright 02005 The Verterre Group, Inc. All rights reserved. No portions of this report may be copied without the prior written permission of The Verterre Group, Inc. 414 Roosevelt Highway, Suite 200 Colchester, Vermont 05446 • Tel 802.654.8663 • Fax 802.654.8667 316 U.S. Route One, York, Maine 03909 • Tel 207.363.7100 - Fax 207.363.7179 Greer's Dry Cleaner's Supplemental Site Investigation Report August 2005 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Verterre Group, Inc.® (Verterre), on behalf of the Greer Family LLC, has performed a Supplemental Site Investigation (SSI) of the Greer's Dry Cleaning and Laundry facility located at 10 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Chittenden County, Vermont, (the SITE). This work was conducted in conformance with Verterre's workplan dated July 25, 2005 and State of Vermont Sites Management Section (SMS) guidelines. Our workplan was submitted to the State of Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (VDEC) SMS on July 25, 2005 to serve as notification of intent to perform this work. Verterre consulted with SMS personnel prior to beginning this work. At SMS request, Verterre provided supplemental information to certain workplan items and added a provision for `real-time' quantification of select soil gas samples if Verterre's photoionization detector (PID) failed to provide adequate data in the field. Verterre conducted a review of pertinent documents including, but not limited to, the July 8, 2005 Heindel & Noyes, Inc. (H&N) Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) Report. A Phase I ESA has not been performed at this SITE. All SSI fieldwork was conducted by Verterre between July 25 and July 29, 2005. This SITE is presently occupied by a Dry Cleaning and Laundry Facility and retail sporting goods store (Mills & Greer) in a commercial section of South Burlington. Based on the available information, H&N believed that there was evidence of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the SITE from former and current operation of the SITE as a dry cleaner. H&N's Phase II work identified that soil and groundwater in several areas of the SITE were impacted with a dry cleaning solvent known as tetracholorethene (PCE). PCE was quantified in 2 of the 4 monitor wells installed by H&N. In two of the wells (MW-1 and MW-2) PCE was quantified above its Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standard (VGES). Concentrations of toluene, tricholorethene, and PCE were also reported in the soil gas beneath the SITE. Based on the findings of the Phase 11 work conducted by H&N, Verterre recommended additional subsurface investigation work be conducted at the SITE. Verterre prepared a workplan to conduct a supplemental SITE investigation aimed at further defining the extent and magnitude of subsurface PCE contamination, particularly in the groundwater. Verterre began most of this work on July 26, 2005 only after the VDEC SMS commented via the telephone on our workplan. After some discussion with SMS personnel, the following supplemental field activities were conducted: ➢ Conducting a detailed evaluation of the underground utilities buried on -SITE; ➢ Drilling and installation of eighteen (18) shallow vapor monitor wells as a part of a detailed soil gas survey; ➢ Drilling and installation of six (6) new groundwater monitor wells at locations identified during the soil gas survey; ➢ Collection of depth -to -groundwater measurements from all SITE wells (new and existing); and, Verterre Project #05-045 I Greer's Dry Cleaner's Supplemental Site Investigation Report August 2005 I ➢ Collection of groundwater samples from the six (6) newly drilled monitor wells, the four (4) existing H&N installed monitor wells, and two (2) monitor wells located on the adjacent Judge property for volatile organic compound (VOC) analysis by EPA Method 8260. Results of this work clearly indicate that PCE was quantified in the collected groundwater samples exceeding VGES in five (5) of the monitor wells. The data collected suggests that the PCE contamination is probably from a source area located somewhere beneath the building. Verterre's efforts at locating the source adjacent to the former or current dry cleaning machines were not verified. The presence of PCE in SITE groundwater suggests that the former/current dry cleaner operations released PCE to the environment. Former operations are probably responsible, because no obvious current activities appear to be impacting the environment. 1 Significant soil contamination was also noted during the soil gas survey work. Impacted SITE media include soil and groundwater beneath the SITE. Despite this significant contamination the only other receptors identified were utilities corridors surrounding the property. The location and proximity of the contaminated groundwater suggests that several utilities lines may be threatened. Based on the findings detailed above, Verterre recommends the following actions: ➢ Further evaluate the SITE to determine the location(s) of the PCE source(s); and, ➢ Conduct routine monitoring of the existing SITE monitor well network. Verterre Project #05-045 2 THE VERTERRE GROUP, INC F rime imcnlat Srienwo an i £ngiiteere check ✓ Site Investigation ❑ Work Scope ❑ Corrective Action Feasibility ✓ Technical Report Investigation 0 PCF Reimbursement Request ❑ Corrective Action Plan 0 General Correspondence ❑ Corrective Action Summary Report ❑ O erations &Monitoring Report SOURCE AREA INVESTIGATION REPORT Date Submitted: October 18, 2005. Greer's Dry Cleaning 10 Dorset Street . South Burlington, Vermont Verterre Project,405-045 Report Prepared for: Dennis and Jory Curran Greer Family, LLC 81 Maple Leaf Farm Road Underhill, Vermont 05489 Written By: _' Martha Roy, Project Manager - - Reviewed By: Z•� J R. Dieg t Manager Copyright ©2005 The Verterre Group, Inc. All rights reserved. No portions of this report may be copied without the prior written permission of The Verterre Group, Inc. 414 Roosevelt Highway, Suite 200 Colchester, Vermont 05446 • Tel 802.654.8663 • Fax 802.654.8667 316 U.S. Route One, York, Maine 03909 • Tel 207.363.7100 • Fax 207.363.7179 Greer's Dry Cleaning Supplemental Site Investigation Report October 2005 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Verterre Group, Inc.® (Verterre), on behalf of the Greer Family LLC, has performed a Source Area Investigation of Greer's Dry Cleaning located at 10 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Chittenden County, Vermont, (the SITE). This SITE is presently occupied by Greer's Dry Cleaning and retail sporting goods store (Mills & Greer) in a commercial section of South Burlington. This work was conducted in conformance with Verterre's workplan dated September 2, 2005 and approved by the State of Vermont Sites Management Section (SMS) on September 8, 2005. The purpose of this work was to further define the source area of tetrachloroethene (PCE) contamination noted during Verterre's August 2005 Supplemental Site Investigation. A general SITE Map is presented as Figure 1 and a detailed SITE Plan is provided as Figure 2. Field work for this Source Area Investigation began on this SITE on September 13, 2005. All field work was completed by October 14, 2005. The following field activities were conducted: ➢ Installing seventeen (17) temporary soil vapor extraction points to aid in positioning monitor well locations; ➢ Drilling and installation of three (3) new groundwater monitor wells at locations identified during the soil gas survey; ➢ Collection of soil samples from the saturated zone of each new well for fraction of organic content (F..) by ASTM method D2974-87 analysis; ➢ Collection of a grab water sample (SP-1) using Geoprobeo screen point 15 from inside the building near the drain at a depth of 17-20 feet for volatile organic compounds (VOC) analysis by EPA Method 8260B; ➢ Collection of groundwater samples from the three (3) newly drilled monitor wells using diffuser sampler bag technology. The collected samples were than analyzed for VOC analysis by EPA Method 8260B; ➢ Collection of a sample (Manhole) from the 6 inch drain pipe between the relic tank and the manhole for VOC analysis by EPA Method 826013; and, ➢ An off -SITE receptor survey to identify potential areas where PCE contamination from the SITE may have migrated. Results of this work indicate that PCE exceeded Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standards (VGES) in all three (3) of the newly installed monitor wells and the grab sample (SP-1). The data collected suggests that the source of the PCE contamination is from a relic tank that was abandoned many years ago but not removed. The approximate location of this relic tank is depicted on Figure 2. Verterre believes that the source of the PCE contamination is the original dry cleaning machine that was part of Greer's Dry Cleaning. Reportedly, this machine was located near a drain that is inside the building. This drainage system includes the drain, a relic tank (that Verterre believes is still present in the ground in front of the building) and a 6 inch pipe that leads from the tank to the manhole (present on the Dorset Street side of the SITE). This drainage system is believed to be the conveyor of the PCE Verterre Project 405-045 i Greer's Dry Cleaning Supplemental Site Investigation Report October 2005 contamination from the dry cleaning machines to the soil and groundwater beneath the SITE. The tank I is an intermediary source of the PCE contamination since it is believed that the tank may contain dry cleaning sludge. Based on the findings detailed above, Verterre recommends the following actions: ➢ Perform an intrusive investigation to confirm the presence of the relic tank and determine if subsequent removal of the tank and or its contents should occur; ➢ Perform an additional round of groundwater monitoring using diffuser sampling bags to include VOC analysis by EPA Method 8260B of wells MW-1, MW-2, MW-101, MW- 102S, MW-102D, MW-103, MW-104, MW-201, MW-202 and MW-203; and, ➢ Perform a limited investigation of the stream bed located behind the Holiday Inn to 1 identify if any PCE contamination has reached this receptor. Verterre Project #05-045 2 ATTACHMENT 2 LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. EMSL Analytical, Inc., IH Laboratory, 3 Cooper Street, Westmont, NJ 08108 phone (800)220-3675 John Diego Leggette, Brashear & Graham 76 Pearl Street Suite 203 Essex Junction, VT 05452 Email: jdiego@lb .com; kcrawfordDb .com RE: EMSL 280901453 Project: TO-15 ANALYSIS Dear John: gY: Attached please find the lab report and results for the above referenced analysis. Sample canisters were received in acceptable condition unless otherwise noted. If you have any questions or need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me at extension 1275. If you require data interpretation, please contact Vince Daliessio, CIH, at extension 1240. Summa canisters are guaranteed to be retained for one day after results are reported. Please review your results to ensure that your project scope is fully addressed. Cans may be retained for a longer period of time but this is dependant on demand for cans. Arrangements to hold your cans must be made through your customer account representative. Sincerely, Scott VanEtten Senior Chemist IH Laboratory Manager NJ-NELAP Laboratory No. 04653 AIHA 100194 VOLATILE ORGANICS DATA ANALYSIS SUMMARY EPA COMPENDIUM TO-15 Lab Name: EMSL ANALYTICAL Lab Location: WESTMONT, NJ Sample Matrix: Air Laboratory ID Number: 280901453-1 Laboratory File ID: j4063.d Compound CAS Number Q Results ppbv Results u /m3 Propytene 115-07-1 ND 20 34 Freon 12(Dichlorodifluoromethane) 75-71-8 88 440 Freon 114(1,2-Dichlorotetrafluoroethan 76-14-2 ND 10 70 Chloromethane 74-87-3 ND 10 21 Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 60 150 1,3-Butadiene 106-99-0 ND 10 22 Bromomethane 74-83-9 ND 10 39 Chloroethane 75-00-3 ND 10 26 Ethanol 64-17-5 30 56 Bromoethene (Vinyl bromide) 593-60-2 NO 10 44 Freon 11(Trichlorofluoromethane) 75-69-4 ND 10 56 Isopropyl alcohol(2-Propanol) 67-63-0 ND 30 74 Freon 113(1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethan 76-13-1 ND 10 77 Acetone 67-64-1 ND 60 140 1,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 ND 10 40 Acetonitrile 75-05-8 ND 10 17 Tertiary butyl alcohol (TBA) 75-65-0 ND 10 30 Bromoethane (Ethyl bromide) 74-96-4 ND 10 44 3-Chloropropene (Ally) chloride) 107-05-1 ND 10 31 Carbon disulfide 75-15-0 ND 10 31 Methylene chloride 75-09-2 ND 30 100 Acrylonitrile 107-13-1 ND 10 22 Methyl-tert-butyl ether(MTBE) 1634-04-4 ND 10 36 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-00-5 130 500 n-Hexane 110-54-3 ND 10 35 1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 ND 10 40 Vinyl acetate 108-05-4 NO 10 35 2-Butanone(MEK) 78-93-3 ND 10 29 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 D 8600 34000 D--J4117n Ethyl acetate 141-78-6 ND 10 36 Chloroform 67-66-3 18 86 Tetrahydrofuran 109-99-9 ND 10 29 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 ND 10 55 Cyclohexane 110-82-7 ND 10 34 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane (Isooctane) 540-84-1 ND 10 47 Results for Project: EMSL 280901453 Client Sample ID: VE-2-537 Analysis Date: 08/31/09 Sample Volume(mL): 13 Canister ID: ME3044 Compound CAS Number Q Results ppbv Results u m3 Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 ND 10 63 n-He tane 142-82-5 ND 10 41 1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 ND 10 40 Benzene 71-43-2 ND 10 32 Trichloroethene 79-01-6 D 6500 35000 D=J41170 1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 ND 10 46 Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 ND 10 67 1,4-Dioxane 123-91-1 ND 10 36 4-Methyl-2-pentanone(MIBK) 108-10-1 ND 10 41 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-01-5 ND 10 45 Toluene 108-88-3 ND 10 38 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-02-6 ND 10 45 1,1,2-Trchloroethane 79-00-5 ND 10 55 2-Hexanone(MBK) 591-78-6 ND 10 41 Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 D 560000 3800000 D=J415e D Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 ND 10 85 1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 NO 10 77 Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 ND 10 46 Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 ND 10 43 Xylene (para d1 meta) 1330-20-7 ND 10 43 Xylene (Ortho) 95-47-6 ND 10 43 Styrene 100-42-5 ND 10 43 Bromoform 75-25-2 ND 10 100 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 ND 10 69 4-Ethyltoluene 622-96-8 ND 10 49 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 108-67-8 ND 10 49 2-Chlorotoluene 95-49-8 ND 10 52 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 95-63-6 ND 10 49 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 ND 10 60 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 ND 10 60 Benzyl chloride 100-44-7 ND 10 73 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 ND 10 50 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 ND 10 74 Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene 87-68-3 ND 10 110 Surrogate Result(ppbv) True(ppbv) %Recovery Limits % 4-Bromolluorobenzene 855 1000 86 70 -130 Qualifier (Q) Key: (No Qualifier in field) = Compound detected at reported concentration in ppbv and ug/m3. B= Detected in blank. ND= Not Detected. E= Estimated Concentration. Exceeded calibration limit. D= Diluted. Reported from dilution run. Value is accurate. J= Detected below practical quatitation level, but above MDL. 9014531 XLS VOLATILE ORGANICS DATA ANALYSIS SUMMARY EPA COMPENDIUM TO-15 Lab Name: EMSL ANALYTICAL Results for Project: EMSL 280901453 Lab Location: WESTMONT, NJ Client Sample ID: VE-3-785 Sample Matrix: Air Analysis Date: 08/31/09 Laboratory ID Number: 280901453-2 Sample Volume(ml-): 13 Laboratory File ID: j4061.d Canister ID: ME3034 Compound CAS Number Q Results ppbv Results u /m3 Propylene 115-07-1 ND 20 34 Freon 12 Dichlorodifluoromethane 75-71-8 ND 10 49 Freon 114(1,2-Dichlorotetrafluoroethan 76-14-2 ND 10 70 Chloromethane 74-87-3 ND 10 21 Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 ND 10 26 1,3-Butadiene 106-99-0 ND 10 22 Bromomethane 74-83-9 ND 10 39 Chloroethane 75-00-3 ND 10 26 Ethanol 64-17-5 30 56 Bromoethene (Vinyl bromide) 593-60-2 ND 10 44 Freon 11(Tdchlorofluoromethane) 75-69-4 ND 10 56 Isopropyl alcohol(2-Propanol) 67-63-0 ND 30 74 Freon 113(1,1,2-Tdchlorotrifluoroethan 76-13-1 ND 10 77 Acetone 67-64-1 ND 60 140 1, 1 -Dichloroethene 75-35-4 ND 10 40 Acetonitrile 75-05-8 ND 10 17 Tertiary butyl alcohol (TBA) 75-65-0 ND 10 30 Bromoethane (Ethyl bromide) 74-96-4 ND 10 44 3-Chloropropene (Ally) chloride) 107-05-1 ND 10 31 Carbon disulfide 75-15-0 ND 10 31 Methylene chloride 75-09-2 ND 30 100 Acrylonitrile 107-13-1 ND 10 22 Methyl-tert-butyl ether(MTBE) 1634-04-4 ND 10 36 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 ND 10 40 n-Hexane 110-54-3 14 49 1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 ND 10 40 Vinyl acetate 108-05-4 ND 10 35 2-Butanone(MEK) 78-93-3 ND 10 29 as-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 D 830 3300 D=J4116.D Ethyl acetate 141-78-6 ND 10 36 Chloroform 67-66-3 ND 10 49 Tetrahydrofuran 109-99-9 ND 10 29 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 ND 10 55 Cyclohexane 110-82-7 ND 10 34 2,2,4-Trlmethylpentane Compound CAS Number Q Results by Results u m3 Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 ND 10 63 n-He Lane 142-82-5 ND 10 41 1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 ND 10 40 Benzene 71-43-2 ND 10 32 Trichloroethene 79-01-6 D 1700 8900 D=J41160 1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 ND 10 46 Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 ND 10 67 1,4-Dioxane 123-91-1 ND 10 36 4-Methyl-2-pentanone(MIBK) 108-10-1 ND 10 41 cis- 1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-01-5 ND 10 45 Toluene 108-88-3 ND 10 38 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-02-6 ND 10 45 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 ND 10 55 2-Hexanone(MBK) 591-78-6 ND 10 41 Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 D 610000 4100000 D=J4157 D Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 r)D 10 85 1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 HD 10 77 Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 ND 10 46 Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 ND 10 43 Xylene (para & meta) 1330-20-7 ND 10 43 Xylene (Ortho) 95-47-6 ND 10 43 Styrene 100-42-5 ND 10 43 Bromoform 75-25-2 ND 10 100 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 ND 10 69 4-Ethyltcluene 622-96-8 ND 10 49 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 10"7-8 ND 10 49 2-Chlorotoluene 95-49-8 ND 10 52 1,2,4-Tdmethylbenzene 95-63-6 ND 10 49 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 ND 10 60 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 ND 10 60 Benzyl chloride 100-44-7 ND 10 73 12-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 ND 10 60 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 ND 10 74 Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene 87-68-3 ND 10 110 (Isooctane) 540-84-1 13 62 Surrogate Result(ppbv) 4-Bromolluorobenzene 8.87 Qualifier (Q) Key: (No Qualifier in Feld) = Compound detected at reported concentration in ppbv and ug/m3. B= Detected in blank. ND= Not Detected. E= Estimated Concentration. Exceeded calibration limit. D= Diluted. Reported from dilution run. Value is accurate. J= Detected below practical quatitation level, but above MDL. True(ppbv) %Recovery Limits 10.00 89 70 - 130 9014512xLS 1 E MS LANALYTICAL, INC. External EMSL Project #6 �- 107 Haddon Avenue Chain of Custody / Analysis Request Form PO# Westmont, New Jersey 08108 Note: Please complete all required information. Incomplete shaded areas may hinder' processing samples. 856-858-4800 Extension 1301 Project Name: 856-858-3502 Fax or j pp mhowiey0emsl.com or svanetten(aemsi.com (Weather conditions (if known): Bar. Pressure: 2� C�?j�emo • Sl°F % Humidity,• Custody and Sample Information - Print ALL information_ writo nue in hiankax not anniinahIa 1. Report -to: rgg G 1 I I J 1 1� ('�� �••� C�1 "' aj V 1 2. Bill To: I f t y — Z Contact Person _ Name: 1 C, Sample Shipping and Transport Notice The individual signing this document to relinquish the sample(s) is indicating that the sarnple(s) is/are being shipped in compliance wnh all applicable local, suite or Federal as well as international I, regulations and ordinances- EMSL Analytical, Inc assumes no liability with respect to sampling, handling or shipping of the samples included to this shipment The relinquishing signature in addition indicates agreement to hold harmless, defend and indemnify EMSL Analytical. Inc_ against any claim, demand, or action, related to the sampling, handling, or shipping ofsamples Call the D,O,T Hotline at -(900) 4674922 for questions about regulations — E=mail• T l OD W Z 3. led Signature) 4. #cQ�f Samples in Shipment 5. D to of Sample Shipment 6. D4me Results,Needed E - Lab Sample ID Canister ID Client Sample ID Sampling Date i Time Start Start Sampling Date / Time Stop Stop Regulator Type Analyses Requested 1 } TO-15 2 537 615 (01,551 8'l210 0 se _ �I ---- 4 5 -- 6 Sample Type: [ ] Indoor Air Quality [x] Soil Gas [ ] Vent Gas ( ] Other Library Search needed: ( ] Yes [x] No, required if you will n d help interpreting your report Do you want your results e-mailed? Yes No Relinquished by (print(sign): Company: EMSL Da ime yY! is Affixed Custody Seal No. Received by (print(sign): alj�rlvd Company: D e 'me Was Custody Seal Broken? l ]Yes ()gNo Relinquished by (print/sign): " Company: batai I i 11 e Mypo Affixed Custody Seal No. %A-9-7 Received by (print/sign): Company: Da aMime Was Custody Seal Broken? [ ]Yes [ ]No Relinquished by (print/sign): Company: Date/'rime Affixed Custody Seal No. Received by (printisign): Q Compa Date a - Was Custody Seal BroW [- e Relinquished by (printlsign): Company:��S L D i % o Affixed CustgdySbal 1, r- -rt ��►I :J� t; 7' Received by (print/sign): Company: DatelTime Was Custo Broken? [ No "' [ I r? Please indicate Turn I Y I Standard 10 Days" Ll *96-Hour *72-Hour H *48-Hour I I *24-HourI- - ,� r D Around Time needed: *TAT subject to laboratory workload. Comments: r� 63 � jC v� ( ►�, Crn��x� Ui� 1 7 Please indicate reporting requirements: I O — D Cl) II 1) esults only 2 then (Attach a copy of requirements) CJl _ m c) w-u num an ran �tx wu u . Drat a�o5o�y� TO-15 Sample Information Please fill out this worksheet in addition to the Chain of Custody form. Turnaround time will start after all required information is received. Company: LgAo e lc �ra�ln it (� Contact Person: Name: rl 0C E-mail: &10 Cif- ��v �(@l v-� C.OM_ Additional E-mail: Tele hone #: qum Fax: 8"02-=_CN Do you want your results emailed? [x]YES [ ] NO Library Search requested: [ ] YES [)(] NO A library search will identify up to 20 of the largest, non -target peaks that are not part of the standard TO-15 list of 62 compounds. If you are performing an Indoor Air Quality or odor investigation the library search is recommended. If you will need help interpreting your report the library search is REQUIRED. The standard cost is $25/sample Requests for a library search after the analysis has been completed will cost $75/sample. Sample Type: [ ] Indoor Air Quality (Home/Office) [ ] IAQ (Industrial) ] Vent Gas ] Other: _ [ X,] Soil Gas Description of sample (Imports for the lab to achieve your req ested turnaround time): (�cr r�¢� c lec-fed `SVE S�e-rn OCT 0. tns.� d cl�t4xu �� ��c` rnivc�(\t rno& ko Coca'kk�L1ia) �-aurna C�i�S�t0�a 'n Ya n bdi_Jeaa J "'�` 5O0 -loC�ppm.v. Are thePe an pecial detection limits, specific set of compounds, or any other specifics you need in your report? [ ] YES (Please list or attach separate sheet) [ x ] NO Do you need any additional analysis on the canister sample? (circle below) TVo CO Methane CO2 H2S S02 EtO Nox 02 Other Please note that turnaround time for additional analyses begin after TO-15 is complete. Sl�a�en-, Policy: All canisters are guaranteed to be retained for one day after results a ep ease review your results to ensure that your project scope is fully addressed. Cann, fltay e�retained for a longer period of time but this is dependant on demand for cans. Arrangements to hold your cans must be made through your customer account {gpr,esa#ye.. iTh'ap(f you. L Of9lbilfM1OIm.y TO-15 Sample Information v2 AS SISAIV14V 80_1 a31d300b S31d"VS ATTACHMENT 3 LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. Environmental Laboratories Corporation 111 Herrick Street, Merrimack, NH 03054 TEL: (603) 424-2022 • FAX: (603) 429-8496 www.amrolabs.com September 02, 2009 ANALYTICAL TEST RESULTS John Diego Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 76 Pearl Street Suite 203 Essex Junction, VT 05452 TEL: (802) 288-9600 FAX: (802) 288-9881 Subject: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Workorder No.: 0908065 Dear John Diego: AMFO Environmental Laboratories Corp. received 6 samples on 8/26/2009 for the analyses presented in the following report. AMRO is accredited in accordance with NELAC and certifies that these test results meet all the requirements of NELAC, where applicable, unless otherwise noted in the case narrative. The enclosed Sample Receipt Checklist details the condition of your sample(s) upon receipt. Please be advised that any unused sample volume and sample extracts will be stored for a period of- 60 days from sample receipt date (90 days for samples from Nely York). After this time, AMRO will properly dispose of the remaining sample(s). If you require fitrther analysis, or need the samples held for a longer period, please contact us immediately. This report consists of a total of ° —6 pages. This letter is an integral part of your data report. All results in this project relate only to the sample(s) as received by the laboratory and documented in the Chain -of -Custody This report shall not be reproduced except in full, without the written approval of the laboratory. If you have any questions regarding this project in the future, please refer to the Workorder Number above. ` Sincerely, �f Nancy Stewart Vice President State Certifications: NH (NELAC): 1001, MA: M-NH012, CT: PH-0758, NY: 1 1278 (NELAC), ME. NHO12 and 1001, NJ: NH 125, RI: 00105, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center (NFESC). Hard copy of the State Certification is available upon request. AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. Date: 31-Aug-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Work Order Sample Summary Lab Order: 0908065 Date Received: 8/26/2009 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Collection Date Collection Time 0908065-OIA UD-76 8/24/2009 10:05 AM 0908065-02A UD-56 8/24/2009 11:04 AM 0908065-03A UD-32 8/24/2009 11:36 AM 0908065-04A UD-19 8/24/2009 11:57 AM 0908065-05A UD-3 8/24/2009 12:20 PM 0908065-06A CB-N 8/24/2009 12:38 PM 1 2 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. 31-Aug-09 Lab Order: 0908065 Client: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. DATES REPORT Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Sample ID Client Sample ID Collection Date Matrix Analytical Test Name Analysis Date Preparatory Test Name Prep Date Batch ID TCLP Date 0908065-01 A UD-76 8/24/2009 10-05:00 AM Aqueous EPA 9260B VOLATILES by GUMS 8/28/2009 EPA 5030B 8/24/2009 R43050 EPA 8260B VOLATILES by GC/MS 8/27/2009 8/24/2009 R43043 0908065-02A UD-56 8/24/2009 11:04.00 AM EPA 8260B VOLATILES by GUMS 8/28/2009 8/24/2009 R43050 EPA 8260B VOLATILES by GUMS 8/27/2009 8/24/2009 R43043 0908065-03A UD-32 8/24/2009 11:36:00 AM EPA 8260B VOLATILES by GC/MS 8/28/2009 Ca 8/24/2009 R43050 EPA 8260B VOLATILES by GUMS 8/27/2009 8/24/2009 R43043 0908065-04A UD-19 8/24/2009 11-57:00 AM EPA 8260B VOLATILES by GUMS 8/28/2009 8/24/2009 R43050 EPA 8260B VOLATILES by GC/MS 9/27/2009 8/24/2009 R43043 0908065-05A UD-3 8/24/2009 12:20:00 PM EPA 8260E VOLATILES by GUMS 828/2009 8/24/2009 R43050 EPA 8260B VOLATILES by GC/MS 8/27/2009 824/2009 R43043 0908065-06A CB-N 8/24/2009 12:38:00 PM EPA 8260B VOLATILES by GUMS 8/28/2009 824/2009 R43050 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corporation CHAIN -OF -CUSTODY RECORD 58559 Office: (603) 424-2022 111 Herrick Street Fax: (603) 429-8496 Merrimack, NH 03054 web: www.amrnlahs.com Project No.: P.O.#: Pro' ct Name: S Results Needed by: X Project State: V N 02l c U o o. Project Manager; am n RE UESTED ANAINSES lers (Signature): AMRO Project No.: Remarks Q =,Vw cbam Tyl CL� -via I QUOTE #: Seal Intact? Yes No N/A Sample ID.: aDate/Time Sampled i.r X r I , Preservative: C1-HCl, McOH, N-HNO3, S-H2SO4, Na-NaOH, 0- Other ❑ Send Results To: PRIORITY TURNAROUND TIME AUTHORIZATION Before submitting samples for expedited TAT, you must have a coded A UTHORIZA TION NUMBER AUTHORIZATION No.: BY: METALS 8 RCRA ❑ 13 PP ❑ 23 TAL ❑ 14 MCP ❑ Method: 6010 ❑ 200.7 ❑ Other Metals: Dissolved Metals Field Filtered? YES ❑ NO ❑ PHONE #: 2- -c (off FAX #: St q_- - E mail: � ,(aw- MCP Presumptive Certainty Required? YES F1 N MCP Methods Needed: YES Np Q Required Reporting Limits: IS-1 GW-1 Relin uis d By: DatelTime Received B JJAMR0 report package level needed: S-2 GW-2 ❑ 11S-3 GW-3 ❑ Other: EDD required: e rint c ear y, egt y an comp ete y. amp es can no ein and the turnaround time clock will not start until 7beloggpd mbiguities are resolved. amp es arnvrng after noon x� a trot a an billed as received on the following dad. policy requires notification to tvntng to e laboratory in cases where the samples were ELecLed from highlycontaminated sl(es.G CONT INATION: h-�j� `I JWhite: o Yellow: Client o SHEET OF AMR0C0C20u4. R-1 O8/18/04 C IL I AMRO Environmental SAMPLE RECEIPT CHECKLIST 111 Herrick Street Laboratories Corporation Merrimack, NH 03054 603) 424-2022 Client: L AMRO ID: Project Name: /2 -5 Date Rec.: Ship via: (circle one) Fed Ex., UPS , MRO Courier, Date Due: --�_ Hand Del., Other Courier, Other: Items to be Checked Upon Receipt I. Army Samples received in individual plastic bags? 2. Custody Seals present? 3. Custody Seals Intact? 4. Air Bill included in folder if received? 3. Is CDC included with samples? 6. Is CDC signed and dated by client? QO 7. Laboratory receipt temperature. TEMP =7 Samples rec. with ice—zice packs_ neither_ 8. Were samples received the same day they were sampled? Is client temperature = or <6°C ? If no obtain authorization from the client for the analyses. Client authorization from: Date: Obtained by: 9. Is the CDC filled out correctly and completely? i 10 Does the info on the CDC match the samples I 1 Were samples rec within holding time? 12. Were all samples properly labeled? 13 Were all samples properly preserved? 14. Were proper sample containers used9 15. Were all samples received intact? (none broken or leaking) 16. Were VOA vials rec. with no air bubbles? 17. Were the sample volumes sufficient for requested analysis? 18. Were all samples received? Yes No NA Comments t/ L/ l/ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ r/ ✓ ✓ [/ r/ 19. VPH and VOA Soils only: Sampling Method VPH (circle one): M=Methanol, E=EnCore (air -tight container) Sampling Method VOA (circle one): M=Methanol, SB=Sodium Bisulfate, E=EnCore, B=Bulk If M or SB: Does preservative cover the soil? If NO then client must be faxed. Does preservation level come close to the fill line on the vial? If NO then client must be faxed. Were vials provided by AMRO? If NO then weights MUST be obtained from client Was dry weight aliquot provided? If NO then fax client and inform the VOA lab ASAP. 20. Subcontracted Samples - What samples sent: Where sent Date: Analysis: TAT: 21. Information entered into: Internal Tracking Log? Dry Weight Log? Client Log? Composite Log? Filtration Log? ✓ ✓ Received By: CC Date: —�(o —O Loggcd to By: GG Date: — � — 09 Labeled By. GG Date: F_ — Checked BY: Date: tP ' 2 6—F3 NA= Not Applicable qc/gcmemos/forms/samplerec Rev.19 04/20/09 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corporation Please Circle if- Sample= Soil Sample= Waste 111 Herrick Street Merrimack, NH 03054 (603) 424-2022 AMRO ID: d 90)80(05 Listed I-E List Pre5erV. .. .. •• • Volume Added Final - .. r 24 ., .............y �,. c�u „r ururntng wilier sampte (s)for Cr/l methoa duu series, sample (s) should be held at least 16 hours prior to analysis or 24 hours for water sample (s). pH Checked By: Date: pH adjusted By: Date: pH Checked By: Date: H adj.(16 or 24hrs)By: Date: qc/gcmemos/forms/samp erec Rev.19 04/20/OT - AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. Date: 01-Sep-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greees CASE NARRATIVE Lab Order: 0908065 GC/MS VOLATILES: 1. A Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) and Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD) were performed on 08/27/09 (Batch ID: R43043). 1.1 The % Recovery for 1 analyte out of 67 analytes in the LCS was outside the laboratory control limits. 1.2 The % RPD for 1 analyte out of 67 analytes was outside the laboratory control limits. 2. A Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) was performed on 08/28/09 (Batch ID: R43050). 2.1 The % Recovery for 1 analyte out of 67 analytes in the LCS was outside the laboratory control limits. 7 DATA COMMENT PAGE Organic Data Oualifiers ND Indicates compound was analyzed for, but not detected at or above the reporting limit. J Indicates an estimated value. This flag is used either when estimating a concentration for tentatively identified compounds where a 1:1 response is assumed, or when the data indicates the presence of a compound that meets the identification criteria but the result is less than the sample quantitation limit but greater than the method detection limit. H Method prescribed holding time exceeded. E This flag identifies compounds whose concentrations exceed the calibration range of the instrument for that specific analysis. B This flag is used when the analyte is found in the associated blank as well as in the sample. R RPD outside accepted recovery limits RL Reporting limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. S Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits. # See Case Narrative Micro Data Oualifiers TNTC Too numerous to count Inorganic Data Oualifiers ND or U Indicates element was analyzed for, but not detected at or above the reporting limit. J Indicates a value greater than or equal to the method detection limit, but less than the quantitation limit. H Indicates analytical holding time exceedance. B Indicates that the analyte is found in the associated blank, as well as in the sample. MSA Indicates value determined by the Method of Standard Addition E This flag identifies compounds whose concentrations exceed the calibration range of the instrument for that specific analysis. R RPD outside accepted recovery limits RL Reporting limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. S Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits. W Post -digestion spike for Furnace AA analysis is out of control limits (85-115), while sample absorbance is less than 50% of spike absorbance. * Duplicate analysis not within control limits. + Indicates the correlation coefficient for the Method of Standard Addition is less than 0.995 # See Case Narrative Report Comments: 1. Soil, sediment and sludge sample results are reported on a "dry weight' basis. 2. Reporting limits are adjusted for sample size used, dilutions and moisture content, if applicable. AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Lab Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Lab ID: 0908065-OIA Date: 31-Aug-09 Client Sample ID: UD-76 Collection Date: 8/24/2009 10:05:00 AM Matrix: AQUEOUS Analyses Result RL Qual Units DF Date Analyzed EPA 8260B VOLATILES BY GC/MS SW8260B Analyst: SK Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Chloromethane ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11 00 PM Vinyl chloride ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11 00 PM Chloroethane ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Bromomethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Trichlorofluoromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Diethyl ether ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Acetone ND 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Carbon disulfide ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Methylene chloride ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Methyl tert-butyl ether ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM trans- l,2-Dichloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 2-Butanone ND 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 7.1 20 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11-00 PM Chloroform 4.8 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Tetrahydrofuran ND 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Bromochloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8127/20098:11:00 PM 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Carbon tetrachloride ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8.11:00 PM 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/20098.11:00 PM Benzene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Trichloroethene 2.8 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8-11:00 PM 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8-11:00 PM Bromodichloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Dibromomethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 4-Methyl-2-pentanone ND 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM cis- 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Toluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM trans- 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8-11:00 PM 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 2-Hexanone ND 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8127/2009 8:11:00 PM Tetrachloroethene 2,500 200 pg/L 100 8/28/2009 1:11:00 PM Dibromochloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 9 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Lab Order: 0908065 Date: 31-Aug-09 Client Sample ID: UD-76 Collection Date: 8/24/2009 10:05:00 AM Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Matrix: AQUEOUS Lab ID: 0908065-01 A Analyses Result RL Qual Units DF Date Analyzed Chlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 1. 1, 1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Ethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11.00 PM m,p-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11.00 PM o-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27J2009 8:11:00 PM Styrene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Bromoform ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Isopropylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11.00 PM 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11.00 PM 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Bromobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM n-Propylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27J2009 8:11:00 PM 2-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27J2009 8:11:00 PM 4-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM tert-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM sec-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 4-Isopropyltoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8127/20098:11:00 PM 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM n-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 5.0 Ng/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 Ng/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Hexachlorobutadiene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Naphthalene ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8-11:00 PM 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 Ng/L 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 96.4 85-119 %REC 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Surr: 1,2-DichloroethaneA4 105 79-131 %REC 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Surr: Toluene-0 91.4 90-110 %REC 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 88.7 76-117 %REC 1 8/27/2009 8:11:00 PM 10 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Lab Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Lab ID: 0908065-02A Date: 31 Aug-09 Client Sample ID: UD-56 Collection Date: 8/24/2009 11:04:00 AM Matrix: AQUEOUS Analyses Result RL Qual Units DF Date Analyzed EPA 8260B VOLATILES BY GC/MS SW8260B Analyst: SK Dichlorodifluoromethane NO 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Chloromethane NO 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Vinyl chloride NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Chloroethane NO 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Bromomethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Trichlorofluoromethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Diethyl ether NO 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Acetone NO 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,1-Dichloroethene NO 1.0 pg/L 1 8127/2009 8:47.00 PM Carbon disulfide NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Methylene chloride NO 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Methyl tert-butyl ether NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM trans-1,2-Dichloroethene NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,1-Dichloroethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 2-Butanone NO 10 Ng/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 2,2-Dichloropropane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 2.3 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Chloroform 5.6 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Tetrahydrofuran ND 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Bromochloromethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,1,1-Trichloroethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/2712009 8:47:00 PM 1,1-Dichloropropene NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Carbon tetrachloride NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,2-Dichloroethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/20098:47:00PM Benzene NO 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Trichloroethene NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,2-Dichloropropane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Bromodichloromethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Dibromomethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 4-Methyl-2-pentanone NO 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM cis-1,3-Dichloropropene NO 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Toluene NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM trans-1,3-Dichloropropene NO 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,1,2-Trichloroethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,2-Dibromoethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 2-Hexanone NO 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,3-Dichloropropane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Tetrachloroethene 1,100 200 pg/L 100 8/28/2009 2:19:00 PM Dibromochloromethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. Date: 31-Aug-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Client Sample ID: UD-56 Lab Order: 0908065 Collection Date: 8/24/2009 11:04:00 AM Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Matrix: AQUEOUS Lab ID: 0908065-02A Analyses Result RL Qual Units DF Date Analyzed Chlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1. 1, 1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Ethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47.00 PM m,p-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/2712009 8:47-00 PM o-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47.00 PM Styrene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Bromoform ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Isopropylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47 00 PM 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47.00 PM Bromobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM n-Propylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 2-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 4-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM tent-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/20098:47:00 PM sec-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 4-Isopropyltoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 812712009 8:47:00 PM n-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/20098-47:00 PM Hexachlorobutadiene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Naphthalene ND 50 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 96.8 85-119 %REC 1 8/27/2009 8:47.00 PM Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 105 79-131 %REC 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Surr: Toluene-d8 92.2 90-110 %REC 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 92.2 76-117 %REC 1 8/27/2009 8:47:00 PM 12 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Lab Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Lab ID: 0908065-03A Analyses Date: 31-Aug-09 Client Sample ID: UD-32 Collection Date: 8/24/2009 l 1:36:00 AM Matrix: AQUEOUS Result RL Qual Units DF Date Analyzed EPA 8260B VOLATILES BY GC/MS SW8260B Analyst: SK Dichlorodifluoromethane NO 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Chloromethane NO 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Vinyl chloride NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Chloroethane NO 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Bromomethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Trichlorofluoromethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Diethyl ether NO 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Acetone NO 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,1-Dichloroethene NO 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23.00 PM Carbon disulfide NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Methylene chloride NO 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Methyl tert-butyl ether NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM trans-1,2-Dichloroethene NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,1-Dichloroethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23-00 PM 2-Butanone NO 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 2,2-Dichloropropane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23-00 PM cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.4 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23 00 PM Chloroform 3.8 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Tetrahydrofuran NO 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23-00 PM Bromochloromethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,1,1-Trichloroethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,1-Dichloropropene NO 2.0 Ng/L 1 8/27/20099:23.00PM Carbon tetrachloride NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23.00 PM 1,2-Dichloroethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8127/2009 9:23:00 PM Benzene NO 1.0 yg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Trichloroethene 2.5 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,2-Dichloropropane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Bromodichloromethane NO 2.0 Ng/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Dibromomethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 4-Methyl-2-pentanone NO 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM cis-1,3-Dichloropropene NO 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Toluene NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23-00 PM trans-1,3-Dichloropropene NO 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,1,2-Trichloroethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,2-Dibromoethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 2-Hexanone NO 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,3-Dichloropropane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Tetrachloroethene 2,200 200 pg/L 100 8/28/2009 3:33:00 PM Dibromochloromethane NO 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 13 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Lab Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Lab ID: 0908065-03A Date: 31-Aug-09 Client Sample ID: UD-32 Collection Date: 8/24/2009 11:36:00 AM Matrix: AQUEOUS Analyses Result RL Qual Units DF Date Analyzed Chlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23-00 PM Ethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23-00 PM m,p-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM o-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23 00 PM Styrene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Bromoform ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Isopropylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Bromobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM n-Propylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 2-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 4-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 812712009 9:23:00 PM tert-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM sec-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 4-Isopropyltoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/20099:23.00 PM 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8127/20099:23:00 PM n-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Hexachlorobutadiene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Naphthalene ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8127120099:23:00 PM Surr. Dibromofluoromethane 96.7 85-119 %REC 1 8/27/2009 9-23:00 PM Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 104 79-131 %REC 1 8/27/20099:23:00 PM Surr Toluene-d8 92.8 90-110 %REC 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM Surr. 4-Bromofluorobenzene 89.8 75-117 %REC 1 8/27/2009 9:23:00 PM 14 IAMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. Date: 31-Aug-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Client Sample ID: UD-19 -__ Lab Order: 0908065 Collection Date: 8/24/2009 11:57:00 AM I Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greces Matrix- AQUEOUS Lab ID: 0908065-04A IAnalyses Result RL Qual Units DF Date Analyzed EPA 8260B VOLATILES BY GC/MS SW8260B Analyst: SK IDichlorodifluoromethane ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Chloromethane ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Vinyl chlonde ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Chloroethane I ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Bromomethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Trichlorofluoromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Diethyl ether ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Acetone I ND 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Carbon disulfide ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/200910:05:00 PM Methylene chloride I ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Methyl tert-butyl ether ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 2-Butanone I ND 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/271200910:05:00 PM cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene 3.8 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10.05:00 PM I Chloroform 3.5 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Tetrahydrofuran ND 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Bromochloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,1-Dichloropropene I ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Carbon tetrachloride ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM I Benzene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Trichloroethene 2.1 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Bromodichloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Dibromomethane I ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 4-Methyl-2-pentanone ND 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM I Toluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 2 0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 2-Hexanone I ND 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Tetrachloroethene 1,600 200 pg/L 100 8/28/20094:08:00 PM IDibromochloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 15 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Lab Order: Project: Lab ID: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 0908065 2006.Greers.00 Greer's 0908065-04A Date: 31-Aug-09 Client Sample ID: UD-19 Collection Date: 8/24/2009 11:57:00 AM Matrix: AQUEOUS Analyses Result RL Qual Units DF Date Analyzed Chlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/271200910:05:00 PM Ethylbenzene ND 2.0 ug/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM m,p-Xylene ND 2.0 ug/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM o-Xylene ND 2.0 ug/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Styrene ND 2.0 ug/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Bromoform ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Isopropylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 2.0 Ng/L 1 8/27/200910:05:00 PM Bromobenzene ND 2.0 Ng/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM n-Propylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 2-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 4-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM tert-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 Ng/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 Ng/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM sec-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 ug/L 1 8/271200910:05:00 PM 4-Isopropyltoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM n-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 Ng/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 Ng/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 12-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 5.0 Ng/L 1 81271200910:05:00 PM 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Hexachlorobutadiene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/200910.05:00 PM Naphthalene ND 5.0 Ng/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 93.8 85-119 %REC 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 104 79-131 %REC 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM Surr. Toluene-d8 91 2 90-110 %REC 1 8127/200910:05:00 PM Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 91.7 76-117 %REC 1 8/27/2009 10:05:00 PM 16 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Lab Order: Project: Lab ID: Analyses Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 0908065 2006.Greers.00 Greer's 0908065-05A Date: 31-Aug-09 Client Sample ID: UD-3 Collection Date: 8/24/2009 12:20:00 PM Matrix: AQUEOUS Result RL Qual Units DF Date Analyzed EPA 8260B VOLATILES BY GC/MS SW8260B Analyst: SK Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 50 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10-59:00 PM Chloromethane ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/200910-59:00 PM Vinyl chloride ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Chloroethane ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Bromomethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Trichlorofluoromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Diethyl ether ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Acetone ND 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Carbon disulfide ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Methylene chloride ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Methyl tert-butyl ether 3.2 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 2-Butanone ND 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 2.9 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/200910:59.00 PM Chloroform 2.6 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Tetrahydrofuran ND 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Bromochloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Carbon tetrachloride ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Benzene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Trichloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Bromodichloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Dibromomethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 4-Methyl-2-pentanone ND 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1 0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Toluene ND 2 0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 2-Hexanone ND 10 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Tetrachloroethene 1,200 200 pg/L 100 8/28/2009 5:03:00 PM Dibromochloromethane ND 2 0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 17 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Lab Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Lab ID: 0908065-05A Date: 31-Aug-09 Client Sample ID: UD-3 Collection Date: 8/24/2009 12:20:00 PM Matrix: AQUEOUS Analyses Result RL Qual Units DF Date Analyzed Chlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Ethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM m,p-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM o-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Styrene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Bromoform ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Isopropylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Bromobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM n-Propylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 2-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 4-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10-59:00 PM 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM tert-B utyl benzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM see-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 4-Isopropyltoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,3-Dichlorobe nzene ND 2.0 Yg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM n-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10.59:00 PM 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Hexachlorobutadiene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Naphthalene ND 5.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 96.0 85-119 %REC 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane.d4 107 79-131 %REC 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Surr: Toluene-d8 91.6 90-110 %REC 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 90.7 76-117 %REC 1 8/27/2009 10:59:00 PM 18 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Lab Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Lab ID: 0908065-06A Date: 31-Aug-09 Client Sample ID: CB-N Collection Date: 8/24/2009 12:38:00 PM Matrix: AQUEOUS Analyses Result RL Qual Units DF Date Analyzed EPA 8260E VOLATILES BY GC/MS SW8260B Analyst: SK Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 50 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Chloromethane ND 50 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Vinyl chloride ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Chloroethane ND 50 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Bromomethane ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Trichlorofluoromethane ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Diethyl ether ND 50 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Acetone ND 100 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 5:14:00 PM 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 10 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Carbon disulfide ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Methylene chloride ND 50 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Methyl tert-butyl ether ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:0D PM trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14.00 PM 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/20096:14:00PM 2-Butanone ND 100 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14 00 PM Chloroform ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Tetrahydrofuran ND 100 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Bromochloromethane ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 20 pg/L 10 8128/2009 6:14:00 PM 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Carbon tetrachloride ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Benzene ND 10 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14.00 PM Trichloroethene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Bromodichloromethane ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Dibromomethane ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 4-Methyl-2-pentanone ND 100 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 10 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Toluene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6-14:00 PM trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 10 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14.00 PM 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 5:14:00 PM 2-Hexanone ND 100 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Tetrachloroethene 470 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Dibromochloromethane ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6.14:00 PM 19 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. Date: 31-Aug-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Lab Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Lab ID: 0908065-06A Analyses Result RL Client Sample ID: CB-N Collection Date: 8/24/2009 12:38:00 PM Matrix: AQUEOUS Qual Units DF Date Analyzed Chlorobenzene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14.00 PM 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Ethylbenzene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14-00 PM m,p-Xylene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM o-Xylene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Styrene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Bromoform ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Isopropylbenzene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6.14:00 PM 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 20 pg/L 10 8128/20096:14.00 PM 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Bromobenzene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM n-Propylbenzene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 2-Chlorotoluene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 4-Chlorotoluene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6.14:00 PM 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 20 pg/L 10 8128/20096:14:00 PM tort-Butylbenzene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 20 pg/L 10 8128/20095:14:00 PM sec-Butylbenzene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 4-Isopropyltoluene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM n-Butylbenzene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 12-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 50 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Hexachlorobutadiene ND 20 pg/L 10 8128120096:14:00 PM Naphthalene ND 50 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 20 pg/L 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 96.6 85-119 %REC 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Surr. 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 105 79-131 %REC 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM Surr: Toluene-d8 90.4 90-110 %REC 10 8/28/20096:14:00 PM Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 91.0 76-117 %REC 10 8/28/2009 6:14:00 PM 20 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. Date: 30-Aug-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's QC SUMMARY REPORT Method Blank Sample ID: mb-08/27/09 Batch ID: R43043 Test Code: SW8260B Units: pg/L Analysis Date: 8/27/2009 3:06:00 PM Prep Date: 8/27/2009 Client ID: Run ID: V-3_090827A SegNo: 7148" QC Sample QC Spike Original Sample Original Sample Analyte Result RL Units Amount Result %REC Lowl-imit Highl-imit or MS Result %RPD RPDLimit Qua Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 5.0 pg/L Chloromethane ND 5.0 pg/L Vinyl chloride ND 2.0 pg/L Chloroethane ND 5.0 pg/L Bromomethane ND 2.0 pg/L Trichlorofluoromethane ND 2.0 pg/L N Diethyl ether ND 5.0 pg/L Acetone ND 10 pg/L 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 1.0 pg/L Carbon disulfide ND 2.0 pg/L Methylene chloride ND 5.0 pg/L Methyl tert-butyl ether ND 2.0 pg/L trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 2-Butanone ND 10 pg/L 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L cis- 1, 2-Dichloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L Chloroform ND 2.0 pg/L Tetrahydrofuran ND 10 pg/L Bromochloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 2.0 pg/L Carbon tetrachloride ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L Benzene ND 1.0 pg/L Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Trichloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L Bromodichloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L Dibromomethane ND 2.0 pg/L 4-Methyl-2-pentanone ND 10 pg/L cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1.0 pg/L Toluene ND 2.0 pg/L trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1.0 pg/L 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 2.0 pg/L 2-Hexanone ND 10 pg/L 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L N Tetrachloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1v Dibromochloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L Chlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L Ethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L m,p-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L o-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L Styrene ND 2.0 pg/L Bromoform ND 2.0 pg/L Isopropylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L Bromobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L n-Propylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 2-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 4-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L tert-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. Date: 30-Aug-09 QC SUMMARY REPORT Method Blank B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Date: 30-Aug-09 `QC SUMMARY REPORT Method Blank sec-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 µg/L 4-Isopropyltoluene ND 2.0 µg/L 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 µg/L 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 µg/L n-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 µg/L 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 µg/L 12-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 5.0 µg/L 1,2,4-Trichicrobenzene ND 2.0 µg/L Hexachlorobutadiene ND 2.0 µg/L Naphthalene ND 5.0 µg/L 12,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 µg/L Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 23.36 2.0 ug/L 25 0 93.4 85 119 0 N Surr:1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 24.85 2.0 µg/L 25 0 99.4 79 131 0 Surr: Toluene-0 22.85 2.0 µg/L 25 0 91.4 90 110 0 Surr:4-Bromofluorobenzene 22.91 2.0 µg/L 25 0 91.6 76 117 0 Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits NA - Not applicable when; J values or ND results occur RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Date: 30 Aug-09 QC SUMMARY REPORT Method Blank Sample ID: mb-08/28/09 Batch ID: R43050 Test Code: SW8260B Units: pg/L Analysis Date: 8/28/2009 12:01:00 PM Prep Date: 8/28/2009 Client ID: Run ID: V•3 090828A SegNo: 714929 QC Sample QC Spike Original Sample Original Sample Analyte Result RL Units Amount Result %REC LowUmit Highl-imit or MS Result %RPD RPDLimit Qua Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 5.0 pg/L Chloromethane ND 5.0 pg/L Vinyl chloride ND 2.0 pg/L Chloroethane ND 5.0 pg/L Bromomethane ND 2.0 pg/L Trichlorofluoromethane ND 2.0 pg/L N Diethyl ether ND 5.0 pg/L p Acetone ND 10 pg/L 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 1.0 pg/L Carbon disulfide ND 2.0 pg/L Methylene chloride ND 5.0 pg/L Methyl tert-butyl ether ND 2.0 pg/L trans- 1,2-Di chloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 2-Butanone ND 10 pg/L 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L Chloroform ND 2.0 pg/L Tetrahydrofuran ND 10 pg/L Bromochloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 2.0 pg/L Carbon tetrachloride ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L Benzene ND 1.0 pg/L Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. Date: 30-Aug-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's QC SUMMARY REPORT Method Blank Trichloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L Bromodichloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L Dibromomethane ND 2.0 pg/L 4-Methyl-2-pentanone ND 10 pg/L cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1.0 pg/L Toluene ND 2.0 pg/L trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1.0 pg/L 1,1,2-Tdchloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 2.0 pg/L 2-Hexanone ND 10 pg/L 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L N Tetrachloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L Dibromochloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L Chlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1.1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L Ethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L m,p-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L o-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L Styrene ND 2.0 pg/L Bromoform ND 2.0 pg/L Isopropylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2,3-Tdchloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L Bromobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L n-Propylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 2-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 4-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L tert-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's sec-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 4-Isopropyltoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L n-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 5.0 pg/L 1,2,4-Tdchlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L Hexachlorobutadiene ND 2.0 pg/L Naphthalene ND 5.0 pg/L 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 23.41 2.0 pg/L N Sum 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 25.17 2.0 pg/L rn Surr: Toluene-d8 22.81 2.0 pg/L Surr:4-Bromofluorobenzene 23.25 2.0 pg/L Date: 30-Aug-09 QC SUMMARY REPORT Method Blank 25 0 93.6 85 119 0 25 0 101 79 131 0 25 0 91.2 90 110 0 25 0 93 76 117 0 Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Sample ID: les-08/27/09 Batch ID: R43043 Client ID: Analyte Dichlorod ifluoromethane Chloromethane Vinyl chloride Chloroethane Bromomethane Trichlorofluoromethane N Diethyl ether �J Acetone 1.1-Dichloroethene Carbon disulfide Methylene chloride Methyl tert-butyl ether trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 1,1-Dichioroethane 2-Butanone 2,2-Dichloropropane cis-1,2-Dichloroethene Chloroform Tetrahydrofuran Bromochloromethane 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 1,1-Dichloropropene Carbon tetrachloride 1,2-Dichloroethane Benzene QC Sample Result 14.18 17.39 17.82 17.54 17.54 16.99 20.48 23.76 18.81 18.16 21.26 20.32 19.07 20.79 19.63 19.81 21.06 18.89 21.35 23.55 21.05 20.68 17.32 19.75 19.22 Date: 30-Aug-09 QC SUMMARY REPORT Laboratory Control Spike Test Code: SW8260B Units: Ng/L Analysis Date: 8/27/2009 1:12:00 PM Prep Date: 8/27/2009 Run ID: V-3_090827A SegNo: 71484T QC Spike Original Sample Original Sample RL Units Amount Result %REC Lowl-imit Highl-imit or MS Result %RPD RPDLlmit Qua 5.0 pg/L 20 0 70.9 10 150 0 5.0 pg/L 20 0 87 37 150 0 2.0 pg/L 20 0 89.1 48 150 0 5.0 pg/L 20 0 87.7 54 142 0 2.0 pg/L 20 0 87.7 51 137 0 2.0 pg/L 20 0 85 62 141 0 5.0 pg/L 20 0 102 68 134 0 10 pg/L 20 0 119 9 150 0 1.0 pg/L 20 0 94.1 68 146 0 2.0 pg/L 20 0 90.9 52 131 0 5.0 pg/L 20 0 106 67 138 0 2.0 pg/L 20 0 102 63 139 0 2.0 pg/L 20 0 95.4 81 126 0 2.0 pg/L 20 0 104 78 124 0 10 pg/L 20 0 98.2 41 150 0 2.0 pg/L 20 0 99 71 150 0 2.0 pg/L 20 0 105 78 121 0 2.0 pg/L 20 0 94.4 82 123 0 10 pg/L 20 0 107 51 146 0 2.0 pg/L 20 0 118 77 131 0 2.0 pg/L 20 0 105 81 127 0 2.0 pg/L 20 0 103 76 119 0 2.0 pg/L 20 0 86.6 76 129 0 2.0 pg/L 20 0 98.8 76 127 0 1.0 pg/L 20 0 96.1 81 118 0 Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. Date: 30-Aug-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. QC SUMMARY REPORT Work Order: 0908065 Laboratory Control Spike Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Trichloroethene 19.26 2.0 pg/L 20 0 96.3 81 119 0 1,2-Dichloropropane 20.95 2.0 Ng/L 20 0 105 79 120 0 Bromodichloromethane 18.44 2.0 pg/L 20 0 92.2 77 131 0 Dibromomethane 20.3 2.0 Ng/L 20 0 102 76 128 0 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 20.01 10 Ng/L 20 0 100 51 141 0 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 19.02 1.0 Ng/L 20 0 95.1 76 120 0 Toluene 19.13 2.0 Ng/L 20 0 95.7 83 119 0 trans-1.3-Dichloropropene 17.83 1.0 Ng/L 20 0 89.2 66 128 0 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 20.06 2.0 pg/L 20 0 100 74 123 0 1,2-Dibromoethane 19.46 2.0 pg/L 20 0 97.3 72 128 0 2-Hexanone 23.02 10 pg/L 20 0 115 31 148 0 1,3-Dichloropropane 23.D4 2.0 pg/L 20 0 115 76 122 0 Iv Tetrachloroethene 21.21 2.0 pg/L 20 0 106 81 124 0 tb Dibromochloromethane 17.27 2.0 pg/L 20 0 86.4 63 126 0 Chlorobenzene 20.21 2.0 Ng/L 20 0 101 84 113 0 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 22.56 2.0 Ng/L 20 0 113 73 124 0 Ethylbenzene 20.19 2.0 Ng/L 20 0 101 83 118 0 m,p-Xylene 38.89 2.0 Ng/L 40 0 97.2 85 116 0 o-Xylene 20.4 2.0 Ng/L 20 0 102 84 115 0 Styrene 20.36 2.0 Ng/L 20 0 102 81 118 0 Bromoform 16.54 2.0 Ng/L 20 0 82.7 55 126 0 Isopropylbenzene 21.68 2.0 Ng/L 20 0 108 77 125 0 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 25.2 2.0 Ng/L 20 0 126 62 134 0 1,2,3-Tdchloropropane 27.06 2.0 Ng/L 20 0 135 62 132 0 3 Bromobenzene 22.14 2.0 Ng/L 20 0 111 78 119 0 n-Propylbenzene 20.48 2.0 Ng/L 20 0 102 77 127 0 2-Chlorotoluene 20.86 2.0 pg/L 20 0 104 78 118 0 4-Chlorotoluene 21.97 2.0 pg/L 20 0 110 77 119 0 1,3,5-Tdmethylbenzene 20.3 2.0 pg/L 20 0 102 80 120 0 tert-Butylbenzene 19.85 2.0 pg/L 20 0 99.2 81 120 0 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 20.22 2.0 pg/L 20 0 101 80 118 0 Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. N m AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. Date: 30-Aug-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. QC SUMMARY REPORT Work Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Laboratory Control Spike sec-Butylbenzene 20.87 2.0 pg/L 20 0 104 82 123 0 4-Isopropyltoluene 19.15 2.0 pg/L 20 0 95.8 80 126 0 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 21.38 2.0 pg/L 20 0 107 84 115 0 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 21.05 2.0 pg/L 20 0 105 79 117 0 n-Butylbenzene 20.03 2.0 pg/L 20 0 100 76 128 0 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 21.58 2.0 pg/L 20 0 108 81 117 0 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 21.88 5.0 pg/L 20 0 109 47 136 0 1,2,4-Tdchlorobenzene 21.85 2.0 pg/L 20 0 109 73 126 0 Hexachlorobutadiene 23.32 2.0 pg/L 20 0 117 77 134 0 Naphthalene 23.23 5.0 pg/L 20 0 116 58 138 0 1,2,3-Tdchlorobenzene 20.18 2.0 pg/L 20 0 101 76 124 0 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 23.28 2.0 pg/L 25 0 93.1 85 119 0 Surr:1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 24.33 2.0 pg/L 25 0 97.3 79 131 0 Surr: Toluene-d8 23.48 2.0 pg/L 25 0 93.9 90 110 0 Surr 4-Bromofluorobenzene 24.1 2.0 pg/L 25 0 96.4 76 117 0 Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. Date: 30 Aug-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. QC SUMMARY REPORT Work Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Laboratory Control Spike Duplicate Sample ID: lesd-08/27/09 Batch ID: R43043 Test Code: SW8260B Units: pg/L Analysis Date: 8/27/2009 1:55:00 PM Prep Date: 8/27/2009 Client ID: Run ID: V-3_09OB27A SegNo: 714846 QC Sample QC Spike Original Sample Original Sample Analyte Result RL Units Amount Result %REC Lowl-imit Highl-imit or MS Result %RPD RPDLimit Qua Dichlorodifluoromethane 14.78 5.0 pg/L 20 0 73.9 10 150 14.18 4.14 20 Chloromethane 18.69 5.0 pg/L 20 0 93.4 37 150 17.39 7.21 20 Vinyl chloride 18.8 2.0 pg/L 20 0 94 48 150 17.82 5.35 20 Chloroethane 19.14 5.0 pg/L 20 0 95.7 54 142 17.54 8.72 20 Bromomethane 18.66 2.0 pg/L 20 0 93.3 51 137 17.54 6.19 20 Trichlorofluoromethane 17.66 2.0 pg/L 20 0 88.3 62 141 16.99 3.87 20 to Diethyl ether 20.37 5.0 pg/L 20 0 102 68 134 20.48 0.539 20 Acetone 21.99 10 pg/L 20 0 110 9 150 23.76 7.74 20 1,1-Dichloroethene 19.98 1.0 pg/L 20 0 99.9 68 146 18.81 6.03 20 Carbon disulfide 19.36 2.0 pg/L 20 0 96.8 52 131 18.18 6.29 20 Methylene chloride 21.55 5.0 pg/L 20 0 108 67 138 21.26 1.35 20 Methyl tert-butyl ether 20.8 2.0 pg/L 20 0 104 63 139 20.32 2.33 20 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 19.67 2.0 pg/L 20 0 98.4 81 126 19.07 3.1 20 1,1-Dichloroethane 21.5 2.0 pg/L 20 0 108 78 124 20.79 3.36 20 2-Butanone 16.76 10 pg/L 20 0 83.8 41 150 19.63 15.8 20 2,2-Dichloropropane 22 2.0 pg/L 20 0 110 71 150 19.81 10.5 20 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 21 2.0 pg/L 20 0 105 78 121 21.06 0.285 20 Chloroform 19.29 2.0 pg/L 20 0 96.5 82 123 18.89 2.1 20 Tetrahydrofuran 18.25 10 pg/L 20 0 91.2 51 146 21.35 15.7 20 Bromochloromethane 22.43 2.0 pg/L 20 0 112 77 131 23.55 4.87 20 1,1,1-Trichloroeth2ne 22.16 2.0 pg/L 20 0 111 81 127 21.05 5.14 20 1,1-Dichloropropene 21.18 2.0 pg/L 20 0 106 76 119 20.68 2.39 20 Carbon tetrachloride 18.02 2.0 pg/L 20 0 90.1 76 129 17.32 3.96 20 1,2-Dichloroethane 19.69 2.0 pg/L 20 0 98.4 76 127 19.75 0.304 20 Benzene 19.38 1.0 pg/L 20 0 96.9 81 118 19.22 0.829 20 Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Trichloroethene 19.11 2.0 pg/L 20 0 95.6 1,2-Dichloropropane 21.06 2.0 pg/L 20 0 105 Bromodichloromethane 18.46 2.0 pg/L 20 0 92.3 Dibromomethane 19.11 2.0 pg/L 20 0 95.6 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 16.52 10 pg/L 20 0 82.6 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 18.59 1.0 pg/L 20 0 93 Toluene 19.17 2.0 pg/L 20 0 95.8 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 17.15 1.0 pg/L 20 0 85.8 1,1,2-Tdchloroethane 19.04 2.0 pg/L 20 0 95.2 1,2-Dibromosthane 18.02 2.0 pg/L 20 0 90.1 2-Hexanone 18.83 10 pg/L 20 0 94.2 1,3-Dichloropropane 22.43 2.0 pg/L 20 0 112 w Tetrachloroethene 21.51 2.0 pg/L 20 0 108 Dibromochloromethane 17.37 2.0 pg/L 20 0 86.8 Chlorobenzene 20.37 2.0 pg/L 20 0 102 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 22.79 2.0 pg/L 20 0 114 Ethylbenzene 20.58 2.0 pg/L 20 0 103 m,p-Xylene 39.91 2.0 pg/L 40 0 99.8 o-Xylene 20.87 2.0 pg/L 20 0 104 Styrene 21.1 2.0 pg/L 20 0 106 Bromoform 15.32 2.0 pg/L 20 0 76.6 Isopropylbenzene 22.16 2.0 pg/L 20 0 111 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 22.38 2.0 pg/L 20 0 112 1,2,3-Tdchloropropane 24.37 2.0 pg/L 20 0 122 Bromobenzene 22.28 2.0 pg/L 20 0 111 n-Propylbenzene 20.73 2.0 pg/L 20 0 104 2-Chlorotoluene 21.33 2.0 pg/L 20 0 107 4-Chlorotoluene 21.95 2.0 pg/L 20 0 110 1,3,5-Tdmethylbenzene 20.89 2.0 pg/L 20 0 104 tert-Butylbenzene 20.05 2.0 pg/L 20 0 100 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 20.61 2.0 pg/L 20 0 103 Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate Date: 30-Aug-09 QC SUMMARY REPORT Laboratory Control Spike Duplicate 81 119 19.26 0.782 20 79 120 20.95 0.524 20 77 131 18.44 0.108 20 76 128 20.3 6.04 20 51 141 20.01 19.1 20 76 120 19.02 2.29 20 83 119 19.13 0.209 20 66 128 17.83 3.89 20 74 123 20.06 5.22 20 72 128 19.46 7.68 20 31 148 23.02 20 20 76 122 23.04 2.68 20 81 124 21.21 1.4 20 63 126 17.27 0.577 20 84 113 20.21 0.789 20 73 124 22.56 1.01 20 83 118 20.19 1.91 20 85 116 38.89 2.59 20 84 115 20.4 2.28 20 81 118 20.36 3.57 20 55 126 16.54 7.66 20 77 125 21.68 2.19 20 62 134 25.2 11.9 20 62 132 27.06 10.5 20 78 119 22.14 0.63 20 77 127 20.48 1.21 20 78 118 20.86 2.23 20 77 119 21.97 0.0911 20 80 120 20.3 2.86 20 81 120 19.85 1 20 80 118 20.22 1.91 20 B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur R AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Date: 30-Aug-09 QC SUMMARY REPORT Laboratory Control Spike Duplicate sec-Butylbenzene 20.88 2.0 pg/L 20 0 104 82 123 20.87 0,0479 20 4-Isopropyltoluene 19.31 2.0 pg/L 20 0 96.6 80 126 19.15 0.832 20 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 21.27 2.0 pg/L 20 0 106 84 115 21.38 0.516 20 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 20.93 2.0 pg/L 20 0 105 79 117 21.05 0.572 20 n-Butylbenzene 20.09 2.0 pg/L 20 0 100 76 128 20.03 0.299 20 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 21.71 2.0 pg/L 20 0 109 81 117 21.58 0.601 20 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 18.58 5.0 pg/L 20 0 92.9 47 136 21.88 16.3 20 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 21.79 2.0 pg/L 20 0 109 73 126 21.85 0.275 20 Hexachlorobutadiene 24.19 2.0 pg/L 20 0 121 77 134 23.32 3.66 20 Naphthalene 20.69 5.0 pg/L 20 0 103 58 138 23.23 11.6 20 1,2,3-Tdchlorobenzene 19.29 2.0 pg/L 20 0 96.5 76 124 20.18 4.51 20 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 23.4 2.0 pg/L 25 0 93.6 85 119 0 0 0 to Surr:1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 23.92 2.0 pg/L 25 0 95.7 79 131 0 0 0 ro Surr: Toluene-d8 23.24 2.0 pg/L 25 0 93 90 110 0 0 0 Surr:4-Bromofluorobenzene 24.29 2.0 pg/L 25 0 97.2 76 117 0 0 0 Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit W S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greefs Date: 30-Aug-09 QC SUMMARY REPORT Laboratory Control Spike Sample ID: Ies-08/28/09 Batch ID: R43050 Test Code: SW8260B Units: pg/L Analysis Date: 8/28/2009 10:49:00 AM Prep Date: 8/28/2009 Client ID: Run ID: V-3_090828A SegNo: 714930 QC Sample QC Spike Original Sample Original Sample Analyte Result RL Units Amount Result %REC LowLimit FlighLimit or MS Result %RPD RPDLimit Qua Dichlorodifluoromethane 16.15 5.0 pg/L 20 0 80.8 10 150 0 Chloromethane 20.27 5.0 pg/L 20 0 101 37 150 0 Vinyl chloride 21.84 2.0 pg/L 20 0 109 48 150 0 Chloroethane 21.43 5.0 pg/L 20 0 107 54 142 0 Bromomethane 19.81 2.0 pg/L 20 0 99 51 137 0 Trichlorofluoromethane 21.34 2.0 pg/L 20 0 107 62 141 0 Co Diethyl ether 20.81 5.0 pg/L 20 0 104 68 134 0 w Acetone 23.98 10 pg/L 20 0 120 9 150 0 1,1-Dichloroethene 22.52 1.0 pg/L 20 0 113 68 146 0 Carbon disulfide 21.04 2.0 pg/L 20 0 105 52 131 0 Methylene chloride 20.39 5.0 pg/L 20 0 102 67 138 0 Methyl tert-butyl ether 21.18 2.0 pg/L 20 0 106 63 139 0 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 21.43 2.0 pg/L 20 0 107 81 126 0 1,1-Dichloroethane 22.92 2.0 pg/L 20 0 115 78 124 0 2-Butanone 19.59 10 pg/L 20 0 98 41 150 0 2,2-Dichloropropane 22.69 2.0 pg/L 20 0 113 71 150 0 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 22.89 2.0 pg/L 20 0 114 78 121 0 Chloroform 20.36 2.0 pg/L 20 0 102 82 123 0 Tetrahydrofuran 21.67 10 pg/L 20 0 108 51 146 0 Bromochloromethane 23.51 2.0 pg/L 20 0 118 77 131 0 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 24.06 2.0 pg/L 20 0 120 81 127 0 1,1-Dichloropropene 23.9 2.0 pg/L 20 0 120 76 119 0 Carbon tetrachloride 20.43 2.0 pg/L 20 0 102 76 129 0 1,2-Dichloroethane 20.46 2.0 pg/L 20 0 102 76 127 0 Benzene 21.04 1.0 pg/L 20 0 105 81 118 0 Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. S AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greees Trichloroethene 21.5 2.0 pg/L 20 0 108 1,2-Dichloropropane 21.81 2.0 pg/L 20 0 109 Bromodichloromethane 19.1 2.0 pg/L 20 0 95.5 Dibromomethane 20.19 2.0 pg/L 20 0 101 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 20.17 10 pg/L 20 0 101 cis- 1,3-Dichloropropene 19.11 1.0 pg/L 20 0 95.6 Toluene 20.78 2.0 pg/L 20 0 104 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 17.42 1.0 pg/L 20 0 87.1 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 20.27 2.0 pg/L 20 0 101 1,2-Dibromoethane 20.1 2.0 pg/L 20 0 100 2-Hexanone 22.46 10 pg/L 20 0 112 1,3-Dichloropropane 23.33 2.0 pg/L 20 0 117 Tetrachloroethene 24.47 2.0 pg/L 20 0 122 Dibromochloromethane 17.62 2.0 pg/L 20 0 88.1 Chlorobenzene 21.49 2.0 pg/L 20 0 107 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 22.77 2.0 pg/L 20 0 114 Ethylbenzene 22.2 2.0 pg/L 20 0 111 m,p-Xylene 42.58 2.0 pg/L 40 0 106 o-Xylene 21.94 2.0 pg/L 20 0 110 Styrene 21.99 2.0 pg/L 20 0 110 Bromoform 15.67 2.0 pg/L 20 0 78.4 Isopropylbenzene 23.95 2.0 pg/L 20 0 120 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 24.41 2.0 pg/L 20 0 122 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 25.77 2.0 pg/L 20 0 129 Bromobenzene 22.78 2.0 pg/L 20 0 114 n-Propylbenzene 22.68 2.0 pg/L 20 0 113 2-Chlorotoluene 22.36 2.0 pg/L 20 0 112 4-Chlorotoluene 23.22 2.0 pg/L 20 0 116 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 22.25 2.0 pg/L 20 0 111 tert-Butylbenzene 21.77 2.0 pg/L 20 0 109 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 21.85 2.0 pg/L 20 0 109 Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. Date: 30-Aug-09 QC SUMMARY REPORT Laboratory Control Spike 81 119 0 79 120 0 77 131 0 76 128 0 51 141 0 76 120 0 83 119 0 66 128 0 74 123 0 72 128 0 31 148 0 76 122 0 81 124 0 63 126 0 84 113 0 73 124 0 83 118 0 85 116 0 84 115 0 81 118 0 55 126 0 77 125 0 62 134 0 62 132 0 78 119 0 77 127 0 78 118 0 77 119 0 80 120 0 81 120 0 80 118 0 B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur AMRO Enviromnental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0908065 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Date: 30-Aug-09 QC SUMMARY REPORT Laboratory Control Spike sec-Butylbenzene 23.44 , 2.0 pg/L 20 0 117 82 123 0 4-Isopropyltoluene 21.31 2.0 pg/L 20 0 107 80 126 0 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 22.67 2.0 pg/L 20 0 113 84 115 0 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 21.69 2.0 pg/L 20 0 108 79 117 0 n-Butylbenzene 22.34 2.0 pg/L 20 0 112 76 128 0 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 22.26 2.0 pg/L 20 0 ill 81 117 0 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 19.76 5.0 pg/L 20 0 98.8 47 136 0 1,2,4-Tdchlorobenzene 22.46 2.0 pg/L 20 0 112 73 126 0 Hexachlorobutadiene 25.28 2.0 pg/L 20 0 126 77 134 0 Naphthalene 22.91 5.0 pg/L 20 0 115 58 138 0 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 20.15 2.0 pg/L 20 0 101 76 124 0 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 23.02 2.0 pg/L 25 0 92.1 85 119 0 W Surr:1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 23.84 2.0 pg/L 25 0 95.4 79 131 0 Cn Surr: Toluene-d8 23.39 2.0 pg/L 25 0 93.6 90 110 0 Sum 4-Bromofluorobenzene 23.48 2.0 pg/L 25 0 93.9 76 117 0 Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corporation CHAIN -OF -CUSTODY RECORD 5 8 5 g 5-, Office: (603) 424-2022 111 Herrick Street Fax: (603) 429-8496 Merrimack. NH 03054 web: www.amrolabs.com Project No.: Z000P- V-Sby Prole I ct Name: Project State: V-T— Project Manager: Samplers (Signature): -- AMRO Project No.: P.O.#: esulA Needed by: co V H n E U m C� RE UES ED ANAI SES Remarks OA l 1 ICl IC` -may 0. 1 QUOTE #: Seal Intact? Yes No N/A Sample ID.: ISampl de L✓ X 1 Preservative: Cl-HCl, McOH, N-HNO3, S-H2SO4, Na-NaOH. 0- Other 0 Send Results To: PRIORITY TURNAROUND TIME AUTHORIZATION Before submitting samples for expedited TAT, you must have a coded A UTHORIZA TION NUMBER AUTHORIZATION No.: BY: METALS 8 RCRA ❑ 13 PP ❑ 23 TAL ❑ 14 MCP ❑ Method: 6010 ❑ 200.7 ❑ Other Metals: Dissolved Metals Field Filtered? YES ❑ NO ❑ �rt� PHONE #: O`L- w 0 -� 4 FAX #: s'() 'L- 2 �- ���i E-mail: �/ } . Cl�-- MCP Presumptive Certainty Required? YES NO 11YES IMCP Methods Needed: R NO Required Reporting Limits: IS-lHGW-1 ❑ Relin uis d B : Daterrime Received B AMRO report package levelneeded: S-2GW-2 ❑O S-3GW-3 ❑ Other: Q MD required: Please print clearly, eq y and completely. Samples can not be logged in and the turnaround time clock will not start and an ambiguities are resolved. mp es amving after noon will a tracked and billedas received on the following day. po icy requires notification inwilting to the laboratory in cases where the samples were collected from highly contaminated sites. UWN SIFE CONTAMINATION: 1� Yellow: lent o SHEET OF AMROCOC2004 Re .3 09/18104 It i I Environmental == = W16O.- Laboratories Corporation �.. 111 Herrick Street, Merrimack, NH 03054 TEL: (603) 424-2022 • FAX: (603) 429-8496 www.amrolabs.com September 10, 2009 ANALYTICAL TEST RESULTS John Diego Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 76 Pearl Street Suite 203 Essex Junction, VT 05452 TEL: (802) 288-9600 FAX: (802) 288-9881 Subject: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Dear John Diego: �U(Oxcgo- �11 OG9 �t SEP 1 2 BY - -------------------- Workorder No.: 0909016 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. received 2 samples on 9/4/2009 for the analyses presented in the following report. AMRO is accredited in accordance with NELAC and certifies that these test results meet all the requirements of NELAC, where applicable, unless otherwise noted in the case narrative. The enclosed Sample Receipt Checklist details the condition of your sample(s) upon receipt. Please be advised that any unused sample volume and sample extracts will be stored for a period of 60 days from sample receipt date (90 days for samples from New York). After this time, AMRO will properly dispose of the remaining sample(). If you require further analysis, or need the samples held for a longer period, please contact us immediately. This report consists of a total of _)) g pages. This letter is an integral part of your data report. All results in this project relate only to the sample(s) as received by the laboratory and documented in the Chain -of -Custody. This report shall not be reproduced except in full, without the written approval of the laboratory. If you have any questions regarding this project in the future, please refer to the Workorder Number above. ,Sincerely, Nancy Stewart Vice President State Certifications: NH (NELAC): 1001, MA: M-NH012, CT: PH-0758, NY: 11278 (NELAC), ME: NH012 and 1001, NJ: NH125, RI: 00105, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center (NFESC). Hard copy of the State Certification is available upon request AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. Date: 09-Sep-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Work Order Sample Summary Lab Order: 0909016 Date Received: 9/4/2009 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID 0909016-OIA CB-W 0909016-02A Outfall Collection Date Collection Time 9/3/2009 12:55 PM 9/3/2009 1:14 PM 1 2 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. 09-Sep-09 Lab Order: 0909016 Client: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. DATES REPORT Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Sample ID Client Sample ID Collection Date Matrix Analytical Test Name Analysis Date Preparatory Test Name Prep Date Batch ID TCLP Date 0909016-01 A CB-W 9/32009 12!55.00 PM Aqueous EPA 8260B VOLATILES by GC/MS 9/4/2009 EPA 5030B 9/32009 R43097 EPA 8260B VOLATILES by GC/MS 9/42009 9/32009 R43097 0909016-02A Outfall 9/32009 1:14:00 PM EPA 8260B VOLATILES by GUMS 9/42009 9/32009 R43097 w AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corporation CHAIN -OF -CUSTODY RECORD 58561 Office: (603) 424-2022 111 Herrick Street Fax: (603) 429-8496 Merrimack, NH 03054 , - , I Project No.: j Project Name: Y Results Needed by: k Project State: C 0 U c Z 0 F E U 0 Project Manager: h REQUESTED A � Samplers (Signature): LYSES AMRO Pro' ct No.: Remarks r�Lis� F--uU�i — I QUOTE #: Seal Intact? Yes No N/A Sample ID.: Date/Time Sampled —W Ct o L 140 VrA i 41. Preservative: Cl-HCI, McOH, N-HNO3, S-H2SO4, Na-NaOH, O- Other ❑ Send Results To: PRIORITY TURNAROUND TIME AUTHORIZATION Before submitting samples for expedited TAT, you must have a coded AUTHORIZATIONNUMBEJ,?�, AUTHORIZATION No.: BY: METALS 8 RCRA ❑ 13 PP ❑ 23 TAL ❑ 14 MCP ❑ Method: 6010 ❑ 200.7 ❑ Other Metals: Dissolved Metals Field Filtered? YES ❑ NO ❑ PHONE #: IFID7� wb FAX E-mail: @ b yq,CoM- MCP Presumptive Certainty Required? YES NO MCP Methods Needed: YES NO Required Reporting Limits: S-1 GW-1 ❑ Relin cashed BY: DatelIime Received B AMRO report package level needed: S-2 S-3 GW-2 ❑ GW-3 ❑ 42 DI —4-0 !(, sJ- EDD required: Other: ease print clearly. egt y ancl completely Npies can not be logged in and the turnaround time clock will not start until any ambiguities are resolved. amp es amvmg a ter naon4vr a lrac a an=1collectedh-omizighlycontamina received on the followin da . y po rcy requrres notification in writing to the laboratoryin cases where the samples were ted sites. �K(IN NTAM NnAIT'I�O1N_:'e'- ( EA`^-^•^"Iv� i euvw. �,ueut Ik- Ul)y IL SHEET OF 1 l AMR000Q2004 Rev.3 08/t8/04 ��u, J AMRO Environmental SAMPLE RECEIPT CHECKLIST 111 Herrick Street Laboratories Corporation Merrimack, NH 03054 603 424-2022 Client: AMRO ID. Project Name: �5 Date Rec.: Ship via: (circle one) Fed Ex., fPV, AMRO Courier, Date Due: Hand Del., Other Courier, Other: Items to be Checked Upon Receipt 1. Army Samples received in individual plastic bags? 2. Custody Seals present? 3. Custody Seals Intact? 4. Air Bill included in folder if received') 5. Is CDC included with samples 6. Is CDC signed and dated by client?�O 7. Laboratory receipt temperature. j TEMP = Samples rec with ice_✓ice packs_ neither_ 8. Were samples received the same day they were sampled? Is client temperature = or <6°C ? If no obtain authorization from the client for the analyses. Client authorization from: Date: Obtained by: 9. Is the CDC tilled out correctly and completely? 10 Does the info on the CDC match the samples9 11, Were samples rec. within holding time? 12. Were all samples properly'labeled? 13. Were all samples properly preserved? 14. Were proper sample containers used? 15. Were all samples received intact? (none broken or leaking) 16. Were VOA vials rec. with no air bubbles? 17 Were the sample volumes sufficient for requested analysis? 18. Were all samples received? Yes No NA Comments ✓ r/ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 19. VPH and VOA Soils only: Sampling Method VPH (circle one): M=Methanol, E=EnCore (air -tight container) Sampling Method VOA (circle one): M=Methanol, SB=Sodium Bisulfate, E=EnCore, B=Bulk If M or SB: Does preservative cover the soil? If NO then client must be faxed. Does preservation level come close to the fill line on the vial? If NO then client must be faxed. Were vials provided by AMRO? ' If NO then weights MUST be obtained from client Was dry weight aliquot provided? If NO then fax client and inform the VOA lab ASAP. 20. Subcontracted Samples: What samples sent: Where sent: Date: Analysis - TAT. 21. Information entered into: Internal Tracking Log? Dry Weight Log? Client Log? Composite Log? Filtration Log? Received By: 16— Date: — —('9 Logged in By: cc_ Date: 9 Labeled By: GG Date: Checked By: Date: —� 5 NA= Not Applicable qc/gcmemos/forms/samplerec Rev.19 04/20109 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corporation Please Circle if. - Sample= Soil Sample= Waste 111 Herrick Street Merrimack, NH 03054 (603) 424-2022 AINIRO ID: C2,70 901�o 10 Added . ANTRO • of Volume adjustedList Final .. r 24 16 hours prior to analysis or 21 lours jar water sample (s). pH Checked By: Date: pH adjusted By: Date: pH Checked By: Date: pF[ adj.(16 or 24hrs)By: Date: qc/gcmemos/forms/sampie rec Nev.19 04/20/07-- AMRO Environmental Laboratories Cora. Date: 10-Sep-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's CASE NARRATIVE Lab Order: 0909016 GC/MS VOLATILES: 1. A Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) was performed on 09/04/09 (Batch ID: R43097). 1.1 The % Recovery for 2 analytes out of 67 analytes in the LC was outside the laboratory control limits. 7 DATA COMMENT PAGE Organic Data Oualifiers ND Indicates compound was analyzed for, but not detected at or above the reporting limit. J Indicates an estimated value. This flag is used either when estimating a concentration for tentatively identified compounds where a 1:1 response is assumed, or when the data indicates the presence of a compound that meets the identification criteria but the result is less than the sample quantitation limit but greater than the method detection limit. H Method prescribed holding time exceeded. E This flag identifies compounds whose concentrations exceed the calibration range of the instrument for that specific analysis. B This flag is used when the analyte is found in the associated blank as well as in the sample. R RPD outside accepted recovery limits RL Reporting limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. S Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits. # See Case Narrative Micro Data Oualifiers TNTC Too numerous to count Inorganic Data Oualifiers ND or U Indicates element was analyzed for, but not detected at or above the reporting limit. J Indicates a value greater than or equal to the method detection limit, but less than the quantitation limit. H Indicates analytical holding time exceedance. B Indicates that the analyte is found in the associated blank, as well as in the sample. MSA Indicates value determined by the Method of Standard Addition E This flag identifies compounds whose concentrations exceed the calibration range of the instrument for that specific analysis. R RPD outside accepted recovery limits RL Reporting limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. S Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits. W Post -digestion spike for Furnace AA analysis is out of control limits (85-115), while sample absorbance is less than 50% of spike absorbance. • * Duplicate analysis not within control limits. + Indicates the correlation coefficient for the Method of Standard Addition is less than 0.995 # See Case Narrative Report Comments: 1. Soil, sediment and sludge sample results are reported on a "dry weight" basis. 2. Reporting limits are adjusted for sample size used, dilutions and moisture content, if applicable. 8 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. Date: 09-Sep-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Client Sample ID: CB-W Lab Order: 0909016 Collection Date: 9/3/2009 12:55:00 PM Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Matrix: AQUEOUS Lab ID: 0909016-01A Analyses Result RL Qual Units DF Date Analyzed EPA 8260E VOLATILES BY GC/MS SW8260B Analyst: SK Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 5.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Chloromethane ND 50 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4.02:00 PM Vinyl chloride ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Chloroethane ND 5.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Bromomethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Trichlorofluoromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Diethyl ether ND 5.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Acetone ND 10 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Carbon disulfide ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Methylene chloride ND 5.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Methyl tert-butyl ether ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 2-Butanone ND 10 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4-02:00 PM Chloroform ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Tetrahydrofuran ND 10 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Bromochloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1, 1, 1 -Trichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Carbon tetrachloride ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Benzene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Trchloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Bromodichloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Dibromomethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 4-Methyl-2-pentanone ND 10 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM cis- 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Toluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM trans- 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 2-Hexanone ND 10 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Tetrachloroethene 540 20 pg/L 10 9/4/2009 5:49:00 PM Dibromochloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 9 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. Date: 09-Sep-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Client Sample ID: CB-W Lab Order: 0909016 Collection Date: 9/3/2009 12:55:00 PM Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Matrix: AQUEOUS Lab ID: 0909016-OIA Analyses Result RL Qual Units DF Date Analyzed Chlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Ethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM m,p-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM o-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Styrene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Bromoform ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Isopropylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 Ng/L 1 9/4/20094:02:00PM 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Bromobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM n-Propylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 2-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 4-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM tert-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM sec-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 4-Isopropyltoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 Ng/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM n-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 5.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Hexachlorobutadiene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Naphthalene ND 5.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 96.8 85-119 %REC 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 108 79-131 %REC 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Surr: Toluene-0 92.0 90-110 %REC 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 87.3 76-117 %REC 1 9/4/2009 4:02:00 PM 10 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. iCLIENT: Date: 09-Sep-09 Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. _ Client Sample ID: Outfall Lab Order: 0909016 Collection Date: 9/3/2009 1:14:00 PM Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Matrix: AQUEOUS Lab ID: 0909016-02A i I Analyses iiii Result RL Qual Units DF Date Analyzed EPA 8260E VOLATILES BY GC/MS SW8260B Analyst: SK IDichlorodifluoromethane ND 5.0 Ng/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Chloromethane ND 5.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Vinyl chloride ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Chloroethane ND 5.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Bromomethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/20D9 6:38:00 PM Trichlorofluoromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/20D9 6:38:00 PM Diethyl ether ND 5.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Acetone ND 10 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Carbon disulfide ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM I Methylene chloride ND 5.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM l Methyl tert-butyl ether ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM trans- 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 2-Butanone I ND 10 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM cis- 1, 2-Dichloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM I Chloroform ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Tetrahydrofuran ND 10 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Bromochloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1. 1, 1 -Trichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Carbon tetrachloride ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1 Benzene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM ` Trichloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Bromodichloromethane ND 2 0 pg/L 1 9l4/2009 6:38:00 PM Dibromomethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 4-Methyl-2-pentanone ND 10 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM I Toluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 2-Hexanone ND 10 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38.00 PM 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38.00 PM Tetrachloroethene 200 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38.00 PM I Dibromochloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. Date: 09-Sep-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Client Sample ID: Outfall Lab Order: 0909016 Collection Date: 9/3/2009 1:14:00 PM Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Matrix: AQUEOUS Lab ID: 0909016-02A Analyses Result RL Qual Units DF Date Analyzed Chlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 ug/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Ethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM m,p-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM o-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Styrene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 914/2009 6:38:00 PM Bromoform ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Isopropylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Bromobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM n-Propylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 2-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 4-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM tert-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM sec-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 4-Isopropyltoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 Ng/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM n-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 5.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Hexachlorobutadiene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Naphthalene ND 5.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 98.2 85-119 %REC 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Surr. 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 112 79-131 %REC 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Surr: Toluene-d8 92.6 90-110 %REC 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 86.6 76-117 %REC 1 9/4/2009 6:38:00 PM 12 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0909016 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Date: 08-Sep-09 QC SUMMARY REPORT Method Blank Sample ID mb-09/04/09 Batch ID: R43097 Test Code: SW8260B Units: pg/L Analysis Date 9/4/09 1:43:00 PM Client ID: Run ID: V-3 090904A SegNo: 715535 QC Sample QC Spike Original Sample Original Sample Analyte Result RL Units Amount Result %REC Lowl-imit Highl-imit or MS Result Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 5.0 pg/L Chloromethane ND 5.0 pg/L Vinyl chloride ND 2.0 pg/L Chloroethane ND 5.0 pg/L Bromomethane ND 2.0 pg/L Trichlorofluoromethane ND 2.0 pg/L Diethyl ether ND 5.0 pg/L C"3 Acetone ND 10 pg/L 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 1.0 pg/L Carbon disulfide ND 2.0 pg/L ` Methylene chloride ND 5.0 pg/L Methyl tert-butyl ether ND 2.0 pg/L trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 2-Butanone ND 10 pg/L 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L cis- 1,2-Dich loroethene ND 2.0 pg/L Chloroform ND 2.0 pg/L Tetrahydrofuran ND 10 pg/L Bromochloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 2.0 pg/L Carbon tetrachloride ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L Benzene ND 1.0 pg/L Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. Prep Date 9/4/09 %RPD RPDLimit Qua B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. Date: 08-Sep-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0909016 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's QC SUMMARY REPORT Method Blank Trichloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L Bromodichlommethane ND 2.0 pg/L Dibromomethane ND 2.0 pg/L 4-Methyl-2-pentanone ND 10 pg/L cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1.0 pg/L Toluene ND 2.0 pg/L trans- 1, 3-Dichloropropene ND 1.0 pg/L 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 2.0 pg/L 2-Hexanone ND 10 pg/L 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 pg/L Tetrachloroethene ND 2.0 pg/L Dibromochloromethane ND 2.0 pg/L Chlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,1,1,2-Tetrachlomethane ND 2.0 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L m,p-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L o-Xylene ND 2.0 pg/L Styrene ND 2.0 pg/L Bromoform ND 2.0 pg/L Isopropylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2,3-Trichooropropane ND 2.0 pg/L Bromobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L n-Propylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 2-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 4-Chlorotoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L tert-Butyl benzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0909016 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greees sec-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 4-Isopropyltoluene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L n-Butylbenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 5.0 pg/L 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L Hexachlorobutadiene ND 2.0 pg/L Naphthalene ND 5.0 pg/L 1,2.3-Tdchlorobenzene ND 2.0 pg/L Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 23.96 2.0 pg/L Sum 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 27.31 2.0 pg/L cn Surr: Toluene-d8 23.3 2.0 pg/L Surr:4-Bromofluorobenzene 22.51 2.0 pg/L Date: 08-Sep-09 QC SUMMARY REPORT Method Blank 25 0 95.8 85 119 0 25 0 109 79 131 0 25 0 93.2 90 110 0 25 0 90 76 117 0 Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0909016 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Date: 08-Sep-09 QC SUMMARY REPORT Laboratory Control Spike Sample ID les-09/04/09 Batch ID: R43097 Test Code: SW8260B Units: pg/L Analysis Date 91410912:30:00 PM Prep Date 914109 Client ID: Run ID: V-3 090904A SenNo: 715536 QC Sample QC Spike Original Sample Original Sample Analyte Result RL Units Amount Result %REC Lowl-imit Highl-imit or MS Result %RPD RPDLimit Qua Dichlorodifluoromethane 28.77 5.0 pg/L 20 0 144 10 150 0 Chloromethane 26.33 5.0 pg/L 20 0 132 37 150 0 Vinyl chloride 26.67 2.0 pg/L 20 0 133 48 150 0 Chloroethane 25.02 5.0 pg/L 20 0 125 54 142 0 Bromomethane 23.5 2.0 pg/L 20 0 118 51 137 0 Teich lorofluoromethane 25.17 2.0 pg/L 20 0 126 62 141 0 Diethyl ether 21.21 5.0 pg/L 20 0 106 68 134 0 Acetone 23.01 10 pg/L 20 0 115 9 150 0 1,1-Dichloroethene 21.89 1.0 pg/L 20 0 109 68 146 0 Carbon disulfide 19.3 2.0 pg/L 20 0 96.5 52 131 0 Methylene chloride 21.36 5.0 pg/L 20 0 107 67 138 0 Methyl tert-butyl ether 21.69 2.0 pg/L 20 0 108 63 139 0 trans- 1, 2-Dichloroethene 21.45 2.0 pg/L 20 0 107 81 126 0 1,1-Dichloroethane 23.61 2.0 pg/L 20 0 118 78 124 0 2-Butanone 20.27 10 pg/L 20 0 101 41 150 0 2,2-Dichloropropane 22.51 2.0 pg/L 20 0 113 71 150 0 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 22.97 2.0 pg/L 20 0 115 78 121 0 Chloroform 21.36 2.0 pg/L 20 0 107 82 123 0 Tetrahydrofuran 21.72 10 pg/L 20 0 109 51 146 0 Bromochloromethane 23.97 2.0 pg/L 20 0 120 77 131 0 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 24.37 2.0 pg/L 20 0 122 81 127 0 1,1-Dichloropropene 24.11 2.0 pg/L 20 0 121 76 119 0 S Carbon tetrachloride 20.19 2.0 pg/L 20 0 101 76 129 0 1,2-Dichloroethane 21.89 2.0 pg/L 20 0 109 76 127 0 Benzene 21.16 1.0 pg/L 20 0 106 81 118 0 Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur RL - Repotting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. AMRO Enviromnental Laboratories Corp. CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. Work Order: 0909016 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Trichloroethene 21.56 2.0 pg/L 20 0 101 1,2-Dichloropropane 22.52 2.0 pg/L 20 0 11: Bromodichloromethane 19.16 2.0 pg/L 20 0 95.1 Dibromomethane 21.09 2.0 pg/L 20 0 10! 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 19.47 10 pg/L 20 0 97 , cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 19.29 1.0 pg/L 20 0 96.! Toluene 20.8 2.0 pg/L 20 0 104 trans-1 ,3-Dichloropropene 17.89 1.0 pg/L 20 0 89 , 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 20.47 2.0 pg/L 20 0 10: 1,2-Dibromoethane 19.77 2.0 pg/L 20 0 98.1 2-Hexanone 22.05 10 pg/L 20 0 111 1,3-Dichloropropene 23.65 2.0 pg/L 20 0 11l Tetrachloroethene 23.34 2.0 pg/L 20 0 11' --J Dibromochloromethane 16.29 2.0 pg/L 20 0 81: Chlorobenzene 21.11 2.0 pg/L 20 0 101 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 22.92 2.0 pg/L 20 0 11! Ethylbenzene 21.81 2.0 pg/L 20 0 10! m,p-Xylene 41.99 2.0 pg/L 40 0 10! o-Xylene 21.83 2.0 pg/L 20 0 10! Styrene 21.7 2.0 pg/L 20 0 10 Bromoform 13.29 2.0 pg/L 20 0 66: Isopropylbenzene 2325 2.0 pg/L 20 0 11i 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroetharte 24.65 2.0 pg/L 20 0 1Z 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 26.45 2.0 pg/L 20 0 13: Bromobenzene 21.93 2.0 pg/L 20 0 11i n-Propylbenzene 22.36 2.0 pg/L 20 0 11: 2-Chlorotoluene 22.03 2.0 pg/L 20 0 11i 4-Chlorotoluene 22.99 2.0 pg/L 20 0 11 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 21.6 2.0 pg/L 20 0 10 tert-Butylbenzene 21.4 2.0 pg/L 20 0 10 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 21.56 2.0 pg/L 20 0 10 Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. Date: 08-Sep-09 QC SUMMARY REPORT Laboratory Control Spike 81 119 0 79 120 0 77 131 0 76 128 0 51 141 0 76 120 0 83 119 0 66 128 0 74 123 0 72 128 0 31 148 0 76 122 0 81 124 0 63 126 0 84 113 0 73 124 0 83 118 0 85 116 0 84 115 0 81 118 0 55 126 0 77 125 0 62 134 0 62 132 0 78 119 0 77 127 0 78 118 0 77 119 0 80 120 0 81 120 0 80 118 0 B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur S �1 00 AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corp. Date: 08-Sep-09 CLIENT: Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. QC SUMMARY REPORT Work Order: 0909016 Project: 2006.Greers.00 Greer's Laboratory Control Spike sec -Butyl benzene 22.5 2.0 pg/L 20 0 112 82 123 0 4-Isopropyltoluene 20.4 2.0 pg/L 20 0 102 80 126 0 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 21.75 2.0 pg/L 20 0 109 84 115 0 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 20.94 2.0 pg/L 20 0 105 79 117 0 n-Butylbenzene 21.86 2.0 pg/L 20 0 109 76 128 0 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 21.79 2.0 pg/L 20 0 109 81 117 0 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 18.8 5.0 pg/L 20 0 94 47 136 0 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 21.41 2.0 pg/L 20 0 107 73 126 0 Hexachlorobutadiene 24.16 2.0 pg/L 20 0 121 77 134 0 Naphthalene 21.91 5.0 pg/L 20 0 110 58 138 0 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 19.16 2.0 pg/L 20 0 95.8 76 124 0 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 23.97 2.0 pg/L 25 0 95.9 85 119 0 Surr:1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 25.66 2.0 pg/L 25 0 103 79 131 0 Surr: Toluene-d8 24.2 2.0 pg/L 25 0 96.8 90 110 0 Surr:4-Bromofluorobenzene 23.77 2.0 pg/L 25 0 95.1 76 117 0 Qualifiers: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits J - Analyte detected below quantitation limits R - RPD outside accepted recovery limits RL - Reporting Limit; defined as the lowest concentration the laboratory can accurately quantitate. B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank NA - Not applicable where J values or ND results occur AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corporation CHAIN -OF -CUSTODY RECORD ;; 3 561 Office: (603) 424-2022 111 Herrick Street Fax: (603) 429-8496 Merrimack, NH 03054 web: www.amrolabs.com Project No.: 'f L Project Name: 1% Project State: Project Manager: Samplers(Signature): AMRO Project No.: , P.OA: Results Needed by: x U o E� U C7 REQUESTED ANALYSES Remarks S QUOTE #: Seal Intact? Yes No N/A Sample ID.: Date/Time SampledLil -1, ,.mac JF- Preservative: Cl-HCI, McOH, N-H03, S N-H2SO4, Na-NaOH, Send Results To: 0- Other ❑ PRIORITY TURNAROUND TIME AUTHORIZATION METALS S RCRA ❑ 13 PP ❑ 23 TAL ❑ 14 MCP ❑ Before submitting samples for expedited TAT, you must Method: 6010 ❑ 200.7 ❑ Other Metals: haveacoded AUTHORIZATIONNUMBERS,, AUTHORIZATION No.: BY: Dissolved Metals Field Filtered? YES ❑ NO ❑ PHONE : FAX S: Z01 Zc��-�IbcG} 7MCP Presumptive Certainty Required? YES F1 NO CP Methods Needed: S NO is-1 Required Reporting Limits: GW-1 ❑ S-2 GW-2 ❑ S-3 GW-3 ❑ Other: Relin uished B : Date/Time Received B AMRO report package level needed: i EDD required: Please print clearly, egg y and comp ete y. amp es can not mp es arriving aller 12TU noon WNTF—tracked and ica ion in writing to be logged in and the turnaround time clock will not start unto received on the following daythe laboratory in cases where the samples were any ambiguities are resolved. collected from highly contaminated sites. I e: o Yellow: tent COPY SHEET OF AMROCOC2004, Rev.3 GW18l04 CONTAMINATION: '01"f yr ' VANLED20 L I G H T I N G Project: Type: --- - - ---- - -- -- ------ Prepared By: ---- Date: Driver Info LED Info I Type: Constant Current Watts. 20W 120V. 0.30A Color Temp 5000K 208V. 0.20A Color Accuracy 74 CRI 240V. 0 17A L70 Lifespan: 100000 277V 015A Lumens. 2,352 Input Watts 22W Efficacy. 108 LPW Efficiency 92 % Low -profile vandal -resistant fixture covers the footprint of most traditional canopy lights. Available in flat or drop lens Color. Bronze Weight 12 0 Ibs 4 Technical Specifications Listings Housing: Green Technology: UL Listing: Die-cast aluminum housing and lens frame with (4) Mercury and UV free, and RoHS compliant. Polyester 1 /2" NPS side conduit entries and weatherproof rear powder coat finish formulated without the use of VOC Suitable for wet locations wire plug and access plate or toxic heavy metals IESNA LM-79 & LM-80 Testing: Mounting: LED Characteristics RAB LED luminaires have been tested by an independent laboratory in accordance with IESNA LM- Ceiling mount to recessed Junction with knockout LEDs: 79 and LM-80, and have received the Department of template or directy to ceiling surface, utilizing side Discreet LEDs on PCB board Energy "Lighting Facts' label conduit entry points Color Stability: DLC Listed: IP Rating: RAB LEDs exceed industry standards for chromatic This product is on the Design Lights Consortium (DLC) Ingress Protection rating of IP66 for dust and water stability. Qualified Products List and is eligible for rebates from Lens: Color Uniformity: DLC Member Utilities Vandal -resistant polycarbonate textured opaque for RAB's range of CCT (Correlated Color Temperature) DLC Product Code. PZQIZ223 low glare drop lens follows the guidelines of the American National Electrical Reflector: Standard for Speafications for the Chromaticity of Driver: Solid State Lighting (SSL) Products, ANSI C78 377- Semi-specular, vacuum-metalized polycarbonate 2011 Class 2, Constant Current, 100-277V, 50-60Hz, 500mA Gaskets: Other THD: High -temperature silicone gaskets Warranty: 6.1% at 120V, 10.1 % at 277V Finish: RAB warrants that our LED products will be free from Construction Our environmentally friendly polyester powder coatings defects in materials and workmanship for a period of Ambient Temperature: are formulated for high -durability n i 1--l—'19 five (5) years from the date of delivery to the end user, s including coverage of light output, color stability, driver Suitable for use in 4D'C (104'F) ambient temperatures r performance and fixture finish See our full warranty Cold Weather Starting: _ I w California Title 24: Minimum starting temperature Is-40'F/-40'C See VANLED20/PCS, VANLED20IPCS2 or VANLED20MS fora 2013 California Title 24 compliant model ' / Y Replacement: , The VANLED 20W replaces up to 70W Metal Halide. Need help'? Tech help line (Bag) RAB-1000 Email sales@rabweb.com Website www rabweb.com Page 1 of 2 Copyright @ 2014 RAB Lighting Inc All Rights Reserved Note Specifications are subject to change at any time without notice VANLED52 Project: I' l Prepared By: Driver Info Type: Constant Current RAS L I G H T I N G Type: i Date: I LED Info Watts: 52W 120V- 0 80A Color Temp: 5000K 208V 0 26A Color Accuracy 75 CRI 240V. 0 23A L70 Lifespan: 100000 277V 0 20A Lumens 5,401 Input Watts 52W Efficacy 105 LPW Low -profile vandal -resistant fixture covers the footprint of most traditional canopy Efficiency NIA lights. Available in flat or drop lens Color. Bronze Weight 12.0lbs Technical Specifications Listings Housing: Green Technology: UL Listing: Die-cast aluminum housing and lens frame with (4) Mercury and UV free, and RoHS compliant. Polyester Suitable for wet locations 1/2" NPS side conduit entries and weatherproof rear powder coat finish formulated without the use of VOC ' IESNA LM-79 & LM-BO Testing: wire plug and access plate or toxic heavy metals Mounting: LED Characteristics RAB LED luminaires have been tested by an Iindependent laboratory in accordance with IESNA LM- Ceiling mount to recessed junction with knockout LEDs: 79 and LM-80, and have received the Department of template or directy to ceiling surface, utilizing side Energy "Lighting Facts" label. conduct entry points. ry P Discreet LEDs on PCB board DLC Listed: IP Rating:Color Stability: This product is on the Design Lights Consortium (DLC) Ingress Protection rating of IP66 for dust and water RAB LEDs exceed industry standards for chromatic Qualified Products List and is eligible for rebates from Lens: stability. DLC Member Utilities Color Uniformity: DLC Product Code PXKSK4YE Vandal -resistant polycarbonate textured opaque for low glare drop lens RAB's range of CCT (Correlated Color Temperature) Electrical follows the guidelines of the American National j Driver: Reflector: Standard for Specifications for the Chromaticity of Semi-specular, vacuum-metalized polycarbonate Solid State Lighting (SSL) Products, ANSI C78.377- Class 2, Constant Current, 100-277V, 50-60Hz, 2011 1400mA Gaskets: Other THD: High -temperature silicone gaskets Warranty: 9.4% at 277V Finish: RAB warrants that our LED products will be free from Construction Our environmentally friendly polyester powder coatings defects in materials and workmanship for a period of Ambient Temperature: are formulated for high -durability and long-lasting five (5) years from the date of delivery to the end user, color, and contain no VOC or toxic heavy metals including coverage of light output, color stability, driver Suitable for use in 40'C (104°F) ambient temperatures performance and fixture finish See our full warranty Cold Weather Starting: I Replacement: Minimum starting temperature is-40'F/-40'C The VANLED 52W replaces up to 15OW Metal Halide A t,) x 3�s �K3000 111 3$o - 0a, yr x Need help'? Tech help line (888) RAB-1000 Email sales@rabweb.com Website www rabweb.com Page 1 of 2 Copyright © 2014 RAB Lighting Inc All Rights Reserved Note Specifications are subject to change at any time without notice F Lamoureux £t Dickinson Engineers Surveyors Planners Wetland & Soil Scientists February 10, 2016 Liam O'Farrell The Growler Garage 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05454 RE: PM Peak Trip Generation Counts Dear Liam, As requested, we have performed trip generation counts during the pm peak period (4:00-6:00 pm) at three beer-tasting/sales locations similar to the Growler Garage at 10 Dorset Street. The following presents the results of those counts. The three locations identified as being similar to the Growler Garage were: • The Tap Room at Switchback Brewery, 160 Flynn Ave., Burlington - licensed for 25 seats, also provides beer tasting, retail sales of bottled beer, gear and merchandise. • Rock Art Brewery, 632 LaPorte Rd, Morrisville - licensed for 8 seats, also provides brewery tours, beer tasting, growler refills and retail sales of kegs/bottled beer, gear and merchandise. • Zero Gravity Brewery, 716 Pine Street, Burlington - licensed for 40 seats, also provides beer tasting, growler refills and retail sales of kegs/bottled beer, gear and merchandise. A mid -week weekday vehicular trip generation count was performed at each location. The counts were not able to differentiate between retail sales and beer tasting customers, and the results represent the total vehicle trips generated by the facilities and services described above. The results are presented in the following table. Location # Seats* Observed Peak Hour Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Trips (vte/hr/seat) Enter Exit I Total Switchback Brewery 25 4:00-5:00 pm 6 8 14 0.56 Rock Art Brewery 8 4:15-5:15 pm. 1 3 4 0.50 Zero Gravity Brewery 40 5:00-6:00 pm 11 9 20 0.50 Weighted Average 0.52 * from Vermont Dept. of Health, Food & Lodging Program 14 Morse Drive, Essex, V1 05452 802.878 4450 www.LDengineering.com ♦ Innovative Solutions + Quality Service Liam O'Farrell February 10, 2016 Page 2 Applying the 0.52 vte/hr/seat trip generation rate to the Growler Garage's 25 seats results in a pm peak hour trip generation of 13 vte/hour. From our May 4, 2015 letter outlining the trip generation of the 10 Dorset Street retail complex, 33.4 vte/hour of the 42.3 vte/hour is currently being used by the other businesses in this complex (excluding the Growler Garage). Thus, only 8.9 vte/hour is available for the Growler Garage. Based on the above results, it appears that the existing 42.3 vte/hour pm peak hour trip allocation could support up to 17 seats at the Growler Garage. If reducing the number of seats represents a viable option in the short-term, we recommend that you pursue that. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, , Roger,Dickinson, P.E., PTOE cc. Jory Curran Ray Belair P:\2015\15036\pm peak trip count results.wpd r �rI►,r,�'�i PLANNING & ZONING March 18, 2016 Re: #SP-15-69 — 10 Dorset Street Dear Applicant: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision rendered by the Development Review Board concerning your recent application. 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. Sincer Ey, iyy/ond;,J. Belair Administrative Officer Encl. CERTIFIED MAIL -Return Receipt Requested # 7015 0640 0007 8199 3525 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburi.com MEN .✓^ s©uthhurfing on PLANNING & ZONING Permit Number SP- - (office use only) APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW ❑Administrative ED Development Review Board 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(S) OF RECORD (Name(s) as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #): Greer Family LLC (802) 363-3344 81 Maple Leaf Farm Road Underhill, VT 05489 2. LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED(S) (Book and page #):vol. 473, pg. 556 3. APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #): (same as owner) (24�CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, address, phone & fax #): Jory Curran, Greer Family LLC 81 Maple Leaf Farm Rd Underhill, VT 05489 (802) 363-3344 4a. CONTACT EMAIL ADDRESS:: JoryVT@aol.com 5. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 10 Dorset Street 6. TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office): 0570-08-10 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl corn 7. PROJECT DESCRIPTION a. General project description (explain what you want approval for): A proposed change of use for the Growler Garage to add a 775 sf tavern for on -site tasting and consumption of craft beer (per its Class 1 liquor license). The remaining 1,368 sf will be used for retail sale of craft beer in growler containers (per its Class 2 liauor license). b. Existing Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use): Greers: 3,728 sf retail, Photoqarden: 2,800 sf retail, Needlemans: 4,488 sf retail, Full Spectrum Salon: 2,449 sf personal services, Growler Garage: 2,143 sf retail c. Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain): Greer's: 3,728 sf retail, Photogarden: 2,800 sf retail, Needlemans: 4,488 sf retail, Full Spectrum Salon: 2,449 sf personal services, Growler Garage: 775 sf tavern + 1,368 sf retail d. Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain): 15,608 sf e. Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine): existing one story building, 32' at peak f. Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain): g. Number of employees (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): The Traffic Overlay District is applicable to this property. Also, copies of pm peak hour trip generation and parking generation analyses are enclosed (May 4, 2015 and October 28, 2015 Lamoureux & Dickinson letters, respectively) Site Plan Application Form. Rev. 12-2011 I 8. LOT COVERAGE a. Building: Total Parcel Size: 58,853 Existing 26.5 % / Proposed 26.5 % / Sq. Ft. 15,60.8 sq. ft. 15,608 sq. ft. b. Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing 85.1 % / 50,116.5 sq. ft. Proposed 85.1 —%/ 50,116.5 sq. ft. c. Front yard (along each street) Existing 11.5 % / 1,376.5 sq. ft. Proposed 11.5 % / 1,376.5 sq. ft. d. Total area to be disturbed during construction (sq. ft.) 0 * 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 $ 0 $ 0 none a. P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out): 39.21 11. PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 4-6 pm 12. PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: weekdays 13. ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: N/A 14. SITE PLAN AND FEE A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information required by the City's Land Development Regulations. Five (5)1 regular size copies, one reduced copy (I I" x 17"), and one digital (PDF-format) copy of the site plan must be submitted A site plan application fee shall be paid to the City at the ti e of submitting the site plan application in accordance with the city's fee schedule. >� /0 //; 7� Af Administrative site plan application"req e three (3) regular size copies, one reduced copy (11" x 17"), and one digital (PDF-format) copy. 3 Site Plan Application Form, Rev 12-2011 NOTE: NOTIFICATION of ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS: Notification of adjoining property owners, in accordance with 24 V.S.A. §4464(a) and Section 17.06(B) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, is the responsibility of the applicant. After deeming an application complete, the Administrative Officer will provide the applicant with a draft meeting agendas or public hearing notice and sample certificate of service. The sworn certificate of service shall be returned to the City prior to the start of any public hearing. 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. r Lim- Pit A RE OF APPLICANT Jory Curran SIGNATURE/Of PROPERTY OWNER PRINT NAME Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: REVIEW AUTHORITY: 2rDevelopment Review Board ❑Administrative Officer I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: Complete n ❑ strative Officer Date The applicant or permittee retains the obligation to identify, apply for, and obtain relevant state permits for this project. Call (802) 879-5676 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist. Site Plan Application Form Rev 12-2011 Lamoureux Et Dickin_so_n ~wEngineers Surveyors October 28, 2015 Liam O'Farrell The Growler Garage 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 RE: 10 Dorset Street Parking Analysis Dear Liam, M Planners Wetland & Soil Scientists As requested, we have examined the available parking and have performed a parking analysis at the 10 Dorset Street retail complex owned by the Greer Family. The most recent site plan of the 10 Dorset Street parcel was prepared by Michael Dugan, AIA, and was last revised on August 24, 2014, This site plan shows a total of 71 existing parking spaces. We field verified the existing parking, and counted a total of 70 existing parking spaces. Space #10, as shown on the above site plan, is too narrow to be a functional parking space. Excluding this space, the northernmost row of this parcel's parking has only 9 existing parking spaces. The attached Google Earthen image shows the existing parking spaces. The parking demand of the existing uses was calculated using the parking space requirements outlined in Article 13 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. Unlike their Trip Generation publication, the ITE Parking Generation' publication does not provide any data for specialty retail centers. For the purpose of the following calculations, we also noted that Full Spectrum Salon fits into the personal service category for which two parking requirements are provided; gross floor area and the number of treatment stations (chairs). The LDR instructions are to use whichever is greater. We stopped at the Full Spectrum Salon and were told that they have 10 chairs, and that there are times when as many as 10 stylists would be working. The resulting parking demand calculations are shown in Table 1. 1 Parking Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 4`h Edition 14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452 802.878,4450 www.LDengineering com ♦ Innovative Solutions • Quality Service Liam O'Farrell October 28, 2015 Page 2 Table 1 - Parking Demand Parking Req'd # Spaces Business Parking Category Requirement Size (rounded up) Greer's personal service 4 spaces/ksf GFA 3,728 sf 15 Full Spectrum Salon personal service 4 spaces/ksf GFA 2,449 sf i9 2 per chair 10 chairs 20 Photo Garden retail business 5 spaces/ksf GFA 2,800 sf 14 Needleman's retail business 5 spaces/ksf GFA 4,488 sf 23 The Growler Garage tavern 0.5 spaces/max.auth. 32 patrons 16 occupancy Total 88 In examining the above businesses and their peak hours, it appears that the peak times of the salon and retail businesses likely differ from the peak times of The Growler Garage. For this reason, we also performed a shared parking analysis'; the results of which are attached. In this analysis, parking ratios from the ULl restaurant -sit down category were selected as best fitting the business patterns of The Growler Garage. The results of the shared parking analysis shows a reduction from 88 to 85 parking spaces. Section 13.01 (N) (2) of the South Burlington LDR permits up to a 25% waiver in the required number of parking spaces if the DRB determines "...that a proposed land use or structure is adequately served by existing or proposed parking facilities...". To reduce the required parking from 85 parking spaces to 70 spaces requires a 17.7% waiver [(85-70) _ 85]. It is our opinion that the businesses at 10 Dorset Street are presently adequately served by the existing 70 spaces, and that the foregoing waiver is justified. Should you have any questions or if additional information is desired, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Rog Dickinson, P.E., PTOE 2 Shared Parking, Urban Land Institute, 2"d Edition Lamoureux & Dickinson Shared Parking Calculations Project: Growler Garage Date: 10/2812015 Sources: South Burlington Land Development Regulations South Burlington, VT By: R. Dickinson Shared Parking, 2nd Ed., ULI Project # 15036 Business Name Land -Use Category Size R 'd Parking Spaces Spaces Greers Personal Service 3,728 sf 4 per ksf 15 Full Spectrum Salon Personal Service 10 seats 2 per seat 20 PhotoGarden Retail Business 2,800 sf 5 per ksf 14 Needleman's Retail Business 4,488 sf 5 per ksf 23 Growler Garage Restaurant - Sit Down 32 seats 0.5 per seat 16 r Total 88 (floor area = 2,449 sf Retail Subtotal 72 Weekday Shared Use Parking Hourly Ratios 0600 0700 0800 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1600 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 General Retail Restaurant - Sit Down 1% 0% 5% 0% 15% 0% 30% 0% 55% 75% 90% 15% 40% 75% 100% 100% 75% 65% 100% 40% 95% 50% 85% 75% 80% 95% 75% 100% 65% 100% Weekday Required Parking Spaces by Hour 0600 0700 0800 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 General Retail Restaurant - Sit Down Total 1 0 1 4 0 4 11 0 11 22 0 22 40 54 65 3 7 12 43 61 78 72 72 12 11 85 84 72 7 79 69 8 78 62 12 75 58 16 75 54 16 71 47 16 64 Maximum 85 spaces `-- P-\20151150361File, 110/28/2015 r SITE PLAN I" = 20` -0XX r N/F CHAMPLAIN OIL CO. INC. 1ST 10-p10551 I ryFXA N/F C, HARLES & JANET PERKINS 1810-01087 - r PLAINT SCHEDULE AfUORV ITAE A'MA11IG'L C} YLR'SIHG LOSH 2GAL LOCATION MAP GREER FAMILY LLC IT ' 13' • N/F 0570-08-10 _ -T- _f}C3(3 s - ^— -- LODGING: NORTH INC. " I �-'-`-f�.��GENERALINFOR,tifATION 1810-01117 7-�T� �-tZ —CRLILDINGCOVERAGE_ • -: rAOVT1ARDCUVERAGE IISY• XwmX.An'•.X _ x I — PARKING REQUIREMENT N/F TEKRAM PARTNERS 0570-00100 S SASS Si 41.%W SF 13J6_59F =z2 xAc�s = IS srwcu IX snc�s Ir =Aces - • czs ro srwcrs Jl srscci rnalron rnuX cunsna-r,oa Xm R -�'� a 4 r 1aoo,gle earth feet 300 meters 100 r ti 'I rlqg Go l,,�-> Ic e a r t h lee, meters MR RECEIVED NOV 0 2 2015 Citj of so. Burlington J CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this _[g_ day of�Q�,[, 20 15, a copy of the foregoing public notice for �,4 P� J e c�rf type of application] #,Sp �- i S-,; q [application number], was sent by U.S. mail, postage prepaid to the owners of all properties adjoining the subject property to development, without regard to any public right-of-way, and including the description of the property and accompanying information provided by the City of South Burlington. I further certify that this notification was provided to the following parties in accordance with 24 V.S.A. §4464(a) and Section 17.06(B) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: List of recipients: (full names and addresses) t . -Po LA W J�LG qv-+-e�.. '44g" I%cK A;ll; Ka � 117 W; h1 fn, R-1,L —%� , �T. 0540.E jm-,+ K P.>.'�)Ki4s 30 56 72 -Pi4lep"- 00-Y. 4) LQAKIA Red. �44o--fie A-E+- Mxti.fyg LaRK;�I 410 S hel yW'M- R. VT ckuo�"a &4_p� Vf 65-44 �� Dated at [town/city], Vermont, this day of DV 0-%,ftn 4Q .20 I r Printed Name: �. -Faftiiv L L L Phone number and email: $ 0? 3 fo 3 3 3 �4 Signature: ��t".. - - Date: 1116 Remit to: City of South Burlington Department of Planning & Zoning 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 South Burlington Sample Certificate of Service Form. Rev. 1-2012 j SITE PLAN V9 = 201.:099 N/F , CHAAIPLAIN OIL CID. INC. L 181Q-01055 1 GIH T- N/F TEKRAM PARTNERS 0576-00100 N/F & JANET PERKINS 1810-01087 PLANT SCHEDULE QTY (D ARBORVITAE WMAX HGT 26 (-) BURNING BUSH 2 GAL 25 LOCATION MAP N/F LODGING NORTH INC. 1810-01117 SNOWS1108AG'. IT L 'ED IS"" I GENERAL INFORMATION • LOT SIZE: 1.35 ACRE 58853 SF wr a ZONE: COMMERCIAL I - BUILDING COVERAGE; 26.5% BUILDING, PAVING, ETC: wo% 47,626.5 SF FRONT YARD COVERAGE: 11.BYe 1376.5 SF z PARKING REQUIREMENTS 04 - NEEDLEMANS 4,488 SF® V1090 - 22 SPACES 04 (RETAIL PERSON SERVICES - GREEWS 3,728 Sf@ 411000 - 15 SPACES 61 �RETAEL- PHOTO GARDEN 2,900 511000 = 14 SPACES FULL SPECTRUM SALON. 2,449 4/1000 = 10 SPACES > GROWLER GARAGE 2,143 SF(9 411000 = 9 SPACES TOTAL SPACES REQUIRED 70 SPACES TOTALPROVIDED 71 SPACES Z PARKING INCREASE TO 88 SPACES PARKING WAIVER GRANTED - 6.18.2013 C RECEIVED, EvD I$ ARBORVITAE ALONG SOUTH PROPERTY LINE OCT' 3 C 201F REVD12.16.20o RrV'DJUNE28-2613 c REV'D JANUARY 2,1013 REVISED: SEPTEMBER 17,2008 CRY Of So. Burlington "v"R`,V1.-.=TN, 'IM .' REVISED JUNE 12,3008 MAY 28, — REV'D DEC. 20,2W6 REV'D MAY 6, 2008 ASPER SBDRB REV'D JAN. 10, 2007 RErD DEC. 18, 1006 NOTE: DECEMBER 6, 2006 GENERAL CONTRACTORIS TO VERIFY ALL DIMENSION: ON TIES DRAWING PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SPI IS TO VERIFY ALL SITE CONDITIONS PRIOR CONSTRUCTION. J SITE PLAN 199 - 207 -077 PLANT SCHEDULE ( ARBORVITAE 4' MAX HGT O BURNING BUSH 2 GAL NIF CHAMPLAIN OIL CO. INC. L_18107p10551 '---T—., EXISTING TREES 5 I I . HARLES & JANET PERKINS 1810-01087 i� PAINTEDISLAN 13 14 IS If I] BC If 30 21 33 1 E 'G fIG11T [OLE I f - '✓ BIEE \II � , ' \ SNOW STORAGE LOCATION MAP 5 102 1\ EE%'GTMN6FYMIEE I i•� d "I Is „ NEEDLEMAN'S b �-i_ �, + 44" SF Y VAYR BE YAZI • � yJ' j � -"1 ' * GREER FAMILY LLC I 2> , 0570-08-10 C7 RSA�� SNOW STORAGE F u' Jr f" PHOTO GARDEN , DRYCLEANWG I 'r fC I i i it • 2000 SF 3 i 1400 SF � SVOW 57iJ FULL SPECTRUM SAMON GROWLER CARAGE ++W� 2449 SF 2143 SF p f6 i F LAUNDROMAT ' '-"�— ;i fl �fF � eF9 J3 eZ 2321 Si 11 � � • L.-+11 1, PAINTED ISLAND k 15 3f 37 L M , q 41 /2 .\ l4C M q K n q PAINTED ISLAND 1 10 `n '1 SAN . W �•�" yR 5Y EN(LO611GF----i - i 4,\ R •4^ `. .1)I--EY-G YYOtANT - _ _-- -_ _ _ -_ - _. _ _ _ _.. - .. -_ - J �- E%'C TELE. X106h • - 1 •o oro-P.o--O-a o:ao:b ".T- �'_ - - `_- f / �• IS ARBORVITAE - .- '" cj I N/F TEKRAM PARTNERS 0570-00100 N/F LODGING NORTH INC. 1810-01117 GENERAL INFORMATION QTY 26 25 LOT SIZE: 1.35 ACRE 58853 SF ZONE; COMMERCIAL 1 . IBUILDING COVERAGE: 26.5% 1--%W$E BUILDING, PAVING, ETC: 80.9% _ 47,6265 SF FRONT YARD COVERAGE: 11.5% 1376.5 SF PARKING REQUIREMENTS NOTE. _I (RETAIL - NEEDLEMAN'S 4,488 SF'@ 5/1000 = 22 SPACES PERSON SERVICES - GREER'S 3,728 SF*U1000 = 15 SPACES 'RETAIL -PHOTO GARDEN 2,800 3P@ 511000 =14 SPACES ` FULL SPECTRUM SALON 2,419 SF@ 411000 = 10 SPACES GROWLER GARAGE 2,143 SF@ 4/1000 = 9 SPACES TOTAL SPACES REQUIRED -�' 70 SPACES TOTAL PROVIDED71 SPACES PARKING INCREASE TO 88 SPACES PARHINyG� WAIVER GRANTED - 6. L8.2013 ' REV'D AUGUST24,2014 lO ARBORVITAE ALONG TH PROPERTY LINE SOUV' - AED 12.16.20V REV'D JUNE 2&2013 ' REV'D JANUARY2 1013 REVISED: SEPT'EMBER 17, 2000 AEV-D SEPTLMkR7, 2000 REV-D NNE NE REVISED NNE 12, 2062 MAY 2R2000 REWD MAY 6,20M REV'D JAN. 10, 2007 GENERAL CONTRACTOR IS TO VERI6Y ALL DDRI ON TERS DRAMINGPRIORTO CONSTRUCTION. GENERAL CONTRACTORIS TO VERIFY ALL SITE CONDITION! PRIOR CONSTRUCTION, a- Eglgy R a W REV'D DEC. 10, 2006 AS PER SBDRB REV'D DEC. 13, 2006 DECEMBER 6, 2D06 J Land Use: 826 Specialty Retail Center Description Specialty retail centers are generally small strip shopping centers that contain a variety of retail shops and specialize in quality apparel, hard goods and services, such as real estate offices, dance studios, florists and small restaurants. Shopping center (Land Use 820) is a related use. Additional Data The sites were surveyed between the late 1970s and the 2000s in California, Florida, Georgia, New York and Pennsylvania. Source Numbers 100, 304, 305, 367, 423, 507, 577 1578 Trip Generation, 9th Edition • Institute of Transportation Engineers N Description Land Use: 925 Drinking Place A drinking place contains a bar, where alcoholic beverages and food are sold, and possibly some type of entertainment, such as music, television screens, video games, or pool tables. Establishments that specialize in serving food but also have bars are not included in this land use. Additional Data The sites were surveyed in 1987, 1995 and 1997 in Colorado, Oregon and South Dakota. Source Numbers 291, 358, 583 Trip Generation, 9th Edition • Institute of Transportation Engineers 1861 Lamoureux ft Dickinson Engineers Surveyors Planners Wetland & Soil Scientists June 17, 2015 Liam O'Farrell The Growler Garage 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 RE: 10 Dorset Street Parking Analysis Dear Liam, As requested, we have examined the available parking and have performed a parking analysis at the 10 Dorset Street retail complex owned by the Greer Family. We have a site plan of the 10 Dorset Street parcel that was prepared by Michael Dugan, AIA, which was last revised on September 17, 2008 (copy attached). This site plan shows a total of 73 existing parking spaces. We field verified the existing parking, and counted a total of 70 existing parking spaces. The difference arises due to the following observations: 1. On the north side of the building, in the northeast corner, the two spaces at the east end of the parking lot (shown as #11 and #24 on the above site plan) are, in our opinion, inadequately sized and non-functional parking spaces. 2. Excluding space #11, the northernmost row of this parking aisle has only 9 existing parking spaces instead of the remaining 10 shown on the site plan. The attached Google Earth® image shows the existing parking spaces. The parking demand of the existing uses was calculated using the parking space requirements outlined in Article 13 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. For the purpose of those calculations, we noted that Full Spectrum Salon fits into the personal service category for which two parking requirements are provided; gross floor area and the number of treatment stations (chairs). The LDR instructions are to use whichever is greater. We stopped at the Full Spectrum Salon and were told that they have 10 chairs, and that there are times when as many as 10 stylists would be working. The resulting parking demand calculations are shown in Table 1. 14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452 802.878.4450 www.LDengineering.com ♦ Innovative Solutions ♦ Quality Service J Liam O'Farrell June 17, 2015 Page 2 Table 1- Parking Demand Parking Req'd # Spaces Business Parking Category Requirement Size (rounded up)_ Greer's retail business 5 spaces/ksf GFA 3,728 sf 19 Full Spectrum Salon personal service 4 spaces/ksf GFA 2,449 sf 4e 2 per chair 10 chairs 20 Photo Garden retail business 5 spaces/ksf GFA 2,800 sf 14 Needleman's retail business 5 spaces/ksf GFA 4,488 sf 23 The Growler Garage tavern 0.5 spaces/max. 32 patrons 16 auth. occupancy Total 92 In examining the above businesses and their peak hours, it appears that the peak times of the salon and retail businesses likely differ from the peak times of The Growler Garage. For this reason, we also performed a shared parking analysis; the results of which are attached. In this analysis, parking ratios from the ULI restaurant -sit down category were selected as best fitting the business patterns of The Growler Garage. The results of the shared parking analysis shows a reduction from 92 to 89 parking spaces. Section 13.01(N) (2) of the South Burlington LDR permits up to a 25% waiver in the required number of parking spaces if the DRB determines "...that a proposed land use or structure is adequately served by existing or proposed parking facilities...". To reduce the required parking from 89 parking spaces to 70 spaces requires a 21.4% waiver. It is our opinion that the businesses at 10 Dorset Street are presently adequately served by the existing 70 spaces. In developing this opinion, we particularly note the low probability that the peak time of the Full Spectrum Salon would coincide with that of The Growler Garage. Should you have any questions or if additional information is desired, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, j t Rog Dickinson, P.E., PTOE Lamoureux & Dickinson Shared Parking Calculations Project: Growler Garage Date: 6/16/2015 South Burlington, VT By: R. Dickinson Project #: 15036 # Req'd Business Name Land -Use Category Size Re 'd Parking Spaces Spaces Greers Retail Business 3,728 sf 5 per ksf 19 Full Spectrum Salon Personal Business 10 seats 2 per seat 20 Photo Garden Retail Business 2,800 sf 5 per ksf 14 Needleman's Retail Business 4,488 sf 5 per ksf 23 Growler Garage Restaurant - Sit Down 32 seats 0.5 per seat 16 Sources: South Burlington Land Development Regulations Shared Parking, 2nd Ed., ULI (floor area = 2,449 so Weekday Shared Use Parking Hourly Ratios 0600 0700 0800 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 General Retail Restaurant -Sit Down 1°% D% 5% 0% 15°% 0% 30% 0%15% 55% 75%90°% 40°% 75% 100% 100%100%95% 75% 65% 40% 50% 85% 75% 80% 95% 75% 100% 65% 100°% Weekday Required Parking Spaces by Hour 0600 0700 0800 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 General Retail Restaurant - Sit Down Total 1 0 1 4 0 4 12 0 12 23 0 23 42 57 69 3 7 12 45 64 82 76 76 12 11 89 88 76 7 83 73 8 82 65 12 78 61 16 78 57 16 74 50 16 67 Maximum 89 spaces VMO P:\2015\15036\File, j6/16/2015 W f SITE PLANK V.= 202 -'0" /F CH IPL OIL C . INC. 1810, 1055 1 i I N/F MARLES & JANET PERIGNS 1810-01087 N/F TEKRAA4PARTNERS 0570=00100 MYARDORYTTAI i'MAX IiGT 26 Q BURMNGDUSII 2GAL 25 LOCATION MAP N/F - LODGING NORTH ]INC. 1810-01117 GENERAL INFORMATION �LOPimm '.35 ACRE 51855 BF PANE: COMMERCIAL 1 BUILDING COVERAGE: 16-s% 15Po65R EUMDING,PAVMG,ETC: PIAaf l IP,I 51 FRONT YARD COVERAGE: I� 131it 1376.131 PARIQNG REOIIIREM M S sm * ,u iP�u1f16 .»pActa ERSR{�I6'RS iGRRIP6 PERSONAL $Eijiiu®I11800 1l6PACi5L RETAIL-MRAS&GRMER,4"26F®SIIOOOGFA-37SPACIS PERMITTED RETAIL lWbTD bARDEN nu6MPOMM-161FAM' TOTAL SPACES REQUIRED- • 43iGIc4L TOTALSPACFSPROVmED- r755P[C" • ecvm,,rrmd..aa.iw eiY'p ivniona, Iw • mMal,-fau ecb:sm mnin, wi . kaYWaw '. - rurorAY;aw .. eevro tu+Ir,aw� eeeuec cbetecme a m vrmr ut. erametonl e •Y+wcrwtm caeslEernoe. � vifrj . b/F CH L OIL C INC 1810,191055 I. u,snnotaeec 'I N/F s & JANET P 1810-01087 -P,,- r .' ..-N/F TEKRAAj PARTNERS 057&-00100 ARBORVITAE .4MAXUGT'. 26 0 SUMINGlausil I GAL 25 LOCATION NM NIF LODGING NORTH INC. 1810-01117 GENERAL INFORMATION J -CRP AA ZONE: COj0=CL&L I I BUILDING COVERAGE: '26.5, BUILDING, PAVING, ETC: Lal.ay..l FRONTYARbCOYERAGEt 'lliu PARJUNG R190UMFNWNT,9 PERSONAL §&R�I* q;GleaeR's xiia"'Wtcl li"Acm RETAIL -MTLLS & GRXER 3029F@SlIWdGFA -13SPACIS P"pj*"TT RETAIL'Wb;04U:Lnoto 6;0�4 Ul Alu' I'l TOTAL SPACES REQUIRED - "lACt9 • TOTAL SPACES PROVIDED- 'Jip En jIM1YK2WA r4 19--: -1 c) c NIDN naasoat Project: Growler Garage South Burlington, VT Project #: 15036 Lamoureux & Dickinson Shared Parking Calculations Date: 6/16/2015 By: R. Dickinson #� R Business Name Land -Use Category Size Re 'd Parking S aces spaces Greers Retail Business 3,728 sf 5 per ksf 19 Full Spectrum Salon Personal Business 10 seats 2 per seat 20 Photo Garden Retail Business 2,800 sf 5 per ksf 14 Needleman's Retail Business 4,488 sf 5 per ksf 23 Growler Garage Restaurant - Sit Down 32 seats 0.5 per seat 16 Total 92 Sources: South Burlington Land Development Regulations Shared Parking, 2nd Ed., ULI (floor area = 2,449 sf Retail Subtotal ?6 Weekday Shared Use Parking Hourly Ratios 0600 0700 0800 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 General Retail Restaurant - Sit Down 1 % 0% 5% 00/0 15% 0% 30% 0% 55% 75% 90% 15% 40%c 75% 100% 100% 75% 65% 100% 40% 95% 50%u 85% 75% 80% 95% 75% 100% 65% 100% Weekday Required Parking Spaces by Hour 0600 0700 0800 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 General Retail Restaurant - Sit Down Total 1 0 1 4 0 4 12 0 12 23 0 23 42 57 69 3 7 12 45 64 82 76 76 12 11 89 88 76 7 83 73 8 82 65 12 78 61 16 78 57 16 74 50 16 67 Maximum 89 spaces Pt2015115036kFile, ]6/16/2015 } Lamoureux bt Dickinson amEngineers Surveyors Planners Wetland & Soil Scientists May 4, 2015 Liam O'Farrell The Growler Garage 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05454 RE: PM Peak Hour Trip Calculations Dear Liam, As requested, we have examined the weekday afternoon peak hour trip generation at the 10 Dorset Street retail complex. This complex is located in Zone 1 of the City's Traffic Overlay District. Because the complex was constructed prior to those regulations being adopted, its grandfathered pm peak hour trip generation has been established as being 42.3 vehicle trip ends per hour (vte/hr). The 42.3 vte/hr was calculated based on a total gross floor area of 15,608 sf and a weekday pm peak hour of adjacent street traffic trip generation rate of 2.71 vte/hr/1,000 sf. The pm peak hour trip generation rate was obtained from land -use category #814 - Specialty Retail Center in the 7ch edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Since that time, Trip Generation has been updated to the 9th edition and the Specialty Retail Center land -use category renumbered to #826. Its description, source data and trip generation rates, however, remain the same as in the 7th edition. I met with Ray Belair to review the current permitted pm peak hour trips for this complex. From our discussion and his notes, I calculate the following: Business Gross Floor Area (sf) ITE Land -Use Category PM Peak Trip Rate (vte/hr/ksf) PM Peak Trips (vte/hr) Greer's 3,728 #826 -Specialty Retail 2.71 10.10 Full Spectrum Salon 2,449 #918 - Hair Salon 1.45 3.55 Photo Garden 2,800 #826 - Specialty Retail 2.71 7.59 Needleman's 4,488 #826 - Specialty Retail 2.71 12.16 Growler Garage (prior to on -site consumption) 2,143 #826 - Specialty Retail 2.71 5.81 Totals 15,068 39.21 14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452 802.878.4450 www.LDengineering.com ♦ Innovative Solutions ♦ Quality Service E E Liam O'Farrell May 4, 2015 Page 2 We understand that The Growler Garage recently added a Class 1 liquor license, which permits on -site beverage consumption, to its previous Class 2 license. This change has caused the City to question whether the specialty retail category remains applicable for this space. We understand, from information provided by you, that the bar (which has the Class 1 license) occupies 775 sf, and the remaining 1,368 sf is for the Class 2 license. The City's Traffic Overlay District permits several options for how this could be handled: A) Estimate the peak hour trip generation Using ITE trip generation rates: The ITE land -use category typically applied to bars is #925 - Drinking Place. Its pm peak hour of adjacent street traffic (one hour between 4-6 pm) trip generation rate equals 11.34 vte/hr/1,000 sf. Applying that to the 775 sf now occupied by the bar would result in The Growler Garage's pm peak hour trips being estimated at 8.79 vte/hr for the bar (Class 1) space plus 3.71 vte/hr for the sales (Class 2) space, for a total of 12.50 vte/hr. This increases the total peak hour trips for the 10 Dorset St complex to 45.9 vte/hr; 3.6 vte/hr above its 42.3 vte/hr permitted maximum. To test the validity of applying this ITE land -use to The Growler Garage, we performed an informal one -hour trip generation count between 5-6 pm on April 22"d, and observed only 6 vehicle trips during that one hour period. Clearly, the local craft beer focus of The Growler Garage causes it to generate less traffic than the typical Drinking Place, and thus it is our opinion that this use contains unique characteristics that cause it to differ from national traffic estimates. B) Continue to classify The Growler Garage as being specialty retail: In Trip Generation, the ITE describes specialty retail centers as: "Specialty retail centers are generally small strip shopping centers that contain a variety of retail shops and specialize in quality apparel, hard goods and services, such as real estate offices, dance studios, florists and small restaurants (emphasis added). Shopping center (Land Use 820) is a related use." Food and beverages are typically consumed on -site at small restaurants. This would also be consistent with the original calculation of pm peak hour trips for this complex, which applied one land -use category (Specialty Retail Center) to the entire complex, rather than to its individual uses. As long as each individual business falls within the above description, this approach remains valid. This approach also accounts for any internal multi -purpose trips that may occur between the different uses within the specialty retail center. C) Perform a local trip generation study: In the event that (B) above is not selected, the results of (A) raises the possibility of performing a local trip generation study at The Growler Garage, The Traffic Overlay District procedures permit such a study, but require that a minimum of four sites be studied. We suspect that it will be difficult to identify four local uses similar to The Growler Garage, and instead suggest doing a study at The Liam O'Farrell May 4, 2015 Page 3 Growler Garage that includes each day of the week (5 data points). This should be reviewed with the City first, however. In summary, it is our opinion that the best approach is to continue to treat The Growler Garage as specialty retail. If that is not accepted, a second option would be to perform a local trip generation study. Should you have any questions or if additional information is desired, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Roger rickinson, P.E., PTOE oll °n/ 5 1A Ne i .. �/�/o `G���,P 4�/L;//7 0, No Text 6X4-111� ---, 4'e'l>v �{��il���liU6 G`T Q south uK iugton PLANNING & ZONING August 28, 2014 Re: #SP-14-47 Dear Applicant: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision rendered by the Administrative Officer concerning the above referenced application. 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. k Belair Administrative Officer Encl. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com E f� southburlin�ton PLANNING & ZONING - Permit Number SP- (office use ouly) APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW [Administrative ❑ Development Review Board 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(S) RECORD (Name(s) as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #): P,e e 1. `' 7,ik,)& i--I-L, T. 01; 2. LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED(S) (Book and page #): 3. APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #): r. 4. CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, address, phone & fax #): kq Q, a iZ I: A4 Lit F �t� _ , �,� h � rrk, I I 4a. CONTACT EMAIL ADDRESS:: To f�,' 111 T (SA I . C.t)Y'" 5. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: _ O 1>0P,S,Q T 1� T 6. TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office): 0! 70 -- C' Q - / 0 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburi.com J 7. PROJECT DESCRIPTION a. General project description (explain what you want approval for): Existing Uses on Property (including description size .of ean.ch separate use): 2 1 LJ 1- ", 4q f i1i1'-2 'l.f.`_1.11 _ / '. 1' (`) 1 Li r) cv-) J *14B J i- ()_ ) W fi c. Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new ur and existing uses to remain): f�� (t. r, � �, q, &.J d c�_f, Yi, jc d. Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain): e. Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine): .J ' +.l JZkAtk f. Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain): g. Number of employees (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): Site Plan Application Fonn. Rev. 12-2011 I 8. LOT COVERAGE Total Parcel Size: Sq. Ft. a. Building: Existing % / Proposed % / b. Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing % / Proposed % / c. Front yard (along each street) Existing Proposed d. Total area to be disturbed during construction (sq. ft.) sq. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. 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: c. Other site improvements (please list with cost): 10. ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a. P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out): 11. PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 12. PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: $ 1350.-- 13. ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: 14. SITE PLAN AND FEE A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information required by the City's Land Development Regulations. Five (5)' regular size copies, one reduced copy (I V x 17"), and one digital (PDF-format) copy of the site plan must be submitted A site plan application fee shall be paid to the City at the time f submitting the site plan application in accordance with the city's fee �j schedule.Afti f r �� / @ //'G S-y ' Administrative site plan applications require three (3) regular size copies, one reduced copy (11" x 17"), and one digital (PDF-format) copy. 3 Site Plan Application Form. Rev. 12-2011 NOTE: NOTIFICATION of ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS: Notification of adjoining property owners, in accordance with 24 V.S.A. §4464(a) and Section 17.06(B) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, is the responsibility of the applicant. After deeming an application complete, the Administrative Officer will provide the applicant with a draft meeting agendas or public hearing notice and sample certificate of service. The sworn certificate of service shall be returned to the City prior to the start of any public hearing. 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. a SI&MktURE OF APPLICANT t OF PROPERTY OWNER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: �—I— T / REVIEW AUTHORITY: 11 Development Review Board UKILnistrative Officer I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: Complete �In omp i Administrative fficer Date AME The applicant or permittee retains the obligation to identify, apply for, and obtain relevant state permits for this project. Call (802) 879-5676 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist. Site Plan Application Form. Rev. 12-2011 SUSAN GREER GARDENS 802. 652.0895 662 So Brownell Rd Williston, Vt 05495 Mr. Ray Belair City of So Burlington 575 Dorset St So Burlington, Vt 05403 Re: Greer Family LLC Installation of 18 Arborvitae 'Emerald Green'(10 Gal) at 10 Dorset St, So Burlington Mr. Belair: Please let this letter serve to inform of you of the following: 1.) 1 selected the variety & quantity: 18 Arborvitae 'Emerald Green' (Thuja occidentalis "Smaragd') 2.) 1 sited the location for the installation. 3.) 1 will be responsible for the planting. Thank you. Susan Greer GREER FAMILY LLC 81 MAPLE LEAF ROAD UNDERHILL, VT 05489 8023633344 City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Dear Ray Belair, August 25, 2014 I would like to install 18 plants on the south side of our building at 10 Dorset Street. The area is depicted on the site map. *Arborvitae Emerald Green *Thuja Occidentalis Smaragd *10 gallon plant *18 plants, $75.00 per plant = $1350.00 total cost Arborvitae is a very popular plant because it is extremely hardy and undemanding. It is very adaptive to most soil conditions and does well in cold climates. Dig Safe has visited the site and approved. Sincerely, Jory Curran ray From: Craig Lambert Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 6:58 AM To: ray Subject: RE: 10 Dorset Street Landscaping Ray, Their plans to add arborvitaes are fine Craig Lambert South Burlington City Arborist 104 Landfill Rd South Burlington, VT 05403 Ph: 802-658-7961 Fax: 802-658-7976 email: clam bert(a)_sburl.com Notice - Under Vermont's Public Records Act, all e-mail, e-mail attachments as well as paper copies of documents received or prepared for use in matters concerning City business, concerning a City official or staff, or containing information relating to City business are likely to be regarded as public records which may be inspected by any person upon request, unless otherwise made confidential by law. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return email. Thank you for your cooperation. From: ray Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 12:47 PM To: Craig Lambert Subject: 10 Dorset Street Landscaping Cra ig, I understand that you have been working with Jory Curran on a project where she wants to add 18 arborvitae plants. Please stop by to look over the plans. Thanks. Ray Belair Administrative Officer City of So. Burlington 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 802-846-4106 www.sburl.com www.sbpathtosustainability.com Notice - Under Vermont's Public Records Act, all e-mail, e-mail attachments as well as paper copies of documents received or prepared for use in matters concerning City business, concerning a City official or staff, or containing information relating to City business are likely to be regarded as public records which may be inspected by any person upon request, unless otherwise made confidential by law. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return email. Thank you for your cooperation. l southburfinuton CY PLANNING & ZONING September 15, 2014 Jory Curran 81 Maple Leaf Road Underhill VT 05489 Re: Tenant Change — 10 Dorset Street — Full Spectrum Salon, LLC Dear Ms. Curran: This is in response to your letter of September 8, 2014 requesting approval for a new tenant at your 10 Dorset Street property under your umbrella approval. The new tenant is Full Spectrum Salon, LLC (personal service use) occupying approximately 2449 sq. ft. with 10 treatment stations. This tenant would occupy the space previously occupied by Next Level Studio (personal service use). A review of the maximum number of parking spaces available and the maximum number of vehicle trip ends allowed indicates that the change in tenant will not exceed the limits allowed. Since this tenant change will not result in a change in use, you will not need to obtain a zoning permit. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, ; 4 - - Paul Conner Director of Planning & Zoning 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com September 8, 2014 City of South Burlington Planning & Zoning Dear Mr. Ray Belair, The Greer Family LLC is requesting a change in tenant for our building located at 10 Dorset St. Next Level Hair Salon was the previous occupant. This space is located on the south side of the building. The square footage is 2449. Full Spectrum Salon LLC is interested in occupying the space, they will operate a full service hair salon. There will be zero changes to the interior. I am requesting that Full Spectrum Salon LLC be given permission to operate their salon including retail. Sincerely, U�NYh—� Jory Curran Greer Family LLC -60VERMONT State of Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation Landowner(s): Agency of Natural Resources WASTEWATER SYSTEM AND POTABLE WATER SUPPLY PERMIT LAWS/REGULATIONS INVOLVED to V.S.A. Chapter 64, Potable Water Supply and Wastewater System Permit Wastewater System and Potable Water Supply Rules, Effective September 29, 2007 Chapter 21, Water Supply Rules, Effective December 1, 2010 Brews Brothers, LLC c/o Brian Stone 8 Murray Lane Jericho VT 05465 Permit Number: WW-4-0250-1 This permit affects property identified as Town Tax Parcel ID # South Burlington: 0570-o8-io referenced in a deed recorded in Book 879 Pages 237-240 of the Land Records in South Burlington, Vermont. This project, to amend Permit #WW-4-0250 for the addition of a beer retail business with a maximum of twenty-five seats (serving two meals per day) to an existing commercial building on a 1.44 +/- acres lot, served by existing municipal water supply and wastewater disposal services located on 8-10 Dorset Street in South Burlington, Vermont, is hereby approved under the requirements of the regulations named above subject to the following conditions. i. GENERAL 1.1 The project shall be completed as described in the application prepared by Paul O'Leary from O'Leary -Burke Civil Associates. The project shall not deviate from the approved proposal without prior written approval from the Drinking Water and Groundwater Protection Division. 1.2 This permit does not relieve the landowner from obtaining all other approvals and permits PRIOR to construction including, but not limited to, those that may be required from the Act 25o District Environmental Commission, the Drinking Water and Groundwater Protection Division, the Watershed Management Division, the Division of Fire Safety, the Vermont Department of Health, the Family Services Division, other State departments, and local officials. 1.3 The conditions of this permit shall run with the land and will be binding upon and enforceable against the landowner and all assigns and successors in interest. The landowner shall record and index this permit in the South Burlington Land Records within thirty (3o) days of issuance of this permit and prior to the conveyance of any lot subject to the jurisdiction of this permit. 1.4 This project is approved for the existing commercial building with the following uses: Beer Retail with a maximum of twenty-five seats (serving two meals per day); Dry Cleaners (drop off only) and Laundromat with a maximum of four employees; Bridal Shop with a maximum of three employees; Photo Garden Retail with a maximum of seven employees; and a Hair Salon with a maximum of four operators and four chairs. No alterations to the existing building other than those indicated in this permit that would change or affect the water supply or wastewater disposal shall be allowed without prior approval by the Drinking Water and Groundwater Protection Division. Construction of additional nonexempt buildings including commercial and residential buildings is not allowed without prior permitting by the Drinking Water and Groundwater Protection Division and such permit may not be granted unless the proposal conforms to the applicable laws and regulations. 1.5 Each purchaser of any portion of the project shall be shown a copy of the Wastewater System and Potable Water Supply Permit prior to conveyance of any portion of the project to that purchaser. 1.6 By acceptance of this permit, the landowner agrees to allow representatives of the State of Vermont access to the property subject to this permit, at reasonable times, for the purpose of ascertaining compliance with Vermont environmental/health statutes, regulations, and permit conditions. Regional Offices — Barre/EssexJct./Rutland/Springfield/St. Johnsbury Wastewater System and Potable Water Sur_ ,Permit W W-4-o250-1 1 Page 2 of 2 1.7 All conditions set forth in Permit Number #WW-4-0250 shall remain in effect except as amended or modified herein. 1.8 Any person aggrieved by this permit may appeal to the Environmental Court within 3o days of the date of issuance of this permit in accordance with io V.S.A. Chapter 22o and the Vermont Rules of Environmental Court Proceedings. 2.WATER SUPPLY 2.1 This project is approved with the existing connection to the municipal water supply for an additional 75o gallons of water per day for a maximum of 19,1oo gallons of water per day. 2.2 This project is approved with an existing building's water service piping. The Drinking Water and Groundwater Protection Division assumes no liability for the adequacy of this water service. Should the water supply fail and not qualify for the minor repair or replacement exemption, the landowner shall engage a Licensed Designer to evaluate the cause of the failure and to submit a permit amendment application to this office, and receive approval thereof, prior to correcting the failure. %WASTEWATER DISPOSAL 3.1 This project is approved with the existing connection to the municipal wastewater treatment facility for an additional 75o gallons of wastewater per day for a maximum of 19,1oo gallons of wastewater per day. 3.2 This project is approved with an existing building sewer. The Drinking Water and Groundwater Protection Division assumes no liability for the adequacy of this sewer piping. Should the wastewater system fail and not qualify for the minor repair or replacement exemption, the landowner shall engage a Licensed Designer to evaluate the cause of the failure and to submit a permit amendment application to this office, and receive approval thereof, prior to correcting the failure. David K. Mears, Commissioner Department of Environmental Conservation By iq�,4 Dated June 24, 2014 Dolores M. Eckert, Assistant Regional Engineer Essex Regional Office Drinking Water and Groundwater Protection Division cc South Burlington Planning Commission Paul O'Leary Jory Curran Department of Health — Food & Lodging Licenses No Text ray From: joryvt@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 9:21 AM To: joryvt@aol.com; ray April 22, 2014 City of South Burlington Planning & Zoning Dear Mr. Ray Belair, The Greer Family LLC is requesting a change in tenant for our building at 10 Dorset Street. Mills & Greer Sports was the previous occupant. This space is located on the south side of the building. The square footage is 2143. Brew Brothers LLC, is interested in occupying this space, they would operate a retail store that fills growlers of beer and sell wine. Sincerely, Jory Curran J May 9, 2014 )ory Curran 81 Maple Leaf Road Underhill VT 05489 o south cur ig-sto y PLANNING & ZONING Re: Tenant Change — 10 Dorset Street — Brew Brothers, LLC Dear Ms. Curran: This is in response to your email of April 22, 2014 requesting approval to add a new tenant to your 10 Dorset Street property under your umbrella approval. The new tenant is Brew Brothers, LLC (retail use) occupying 2143 sq. ft. This tenant would occupy a portion of the space previously occupied by Mills & Greer Sports (retail use). A review of the maximum number of parking spaces available and the maximum number of vehicle trip ends allowed indicates that the change in tenant will not exceed the limits allowed. Since this tenant change will not result in a change in use, no zoning permit is required unless the interior fit -up costs exceed $5000. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Paul Conner Director of Planning & Zoning 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com rr FVA 1�/ 1 `APice southburlington PLANNING & ZONING June 25, 2013 Jory Curran 81 Maple Leaf Road Underhill VT 05489 Re: Tenant Change — 10 Dorset Street — Add Treatment Stations Dear Ms. Curran: This is in response to your email of June 17, 2013 requesting approval to add six (6) additional treatment stations for the new tenant at your 10 Dorset Street property under your umbrella approval. The new tenant is Next Level Studio (personal service use) occupying 2449 sq. ft. with 10 treatment stations. This tenant would occupy a portion of the space previously occupied by Mills & Greer Sports (retail use). A review of the maximum number of parking spaces available and the maximum number of vehicle trip ends allowed indicates that the change in use will not exceed the limits allowed. Since this change will result in an increase in the number of previously approved treatment stations, please submit a zoning permit application to Administrative Officer Ray Belair for the additional treatment stations. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Paul Conner Director of Planning & Zoning 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburi.com j Igo: southburliugton PLANNING & ZONING June 24, 2013 Re: #SP-13-15 Dear Applicant: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision rendered by the Development Review Board concerning your recent application. 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. Sincer y, Raymond J. Be air Administrative Officer Encl. CERTIFIED MAIL -Return Receipt Requested # 7010 0290 0000 2215 5396 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburi.com Page 1 of 1 ray From: joryvt@aol.com Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 4:30 PM To: ray Hi Ray, Below is the info for the change in use for Next Level Hair Salon, you had mentioned it would be ok to email to you. City of South Burlington Planning & Zoning Dear Ray Belair, This letter is requesting a change in tenant use for our building at 8 Dorset Street. Next Level Hair Salon has approval of 4 stations and would like to have a total of 10 stations. That is an increase of 6 stations. Sincerely, Jory Curran 6/18/2013 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD F:\USERS\Planning & Zoning\Development Review Board\Staff Comments\2013\SP_13_15_1 MorsetSt_Greers.doc DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: May 31, 2013 Plans received: April 2, 2013 10 Dorset Street SITE PLAN APPLICATION #SP-13-15 Agenda # 4 Meeting date: June 4, 2013 Owner/Applicant Property Information Greer Family LLC Tax Parcel 0570-00010 81 Maple Leaf Farm Road Commercial 1 Zoning District Underhill, VT 05489 Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING P:IDevelopment Review BoardlStaff Comments120131SP 13 15 10DorsetSt Greers.doc Greer Family LLC, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking site plan approval to amend a previously approved plan for a 15,608 sq. ft. multi -use commercial building under an umbrella permit. The amendment consists of seeking a 25% parking waiver of seventeen (17) parking spaces, 10 Dorset Street. Administrative Officer Ray Belair and Planner Temporary Assignment Dan Albrecht, referred to herein as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted on April 2, 2013 and have the following comments. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements: Table 1. Dimensional Requirements Commercial 1 Zoning District Requirement/Limitation Proposed Min. Lot Size 40,000 SF 1.35 acres Max. Building Coverage 40% 26.5% ♦ Max. Total Coverage 70% 81.8% Min. Front Setback 50 ft. 40-50 ft Min. Side Setback 10 ft. >10 ft Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. >30 ft ♦ Pre-existing non-compliance SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Section 14.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations establishes the following general review standards for all site plan applications: (a) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and adequate parking areas. The Board has previously addressed parking issues at this property in its Findings of Fact & Decision for Site Plan Application, #SP-10-32. In that decision, the Board • Granted a two space or 2.7% parking waiver for a total of 71 spaces provided. The two spaces were to be converted to permanent greenspace. • Established a site limit of 42.3 PM peak hour vehicle trip ends during the p.m. peak hour. The applicant is requesting a 25% parking waiver in order to be able to accommodate the parking needs of current tenants as well as potential tenants who would move into currently unoccupied space. The applicant submitted parking lot car count data for the property. Counts were collected at 9 a.m., 12 Noon, 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. on Mondays, Wednesdays, Fridays and Saturdays from two weeks from March 11th through March 30th. The highest count seen during that time frame was 21 cars on Saturday March 16th at 12 Noon. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING P:IDevelopment Review BoardlStaff Comments120131SP 13 15 10DorsetSt Greers.doc If the Board were to grant a 25% waiver beyond the currently authorized 71 spaces, this would result in an increase of the parking allowance of 17.75 spaces (rounded to 17) for a total of 88 spaces. Future uses of the building shall be limited by this number. Staff supports this waiver as the site is located nearby or adjacent to three CCTA bus routes: Route 1 (Williston), Route 1 V (Williston Village) and Route 12 (the South Burlington Circulator). The site is also available to pedestrian traffic via sidewalks along Dorset Street and Williston Road and to bicyclists via the City's shared use path along Dorset Street. (b) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings to the greatest extent practicable. Given the minor changes proposed in this application, no changes to the parking are warranted. (c) Without restricting the permissible limits of the applicable zoning district, the height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and existing or adjoining buildings. The height of the building will remain unchanged and below 35 feet. (d) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. No changes to the existing buildings are being proposed as part of this application which should require new utility services. However, if any are proposed, they shall be in compliance with this criterion. (e) The DRB shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural characteristics, landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of different architectural styles. The proposed project does not fall within a design review district. However, there is no change proposed to the architecture or materials of the building. (t) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain, and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. See staff comments above. Site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: (a) The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial of collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. There are already sufficient shared accesses to this site via surrounding properties. No additional changes are necessary. E CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING P:IDevelopment Review BoardlStaff Comments120131SP 1315 10DorsetSt Greers.doc (b) Electric, telephone and other wire -served utility lines and service connections shall be underground. Any utility installations remaining above ground shall be located so as to have a harmonious relation to neighboring properties and to the site. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. (c) All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling or other requirements, shall be accessible, secure and properly screened with opaque fencing to ensure that trash and debris do not escape the enclosure(s). There are no changes proposed to the existing trash facilities. The existing facility is screened. (d) Landscaping and Screening Requirements As there is no building construction proposed for this site, there are no new minimum landscaping requirements. Pursuant to Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations, the plans shall depict snow storage areas that will minimize the potential for run-off. Adequate snow storage areas are shown on the plans. Traffic The site is located in Traffic Overlay District 1 and shall be subject to a traffic budget. The property shall be grandfathered for the existing traffic generation. Based on ITE 7t' Edition trip generation figures, the existing site is estimated to generate 2.71 trip ends per 1,000 SF for a total of 42.3 p.m. peak vehicle trip ends. This is in excess of the amount which would be allowed for a vacant lot in the same overlay district. Therefore, the site shall not be permitted to generate more than 42.3 PM peak vehicle trip ends. 2. The site shall be limited to 42.3 PM peak hour vehicle trip ends. Umbrella Approval The site has an existing umbrella approval for the following uses: ■ Personal service ■ Print shop ■ Radio/TV studio ■ Restaurant- short order and standard ■ Retail ■ Tavern/Night club ■ Indoor recreation facility ■ Artist production studio ■ Convenience Store- 3000 SF or less ■ Indoor Theater ■ General Office ■ Hospice ■ Municipal Facility ■ Personal Instruction Facility ■ Place of Worship CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING P:IDevelopment Review BoardlStaff Comments120131SP 13 15 10DorsetSt Greers.doc Staff finds no problems with the requested uses, recognizing that they will each be subject to the limitations on traffic and parking resulting from the site. OTHER The Board has received a letter from Judge Development Corporation, the owners of 100 Dorset Street, located immediately adjacent to the aforementioned site. The letter, in part, notes that "(w)e often find it necessary to intercept drivers of vehicles associated with 10 Dorset Street who park at 100 Dorset Street. In our view this constitutes clear evidence that 10 Dorset Street may have insufficient parking available for its employees and visitors. The letter concludes by cautioning the Board "that increasing parking demand for 10 Dorset Street, a 25% parking waiver may not be in the interest of either property." Staff notes that the set of plans needs to be updated as follows: Consistent with the Board's actions for #SP-10-32, the plan was to be updated to show the conversion of spaces 11 and 24 and the parking aisle in between to greenspace. The plans submitted on April 2, 2013 do not show this and therefore should be revised accordingly. The parking spaces should be renumbered accordingly to total 71. To the extent feasible, the drawings should current tenants and current vacant space. Respectfully submitted, Ray Belair, Administrative Officer Copy to: Jory Curran, Greer Family LLC, applicant .�YERMONT State of Vermont Agency of Natural Resources Department of Environmental Conservation Drinlung Water & Groundwater Protection Division Essex Regional Office [phone] (802) 879-5656 in West Street Essex Junction, VT 05452-4695 www.septic.vt.gov January 10, 2013 Jory Curran 81 Maple Leaf Road Underhill, VT 05489 Subject: WW-4-025o Greer Family LLC Commercial Building, located at 8-10 Dorset Street, South Burlington, VT. Dear Jory: In a letter dated January 9, 2013, you provided this office with the following breakdown of tenant uses/design flows for the above referenced project as of January 1, 2007: Dry Cleaners Plant and Laundromat with 27 employees and 38 washers: 19,405 gpd Sports Retail with 12 employees: 18o gpd Total Design Flow: 19,585 gpd You would now like to reconfigure some of the tenant space and have the following uses for the commercial building:. Dry Cleaners (drop off only) and Laundromat with 4 employees and 35 washers: 17,56o gpd Bridal Shop Retail with 3 employees: 45 gpd Photo Garden Retail with 7 employees: 105 gpd Hair Salon with 4 operators and 4 chairs: 640 gpd Vacant Space: o gpd Total Design Flow: i8,g5o gpd This office has determined that no permit amendment is required because your proposed change of use of the building generates less water and wastewater design flow than the use that existed as of January 1, 2007. We relied entirely on the information submitted to us in issuing this opinion and the landowners are responsible for its accuracy. This letter will not prevent the Agency from taking appropriate enforcement actions should it be determined in the future that the facts were not as stated. Sincerely, 46't'd '�-z &4t'-t— Dolores M. Eckert Assistant Regional Engineer Cc South Burlington Planning & Zoning Regional Offices — Barre/Essex Jct./Rutland/Springfield/St. Johnsbury GREER FAMILY LLC 8 DORSET ST. PARKING LOT CAR COUNT 9:am 12:pm 3:pm 6:pm 3/11 Monday 8 16 9 12 3/13 Wednesday 6 10 17 9 3/15 Friday 4 16 18 20 3/26 Saturday 6 21 17 12 3/18 Monday 7 13 11 12 3/20 Wednesday 8 18 12 18 3/29 Friday 10 15 21 9 3/30 Saturday 6 20 15 8 *The above numbers are customer & employee parking. Page 1 of 1 ray From: joryvt@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 3:10 PM To: ray Subject: Greer Family LLC 2, 2013 City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont Dear Ray Belair, The Greer Family LLC is asking for a 25% increase in our parking requirement. We have completed a two week parking survey and our parking numbers are on the low side. Currently we have 70% of our building occupied with tenants. Next Level Hair Salon has approval from the City to complete their fit up and to open in the near future. Next Level will have stations for various uses in their salon, for example, one customer could sit at different stations for hair cutting, styling, waxing, coloring, makeup, etc. We use this example to show that there is an overlap in how many stations one customer will use. Also, part of Next Level's business strategy will be having Laundromat customers as their customers. While someone is doing their laundry they could also be getting a haircut. Studies show that people would rather multi task while waiting for their laundry to finish. The above is mentioned because there will be an overlapping of customers using more than one business. Sincerely, Marjory Curran Greer Family LLC 4/3/2013 GREER FAMILY LLC 8 DORSET ST. PARKING LOT CAR COUNT 9:am 12:pm 3:pm 6:pm 3/11 Monday 8 16 9 12 3/13 Wednesday 6 10 17 9 3/15 Friday 4 16 18 20 3/16 Saturday 6 21 17 12 3/18 Monday 7 13 11 12 3/20 Wednesday 8 18 12 18 3/29 Friday 10 15 21 9 3/30 Saturday 6 20 15 8 *The above numbers are customer & employee parking. JUDGE Development Corp. May 22, 2013 City of South Burlington Department of Planning & Zoning 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 RE: JUNE 4, 2013 AGENDA ITEM #4 Dear Board Members: 2 Market Street So Burlington, VT 05403 T: 802 863.6500 F: 802 862.5828 I write with regard to Site Plan Application #SP-13-15 seeking to amend a previously approved plan with a request for a 25% parking waiver from the minimum parking requirement at 10 Dorset Street. We are the owners of 100 Dorset Street, immediately adjacent to the aforementioned site. We often fmd it necessary to intercept drivers of vehicles associated with 10 Dorset Street who park at 100 Dorset Street. In our view this constitutes clear evidence that 10 Dorset Street may have insufficient parking available for its employees and visitors. These incidents are not limited to wintertime when snow storage and removal compromise parking usage, but has been personally observed by our employees as late as last week. For this reason, we caution the South Burlington Development Review Board that increasing parking demand for 10 Dorset Street, a 25% parking waiver may not be in the best interest of either property. Sincerely yours, Peter Judge PJ/mb cc: Jeremy Robare Sam Judge S:\Peter's Correspondence\2013\South Burlington, City ot\5-22 Dept. of Planning & Zoning (6-4 Agenda - Greers).DOC o-91171?013 14 43 23R?770171 PACK R SHIP EXPRESS td13F7 P U01i002 -v y 6-J u�.ii bivfcj 6 Lli,c = �i••7"• _ _ � �—_--�`--- __= ��.-- ,T �_ +sue" _ +�L�`>��._� ---- :. Ua. 05/ 1712012 14,42 92R?770171 PAU $ SHIP FYPRF22 ,#12P7 P 002/002 t. hatebY Certify that on +his I!_ day Of notice for C -- I.u-!J, a. copy of the foregoing public pfit NNlfcaw.;ri j , �' � 12pplication number], was by UT S = =p � ;epaz to Tree owners of all pro ernes adjoining t� ec+ o f Mt;nt, w-1il1out re ad rto any public f p n x ae s1,;, . i s open + 11C right-of-way, 7,an d 1n1 hiding the descle4ption Of the PWP"ty and accompanying inforinatior proMded by the r,t;, of S014111 Burling€ors. I furTlzer uertif_v that this notiticatio>Z was provided to the follo=;ping p�zties in accordance t4464(a and Section 17- �5(Rl fT' with 4 V-S.A. ne Sr='.ta B° dl ng=ton .and Development Regulations: T =_t �- . y .�._ Sri-�1}ii, .-rtr5h. ktull,nanies and addresses) J o dy& 4& - J � r • � � IA i• *V, ul 1 i -vryra> t gi Pf,I Y , i 41 " �, c► Dated fat (totiN. n citt erly � r��i:i�i �� :I �7 day IjrIumber and email. ?A,AA �•� T �t r (C� — Signature: Date: ;fir y ' -.: 57 � �i� Buri4'29011 SC ih ug Cd"U lcQttl OJ Jerwca FOM Rev. J-2U11 1 1, ]PLANT SCHEDULE QTY +� ARBORVTTAEE 4' MAX HGT 26 O BURNING BUfSH 2 GAL 25 Is 1" = 209 -0" N/F - I C LAIN OIL C . INC. 1810- 1055. I. j EXITING TREEO I --. - AtLI'C R' --- rt N/F . ; HARLES & JANET PERIGNS MW ENTRANCE CANOPY ••- ' • b • • n� 1810-01087 + , PAINTED I 10 D O n u rc 1'0 rc n L u 20 .^ •c ucRrrou 4' r, RDa cR— SNOW STORAGE •, j ' D I l � Q'07E4NOOLMLR ..•. •• `•• i 101' y I �' I 16 UIILEASED SPACE .1 " 411E SP YNI,Q OEIACK, � I • 1xulrcTlEu1 i GREER FAMILY LLC . LOCATION MAP I SNOWS[ORAGE 0570-08-10,, .• RC -, 1 a M a PHOTO GARDEN , DRY CLEANWG ELRG ROOM } = 2100 SF OI I400SP i 12151 ' _ SNOW S ME a � 1 Ma" t GREERDPORTS tO G e • �1T21calloIr ,�M1710��'::�: N/F TEI RAM PARTNERS 05701-00100, us Z vills ox Ali II N/F LODGING NORTH INC. 1810-01117 u = A GENERAL INFORMATION LOT SIZE: 1.35 ACRE 58853 SF ZONE: COMMERCIAL 1 BUILDING COVERAGE: 26.5 % 15608 SF BUILDING, PAVING, ETC: 81.2 1s,15_65 SF FRONT YARD COVERAGE: -115% 1376.5 SF PARKS% REQUIREMENTS PERSONAL SERVICES - 4415 SF Q 411000 GFA = 18 SPACES 1-4 G a RETAIL - MILLS do GREER - 4592 SF Q 511000 GFA = 23 SPACES PERMITTED RETAIL - 6601 SF Q 511000 GFA = 33 SPACES W TOTAL SPACES REQUIRED - 74 SPACES TOTAL SPACES PROVIDED - 70 SPACES' {7a� E W� O REVISED JUNE M2M MAY 22, 2001 REV'D DEC 20, 2006 REV'D MAY C2WS AS PER SRDRR REV-0 JAN. 10, 2007 REV'D DEC- 1162006 DECEMRER 6, 2006 NOTt: GZNERAL•L CONTRACTOR IS TO VKIM ALL DDUNSIO d ON THIS DRAWING PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. -SP1 GENERALCONTRALTORISTOVEROYALI.SM "torva COND MONS PRIOR CONSTRUCTION. i�o iftlds� 00 :6:1 NO. I - W southburfingtou PLANNING & ZONING �I Permit Number SP- - (office use only) APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW ❑ Administrative Development Review Board 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(S)-OF RECORD (Name(s) as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax ft 2. LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED(S) (Book and page #): 3. APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax ft 4. CONTACT PERSON (person who address, phone & fax #): ve all correspondence from Staff. Include name, 4a. CONTACT EMAIL ADDRESS:: JoRI VT @A of . Cow) 5. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: Ar 9 1>oKSET srguc- ' 6. TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office): 0 5'70 0 8 -10 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburi.com 7. PROJECT DESCRIPTION a. General project description (explain what you want approval for): 1 PAD- m.i L'B00 sF nab c. Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain): 4144- �r000s _ d. Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain): / S. 60 5 F e. Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine): 3 a ) ftE t2f 011Z 0 %Je. 5-1v2J f. Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain): —• 0 g. Number of employees (existing and proposed, note office versus non -office employees): 16 4-- h. Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable): Site Plan Application Form. Rev. 12-2011 8. LOT COVERAGE Total Parcel Size: S $ 53 Sq. Ft. a. Building: Existing 46 . ," % / 15. b O 8 sq. ft. Proposed 46S % / 0 8' sq. ft. b. Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing 86.1 % / 50. . 5 sq. ft. Proposed 8 S. 1 % / 04. 11 sq. ft. c. Front yard (along each street) Existing % / sq. ft. Proposed 1 - % / 13 %6 . s'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: c. Other site improvements (please list with cost): $ —O — 10. ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a. P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out): 11. PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: /a: &o + 3: o-o 12. PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: • okk4 t 13. ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: 14. SITE PLAN AND FEE A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information required by the City's Land Development Regulations. Five (5)1 regular size copies, one reduced copy (I I" x 17"), and one digital (PDF-format) copy of the site plan must be submitted A site plan application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submittin& the site plan a placation in accordance with the city's fee schedule. ��'tp bm 041;� 47 y/// j 1 Administrative site plan applications require three (3) regular size copies, one reduced copy (11" x 17"), and one digital (PDF-format) copy. Site Plan Application Form. Rev. 12-2011 NOTE: NOTIFICATION of ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS: Notification of adjoining property owners, in accordance with 24 V.S.A. §4464(a) and Section 17.06(B) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, is the responsibility of the applicant. After deeming an application complete, the Administrative Officer will provide the applicant with a draft meeting agendas or public hearing notice and sample certificate of service. The sworn certificate of service shall be returned to the City prior to the start of any public hearing. 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. SIG?WUV OF APPLICANT M4R-,-ToR CIAP-RA4 SIGISIAItltt OF PROPERTY OWNER 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: Comp: The applicant or permittee retains the obligation to identify, apply for, and obtain relevant state permits for this project. Call (802) 879-5676 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist. Site Plan Application Form. Rev. 12-2011 l �i rr �hk is southhur ineton PLANNING & ZONING January 2, 2013 Jory Curran 81 Maple Leaf Road Underrhill VT 05489 Re: Tenant Changes — 10 Dorset Street Dear Ms. Curran: This is in response to your letter of December 26, 2012 requesting approval for a new tenant at your 10 Dorset Street property under your umbrella approval. The new tenant is Next Level Studio (personal service use) occupying approximately 2300 sq. ft. with 3-4 treatment stations. This tenant would occupy a portion of the space previously occupied by Mills & Greer Sports (retail use). A review of the maximum number of parking spaces available and the maximum number of vehicle trip ends allowed indicates that the change in use will not exceed the limits allowed. Since this tenant change will result in a change in use, please submit a zoning permit application to Administrative Officer Ray Belair for this change. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, /A — Paul Conner Director of Planning & Zoning 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com December 26, 2012 City of South Burlington, Vt Planning & Zoning Dear Mr. Ray Belair, +I)aX This letter is requesting a change in twfor our building on 8-10 Dorset Street. Currently Mills & Greer Sports is located in the south side of the building occupying 4592 sq. ft. We would like to split the 4592 into two spaces, a demising wall would separate the two spaces. Each tenant would share an entrance and each tenant would have their own bathroom and second door for egress. Next Level Studio which is a hair salon is interested in leasing one of the two spaces available. They would like 3-4 stations. This letter is a request for Next Level Studio to occupy the available space. �h �360 1- 0 -' 1 "+ Sincerely, +Tawv— ham Jopry Curran 0 � l ahh,.lh,V,l V-1 ?0,� - 363 - 3 3gL+ Rgir, 4o southburlington PLANNING & ZONING July 14, 2010 Jory Curran 81 Maple Leaf Farm Road Underhill, VT 05489 Re: 10 Dorset Street Dear Ms. Curran: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision rendered by the Development Review Board on July 14, 2010 (effective 7/14/10 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, Jana71,,,ley Planning and Zoning Assistant Encl. CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT: 7010 0290 0000 2215 2616 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tal 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com southburlinoon PLANNING & ZONING Permit Number SP-- 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 L-t - 2. LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #): T, y,73 t-12Q S56 3. APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #): - ep � � � T ►+. Boa. .33�+� 4. CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, addrMd phone & fax #): C LA R W R 1 t i,.A % FA� M 2 A. 11 P% ,9z _µ? if . VF 0.%kq nu. R0 ,.')-u- a. Contact e-mail address: 5. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 6 -ro •Popoe-T S-T 6. TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office): 05 70 — D 3 1 1D 7. PROJECT DESCRIPTION a. General project description explain what you want approval for . p trlam►" 5Ptyy,-i.- V 10j-o N� P u.+np ti"A• .AM - - Car hON { I W5 UeeA 1 it) ON% $X ZQ C6iTkt>wv ►>,� iN� a �.01 e, bif I lea 575 D rset Str et South Burlington, vT 05 B3 tel 0 .846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburi.com Site Plan i n -_ b. Existing Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use): c. Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain): IeA412— j l�} � ACI d. Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain): ) ! , 609 „:ia IrT e. Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine): 321 L PSG ONE 5 b w 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): +MjjjjexS A eel 8. LOT COVERAGE Total Parcel Size: -, 8 �3 Sq. Ft. a. Building: Existing % sq. ft. Proposed_% / 15^6 af3 • sq. ft. b. Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing $15-. 1 % / 5-611b. 6 sq. ft. Proposed $,5:1 % / .'o, i16• sq. ft. c. Front yard (along each street) Existing I) • % / ) 316. sq. ft. Proposed il. % 13;, - sq. ft. d. Total area to be disturbed during construction (sq. ft.) 54.�,. -f * * 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): $ Af b. Landscaping: $ XA c. Other site improvements (please list with cost): All& 10. ESTIMATED TRAFFIC I►lk 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: !✓ 12. PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: V/,+ 13. ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: Al 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) .� vc� s��-� ��-�9 KK► � ; TAierA�-r yo��.ti� ID S i-4,111,9f n Rd . , s w.a 11 y +� �- P+.) j o ChaivetzL014 / Co. 3 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). 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. "GRhTURE OF APPLICANT �+ F SIGNATLf$EQbF PROPERTY OWNER PR4NT NAME Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: S T AJ REVIEW AUTHORITY: ❑ Development Review Board Administrative Officer I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: Complete ❑ Incomplete 0 irector of Plan6ih� & Zoning or Designee 4 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Report preparation date: June 29, 2010 \drb\sit\greer\sitep1an10-32.doc Plans received: May 51 2010 10 Dorset Street SITE PLAN APPLICATION #SP-10-32 nda#7 Owner/Applicant Greer Family LLC 81 Maple Leaf Farm Road Underhill, VT 05489 Location Map Meetinq date: July 6, 2010 Property Information Tax Parcel 0570-00010 Commercial 1 Zoning District { J CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 2 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING .Greer Family LLC, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking site plan approval to amend a previously approved plan for a 15,608 sq. ft. multi -use commercial building under an umbrella permit. The amendment consists of: 1) installing a subsurface remediation system, and 2) seeking a two (2) space parking waiver, 10 Dorset Street. Associate Planner Cathyann La Rose and Administrative Officer Ray Belair, referred to herein as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted on May 5, 2010 and have the following comments. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements: Table 1. Dimensional Requirements Commercial 1 Zoning District Requirement/Limitation Proposed �l Min. Lot Size 40,000 SF 1.35 acres Max. Building Coverage 40% 26.5% ♦ Max. Total Covera a 70% 81.8% Min. Front Setback 50 ft. 40-50 ft Min. Side Setback 10 ft. >10 ft Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. >30 ft ♦ Pre-existing non-compliance The applicant is proposing to locate a system of soil remediation components in two (2) 8x20 foot trailers and shipping containers near the northeast corner of the property. The proposed location is currently one of the few areas of green space on the property. As the property already exceeds the allowable area of impervious surface on site, no additional amount of impervious surface may be added. At minimum, there must be a replacement of and equal amount of pervious surface elsewhere on the property. The applicant is proposing to fill two paved parking spaces with topsoil. Staff does not feel that the simple addition of topsoil over a paved surface will constitute a pervious surface. Staff has spoken with the South Burlington Stormwater Superintendent who concurs. He advocates for removal of the pavement here, with the location to be seeded with a grass mix. He has stated that if the Board does not impose the removal of the asphalt, at the very minimum the additional topsoil should function at least at the level of a green roof, with a minimum of 6 inches of soil, proper system of drainage of water, proper plantings, and properly contained with curbing. The Board should discuss this proposal. The site currently exceeds the impervious coverage limitations of the district and the addition of more impervious surface should be met at the very least with an equal square footage of pervious surface that functions as true pervious surface. 1. The Board should discuss the proposal for the location of the trailers, and the proposal for mitigation of the loss of pervious surface. l� CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 3 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Section 14.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations establishes the following general review standards for all site plan applications: (a) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and adequate parking areas. In accordance with current tenants and uses, the site requires 50 parking spaces. There is 4,536 square feet of vacant space. Should the vacant space be used for the most intense use of retail, 23 additional spaces will be required. The site provides for 73 parking spaces, which would meet the requirement should the vacant space be filled with retail use. However, with the proposed location of fill on parking spaces, two spaces would be lost. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a two -space, or 2.7% parking waiver. The applicant has submitted a parking count which states that their parking spaces are never fully used (attached). Staff supports this waiver provided that, as stated above, the spaces which are lost are indeed used as appropriate and functional pervious space. Future uses of the building shall be limited by this number. (b) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings to the greatest extent practicable. Given the minor changes proposed in this application, no changes to the parking are warranted. (c) Without restricting the permissible limits of the applicable zoning district, the height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and existing or adjoining buildings. The height of the building will remain unchanged and below 35 feet. (d) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. No changes to the existing buildings are being proposed as part of this application which should require new utility services. However, if any are proposed, they shall be in compliance with this criterion. (e) The DRB shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural characteristics, landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of different architectural styles. The proposed project does not fall within a design review district. However, there is no change proposed to the architecture or materials of the building. (f) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain, and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. See staff comments above. C CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 2 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: (a) The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial of collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. There are already sufficient shared accesses to this site via surrounding properties. No additional changes are necessary. (b) Electric, telephone and other wire -served utility lines and service connections shall be underground. Any utility installations remaining above ground shall be located so as to have a harmonious relation to neighboring properties and to the site. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. (c) All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling or other requirements, shall be accessible, secure and properly screened with opaque fencing to ensure that trash and debris do not escape the enclosure(s). There are no changes proposed to the existing trash facilities. The existing facility is screened. (d) Landscaping and Screening Requirements As there is no building construction proposed for this site, there are no new minimum landscaping requirements. Pursuant to Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations, the plans shall depict snow storage areas that will minimize the potential for run-off. Adequate snow storage areas are shown on the plans. Traffic The site is located in Traffic Overlay District 1 and shall be subject to a traffic budget. The property shall be grandfathered for the existing traffic generation. Based on ITE 7`h Edition trip generation figures, the existing site is estimated to generate 2.71 trip ends per 1,000 SF for a total of 42.3 p.m. peak vehicle trip ends. This is in excess of the amount which would be allowed for a vacant lot in the same overlay district. Therefore, the site shall not be permitted to generate more than 42.3 PM peak vehicle trip ends. 2. The site shall be limited to 42.3 PM peak hour vehicle trip ends. Umbrella Approval The site has an existing umbrella approval for the following uses: ■ Personal service ■ Print shop CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD ■ Radio/TV studio ■ Restaurant- short order and standard ■ Retail ■ Tavern/Night club ■ Indoor recreation facility ■ Artist production studio ■ Convenience Store- 3000 SF or less ■ Indoor Theater ■ General Office ■ Hospice ■ Municipal Facility ■ Personal Instruction Facility ■ Place of Worship 5 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Staff finds no problems with the requested uses, recognizing that they will each be subject to the limitations on traffic and parking resulting from the site. Staff recommends that the applicant address the issue of the pervious surface. Staff does not advocate approval of any plan that simply places topsoil over pavement without meeting the intended function of a pervious surface or without approval from the Stormwater Superintendent. Res ectfully submitted, Cathya LaRose, Associate Planner Copy to: Jory Curran, Greer Family LLC, applicant GREER FAMILY LLC 8 & 10 DORSET STREET PARKING COUNT Week of June 7-12, 2010 9:am 12:pm 3:pm 6:pm 6/7, Monday 12 20 22 13 6/9, Wednesday 8 18 10 8 6/11, Friday 12 10 13 9 6/12,Saturday 7 19 12 4 Week of June 14-19, 2010 9:am 12:pm 3:pm 6:pm 6/14, Monday 12 15 18 10 6/ 16, Wednesday 10 16 18 21 6/18, Friday 9 12 20 11 6/19, Saturday 6 16 9 6 *the above figures represent customer and employee parking. At times employees from the gas station and the Judge property used our parking lot for parking. 1 r Site Plan Application 0021 :1toloso.-W, southburlington PLANNING & ZONING Permit Number SP- 060- 7� 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 #): So2.363.3344 o iR 802,• S�q • �-I }I c� 2. LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #): Kol . 49$ . Qc , rs6 �1 Igl.o 3. APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #): jn" OfACURAW B1 MAPLC LEAfr ---r,.> m- Kr -,A 0 8e2. 363.334L4 MC 862• qq-4-41 a- 4. CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, address, phone & fax #): 6AM E A5 -Jet 3 a. Contact e-mail address: Mum \1T 5. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: S ^ Id ^.DD 5&T S-f,_ 6. TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office): 0690 —a 8 -• 10 7. PROJECT DESCRIPTION a. General project description (explain what yw want approval for): 1 i^hnv,no iIrn Ia,.,AeQAo AAn!mn ( A�oAr 7. 1 1 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com Proposed plantings West/Dorset St. 32 each Japanese Barberry 3 gal. @$46.99 each = $ 1503.68 North/gas station 16 each Tardiva Hydrangea 7 gal. @ $89.99 each = $ 1439.84 East/Clarion Hotel 7 each Pinky Winky Hydranges 3 gal. @ $45.95 each = $ 321.65 Existing trees on propert West/Dorset St. 4 locusts @ $ 469.99 each = $ 1879.96 North/gas station 1 locust @469.99 each = $ 469.99 2 Norway Maple @1299.99 @399.99 = $ 1699.98 1 Box Elder @ 899.99 = $ 899.99 South /Judge Property 4 trees that show on our property, unknown species ? East/ Clarion Hotel 4 Box Elder @ $349.99 = $ 1399.96 Total $ 9,615.05 1 Site Plan Application Q c. Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain): g" 9 9411oOA' 01429 E,rd . d. Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain): I 6D $ (AAA Q -g e. Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine): 3 Z. ' a4-, ao a 0 W RJ f. Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain): -0- g. Number of employees & company vehicles (existing and proposed, note office versus non - office employees): 18 + 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: $ Sq. Ft. a. Building: Existing aG . r % / /5. 60 is sq. ft. Proposed a6.5' % l 15. �o S sq. ft. b. Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing 857.1 % / 5- . 11G_ 5• sq. ft. Proposed $ 5,1 % / SQ II , 1�7 sq. ft. c. Front yard (along each street) Existing l! S % / 1374.'s sq. ft. Proposed 11. 5' % 13 "76 . S sq. ft. 2 t ( 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: $ 3, Q46-Ari 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: 12. PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: 5e a puVI&wd- 4* re,&,t 13. ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: AS -A 9 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 1 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). 4 1 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. WPUTT-EU=R�EOIF APPLICANT SIOVA-WRE OF PROPERTY OWNER `6iRINT 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: Complete„ ❑ Incomplete dv of Planning & Zoning or Designee 5 GREER FAMILY LLC Design Review Board, I am asking for a two space parking waiver for a period of time ranging from 20 to 30 months. Our property is currently undergoing a remediation project to clean up drycleaning solvent that is underground. As we are starting phase 3 of the process, 2 trailers need to be placed on our property for a period of 20 to 30 months. These trailers will house filters needed for the next phase. (see site plan for exact location of trailers) We are working with the State of Vermont who monitors our project. The two trailers are 8x20 each and are shown on the site plan. Our total parking provided is 73 spaces. The parking survey clearly shows that we have the extra parking available at the peak hours. Thank you for your consideration, Jory Curran 6/21/10 J GREER FAMILY LLC 8 & 10 DORSET STREET PARKING COUNT Week of June 7-12, 2010 9:am 12:pm 3:pm 6:pm 6/7, Monday 12 20 22 13 6/9, Wednesday 8 18 10 8 6/11, Friday 12 10 13 9 6/12, Saturday 7 19 12 4 Week of June 14-19, 2010 9:am 12:pm 3:pm 6:pm 6/14, Monday 12 15 18 10 6/ 16, Wednesday 10 16 18 21 6/18, Friday 9 12 20 11 6/19, Saturday 6 16 9 6 *the above figures represent customer and employee parking. At times employees from the gas station and the Judge property used our parking lot for parking. �_�: PLANNING & ZONING June 24, 2010 Greer Family, LLC 81 Maple Leaf Farm Road Underhill, VT 05489 Re: 8-10 Spear Street Dear Property Owner: Enclosed is the draft agenda for the July 6, 2090 South Burlington Development Review Board Meeting. 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 meeting is being held regarding the proposed development. The official agenda will be posted on the City's website (www.sburl.com) by the Friday prior to the meeting. Under Title 24, Section 4464 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 scheduled public meeting. Sincerely, Jana Beagley Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com I 0 ri WAAhlor southb►urlington PLANNING & ZONING August 8, 2008 Jory Curran Greer Family, LLC 81 Maple Leaf Farm Road Underhill, VT 05489 Re: Design Review #DR-08-06 Dear Ms. Curran: Enclosed, please find the Findings of Fact and Decisions regarding the above referenced project. Should you have any questions, please contact our office. Sincerely, (-&u &IA' V Betsy McDonough Brown Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT: 7008 0150 0003 6150 6338 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com t GREER FAMILY LLC 81 MAPLE LEAF FARM ROAD UNDERHILL, VERMONT 05489 802-363-3344 August 13, 2008 City of South Burlington Paul Conner 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vt. 05403 Dear Mr. Conner, I currently have a construction project at 8-10 Dorset Street. Listed below is the past and projected tenants and square footage for the building. Past: 15,608 building total square footage, Mills and Greer was at 6,966 for the retail store and offices. Greer Drycleaning and Laundromat was at 8,642 square feet. Proposed: square footage stays the same at 15,608 Mills and Greer will move to the rear of the building with 4,592 square feet and continue to have a retail store. Greers Drycleaning is moving to the south side of the building and will have a drycleaning drop off and pick up store. The Laundromat is staying the same. Their total square footage is 3,680. Photogarden, a new retail tenant will move to the center of the building on Dorset Street. Their square footage will be 2,800. They would like to take occupancy approximately on 10/1/08. Unleased space, the old Mills and Greer store is unleased at this time, we are looking for a tenant. This new tenant will occupy 4,536 square feet. What do I need to get approval for the above? Please call meat the above number. Sincerely, Jory Curran PLANNING COMMISSION 5 DEcember 1989 page 2 drainageway. Mr. Steele then showed maps of locations of ledge, prime ag soils, vegetation, roads (existing and proposed), and views. The study will suggest a "residential home business zone" on Dorset St. and on Hinesburg Rd. in an anticipation of devel- opment pressures. Curb cuts would be limited to allow easy north - south access to the city, but they felt strip development would be prevented. Mr. Steele said they have been sensitive toward pre- serving views toward the mountains. In the conservation plan, new housing is foreseen along Hinesburg Rd. with agriculture lands to the north and south preserved. The study will take a long look at the Goodrich site from the point of view of neighbors' concerns and views. A new school site will also be considered. In the development plan, all wooded areas are left in tact and many agricultural lands are also left (primarily in conjunction with the wishes of Shelburne). There would be more development on Dorset St. The resource plan would be a balance between the other two. Mr. Jacob noted that the City would want to keep the approximate 50-50 split between residential and commercial. Mr. Sporzynski of the REcreation Path Committee noted that they are trying to keep the path off city streets and asked the con- sultant to keep that in mind. Mr. Steele said they have met with Committee representatives and are taking that into account. Mr. Boyle said the draft of the report is due in mid -January. 4. Site plan application of Earl Greer for construction of a 2040 sq. ft. one-story addition to an existing building, 10 Dorset St. Fred Greer said that since the city and state are taking land for the Dorset St. project, Greers proposes to take off part of a building and then build a new 2040 sq. ft. addition. This will result in a net gain of 348 sq. ft. The addition will help to maintain parking. The northern access will be shared with the Texaco station. They will also keep the access across from Howard Johnson's Motel. The middle curb cut will be eliminated. Cir- culation through Arby's will be maintained by private agreement. Some trees will be moved. Mr. Greer said the addition will be done before the road is widened but the curb cut will not be closed until the road widening. Mrs. Maher felt that would leave more curb cuts than she felt was safe. She felt it should be chained off. Mr. Jacob asked about lighting. Mr. Greer said a new pole will be put in and wiring will run un3erground. Mr. Jacob noted the City Engineer wants it from existing pole 2-12. Mr. Greer said that was no problem. Mr. Jacob also noted that the plan must show where the proposed catch basin -will drain. Mrs. Maher asked what will happen if credit is given for trees that are moved and the trees then die. Mr. Greer said they would replace them. Ms. Pugh said she wants it made clear what Greers will do and what the State will do. Ms. Peacock moved the Planning Commission approve the Site Plan application of E. Frederick Greer for construction of a 2020 sq. ft. addition for retail use as depicted on a plan entitled "Earl and Kathryn Greer, 10 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Adams Construction Company and dated 10/12/89, last revised 11/22/89, with the following stipulations: 1. The applicant shall post a $2,000, 3-year landscaping bond prior to permit. If the relocated trees die, they shall be replaced by Greers. 2. The plan shall be revised prior to permit to show the followin 1) where the proposed catch basin will drain. This shall be approved by the City Engineer 2) new underground service from GMP pole 2-12 instead of a new pole 3) a clear delineation of improvements to be constructed as part of the Dorset Street project (i.e. sidewalk, bike path, curb cuts, etc). 3. The applicant shall close the existing middle curb cut prior to occupancy of the addition. 4. A building permit must be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void. Mr. Belter seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Discussion with UVM regarding proposed construction of a 255 space parking lot behind the Sheraton, Williston Road Mr. Pennaman, Ms. Falcone, and Ms. Killourie represented UVM. They indicated they wanted to get a dialog going on their traffic and circulation plans. UVM's current action plan calls for 3 new housing units: a student apartment housing unit on S. Prospect near the Country Club, housing where University Heights is now (current residents will be relocated in the Orchard Street area and a student complex will be built). An intercampus shuttle system is planned to link various campus areas. All this is being done in conjunction with the Main St. improvement project. There is also a proposed bridge link over Rt. 2 which is now in the design phase. This is a joint project with the City of Burlington and is a non -vehicle bridge (for pedestrians, bikes, and shuttle). r kOr s outhburlington PLANNING & ZONING August 18, 2008 Jory Curran Greer Family, LLC 81 Maple Leaf Farm Road Underhill, VT 05489 Re: New Tenant — Photogarden — 10 Dorset Street Dear Ms. Curran: This is in response to your request of August 13, 2008 seeking authorization under your umbrella approval for a new tenant. The new tenant is Photogarden, a retail use, utilizing 2800 sq. ft. Based upon an analysis of parking and traffic demands for your property for existing and proposed uses, your request is hereby approved. Since the new retail tenant will be occupying space previously used for the dry cleaning business, this change in use will require a zoning permit. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Paul Conner, AICP Director of Planning and Zoning 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com No Text s� FLAI*JPkNItic July 24, 2008 Greer Family, LLC Jory Curran 81 Maple Leaf Farm Road Underhill, VT 05489 Dear Property Owner: Enclosed is the draft agenda for the August 5, 2008 South Burlington Development Review Board Meeting. 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 meeting is being held regarding the proposed development. The official agenda will be posted on the City's website (www.sburl.com) by the Friday prior to the meeting. Under Title 24, Section 4464 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 scheduled public meeting. Sincerely, q��-q &Dj�� Betsy McDonough Brown Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. .�t,:A G -.s -z'i ..,i F'a U 2F 1l ;, 5'�;"�3-� -rl `�'S4 E%'.-1 GfE 2. ?�= - ��:.. '�'"f u1; 22•+_-6 QI sqc, rq-,O b sl I�,-() 1� -may. pQ) q� � -A) -) �V"Io oq Q0 (7ml :6:40 southburlington PLANNING & ZONING July 31, 2008 Jory Curran Greer Family, LLC 81 Maple Leaf Farm Road Underhill, VT 05489 Re: Design Review #DR-08-06 Dear Ms. Curran: 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, August 5, 2008 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, bnj� Betsy McDonough Brown Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tell 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburi.com Aye v4a south -h.. g_ PLANNING & ZONING MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington Development Review Board FROM: Cathyann LaRose, Associate Plann('r DATE: July 31, 2008 COPY TO: Jory Curran, Greer Family LLC, Applicant John Floyd, Design Signs Inc Design Review Application Master Signage Permit DR-08-06 10 Dorset Street Design Signs Inc, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking to obtain a new master signage permit for the properties at 8-10 Dorset Street. The master signage permit would establish the design scheme for the freestanding and wall signs on the property, 10 Dorset Street. Pursuant to Section 6 of the City of South Burlington Sign Ordinance, the erection, alteration, or relocation of any sign within this district shall require design review by the South Burlington Design Review Committee (DRC) and Development Review Board (DRB). Section 8 of the Sign Ordinance requires all property owners within the DS/CC Sign District to obtain a Master Signage Permit. The Design Review Committee has been unable to meet and so staff has moved the items to the DRB for review. Staff has included the standards for review. I. A Master Signage Permit shall be issued to the applicant by the DRB, prior to the issuance of any individual sign permit for the property. DESIGN REVIEW CRITERIA In reviewing an application for signage, the DRC and DRB shall consider the following: (a) Consistent Design 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846 4106 fax 802.846.4101 www sburl.com Design Review Application DR-08-06 Page 2 of 3 The design of a sign must be compatible and harmonious with the design of buildings on the subject property and nearby. The design of all signs on a property shall promote consistency in terms of color, graphic style, lighting, location, material and proportions. Staff finds that the design of the proposed signs are harmonious with the design of the buildings on the subject property and nearby. The applicant is proposing the same or similar colors that have been used for several years now. All sign support structures are natural wood with tapered concrete bases, similar to those used at public entries. (b) Promotion of City Center Goals Signs within the DSlCC Sign District should be of high aesthetic quality and pedestrian oriented. Staff finds that this criterion is being met. The concept sketch submitted depicts a scaled human being next to the freestanding sign. (c) Color & Texture The applicant is proposing that the background area for both freestanding and wall signs be forest green. All tenant names are proposed to be white, with either red, blue, yellow or green accents. Secondary text will utilize the same colors, possibly in reverse. 2. The predominant colors (i.e. central logos and principal text) of the freestanding and wall -mounted signs shall be limited to forest green backgrounds and white text. The text may have outlines or accents of red, blue, yellow, or kelly green. (d) Materials Used Pursuant to Section 20 of the Sign Ordinance, all signs shall be of substantial and sturdy construction, kept in good repair, and painted or cleaned as necessary to maintain a clean, safe, and orderly appearance. The proposed materials are acceptable. Sign support structures will use timbers and tapered concrete bases. The freestanding sign shall be composed of aluminum, with the option of using wood trim to match the building. The freestanding and wall -mounted sign depicting tenant names will be raised (cut-out) letters and logos, primarily plastic and aluminum. 3. Signs faces shall be plastic and/or aluminum. Wood trim shall be permitted. 4. All signs shall be kept in good repair; landscaping surrounding the freestanding signs shall be kept trimmed and neat and shall not obscure the text of the signs. (e) Wall Mounted Signs Section 10 of the Sign Ordinance governs the size and location of wall -mounted signs. Pursuant to Table 10-1 of the Sign Ordinance, a wall -mounted sign for a multi -tenant building or a multi -building lot with a master signage permit in any district with Design Review Application DR-08-06 Page 3 of 3 freestanding or landscape sign shall not exceed 15% of the area of the facade to which it is attached or 100 sq. ft., whichever is smaller. Pursuant to Table 10-1 of the Sign Ordinance, the total area of all wall -mounted signs on the subject property shall not exceed 10% of the area of principal public fagade of each building. The code officer shall ensure that these criteria are met when issuing individual sign permits for the property. Section 10(c) states that a wall -mounted sign shall not project above the roof or parapet of the building nor below the top of any first floor doorway unless permitted through the design review approval process. The proposed sign locations will not project above the roof or parapet of the subject building. In addition, the proposed signs will not extend below the top of any first floor doorways or windows. Thus, the proposed signage is in compliance with this requirement. Pursuant to Section 10(d), a wall -mounted sign shall not cover any opening or project beyond the top or end of any wall to which it is attached. The proposed signs are in compliance with this requirement. Section 10(g) stipulates that a wall -mounted sign shall not project from the wall in excess of 9". The proposed signs are in compliance with this requirement. M Freestanding Signs Section 9(h) states that free-standing signs along Dorset Street are to be located in a sign corridor that begins adjacent to the road Right -of -Way and runs sixteen (16) feet from the edge of the Right of Way toward the building face. In those instances where dimensions do not provide for a two (2) foot setback from the Right -of -Way before a sign support post can be located, it is permitted to erect a centered single pole mounted sign of which the road side edge of the sign is directly outside the R.O.W. line. The code officer shall ensure compliance with this criterion such that the subject sign shall be within this designated sign corridor. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Development Review Board approve Design Review Application #DR-08-06 subject to the numbered items included above. ' Greer Family LLC a p o R E o concept sketch for 12 foot tall freestanding sign 802-872-9906 32 square foot sign panel ©2008 designsignsvt.com July 7, 2008 Greer Family LLC Dorset Street elevation I N G O R P O N A t E 0 802-872-9906 July 7, 2008 © 2008 designsignsAcom K ' �-'- 802-872-9906 © 2008 designsignsvt.com Greer Family LLC South elevation, east end June 26, 2008 } Permit Number DR -- APPLICATION for MASTER SIGNAGE PERMIT City of South Burlington ALL information requested in this application must be completed in full. If you do not provide all of the requested information with this application form, as well as the required plans and design information, the City will not schedule a review of the application before the Design Review Committee. Application for: " Initial Master Signage Permit after June 3, 2002 Amendment of Master Signage Permit Individual Sign, pursuant to Master Signage Permit #DR- - Property & Street Address: 91-/8 -0025e, T 6 T • , ,;- Tax parcel ID # (from Tax Assessor or Planning & Zoning): erty Owner of Record (name as shown on deed, mailing address, phone, r Reer` Fam .jl , Lt1; , RI k), -,1 / ),.I e Applicant, if not Owner (name, mailing address, phone, fax #): Contact person (name, mailing address, phone, fax #) Is the applicant an existing or future tenant of the building? Application i seeki g ap royal to: A cl a V?P rX /,\Q. r b $G Z - 3 G - 2,3ct- _Yes ✓ No tdo ll '0 f n q r'h 4) / V'M_/ _ 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. r � Apple I At Propert ding Owner Please do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION:'/ �Op_ I have reviewed this applicationTand find it to be Code ficer or Designee complete incomplete W, I Date Greer Family LLC Subject property: 10 Dorset Street July 7, 2008 Design Parameters for Master Signage Permit: Freestanding Sign. Sign Size: The total allowed sign area for a freestanding sign in The Dorset Street / City Center Sign District is 32 square feet, with maximum height of 12 feet. Section 9(h) of the ordinance allows for a two (2) foot setback from the property line. Colors: The background area for all tenants is forest green. All tenant names are to be white, with outlines and/or accents of red, blue, yellow or kelly green. Secondary text may be in reverse (red, blue, yellow or kelly green text on a white background). Material: All tenant names will be raised (cut out) letters and logos, primarily plastic and aluminum. Structure: Sign support structure will use timbers and tapered concrete base similar to those used at public entries. Sign faces will be aluminum, with the option of using wood trim to match the building. Lighting_ Downlights on gooseneck arms will illuminate the sign face from above. Light fixtures will match those used on the building signs. Wall Signs: Sign Area: The area and distribution of wall signs is subject to Table 10-1; which allows for a "total area of all wall signs" equal to "10% of principle public facade of each building." The "maximum area of an individual wall sign" is limited to "15 percent of facade to which it is attached or 100 sq. ft., whichever is smaller." The total allowed sign area for a wall signs is 250.5 square feet, based on a principal public facade area of 2,505 square feet. Colors: The background area for all tenants is forest green. All tenant names are to be white, with outlines and/or accents of red, blue, yellow or kelly green. Secondary text may be in reverse (red, blue, yellow or kelly green text on a white background). Material: All tenant names will be raised (cut out) letters and logos, primarily plastic and aluminum. 1 Location of signs: All wall signs will be installed on the face of a 5 foot high sign band. In the case of wall signs on the south wall, rear portion of the building, a 5 foot high extension of the sign band will be erected in the same vertical plane as the sign band, to which that tenant's sign will be attached. Li hg tina: Downlights on gooseneck arms will illuminate the sign face from above. Light fixtures will match those used on the freestanding sign. Hanging Signs: Two-sided hanging signs will be attached to entry porticos on the south wall to identify entrances otherwise difficult to see from the Dorset Street curb cut. Sign Area: Sign area for all hanging signs will be deducted from allowed wall sign area, and will count as one of the two signs allowed per tenant. Colors: The background area for all tenants is forest green. All tenant names are to be white, with outlines and/or accents of red, blue, yellow or kelly green. Secondary text may be in reverse (red, blue, yellow or kelly green text on a white background). Material: All tenant names will be painted and/or self-adhesive vinyl on aluminum or plastic background panel. Lighting: No lighting. Directional Signs: One sign per curb cut, with graphics on both sides. Sign Area: Sign area is not to exceed three square feet. Colors: The background area for is forest green. All text is to be white, with outlines and/or accents of red, blue, yellow or kelly green. Material: All tenant names will be painted and/or self-adhesive vinyl on aluminum or plastic background panel. Lighting: No lighting. Angle U.L. LJed. All products are High Quality Aluminum Construction. 0 7 3/4 u ,n A807 Max Watt100 IA810 Max Watt150 12" A812 Max Watt 200 *INCANDESCENT, MEDIUM BASE IS STANDARD ON ALL FIXTURES UNLESS 14" A814 Max Watt 200 ED OTHERWISE. / STEPS TO EASY ORDERING: order onliing.com 1. Select shade size and color - See page 34 - for color options, see page 58 - for photometric data. 2. Choose how you are going to attach your shade to the wall, ceiling or post. 3. Select any accessories you would like - see page 35. 4. Determine Light Source - For Fluorescent and H.I.D., they will require a ballast that will be housed in a canopy or outdoor weathertight box. Please see page 54 for your choices. If you choose Incandescent, leave the light source blank and you will be finished with the ordering process. Angle Mounting Sources 1/2 Arm and E1 Order Numbers E2 also pictured E3 on E4 pages 28-37 E16 E17 3/4Arai Eli L10 E E12 E1 .`', . El 8. E1SSC.' E19 E21 Post & Wall PM10 PM20 PM30 PM40 PM50 WM35 WM45 WM55 WM55SC WM75 WM85 WM85SCBP WM85SC WM85BP Stems -1/2" 2ST18 IST24 I,ST86 2ST48 (19" to 48" Lengths) Stems - 3/4" 3ST18 3ST24 3ST36 3ST48 (18" to 48" Lengths) Ceiling Mount- Cords BLC WHC RWHC _ RBHC Ceiling Mount- Stems SLC STC RLC RTC , available in 112" or 314" RWT (H.I.D. Weatherti ht Ballast Box) Angle Accessories also GR07 •d on GR10 pages GR12 GR14 Wire Grills Back Plate SO. CB Back Plate Cover CBC Swivel SWL 112" only Glass Order Number 100GL JJ Glass Texture Frosted Clear Prismatic White FR CL PR WH Shade Stvie & Size Accessory Mounting Source A811-49 E5-49 CBC-49 _T Color 6 CALL: 1-800-548-3227 FAX:1-800-242-5483 SURF/ORDER:WWW.ANPLIGHTING.COM Arm Extens' )ns Add a scroll to your arm, consult factory. All arms come with cast back plate. All fixtures are U.L. approved for wet location when used with arms, wall brackets, stems and posts. High quality alumi- num construction. All product is powder coated. 1/2 " Diameter Arm Extensions E1 % 81/211 18" E3 r 71/2" / 14" 5" 243/4" E2 45 1 71/2" 131/2" IT / E4 35" W1 450 41/2" / 141/2" 8„ 221/a" E17 I61/4" 32" Turn buckle, cable and eye bolt included. E16 77 450 900 301/2" 900 450 STC included. 3/4" Diameter Arm Extensions E5 1 121/2' 20" 34 13" 401/4" T 2I21/4" 1 271/2" E6 1 460 5" 9" i 221/4" E12 900 ELBOW I. .I 371/2" E10 n55�' 18" 541/4" E11 35" 430 8r T / 18" 10" 321/4" E13 1 91, 35" / 90° 251/4" E21 26" E7 321/Z � J�'� 9' T I 48114' E 88 1 9„ 22Vz" ! I 31" E18SC 9° / 221/2" 95" 31" E14 E8 1 19 107/e" 8" 12„ i 204' 22" 13" / 72" 101, 41/2„ 211/2" CALL:1-800-548-3227 FAX:1-800-242-5483 31 SURF/ORDER:WWW.ANPLIGHTING.COM ,,00 VERMONT State of Vermont AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES Department of Environmental Conservation Waste Management Division 103 South Main Street/West Building Waterbury, VT 05671-0404 (8o2) 241-3879 FAX (802) 241-3296 michael.b.smith@state.vt.us 29 December 2009 Ms. Donna Kinville South Burlington Clerk 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 RE: Notice of Proposed Corrective Action Plan for the Greer's Dry Cleaning site in South Burlington, Vermont Dear Ms. Kinville: The environmental consultants for the Greer's Dry Cleaning -hazardous site located at 8-10 Dorset Street in South Burlington have submitted a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) to the Department of Environmental Conservation, Waste Management Division, for the remediation of shallow groundwater and soil contamination that is present in the subsurface at this site. I am enclosing a News Brief and a copy of the draft CAP. The Public Notice of this proposal is provided to the City of South Burlington in accordance with the Corrective Action Plan Guidance Document of the Waste Management Division (WMD) of the Department of Environmental Conservation. The WMD requests that you post the enclosed News Brief and this letter in the Town Offices for a period of two (2) weeks. The purpose of this is to allow the public to review and comment on this proposal. Also, please make the Corrective Action Plan document available to the public for review and comment. Any comments or questions on the proposed activity should be forwarded to the Waste Management Division by 15 January 2010 to: Michael B. Smith, Project Manager Waste Management Division 103 South Main Street/ West Building Waterbury, VT 05671-0404 Thank you for your assistance in this public comment process. Please feel free to call me with any questions or comments at (802) 241-3879. Sincerely, Michael B. Smith Hydrogeologist Regional Offices - Barre/Essex Jct./Rutland/Springfield/St. Johnsbury PUBLIC NOTICE Environmental Remediation Project Former Greer's House of Dry Cleaning 8-10 Dorset Street So. Burlington, Vermont The professional hydrogeologic and environmental consulting firm of Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. (LBG) is preparing a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) for the Former Greer's House of Dry Cleaning, located at 8-10 Dorset Street, in South Burlington, VT (the Site). The CAP is being prepared on behalf the Site owner, Greer Family, LLC, to reduce volatile organic impacts to soil and groundwater from the former use as a dry cleaning facility using the solvent tetrachloroethylene (PCE). Dissolved PCE and ganglia is present on -Site. The CAP is a remediation program that will use soil vacuum extraction coupled with air sparging to remove and treat PCE contaminated vapors. The program will also include a groundwater containment system to mitigate the discharge of PCE-contaminated water through the storm drain system. Water conveyed from the underdrain will be treated via activated carbon filtration. Soil vapors removed from the ground will be treated via carbon absorption. Moisture accumulated through soil vapor extraction will also be treated with the water phase treatment. Groundwater and soil vapor will undergo separate treatment processes before being discharged to the on -Site stormwater catch basin and the atmosphere, respectively. The vacuum extraction system is estimated to operate for a period of approximately 20 months. Throughout the remediation program, LBG will monitor the effects of the remediation efforts by collecting groundwater, surface water and vapor samples on a tri-annual basis. Additionally, the treated water and air will be monitored to ensure that the treatment systems are working properly. The goal of the CAP is to achieve acceptable water quality with respect to PCE concentrations at the first sampling station in the unnamed tributary that receives water from the storm drain system. LBG will continue to monitor groundwater and surface water quality for at least one year to ensure that PCE concentrations remain low. The Sate of Vermont Sites Management Section (VT SMS) will evaluate LBG's progress and monitoring results throughout the project. Copies of the CAP will be available to the public at the VT SMS offices in Waterbury, VT. Mr. Michael B. Smith can be reached at 802-241-3879 or michael.b.smith@state.vt.us for questions or copies of the CAP. Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. �oct rd AGENCY OF NATTTRAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Oir ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION 103 SOUTH MAIN STREET WATERBURY, VT 05671-0405 NOTICE: PUBLIC NOTICE NUMBER: PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD PERMITTEE: PERMIT NUMBER: FILE NUMBER: NATURE: VOLUME: RECEIVING WATER: EXPIRATION DATE: Draft Discharge Permit 3-1531 April 19, 2010 through May 19, 2010 PERMITTEE INFORMATION Greer Family, LLC 81 Mapleleaf Farm Rd Underhill, VT 05489 3-1531 04-14 DISCHARGE INFORMATION Treated contaminated groundwater 14,400 gpd, monthly average Centennial Brook March 31, 2015 DESCRIPTION: This is a draft discharge permit proposed for issuance to the Greer Family, LLC for the discharge of treated contaminated groundwater from remediation activities at a dry cleaning facility located at 8 Dorset Street, South Burlington, VT to Centennial Brook. TENTATIVE DETERMINATIONS Tentative determinations regarding effluent limitations and other conditions to be applied on the pending Vermont permit have been made by the State VermontAgency Standards will be metf Natural . (VANR). The limitations imposed will assure that the Vermont Quality FURTHER INFORMATION The complete application, proposed permit, and other information are on file; and may be inspected at the be obtained by calling (802) 241-3822; cost of copies VANR, Waterbury Office. Copies of the permit may is 10 cents per page or at www.anr.state.vt.us/dec/ww/wwmd.cfm. Office hours are 7:45 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.. Monday through Friday PUBLIC COMMENTS/PUBLIC HEARINGS w*! 2 Public comments on the proposed permit are invited. Comments should be suuii_. , _ .-- ;. .. ,_,_ address listed below. Comments may also be faxed to: 802-241-2596 or submitted by e-mail using the e- mail comment provisions included at http://www.anr.state.vt.us/dec/ww/Drafts.htm All comments received prior to we ucau_.ii� be considered in formulations of the final determinations. Any submitted comments should include the permit number next to the VANR address on the envelope and on the first page of comments. Department of Environmental Conservation Wastewater Management Division Sewing Building 103 South Main Street Waterbury, VT 05671-0405 The comment period will close at the end of the business day 4:30 pm, May 19, 2010. Any person, prior to the above date, may submit a written request to this office for an informal public hearing to consider the proposed permit. Any hearing request shall indicate the interest of the party filing the request and the reasons why a hearing is warranted. A hearing will be held only if the responses to this notice indicate significant public interest. FINAL ACTION/RIGHTS TO APPEAL TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COURT At the conclusion of the public notice period and after consideration of additional information received during the public notice period, the VANR will make a final determination to issue or to deny the permit. Pursuant to 10 V.S.A. Chapter 220, any appeal of this decision must be filed with the clerk of the Environmental Court within 30 days of the date of the decision. The appellant must attach to the Notice of Appeal, the entry fee of $250.00, payable to the state of Vermont. The Notice of Appeal must specify the parties taking the appeal and the statutory provision under which each party claims party status; must designate the act or decision appealed from; must name the Environmental Court; and must be signed by the appellant or their attorney. In addition, the appeal must give the address or location and the description of the property, project or facility with which the appeal is concerned and the name of the applicant or the permit involved in the appeal. The appellant must also serve a copy of the Notice of Appeal in accordance with Rule 5(b)(4)(B) of the Vermont Rules for Environmental Court Proceedings. For further information, see the Vermont Rules for Environmental Court Proceedings, available on line at www.vermontjudiciM.org. The address for the Environmental Court is: 2418 Airport Road - Suite 1, Barre, Vermont 05641, (Tel. 802.828.1660). Justin G. Johnson, Commissioner Department of Environmental Conservation ,00�o VERMONT State of Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation Waste Management Division 103 South Main Street/West Building Waterbury, VT 05671-0404 (802) 241-3879 FAX (802) 241-3296 michael.b.smith@state.vt.us 29 December 2009 Ms. Donna Kinville South Burlington Clerk 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 A GENCY OF NA TURA L RESOURCES RE: Notice of Proposed Corrective Action Plan for the Greer's Dry Cleaning site in South Burlington, Vermont Dear Ms. Kinville: The environmental consultants for the Greer's Dry Cleaning hazardous site located at 8-10 Dorset Street in South Burlington have submitted a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) to the Department of Environmental Conservation, Waste Management Division, for the remediation of shallow groundwater and soil contamination that is present in the subsurface at this site. I am enclosing a News Brief and a copy of the draft CAP. The Public Notice of this proposal is provided to the City of South Burlington in accordance with the Corrective Action Plan Guidance Document of the Waste Management Division (WMD) of the Department of Environmental Conservation. The WMD requests that you post the enclosed News Brief and this letter in the Town Offices for a period of two (2) weeks. The purpose of this is to allow the public to review and comment on this proposal. Also, please make the Corrective Action Plan document available to the public for review and comment. Any comments or questions on the proposed activity should be forwarded to the Waste Management Division by 15 January 2010 to: Michael B. Smith, Project Manager Waste Management Division 103 South Main Street/ West Building Waterbury, VT 05671-0404 Thank you for your assistance in this public comment process. Please feel free to call me with any questions or comments at (802) 241-3879. Sincerely, Michael B. Smith Hydrogeologist Regional Offices — Barre/Essex Jct./Rutland/Springfield/St. Johnsbury Page 1 of 1 ray From: donna Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2009 10:40 AM To: Paul Conner; Ray; Chuck Hafter Subject: FW: Corrective Action Plan for the Greer's Dry Cleaning site imn South Burlington Attachments: 1229.smith.Itr.to.town.re.post.draft.cap.pdf I am unsure if anyone else in the city should receive this notice, so please forward it on if appropriate. Donna Donna Kinville City of South Burlington City Clerk and Treasurer (802)846-4119 From: Smith, Michael B [mailto: Michael. B.Smith@state.vt.us] Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2009 10:23 AM To: donna Subject: Corrective Action Plan for the Greer's Dry Cleaning site imn South Burlington Ms. Kinville: I have just posted a letter to you with a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) and News Brief for the Hazardous Site: Greer's Dry Cleaning (#20053395) located on Dorset Street in South Burlington. I have attached a copy of the letter to this email in pdf format. I would have attached an electronic copy of the CAP but it is 10 MB in size. The site is contaminated primarily with the chlorinated solvent Tetrachloroethene (PCE) that was used as a cleaning agent when dry cleaning was conducted in the building. The contamination does not at this point pose an immediate unacceptable risk to human health but must be remediated as per state regulation. In the attached letter I have requested that you make the news brief and CAP available in the City offices for 14 days so the public has a chance to review the document and send us comments. Thank you for your help with this. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions. Michael Michael B. Smith VT DEC Waste Management Division 103 South Main Street/West Building Waterbury, VT 05671-0404 802 241-3879 michael.b.smith state.vt.us 12/29/2009 r ,0 southburlinoon PLANNING & ZONING September 25, 2008 Jory Curran 81 Maple Leaf Farm Road Underhill, VT 05489 Re: Site Plan Application #SP-08-92 Dear Ms. Curran: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision rendered by the Administrative Officer on September 25, 2008 (effective September 25, 2008). Please note the conditions of a roval includin that a zonin ermit must be obtained within six (6) months. If you have any questions, please contact me Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Brown Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802,846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com i southburlington PLANNING & ZONING June 18, 2008 Jory Curran Michael Dugan, AIA Architect 25 Pinecrest Drive Essex Junction, VT 05452 Re: Greer Property 10 Dorset Street Dear Ms. Curran: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision rendered by the Administrative Officer on June 17, 2008 (effective June 17, 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 M onough Brown Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com Permit Number SP- 0 0 - SLQ CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW &.13-20©g�, 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 #) 8+T • 441 Z 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #) VO(-. 413 Frp aJg (p 2 , let. Co 3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) X.1. A. AR. UWr 25 PcUr�C[2r�r�DR �G.��yU', Vt 0545 Z 1�8 ��o _ a T$ max , 4) CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, address, phone & fax #): U 5) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: Le) `L"�i .4Iert +,- 6) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) 0 154O — Cp 8 —1 p 7) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) Existing Uses on Property (including description pnd size of each se arate use) kA;r (Z4W) �Z�1 U:;A-UMJ G I eS4�l T-&rJ i Lill 1-4 c , o� tom. _, u� b) Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain) LtAcr, (3-f2=8) .WU d:,A C er- -tern --Ar r,— c) Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) t5(008 lip, d) Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine) 32_ < iA k e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain f) Number of employees & company vehicles (existing and proposed, note office versus non -office employees):_ 1 J!i't 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: �, 85 F-.> Sq. Ft. a) Building: Existing 'Z&.S % / sq. ft. Proposed 2Cv.7 % l I SCoo2 sq. ft. b) Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing �_�% / 50, ( 1(&55 sq. ft. Proposed qg, l _% /'60, 1sq. ft. c) Front yard (along each street) Existing 1 I. 412' % / P51(o. 5 sq. ft. 238 Xsb — 11,q `F Proposed % _1316 , 5 sq. ft. Coez6bu 131(01515f• 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 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): l 1) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 'T 00 `7 1O.30 lit '940 --q j . M 2 12) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION:_ M -Ic� S 13) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: Ayco 2003 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) CkAU' ta4ktk0It,-W-'?-0.['70x 2-1UP 50.C3UaWL)6;MJt Vr, 65404 C�42L� JA1�>CT'�zJClk� S 80 ��Oc1(�� �oJE tZp Gib [Qalut�t In • D 5464- t�S , 21�1.�r�thfi tid . gU QUID a rOr(, �t • D5�03 �Wkk) lWvqft fit, qD '- "e-;Wt9 277 C04= eA RA Ttt�4, 0q. 1ZgD 1 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 APPLICANT 142�� ojjkh� SIGIATJJR.0 OF PROPERTY OWNER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: �O REVIEW AUTHORITY: ❑ Development Review Board Administrative Officer I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: Complete //?„ ❑ Incomplete i F of Planning & Zoning or Designee 4 SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4io6 January 18, 2007 Michael Dugan, AIA 25 Pinecrest Drive Essex Junction, VT 05452 Re: DRB Minutes Dear Mr. Dugan: For your records, enclosed is a copy of the approved minutes from the December 19, 2006 Development Review Board meeting. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, 6dN K4ffj* Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. i &ec-c CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 19 DECEMBER 2006 Mr. Plumeau moved to approve Site Plan Application #SP-06-77 of Catherine Antley subject to the stipulations in the draft motion. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 3.�itpe Plan Application #SP-06-79 of Michael Dugan to amend a previously proved plan for a 15,608 sq. ft. multi -use commercial building. The amendment consists of 1) revising the parking layout, and 2) adding an umbrella approval for 18 possible future uses, 10 Dorset Street: Mr. Dugan identified the property as the Greer facility at the top of Dorset St. They would like an umbrella permit for allowable uses in the zone so they can have flexibility in getting tenants. There have been some parking spaces added since 1999. Mr. Belair has counted 70, and the plan will be revised to this number. The applicant proposes to move the Mills & Greer entrance to the north face in order to draw parking to that area. Mr. Farley moved to approve Site Plan Application #SP-06-79 of Michael Dugan subject to the stipulations in the draft motion. Mr. Knudsen seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Continued Public Hearing: Preliminary plat 4SD-06-97 of Nate Hayward for a planned unit development consisting of eight two-family dwellings (16 units), 61 IDX Drive: As Mr. Knudsen would have to recuse himself for this hearing, there would not be a quorum present, so the item was continued until the meeting of 2 January 2007. 7. Continued Public Hearing: Final Plat #SD-06-102 of Bensen Development, LP, to amend a planned unit development consisting of two commercial buildings (9,280 sq. ft. & 3,672 sq. ft.) and 16 multi -family dwellings in three buildings. The amendment consists of constructing a nine unit multi -family dwelling, 5 Executive Drive: Mr. Bensen said the remaining issues involved the Water District and Public Works Director's concerns. The Water District has now issued a new letter, and everything is OK. Regarding the concerns of Public Works, Mr. Bensen said he would add some green space at the entrance to separate the building from the road. -2- CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 January 11, 2007 Michael Dugan, AIA 25 Pinecrest Drive Essex Junction, VT 05452 Re: Tenant Changes — 10 Dorset Street Dear Mr. Dugan: This is in response to your letter of January 10, 2007 requesting approval for tenant changes at 10 Dorset Street. The changes requested are as follows: 1. The existing Mills & Greer, retail tenant will reduce the amount of space they occupy from 4723 sq. ft. to 4592 sq. ft. and relocate to space previously used for personal service use. 2. The existing dry cleaning business (personal service use) will be reduced in size from 8454 sq. ft. to 2015 sq. ft. 3. The remaining 6601 sq. ft. will be vacant until a tenant is found. Pursuant to condition #6 of your 12/19/06 site plan approval, the above changes are hereby approved. Since the retail use will relocate to space previously used for personal service use, a zoning permit is required. Please contact Ray Belair to process your permit application. Sincerely, uli Beth Hinds Director of Planning and Zoning E MichaelDugan A.I.A. H I T E C T • 25 Pinecrest Drive Essex Junction, YF 05452 802.878.0070 802-878.0080 Fax: 802-878.0030 E mail:mduganarch a aol.com 61 Bank Street St. Albans, VT 05478 802.521.1211 January 10, 2007 Julie Beth Hinds, AICP Director of Planning And Zoning South Burlington Department of Planning & Zoning 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: 10 Dorset Street #SP-06-79 15,608 SF Greer Family LLC Dear Julie Beth: On December 19, 2006, the above referenced property was granted approval to amend a previously approved plan. The amendment consists of a revised parking layout and an umbrella permit for 18 possible future uses. This letter seeks approval for the following: 1. The existing Mills & Greer retail space of 4723 sf. located in the northwest corner of the complex is to be relocated to the south east comer of the complex using 4592 sf. of space. The new entry location was approved December 19, 2006. r k_ Y,-\� 4, -, - . ; �1.r a 2. The existing laundromat of 2400 sf. shall remain (fi�t�sesent location. 3. The existing drycleaning business shall be reduced in size from 8494 sf. to 2015 sf All All processing has been moved off the property. 4. The remaining 6601 sf. of open space in the north west comer shall be available for lease under the provisions of the December 19, 2006 umbrella permit. If other information is required, please contact this office as soon as possible. W Micha a A / \ | -� - ---'--- - --`r^-�~~�-------- - ---=����~�� - ---- ArAlt l - - ---------�--�z-' �---^-^-�--^-~-�-- -- --- ---------------------- - - '---- ----- ------- ` - � -'--------�T--'---�---- --'-'----- -- -� ----'------'---------'-----------'-----------� � � � | -- --� - '-- -�+r---'- - -''-' ---- - ------------------'---------------'----------- � |' - -----------�7--------------------------- -----' ----------'--- ----�--------�----'-- �.� ../ ---- ---'- i -- - - --' - --- - - ---- ---- -----'- ' ... �i' 440 Michael Lawrence Associates Landscape Architects / Site Planning Consultants December 15, 2006 Michael Dugan AIA Architect 25 Pinecrest Drive Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 RE: Estimate for New Landregp Existing Commercial Building at 10 Dorset Street South Burlington Vermont Dear Michael, Here is a cost estimate for the plantings you show on the drawing entitled, "Greer Family LLC Site Plan, dated December 6, 2006. Ou Scientific Name Common Name Size Unit Sub-T 25 Euonymus alatus `Compactus' Dwarf Burning Bush 2 eal 50/ea $1,250 26 Thuja occidentalis `Woodwardi' Glove Arborvitae 18 24 in 60/ea $1, 60 Total $2810 I think the compact variety of Burning Bush and globe variety of Arborvitae are good choices for this three foot wide planting area. Both plants can handle light conditions ranging from full sun to full shade, drought as well as occasional flooding and both can be kept at three to four feet in height by pruning. If I can give you any information, please call. Sincerely yours, , ' `' " V " C/ ✓ Michael Charles fv Lawrence ASLA tEMBER American Society of Landscape Architects Eight Linden Lane Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 P/F 802.878.2778 mikeiawrence(4adelpho net CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 December 26, 2006 Michael Dugan, AIA 25 Pinecrest Drive Essex Junction, VT 05452 Re: Site Plan Application #SP-06-79 10 Dorset Street Dear Mr. Dugan: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision of the above referenced project approved by the Development Review Board on December 19, 2006. Please note the conditions of approval including that you obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT: 7005 3110 0004 4484 6807 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 December 14, 2006 Michael Dugan, AIA 25 Pinecrest Drive Essex Junction, VT 05452 Re: #SP-06-79 10 Dorset Street Dear Mr. Dugan: 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, December 19, 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 McD"hhk Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Report preparation date: December 11, 2006 \drb\sit\greer\siteplan.doc Plans received: December 7, 2006 10 Dorset Street SITE PLAN APPLICATION #SP-06-79 Agenda # 5 Meeting date: December 19, 2006 Owner Applicant Greer Family LLC Michael Dugan, AIA 81 Maple Leaf Farm Road 25 Pinecrest Drive Underhill. VT 05489 Essex Junction, VT 05452 Property Information Tax Parcel 0570-00010 Commercial 1 Zoninq District Location Map c � CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING Michael Dugan, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking site plan approval to amend a previously approved plan for a 15,608 sq. ft. multi -use commercial building. The amendment consists of: 1) revising the parking layout, and 2) adding an umbrella approval for 18 possible future uses, 10 Dorset Street. Associate Planner Cathyann LaRose and Administrative Officer Ray Belair, referred to herein as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted on December 7, 2006 and have the following comments. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements: There is no new construction planned and so staff need not assess setback information. Additionally, it is difficult to evaluate coverage information. The information submitted as part of this application does not match the coverages approved as part of the most recent site plan approval on December 5, 1989. Since that time, Dorset Street has been widened and the subject lot has been reduced. Additionally, the site plan submitted includes parking in areas which are currently being utilized as green space. The subject lot already exceeds the allowable coverage in the district. The Development Review Board does not have the authority to allow an increase in coverage. 1. The parking spaces shown to the northeast of the building which do not exist today should be removed from the proposed site plan. Additionally, there are trees which exist as small islands in the northern parking lot which do not appear on the site plan. They should be shown and shall not be removed. Any parking spaces shown in their place shall be removed. 2. The site plan shall be revised so as to accurately reflect all existing ground conditions including trees. No trees shall be removed from the site. Parking spaces shown in their place shall be removed from the site plan. SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Section 14.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations establishes the following general review standards for all site plan applications: (a) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and adequate parking areas. The site is permitted, in accordance with the most site plan approved in December 1989, for 59 spaces. The applicant is proposing some additional parking spaces. Staff finds the addition of the parking spaces to the eastern edge of the building to be permissible and in accordance with the SBLDR. However, as already noted, there are issues with at least eight parking spaces to the north of the building. Staff cannot assess the parking issue any further until it is known how many spaces will be available which are in accordance with the SBLDR. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING (b) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings to the greatest extent practicable. The existing parking is predominantly to the sides of the building. The proposal to relocate the main entrance to the side is harmonious with this criterion; it is the hope of staff and the applicant that patrons to the site will be more likely to utilize the parking to the north as the result of this change. (c) Without restricting the permissible limits of the applicable zoning district, the height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and existing or adjoining buildings. The height of the building will remain unchanged and below 35 feet. (d) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. No changes to the existing buildings are being proposed as part of this application which should require new utility services. However, if any are proposed, they shall be in compliance with this criterion. (e) The DRB shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural characteristics, landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of different architectural styles. The proposed project does not fall within a design review district. However, there is very little change proposed to the architecture or materials of the building. (f) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain, and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. See staff comments above. Site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: (a) The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial of collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. There are already sufficient shared accesses to this site via surrounding properties. No additional changes are necessary. (b) Electric, telephone and other wire -served utility lines and service connections shall be underground. Any utility installations remaining above ground shall be located so as to have a harmonious relation to neighboring properties and to the site. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING (c) All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling or other requirements, shall be accessible, secure and properly screened with opaque fencing to ensure that trash and debris do not escape the enclosure(s). The applicant is proposing to install a fence to screen the existing dumpsters. However, it is not clear if the fence extends to the east of the dumpster. It should extend around all four sides of the dumpster enclosure to as to comply with the criterion above. 3. The plans shall be revised to provide screening on all sides of the dumpster. (d) Landscaping and Screening Requirements As there is no building construction proposed for this site, there are no new minimum landscaping requirements. However, the applicant is proposing several new rows of arborvitae and burning bush. Pursuant to Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations, the plans shall depict snow storage areas that will minimize the potential for run-off. Adequate snow storage areas are shown on the plans. Lighting Pursuant to Section 13.07(A) of the Land Development Regulations, all exterior lighting shall be shielded and downcasting to prevent light from spilling onto adjacent properties and rights -of -way. The applicant has stated that there is no new lighting proposed as part of this application. Staff has visited the site and the existing lighting is in compliance with this criterion. Traffic The site is located in Traffic Overlay District 1 and shall be subject to a traffic budget. The property shall be grandfathered for the existing traffic generation. Based on ITE 7th Edition trip generation figures, the existing site is estimated to generate 2.71 trip ends per 1,000 SF for a total of 42.3 p.m. peak vehicle trip ends. This is in excess of the amount which would be allowed for a vacant lot in the same overlay district. Therefore, the site shall not be permitted to generate more than 42.3 PM peak vehicle trip ends. 4. The site shall be limited to 42.3 PM peak hour vehicle trip ends. Umbrella Approval The applicant has requested umbrella approval for the following uses ■ Personal service ■ Print shop ■ Radio/TV studio ■ Restaurant- short order and standard ■ Retail ■ Tavern/Night club ■ Indoor recreation facility ■ Artist production studio CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD ■ Convenience Store- 3000 SF or less ■ Indoor Theater ■ General Office ■ Hospice ■ Municipal Facility ■ Personal Instruction Facility ■ Place of Worship DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Staff finds no problems with the requested uses, recognizing that they will each be subject to the limitations on traffic and parking resulting from the site. Staff believes that a more accurate site plan is necessary before the Board can render a decision on this application. Parking is a substantial issue for this site and should be resolved first and foremost. Staff recommends that the South Burlington Development Review Board continue Site Plan Application #SP-06-79 so that the applicant may address the numbered items in the "comments" section of this document. Respectfully submitted, Cathyan LaRose, Associate Planner Copy to: Michael Dugan, applicant �--411 1 l NORTH -ELEVATION 1/8" = 1' m® RECEe V E� DEC ®? 2006 City o fso gUrlin 9ton - N/F N OIL Cb. INC. 0- 1055 EXISTING TREES W Z A o fi+ o z o 0 F � z 1 U N/F QHARLES & JANET PERIS 1810-01087 I NRW LIGHT POLE •—SNOW STOMGE TC['G IAAN9VONMPR N/F TE:KRAM PARTNERS 0570`-00100 1" = 201 -0" PLANT St-dEDULE QTY 0 ARBORVITAE 4' MAX HGT 26 O BURNING BUSH 2 GAL 25 R PROJECT S E us Z ���UstoM 422,,%AT E t LOCATION MAP -1. 1: �9e a�= se` � S�2 'y3b b F<5�. N/F LODGING NORTH INC. • • 1810-01117 . ; GENERAL INFORMATION LOT SIZE: 135 ACRE 58853 SF ZONE: COMMERCIAL 1 BUILDING COVERAGE: 26.5% 15608 SF BUILDING, PAVING, ETC: 82.7 % 48,7065 SF FRONT YARD COVERAGE: 11.5% 13765 SF PARKING REOUMEMENTS a C PERSONAL SERVICES - 4415 SF @ 4/1000 GFA = 18 SPACES a RETAIL - MILLS & GREER - 4592 SF Q 5/1000 GFA = 23 SPACES ^ W W PERMTITED RETAIL - 6601 SF Q 5/1000 GFA = 33 SPACES TOTAL SPACES REQUIRED- 74SPACES TOTAL SPACES PROVIDED - 72 SPACES z l O F � Fri a H REWD DEC. IS, I006 NOTE: US EMBER6,2006 4 a GENERAL CONTRACIDRS VERIFY TO ALL DEIffiNSION, o ON THIS DRAWING PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. GENERAL CONTRACTOR +., SP1 IS TO VEREN ALL SITE CONDITIONS PRIOR CONSTRUCTION. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4106 December 8, 2006 Robert Smith 23 Concord Street Plattsburg, NY 12901 Dear Property Owner: Enclosed is a copy of the draft agenda (please check our website www.sburl.com for the official agenda, posted the Friday before the meeting) for the December 19, 2006 Development Review Board meeting. It includes a proposal that abuts your property. 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 scheduled public meeting. Sincerely, C- I Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. Permit Number SP--O-(,/ V 7' - 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 #) 45cfq -414 1 Z V'1- 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #) VOL 40/3 7& 55G 2•17.00 3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) MV44ACLPONJ A.tA. Ai"M� - 4) CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, address, phone & fax #): Slime /o 3 5) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 10 <Cb25E�T='j- 6) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) C) 59 O - © 8 ---1 D 7) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) Existing Uses on Property .(including description and size of each separate use) G�LUNT�24d� Vir-,i -qA444 wa(8sgtl,-aua.S Z -4f�1 -- _ -- b) Propose se�n grope (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain) WW Z' ( Z4m) , MCU.51Ni WG ( W15) teW(,- LA L4.6c (45g2) 'R IGrOW 05 5 OvL /1AMP4US P LA57 c) otal buig square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) zaooStF d) Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine) _ 32,"47- 6�?w � (.,5;VE §r _ _ e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain)_ f) Number of employees & company vehicles (existing and proposed, note office versus non -office employees): 16 it 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: 15M0860 Sq. Ft. a) Building: Existing /Ue.4' % l i5loo$ sq. ft. Proposed 5- % / / S6D 8 sq. ft. b) Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing 85. ! % / :5'C 1/6- G sq. ft. Proposed 65, / % l 60116,5' sq. ft. c) Front yard (along each street) Existing //. S % / / 37(o,�'sq. ft. vp0)( 5-0 = 1/700 5F Proposed /! 5 % IS U. "sq. ft. GAMX) ! 3 7 &5; 5iF d) Total area to be disturbed during construction (sq. ft.) AJIA * 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): $ .��''Q,Can N&W4 Mr1e.5 6v«l�s, b) Landscaping: $ -0S2:00 �/ c) Other site improvements (please list with cost): 10) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC fi a) Average daily traffic for entire property (in and out): �O b) A.M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): c) P.M. Peale hour for entire property (In and out):_20 11) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: /6 030 trot 3.'00 — > S: o 0 '044, 104 12) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION:_ /V --V 13) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: �iU �£ Z07 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) i i4(.�/F►'/1� 4/G GO • O . F30 X 2/Z ro C-70. WW'1-1Aj o7 0,0, [1T QS4Ca � 35' GHfh2Lt'� ✓�4�lC!' L2�+2Xl�SlS 5pC1lVCGal—Rp LOLr,IA(&1424rAl </«G «/7 6U&Z45MV Zo. O. ,gU,C�(,,iit«oli��tl, [,7`• OS40� 07. aS1463 . 4464(10V 7*0�7 1,'-I d� CIO R,>-0-72T ✓-*17 / 2 3 CZWCZX /' 5r )z5 &je&4 AJV /Z90/ 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 (I V 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 APPLICANT SI(J• AlfURE OF PROPERTY OWNER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: r v REVIEW AUTHORITY: L'J Development Review Board ❑ Administrative Officer I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: zComplete XI) ❑ Incom of Planning & Zoning or Designee at 4 MICHAEL L. DUGAN, A( 1. Architect 25 Pinecrest Drive ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 mduganarch@aol.com (802) 878-0070 (802) 878-0080 Fax (802) 878-0003/0, �a we WE ARE SENDING YOU 1< Attached ❑ Under separate cover via ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ❑ DATE / 6 z JOB NO. ATTENTION RE: /0 �•y�'4.�� ❑ Samples the following items: ❑ Specifications Ry s �'s THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: )l For approval ❑ For your use ❑ As requested ❑ For review and comment ❑ FORBIDS DUE REMARKS COPY TO ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ Submit copies for distribution ❑ Return corrected prints ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US SIGNED: A_�= If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. MichaelDul aff A.I.A. , • 25 Pinecrest Drive Essex Junction, VT 05452 802.878.0070 802.878.0080 Fax: 802.878.0030 • Email:mduganarch@aol.com 61 Bank Street St. Albans, VT 05478 802.521.1211 UMBRELLA PERMIT FOR 10 DORSET STREET FOR USES WITHIN COMMERCIAL 1 C1 DISTRICT PERSONAL SERVICE / PRINT SHOP '' RADIO/TV STUDIO RESEARCH B W RESTAURANT RETAIL TAVERN, NIGHT CLUB INDOOR RECREATIONAL FACILITY ARTIST PRODUCTION STUDIO CONVENIENCE STORE - 3000 SF OR LESS FINANCIAL INSTITUTION - NO DRIVE THRU INDOOR THEATER GENERAL OFFICE HOSPICE ' MUNCIPAL FACILITY PERSONAL INSTRUCTION FACILITY ✓ PLACE OF WORSHIP .J fighting C-33 ., �- C ----- s _ - ------------- �-- B D A = Fixture Width Fixture Size A B C D Small 121/2 17 71/8 5 Medium 14 23 8 81/2 Large 19 33 3/4 10 8 1 /2 The S-4 Series Rectangular Cutoff is introduced as an economical alter- native to the sharp cutoff luminaire series Profile 4, for some of the most used light distribution patterns. Through the use of high-tech machinery, Spero lighting has been able to produce a fabricated aluminum housing while still paying attention to detail, integrity of structure and quality that has been associated with the Profile 4 Luminaire Series. The reflector is one piece hydroformed aluminum with semi-specular ALZAK finish. The 3/16" tempered glass lens is securely held in a high strength aluminum door frame and completely gasketed. The S-4 Series Luminaire is available in three sizes, for various High Press- ure Sodium and Metal Hallide wattages. All ballasts are C.W.A. or H.P.F. reactor type ballasts. The hydro - formed reflector is offered in Type II and Type III distributions. The Series S-4 Luminaire is available for single or twin mountings using an extruded aluminum arm and threaded tie rod assembly. It is shown in this catalog with three square steel posts chosen for use with 90 mph wind loading requirements. Other posts and wind loading design criteria are available. The Series S-4 is supplied with a polyurethane finish. When economics dictate the selection, but detail and quality are to be maintained for those commonly used light patterns, the Series S-4 is the overwhelming choice. C-34 C OOMST'Mg oft)TMaToo[ Write your own catalog number according to the specific job requirement S4 / 250HPS / 23 / A / 120 / DBP / 3M / PC / SSN-20-4-11 / DBP E � c d a o E N U O � C C � . ,n C O U L N Rf CL O) co U L a) � n. m — � m U) c _ o Ca a O fa ._ c x ur ro a) L N Q m � E m x v J LL C 7 0 E a0i 0 C m Lmn 0 C:., o 0 a) E r J - i _J J O C O .Q U (`D) ro O a_ Lamp Watts Size Type II short, cutoff Type II medium, cutoff Type III short, cutoff Type III medium, cutoff E.P.A. 250w M.H. 17 2S — 3S — 1.5 400w M.H. 23 — 2M — 3M 2.1 1000w M.H. 34 — 2M — 3M 3.2 150w H.P.S. 17 2S — 3S — 1.5 250w H.P.S.1 23 1 2M — 3M 2.1 400w H.P.S.1 23 1 2M — 3M 2.1 1000w H. P.S.1 34 1 2M — 3M 3.2 Q)Pwna PC - photocell LL - Lexan lens SS- Slip fitter mount for existing pole - specify pole details SF - single fusing DF - double fusing WALL - wall mounting AS - Auto -Safe standby lighting system FT - Forward throw Light Distribution - see above IU0 4 Bhsa Standard: DBP - dark bronze polyurethane Option: BLP - black polyurethane ncxAs �onashsa Lr�Standard: ROX - red oxide primer (for job site painting) Other options: DBP - dark bronze polyurethane BLP - black polyurethane MOUNTING STYLES FOR FIXTURES y ED—= A B C qD E NOTE: Other Mountings and Pole Design Criteria are available. Type Ht. I Width (A) Gage Bolt Circle (B) Bolt projection (C) Bolt size (D) Cover Ht. (E) Cover width (F) Base Thick (G) SSN 20 1 4 11 8 11/4 - 33/4 3/4 x 15 41/2 10'/4 1/2 SSN 25 4 7 8 11/4 - 33/4 3/4 x 30 41/2 103/4 3/4 SSN 30 1 4 3 8 1 1/4 - 33/4 3/4 x 30 41/2 103/4 3/4 For more complete selection of poles see P4-P8 brochure, pages 7-11 Q> D fE �-A-+y POLE BASE AND ANCHOR BOLTS A Fr7R A C =_JJ C C-35 0 _ M 0 A O 9 o J o aQ o I t 0 1 2 3 4 . ,use Side I Street Side Insverse Distance in Units of Mounting Height t i t1 0 1 ,use Side I Street Side Insverse Uistance in Unns of Mounting Helgni i i 11 0 1 ,use Side I Street Side MOUNTING HT. CONVERSION FACTORS Mt. Ht. 1 20' 25' 1 30' Multi. Fac. 1 1.59 1.00 0.69 ITL Report #30337 250w Metal Halide 19500 Lumens` Type II short, cutoff 25' Mounting height For conversion to 150w HPS multiply by .769 Maximum utilization House side: 0.224 Stret side: 0.602 Total: 0.8256 ITL Report #30854 250w Metal Halide 19500 Lumens` Type III short, cutoff 25' Mounting height For conversion to 150w HPS multiply by .769 Maximum utilization House side: 0.233 Street side: 0.568 Total: 0.8014 ITL Report #30338 400w Metal Halide 32000 Lumens` Type II medium, cutoff 25' Mounting height For conversion to: 250 HPS multiply by .859 400 HPS multiply by 1.56 Maximum utilization House side: 0.495 Street side: 0.247 Transverse Distance in Units of Mounting Heights •"' ' ' i ITL Report #30855 400w Metal Halide ' 32000 Lumens` Type III medium, cutoff ° 25' Mounting height 3 For conversion to: 250 HPS Multiply by .859 2 400 HPS multiply by 1.56 1 Maximum utilization House side: 0.230 01 0 1 2 3 4 5 Street side: 0.518 1 UEi MAI s01N— Duse Side I Street side Total. 0.7482 Transverse Distance in Units of Mounting Heights `Lumen output based on horizontal burning lamps ❑ ❑ spero - - O -h UIN o; SPERO ELECTRIC CORP. 1705 NOBLE ROAD CLEVELAND, OHIO 44112 (216) 851-3300 FAX (216) 851-0300 S K 1 C-3 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 June 7, 2001 Business Manager GREER FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Site Plan, 10 Dorset Street To Whom It May Concern: It has once again come to the attention of the Planning & Zoning Office- that you have not provided two painted and signed handicapped parking spaces on your property at 10 Dorset Street as required in your most recently -approved site plan. This office previously sent you written notice of this violation on November 24, 1999; a copy of this letter is attached. At that time, you were also notified that the painted islands shown on your approved site plan were not in fact striped on the parking lot. We would ask that you notify this office as soon as possible that you have either re - striped the parking lot and provided two painted, signed handicapped spaces, or that you will be submitting an amended site application for the parking lot striping. The handicapped spaces are required by law and we suggest you provide them as soon as possible. This office will not grant any approvals for improvements or modifications on your property until these conditions are in compliance. Please contact me at your earliest convenience. Sincerely Ra and J. Belair Administrative Officer Cc: Rep. Mary Ann Parizo Enc. Letter of Nov. 24, 1999 CAMy Documents\Belair - Greer 6-8-01.doc Id DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH B RLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 November 24, 1999 Fred Greer 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Handicapped Spaces Dear Mr. Greer: A handicapped person came to City Hall yesterday complaining that you did not have any handicapped spaces. I pulled out your latest approved site plan and it does show two (2) handicapped spaces. I inspected your property today and found that you did not have handicapped spaces as shown on the plan. Your plan also refers to "painted islands" which do not exist. In order to comply with your approved site plan, please have your parking lot striped as shown on the approved plan as soon as possible. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincerely; Raymond J. Belai"r, Administrative Officer RIB/mcp RUUD LIGHTING )LE MOUNT BULLETIN MPR2-12" mm) PARKING( :OADWAY LIGHT CATALOG # (a) VOLTAGE (b) OPTIONS (Factory Installed) MPR2226-1_ )b) M=120/208/240/277V (For 175W MH & F=Fusing MPR2405-D_Ib) 70.15OW HPS) T-120/277/347V Q=puartz Standby (includes loow - 70W MH MPR2407-D_— (b) — (For 175W MH & 100WMH _ _- - - MPR2410-D_j0I 70-150W HPS) 1=120V (Reactor Ballast) (For 5e-15oWHPS) 175W MH MP_R2_417- (a) 1b1 2=277V (For Fluor.) 35W HPS MPR2503-1 _ Ibl 5=480V (For 175W MH & 70-15OW HIPS) 50W HPS _ MPR2505-D (b) 50D=220/240V 50 Hz (For 175W MH & ------- 70.150W HPS) 70W HPS MPR2507 al b) . _! 54=240V 50 Hz (For Fluor.) 10OW HPS MPR2510- (a) (b) 58=220V 50 Hz (For Fluor.) _ 15OW HPS MPR2515- (a) (b) 8=220V 60 Hz (For 70-175 HID) quartz lamp) (non delay -relay type) -(a)P=Button Photocell -5P=External Photocell (for 4a0V) Specify (a) Voltage, and (b) Options. Ballast - Housing. Reflector. Seamless, Prefinished Capacitor - die cast aluminum. semi-specular Finish color; bronze. & diffuse aluminum. Ignitor (Where required) —6" (152 mm)❑12" (305 mm) i i 5" (127 mm) o -Lamp i . (Included) ......... Lampholder Cord. -- 24" (610 mm) long. Lens Frame. Die cast aluminum Extended -- Ballast door frame secures Pole Mount. Compartment lens; sealed with Finish color; bronze. Cover silicone gasket. Finish color; black. Patented Hinge Assembly GENERAL DESCRIPTION: Parking lot and roadway luminaire for H.I.D. lamp, totally enclosed. Supplied with IES Type III asymmetric distribution pattern. Housing is seamless, die cast aluminum. Mounting consists of a 1.75" (44 mm) wide by 2.5" (64 mm) high by 6" (152 mm) long extruded aluminum arm. The arm is held in place with two 5/16" (8 mm)-18 dia. mounting rods fastened to a steel backing plate inside the pole, and by two nuts inside the fixture housing. Mounting rods are provided with sealing washers to prevent water leakage. Lens assembly consists of rigid aluminum frame and high impact, clear tempered glass. ELECTRICAL: HID fixtures include clear, medium base lamp. Porcelain enclosed, 4kv rated screw shell type lamp holder. Fluorescent fixtures are supplied with a 26W quad compact fluorescent lamp. All ballast assemblies are high power factor and consist of the following: 26W Fluorescent: 120V Fluorescent ballast, see voltage options. 50-100W MH & 50W HPS: Dual -tap (in U.S.: 120/277V; in Canada: 50W MH & 50W HPS=120/ 277V, 70 &100W MH=120/347V) High Reactance ballast. 175W MH: Constant Wattage Autotransformer, see voltage options. 35W HPS: 120V Reactor ballast. 70-15OW HPS: High Reactance ballast, see voltage options. FINISH: Exclusive DeltaGuardTM finish features an E-coat epoxy primer with medium bronze acrylic powder topcoat, providing excellent resistance to corrosion, ultraviolet degradation and abrasion. The finish is covered by our 7 year limited warranty. LABELS: ANSI lamp wattage label supplied, visible during relamping. UL Listed for wet locations and enclosure classified IP54 per IEC 529; in Canada, CSA Certified or Canadian UL Listed for wet locations. ACCESSORIES: FWG-12 = Wire Guard; SBL-12 = Backlight Shield RUUD LIGHTING QUICK MOUNT : J'-I (406 mm) SPEC. # WATTAGE CATALOG # 175WMH CL7417- lal(ei { 250WMH 131-7425- (a)_(b) 400WMH 131-7440- (a)_(b) 250NHPS CL7525 (a) M 400WHPS CL7540- (a) (b) Specify (a) Vollage,and (b) Options. BULLETIN C1.7-16" CAN. JPY LIGHT (a) VOLTAGE (b) OPTIONS (Factory Installed) M=120/208/240/277V F=Fusing T=120/277/347V H=2-Level Lighting 5=480V (Available with 250 & 40OW HPS only) 50D=220/240V 50 Hz J=Tamperproof Lens Fasteners 8=220V 60 Hz N=Noise Suppressor Q=Quartz Standby (w/ 150W quartz lamp) Ballast Cord with J-Box. - Reflector. Mounting Tray. Sealing (By others.') Prefinished Finish color; black. Grommet j specular / aluminum. Hinge -- 016" (406 mm) Bracket O O _ Latch Capacitor Ignitor (Where required) Housing. - Seamless, die cast aluminum. Finish color; white. / Patented Hinge Assembly Lampholder - Lens. High impact, #73 crystal tempered glass. l6.5" (165 mm) 1 i Lamp (Included) Lens Frame. Die cast aluminum door frame secures lens; sealed with silicone gasket. Finish color; white. GENERAL DESCRIPTION: Canopy luminaire for HID lamp, totally enclosed. Reflector is specular aluminum. Lens assembly consists of rigid aluminum frame and high impact #73 Crystal tempered glass. Die cast aluminum housing is provided with two 1/2" (13 mm) threaded and closed conduit openings and hinged, 16 gauge steel mounting box. Box attaches to a recessed junction box or directly to the ceiling. Two 3/4" 09 mm) and four 1/2" (13 mm) knockouts are supplied. Slotted mounting holes allow 45° incremental positioning of box, with adjustment up to ±51. Hinge bracket on housing top hooks onto mounting box, supporting fixture while electrical connections are made. ELECTRICAL: Fixture includes clear, mogul base lamp. Porcelain enclosed, 4kv rated screw shell type lampholder with spring loaded center contact and lamp locking feature. Fixtures installed in U.S. require 90°C temperature feed wire. Fixtures installed in Canada require 1501C temperature feed wire. Ballast assemblies include high power factor Constant Wattage Autotransformer ballast, (see voltage options). FINISH: Exclusive DeltaGuardTM finish features an E-coat epoxy primer with white acrylic powder topcoat, providing excellent resistance to corrosion, ultraviolet degradation and abrasion. The finish is covered by our 7 year limited warranty. LABELS: ANSI lamp wattage label supplied, visible during relamping. UL Listed for damp locations and enclosure classified IP54 per IEC 529; in Canada, CSA certified or Canadian UL Listed for damp locations. ACCESSORY: FWG-16 = Wire Guard DIRECT MOUNT 1-2 (305 BULLETIN MCLO-12" mm) CM SPY LIGHT ..tea., RUUD LIGHTING- (_ L 100 One of four 3/16" (5 mm) dia. fixture mounting holes 5" (127 mmh + 3.19" (81 mm) I f 1.75" (44 mm) + + 2.38" (60 mm) — — 3.63" (92 mm) 1/2" (13 mm) conduit entry & exit as viewed throuqh lens. SPEC. # WATTAGE 26WFIuorescent 50WMH 70W MH 10OWMH 175W MH 35W HPS 50WHPS 70WHPS 100WHPS 150WHPS MCL0226-1-� (b) MCL0405-D_(b) MCL0407-D__ 1b) MCL0410-D (b) MCL0417- (a) (b) MCL0503-1 _(b) MCLO505-D M MCL0507- (a) (b) MCL0510- (a) (b) MCL0515- (a) (b) (a) VOLTAGE M=120/208/240/277V (For 70-1001W MH & 70-15OW HPS; T=120/277/347V (For 175W N1H, 35W HPS, & 70.15OW HPS) 1=120V (Reactor Ballast) (For 50-15OW HPS) 2=277V (For Fluor.) 5=480V (For MH & 70-15OW HPS) 50D=220/240V 50 Hz (N/A on 50-70W MH & 35W HPS) 54=240V 50 Hz (For Fluor.) 58=220V 50 Hz (For Fluor.) 6=347V (N/A on 35-50W HPS) 8=220V 60 Hz (For 70-175W HID) (b) OPTIONS (Factory Installed) A=Polycarbonate Drop Prismatic Lens (N/A on 175W MH & 150W HPS; F=Fusing J=Tamperproof Lens Fasteners N=Noise Suppressor Q=Quartz Standby (Relay w/ 100W quartz lamp) Specify (a) Voltage, and (b) Options. Housing. SB-16 Accessory Reflector. Seamless, (Where surface Prefinished die cast aluminum. wiring is required) specular aluminum. Finish color; white. Capacitor ❑12" (305 mamp (Included) Ignitorr - - - -----------•----- -----------------; ::; (Where '---------- ---------='-"---------------------� required) Ballast 5" (127 mm) Lampholder Patented Lens Frame. Hinge Die cast Assembly aluminum door frame secures Lens. lens; sealed High impact, #73 crystal with silicone gasket. tempered glass. Finish color; white. GENERAL DESCRIPTION: Canopy luminaire for HID lamp, totally enclosed. Reflector is specular aluminum. Lens assembly consists of rigid aluminum frame and high impact, #73 Crystal tempered glass. Fixture is designed for direct mount over a recessed junction box. Provided with four .188 (5 mm) clearance holes and stainless steel mounting screws with sealing washers. Two 1/2" (13 mm) conduit openings are provided for wire supply. SB-16 Surface Box is required with 175W MH and 150W HPS units, unless mounting is to brick, concrete or metal surface. 35, 50 & 70W units are suitable for recessed mounting in a poured concrete surface. Polycarbonate Drop Prismatic Lens option measures 1.75" (44 mm) D x 9.625" (244 mm) square. ELECTRICAL: Fluorescent fixtures are supplied with a 26W quad compact fluorescent lamp. HID fixtures include clear, medium base lamp. Porcelain enclosed, 4kv rated screw shell type lampholder with spring loaded center contact. Fixtures installed in U.S. require 90°C temperature feed wire. Fixtures installed in Canada require 150°C temperature feed wire. All ballast assemblies are high power factor and consist of the following: 26W Fluorescent: 120V Fluorescent ballast, see voltage options. 35W HPS: 120V Reactor ballast. 50-100W MH & 50W HPS: Dual tap (in U.S.=120/277V; in Canada; 50W MH & 50W HPS= 120/277V; 70-100W MH=120/347V) High Reactance ballast. All other ballast assemblies: Constant Wattage Autotransformer ballast, (see voltage options). FINISH: Exclusive DeltaGuardTM finish features an E-coat epoxy primer with white acrylic powder topcoat, providing excellent resistance to cofrosion, ultraviolet degradation and abrasion. The finish is covered by our 7 year limited warranty. LABELS: ANSI lamp wattage label supplied, visible during relamping. UL Listed for wet locations and enclo- sure classified IP54 per IEC 529; in Canada, CSA certified or Canadian UL Listed for wet locations. ACCESSORIES: FWG-12 = Wire Guard SB-16 = Surface Box ' HID V.,kOJECTION CUT )FF SPEC. # MOUNTING WATTAGE CATALOG # POSITION (a) VOLTAGE �,- r�. Wall Downlight 5 MH E4405-D 11 2=277V (For HPS) Wall Downlight 7 W MH E4407-D (1) 3=208V (For HPS) Any 35W HPS E4503-1!al el 4=240V (For HPS) Any 5OW HPS E4505-1 (a) ul 50D=220/240V 50 HZ Wall Downlight 70W HPS E4507-1 al 1b1 (For 50.70W HPS) _ 6=347V (For 70W HPS) (a) For voltage other than 120V, replace -1 with appropriate suffix. (b) Specify Options. RUUD LIGHTING SIDE VIEW BULLETIN E4-H SECURITY LIGHT (b) OPTIONS (Factory Installed) BS= Bronze Color Shroud GS= Gold Color Shroud H=High Power Factor Ballast J =Tamperproof Lens Fasteners P=Photocell Mounting Hole Line --- 10" (254 mm)L x 6" (152 mm, Sealing / Fixture Gasket Mounting 25" (6 mm) Bar Housing. Finish color: —� Ignitor bronze. - 0 0 2.25" (57 mm)* — Photocell Ballast (Optional) TReflector Threaded 4.2" (107 mm) Nipple With Slotted Hex Lamp Head Cap. (Included) - - Lampholder Polycarbonate -- -- ---� ----- - Aluminum Lens Shroud NOTE: * For all MH, and 100W HPS with 208V or 240V, this dimension is 3.0" (76 mm). GENERAL DESCRIPTION: Aluminum die cast ballast housing features a thermal air isolation chamber separating the ballast core and coil from the other electrical components. Completely gasketed clear lens is virtually unbreakable polycarbonate. Combination of internal polished aluminum shroud and semi-specular reflector directs light out and away from fixture. Supplied with a neoprene sealing gasket for complete weatherproofing at the mounting surface. A silicone rubber seal is furnished to provide a seal at the lens. Lens is fastened to housing with Phillips -head captive stainless steel screws. Steel fixture mounting bar and threaded nipple provided for direct mounting to recessed junction box. ELECTRICAL: Fixture includes clear, medium base lamp and porcelain enclosed, 4kv rated screw shell type lampholder with spring loaded center contact. HPS ballast assemblies include a 120V normal power factor Reactor ballast. MH ballast assemblies include a dual -tap (in U.S.: 120/277V; in Canada: 50W MH=120/277V; 70W MH=120/347V) normal power factor High Reactance ballast. When optional 208, 240 or 277V HPS ballast is utilized, a step-down transformer is included in assembly. (See voltage options). FINISH: Exclusive DeltaGuardTM finish features an E-coat epoxy primer with medium bronze acrylic powder topcoat, providing excellent resistance to corrosion, ultraviolet degradation and abrasion. The finish is covered by our 7 year limited warranty. LABELS: ANSI lamp wattage label supplied, visible during relamping. UL Listed for wet locations and enclo- sure classified IP54 per IEC 529; in Canada, CSA Certified or Canadian UL Listed for wet locations. ACCESSORIES: ESB-7 = Surface Mounting Box PAS-7 = Pole Mounting Bracket TPS-1 = Tamperproof Screwdriver r� r 3 ,5 .3 .1 1 .1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LABEL QTY DESCRIPTION LUMENS LLF PR 3 PR 400 WATT MH @ 20' HEIGHT 32000 75 7 1.2 .2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CL40D 4 CL 400 WATT MH @ 19,5' & 26' HEIGHT 320DO .75 1.3 1.9 .6 .3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ICLlDD 14 ICL 100 WATT MH @ 15' HEIGHT 17020 1 ,75 E4 10 E4407-D 70 WATT MH @ 8' HEIGHT 5040 .75 ,1 2.5 .8 .6 .1 .1 .1 0 0 0 0 ,1 ,1 LIGHT LEVELS ARE MAINTAINED FOOTCANDLES .6 3.6L52 3 2 O O 1 1 1 REPORT NO, 1 DRAWING: GREERSI.AGI 6 3.4 7 .3 10 .1 .1 ART HEPHNER - 10/13/95 7 3,9 2 AVERAGE fc = 2.07 POINT SPACING LEFT -TO -RIGHT = 15 ft MAXIMUM -Fc = 22.4 POINT SPACING TOP -TO -BOTTOM = 10 ft 3 4.3 2 4 MINIMUM fc = 0 M CLA00 AVERAGE/MINIMUM = 0 .5 5.1 9.1 Z 1.5 .7 MAXIMUM/MINIMUM = 0 SCALE: 1" = 00' .9 4.4 17 ME4 2.5 1. 9 7 4 8.8 L 0 4.7 1,8 3,9 1.8 3,2 1 1 0 O 0 F 0 .2 3.4 8.5 1 m - ,2 .1 1 0 0 0 4 E 9 2.9 8,4 1 .3 2 6 ,2 .1 1 0 0 0 6 2.5 T L 0 E ,4 ,7 .2 .1 .1 0 0 0 7 2.2 2 0 1 .2 .1 1 0 0 0 6 1 .8 11.1 .4 L 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 E ,5 1.5 1 .2 .1 1 0 0 0 Ll 10 C 0 I I C DJQ�_L�LJL 0 E 4 5 1.2 3.2 6,1 ®,1 4.5 ®6.4 5.� 5.6 6®4 4,4 4.9 8 3,7 8 2 1 1 O 0 0 ,7 1.2 9 2.7 2.1 2. 1 2 2 2. ,3 112 2,4 2, ,3 2 2 2 7 .3 .1 .1 0 0 0 0 1.4 1.8 2.1 .1 .6 1.1 .7 .6 1J 1.6 1,7 L.5 1 4 1.1 5 .2 .1 .1 0 0 0 0 4.6 4.4 4.6 5.2 2.3 1 .4 .4 .7 1.7 2.4 2.5 2.7 2,8 2.1 1.2 .5 ,2 .1 0 0 0 0 0 5.4 1.6 .6 2 .2 ,6 1.8 4.9 6.207.1 6.6 2.5 1 ,3 ,1 .1 0 0 0 0 0 PR 1.2 .4 .1 .1 3 1 .6 7.1 9.3 PR =7,.2 M E M O R A N D U M 7b: Sou .h Burlington Planning (:ommission : ,e Weith, City Planner Re: December 5, 1989 agenda items Date: December 1, 1989 3) T.J. BOYLE STUDY T.J. Boyle and Associates will be present at Tuesday's meeting to present the preliminary Public Improvements/Scenic. and Natural Areas protection study for the S.E. Quadrant. 4) GREER ADDITION. DORSET STREET Earl and Kathryn Greer propose to remove 1,691 square feet of the front (westerly) portion of the Greer's Dry Cleaning/Mills & Greer building and replace it with a new 2040 square foot addi- tion on the northern side of the building. The actual change in building size will be a 348 square foot increase to a nori-con- forming structure. The lot size will decrease from 1.55 to 1.47 acres due to the Dorset Street widening project. Removing the front portion of the building will allow sufficient space in which to maintain parking spaces. The Zoning Board granted a variance on 11/13/89 allowing the applicant to alter the non -conforming structure above the 25% rule. The structure is currently non -conforming in terms of front -yard set back, lot coverage and front yard coverage. The Zoning Board cited that proposed changes would improve traffic flow and create more green space. It referred the project to the Planning Commission for traffic review. The area is zoned C-1. It is bounded by Champlain Oil (Texaco) to the north, Arby's and the Ramada Inn to the east, 100 Dorset. Street to the south and to the west by Dorset Street. Access and Circulation: Access would be enhanced by moving one of the two exiting entrances 80 feet northerly towards the Wil- liston Road intersection. This new curb cut would be shared with Texaco. The existing curb cut directly across from the Howard Johnson's exit would be closed. A second access would be main- tained through the existing 35 footwide curb cut. to the south. 1 Memorandum December 5, December 1, Page 2 C.irr_ulation is shared portions of Texaco. - Planning 1989 agenda items 1989 is provided on all sides of the complex. Circulation with 1.00 Dorset Street on the southeast and southwest the lot, and on the northern portion of the lot. with Covera e setbacks: The site presently does not meet front yard or total lot coverage requirements. The proposal would improve the situation. The current lotcoverage is 90% (70% maximum allowed) and the proposed lot coverage is 82%. All setbacks are met except the front yard setback. The current setback from the planned r.o.w. line is 28 feet. (50 feet minimum allowed) and the proposed setback is 38 feet. Parking: The plan proposes 59 parking spaces including one handicapped space. The zoning regulations do not have specific standards for dry-cleaning establishments. Applying the retail standard to the sporting goods store and laundromat and the manufacturinb standard to the dry-cleaning plant results in a need of 47 spaces. The 59 spaces should be sufficient.. Traffic.: This site is located in Traffic Overlay zone 1 which allows 25 peak hour trips. Based on ITE data (Code 810) this site currently generated 72 peak hour trip ends. The building is proposed to be increased by 348 square feet, once the old building is removed. This translates into an additional 2 peak hour trip ends. The I'._anning Commission may approve peak hour traffic volumes above the normal standards for a pre-existing lot in a traffic overlay zone if it determines that other site improvements will produce a net benefit for traffic flow in the vicinity. One of these improvements is a change or reduction in curb cuts (Section 17.502). The proposed plan and Dorset Street project would involve a reduction in curb cuts since an existing sole access would be replaced by a shared access. Landscaping: The project requires $4,500 in new landscaping. The plan proposes new rosa rugosa and spirea which is valued at. $190. The applicant proposes to relocate several Honeylocust., Spirea and a Plum. There is not much space available for plantings. Turning the proposed painted islands at the northwest and southwest corners of the building to curbed, landscaped areas would improve the appearance of the sight, however, this would aggravate snow plowing. Memorandum -- Planning December 5, 1989 agenda items December 1, 1989 Page 3 Other_ The plan should clearly indicate whatimprovements in front (i.e., sidewalk, bi kepath , ari. i:,e dc)nf- by the appil icant and which are to be done by the City as part of the Dorset Street project. Also, it is not clear whether this will be done prior to or after the Dorset Street projer~t. If it is to be done prior to Dorset. Street, will the exist.in ui cutbe closed and the new shared curb cut be put in? 5) U.V.M. PARKING LOT U.V.M. proposes to construct a 255 space parking lot behind the Sheraton. This application will be treated as a site plan. This meeting is a discussion and not a formal site plan review. The parcel is zoned C-1. University facilities are a conditional use. U.V.M. is currently in front of the Zoning Beard for Condi- tional use approval awaiting a traffic study. This lot is part of a campus wide parking/circulation plan in- volving the use of shuttles. Access: Access would be provided via private access roads from both Williston Road and East Avenue. Access from Williston Road would be provided over the Sheraton lot. The University is currently investigating ways to keep this road network from becoming a short cut. from Williston Road to East Avenue and vise -versa. Traffic: A traffic study is currently tieing prepared. It will be available prior to the formal site plan review. A major concern will be the impact of such a facility on traffic on Williston Road and Spear Street. Other: The University has mentioned using this lot as a possible entrance to Centennial Woods natural area. 3 No Text E Spy . y fi *. tic, a a _ 'I r No Text No Text 3�, 32- o-7. 3-7 2 1q( ?S7 -7, A14 i) , 3q,,�2- (, 311 / 1 1 ?2 37 y L r . It I A 30 60 Y Parking/Roadway Li,-'-t PR Series I HID 52 T�; . — ,,�� y I� �+ h�4 t, Parking/Roadway r Order ormation Housing Wattage Fixture# Mounting Code Size(sq.) Lamp (add mounting code) (Insert Code at' in Fixture#) 12" 26W Fluor. MPR_226-1 1=11/2" Close Pole Mount 12' 5OWMH MPR_405-D 2=6" Extended Pole Mount 12" 70WMH MPR'407-D 3 = 2' Adjustable Filter 12" 10OWMH MPR'410-D 4=Yoke Mount 12" 175W MH MPR-417-M 6 = 1/2" Adjustable Fitter 16" 175W MH PR`417-M ('or use on 12" housings only) 16" 250WMH PR'425-M K=Round Tube Off -Center Tenon Mount 16" 40OWMH PR'440-M (For 23/8"or TOR) 22" 1000WMH PR'499-M M=Round Tube Off -Center Direct Mount 12" 35WHPS MPR"503-1 U= Indirect Mount (Uplight) 12" 5OWHPS MPR'505-D W=Wall Mount 12" 70WHIPS MPR-507-M S= Round Tube Twin Direct Mount 12" 100WHIPS MPR-510-M (For 4" sq. pole) (requires 2 fixtures) 12" 150WHPS MPR'S15-M (Note:Kmand Smountings for 16"housings only) 16" 250W HPS PR `525-M Without Mounting (factory -drilled) 16" 400W HPS PR `540-M Please refer to page HID 51 22" 1000WHPS PR'599-M for Voltage Suffix Key. Options: (factory -installed) Change Add After Description Suffix To Suffix 120V Reactor ballast (50-150W HPS 12" housing only) 1 277V ballast (For fluorescent) 2 480Vballast (175-1000WMH&7a1000WHPSonly) 5 Tri-tapballast (175-1000WMH&70-1000WHIPS only) T Single Fuse (120V, Dual -tap or Tri-tap) F Dual Fuse (48OVor Multi -tap) F Quartz Standby (includes 0lamp'.100W-12",150W-16'&22')(non delay -relay type) Q Button Photocell' (Factory -instal led with all mountings other than 2" Adjustable Fitter) (except: 1000Ww/120V:all480V) voltagesuffix P External Photocell* (factory instal led) For fixtures w/1000W,120V 1 P For fixtures w/480V 5 P Button Photocell` Catalog # Field -installed in fixtures with 2" Adjustable Fitter For fixtures w/120V (except 1000W) PC-41/1000VA For fixtures w/208, 240 or 277V PC-42/1000VA For `fixtures w/347V PC'46/1000VA 'Note Al I fixtures with factory -instal led photocell will be supplied with single voltage ballast. Accessories: (field -installed) (Page HID 67) 12" housing 16" housing 22" housing Wire Guard FWG-12 FWG-16 notavailable Backlight Shield SBL-12 SBL-16 SBL-22 Housing The seamless, die cast aluminum housing is standard with our exclusive DeltaGuardlm finish featuring an E-coat epoxy primer and medium bronze acrylic powder topcoat. Sizes: 12" square x 5" deep, 16" square x 6.5" deep and 22" square x 9" deep. Optics The 12" housing has a Type 111 asymmetric distribution pattern. The 16" housing has field adjustable Type II or Type III optics. The 22" housing has Type II asymmetric distribution. Ideally suited for roadway applications, parking areas orfor building mounted security lighting. Lens Aclear, tempered glass lens is held securely in a recessed, die cast doorframe. The lens frame is supplied with mounting holes for field -installed accessories. Ballast All fixtures are standard with a high powerfactor ballast. The fluorescent fixture includes a 26W, 1 20V ballast. The 35W HPS fixture is standard with a 120V ballast. The 50, 70 and 100W MH and 50W HPS are standard with adual-tap ballast (in U.S.:120/277V; in Canada: 50W MH and 50W HPS=120/277V; 70W and 100W MH=120/347V). All other wattages are standard with a multi -tap ballast (120/208/240/ 277V). Bal last options include: 277V ballastfor fluorescent; 120V Reactor ballast for 50-15OW HPS; 480V for 175-1000WMH & 70-1000W HPS; Tri tap (120/277/ 347V) for 175-1000W MH and 70-1000W HPS. An energy efficient low Ioss277V ballast is available on many Metal Halide fixtures —consult factory. Lamps The 12" housing accommodates 26W Fluorescent, 50, 70,100 or 175W MH and 35, 50, 70,100 or 150W HPS medium base lamps. The 16" housing accommodates 175,250 or 400W MH and 250 or 40OW HPS mogul base lamps. The 22"housing accommodates 1000W MH or HPS mogul base lamps. Gasketing Complete silicone gasketing around lens frameand at mounting provide a watertight seal. Labels The Parking/Roadway Light is U.L. I isted for wet locations, CSA certified, and enclosure classified IP54 per IEC S29. Mountings Close Pole Mount. ■ Mounting Code "1" Extruded aluminum mounting arm attaches fixture in a fixed horizontal position to the side of a square pole. A steel backing plate inside the pole secures the fixture. On 12" hous- ings, thearm measures 11/2" Lx 21/2" H; on 16" and 22" housings, it measures 11/2" Lx41/2" H. Extended Pole Mount. ■ MountingCode'2" Extruded aluminum mountingarm attaches fixture in afixed horizontal position to the side of a square pole. A steel backing plate inside the pole secures the fixture. On 12" hous- ings, the arm measures 6" L x 21/2" H; on 16" and 22" housings, the arm measures 6" L x 41/2" H. Wall Mount . ■ Mounting Code "W" Cast aluminum mounting boxwith gasket attaches in a fixed position to the side of fixture, utilizing threaded mounting studs supplied. Provided with 4threaded and closed 1/2" conduit entries. Indirect Mount ■ , -:; Code "L, The same cast aluminum boxas provided for the Wall Mount secures fixture in an uplight position. A noise - suppressor ballast is supplied with this mounting. 0 PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 March 11, 1994 Earl Greer 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Zoning Violation, Exterior Lighting Dear Mr. Greer: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 This is to follow up my letter to you dated November 22, 1993 (copy enclosed). That letter brought to your attention the fact that your new pole lights did not comply with the lights approved on 12/5/89. To date, the nonapproved flood lights have not been replaced with the approved type with cutoff luminaries nor has the City Planner approved of the location changes. Unless this violation is corrected within two (2) weeks, the City will begin to take legal action to obtain compliance with the approved site plan. Your cooperation in this matter will be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please call either Joe Weith or myself. Sinc ely,, f ,��/- Raym nd J. Belair, Zoning and Planning Assistant RJB /mcp 1 Encl PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 November 22, 1993 Earl Greer 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Zoning Violation, Exterior Lighting Dear Mr. Greer: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 This is in regards to the exterior lighting which you have recently installed at 10 Dorset Street. These new pole lights appear to be 400 watt sodium flood lights which the Planning Commission did not approve. A note on the plan approved on 12/5/89 (see enclosed) indicated that the exterior pole lights would consist of 150 watt lights with cutoff luminaries. Also, the locations of these lights are different then shown on the approved plan. The City Planner can approve locations changes but the City will not accept the flood lights you have installed. Therefore, you must replace these flood lights with the type which include cutoff luminaries and have new locations approved by the City Planner. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sinc ly, �2� v� R/ym nd J. Belair, Zoning and Planning Assistant 1 Encl RJB/mcp cc: Richard Ward City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 September 8, 1992 Earl Greer 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Addition, 10 Dorset Street Dear Mr. Greer: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 A recent inspection of your 10 Dorset Street property revealed that you have not completed the landscaping and parking improvements as required by the Planning Commission on December 5, 1989. This approval also required that you submit a revised site plan which has yet to be submitted. You are hereby requested to complete all improvements shown on the approved site plan as soon as possible and submit a revised site plan as required. It is imperative that all landscaping be planted this fall because your landscaping bond expires on March 22, 1993. Failure to comply with your site plan approval is considered a zoning violation. Unless these improvements are completed by this fall, the City will be forced to take legal action. I hope this step will not be necessary and look forward to your anticipated cooperation in having these improvements completed. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sinc ly, ,� _ Raym nd J. Belair, Zoning and Planning Assistant RJB/mcp PLANNING COMMISSION 5 DEcember 1989 page 2 drainageway. Mr. Steele then showed maps of locations of ledge, prime ag soils, vegetation, roads (existing and proposed), and views. The study will suggest a "residential home business zone" on Dorset St. and on Hinesburg Rd. in an anticipation of devel- opment pressures. Curb cuts would be limited to allow easy north - south access to the city, but they felt strip development would be prevented. Mr. Steele said they have been sensitive toward pre- serving views toward the mountains. In the conservation plan, new housing is foreseen along Hinesburg Rd. with agriculture lands to the north and south preserved. The study will take a long look at the Goodrich site from the point of view of neighbors' concerns and views. A new school site will also be considered. In the development plan, all wooded areas are left in tact and many agricultural lands are also left (primarily in conjunction with the wishes of Shelburne). There would be more development on Dorset St. The resource plan would be a balance between the other two. Mr. Jacob noted that the City would want to keep the approximate 50-50 split between residential and commercial. Mr. Sporzynski of the REcreation Path Committee noted that they are trying to keep the path off city streets and asked the con- sultant to keep that in mind. Mr. Steele said they have met with Committee representatives and are taking that into account. Mr. Boyle said the draft of the report is due in mid -January. 4. Site plan application of Earl Greer for construction of a 2040 sq. ft. one-story addition to an existing building, 10 Dorset St. Fred Greer said that since the city and state are taking land for the Dorset St. project, Greers proposes to take off part of a building and then build a new 2040 sq. ft. addition. This will result in a net gain of 348 sq. ft. The addition will help to maintain parking. The northern access will be shared with the Texaco station. They will also keep the access across from Howard Johnson's Motel. The middle curb cut will be eliminated. Cir- culation through Arby's will be maintained by private agreement. Some trees will be moved. Mr. Greer said the addition will be done before the road is widened but the curb cut will not be closed until the road widening. Mrs. Maher felt that would leave more curb cuts than she felt was safe. She felt it should be chained off. Mr. Jacob asked about lighting. Mr. Greer said a J new pole will be put in and wiring will run underground. Mr. Jacob noted the City Engineer wants it from existing pole 2-12. Mr. Greer said that was no problem. Mr. Jacob also noted that the plan must show where the proposed catch basin -will drain. Mrs. Maher asked what will happen if credit is given for trees that are moved and the trees then die. Mr. Greer said they would replace them. Ms. Pugh said she wants it made clear what Greers will do and what the State will do. Ms. Peacock moved the Planning Commission approve the Site Plan application of E. Frederick Greer for construction of a 2020 sq. ft. addition for retail use as depicted on a plan entitled "Earl and Kathryn Greer, 10 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Adams Construction Company and dated 10/12/89, last revised 11/22/89, with the following stipulations: 1. The applicant shall post a $2,000, 3-year landscaping bond prior to permit. If the relocated trees die, they shall be replaced by Greers. 2. The plan shall be revised prior to permit to show the followin 1) where the proposed catch basin will drain. This shall be approved by the City Engineer 2) new underground service from GMP pole 2-12 instead of a new _.pole 3) a clear delineation of improvements to be constructed as part of the Dorset Street project (i.e. sidewalk, bike path, curb cuts, etc). 3. The applicant shall close the existing middle curb cut prior to occupancy of the addition. 4. A building permit must be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void. Mr. Belter seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Discussion with UVM regarding proposed construction of a 255 space parking lot behind the Sheraton, Williston Road Mr. Pennaman, Ms. Falcone, and Ms. Killourie represented UVM. They indicated they wanted to get a dialog going on their traffic and circulation plans. UVM's current action plan calls for 3 new housing units: a student apartment housing unit on S. Prospect near the Country Club, housing where University Heights is now (current residents will be relocated in the Orchard Street area and a student complex will be built). An intercampus shuttle system is planned to link various campus areas. All this is being done in conjunction with the Main St. improvement project. There is also a proposed bridge link over Rt. 2 which is now in the design phase. This is a joint project with the City of Burlington and is a non -vehicle bridge (for pedestrians, bikes, and shuttle). City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 August. 13, 1990 Mr. E. Frederick Greer 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Addition, 10 Dorset Street Dear Mr. Greer: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 The South Burlington Planning Commission asked me to inform you that the site plan approval granted on 12/5/89 (minutes enclosed) was for a 2020 square foot addition for retail use. It has been observed that as part of your construction, you have added a second floor. Please note that you must receive approval from the Planning Commission to use this second floor space for any purpose, including storage. Please keep in mind that the middle curb cut - serving your proper- ty must be closed prior to occupancy of the new addition as stipulated in the approval. Please contact me if you have any questions. S- cerel , Joe Weith, City Planner cc: Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator JW/mcp � � � \ EARL B GREER THE GREERS HOUSE OF DRYCLEANING, INC. 8 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 TELEPHONE: 802/864-7381 15 AUGUST 90 JOSEPH WEITH, CITY PLANNER CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 RE: YOUR LETTER DATED 8/13/90 (ADDITION, 10 DORSET STREET MR. WEITH: PLEASE BE ASSURED WE ARE NOT ADDING A SECOND STORY TO THE BUILDING AT THIS TIME. WE ARE AWARE THAT ADDITIONAL APPROVAL FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD BE REQUIRED TO DO THIS. WHEN THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT WAS MADE CONCERNING THE CENTER CURB CUT, THE ROADWAY WAS SCHEDULED TO BE UNDER CONSTRUCTION BY THIS TIME AND A NEW CURB WOULD BE INSTALLED. DUE TO THE DELAY IN THE CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE, WE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE USING THE CURB CUT UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON ELIMINATES IT. I AM FREE TO MEET WITH YOU AT YOUR CONVENIENCE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR WOULD LIKE ADDITIONAL INPUT. SINCERELY PLANNING COMMISSION 21 AUGUST 1990 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a meeting on Tuesday, 21 August 1990, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present William Burgess, Chairman; Mary -Barbara Maher, John Belter, Ann Pugh, David Austin, William Craig, Cathereine Peacock Also Present Joe Weith, City Planner; Sid Poger, The Other Paper; David Simindinger, Bill Simindinger, John Steele 1. Other Business a) Mr. Weith showed a draft of a memo to the Zoning Board regarding the Howard Johnson's request to subdivide pro- perty. Members approved.(,: b) Mr. Burgess noted the Williston Rd. Committee report was given to the City Council last night and was accepted as written. Mrs. Maher suggested the Commission read and dis- cuss it at a later date. c) Mr. Belter reported that George Brady had asked what the Commission is doing about his Airport Parkway property. Mr. Weith said he gave the information to the City Attorney but hasn't heard back from him. Mr. Weith will check on this. d) Mr. Weith reported getting a letter from Earl Greer who says there is no second floor to the building being built. There is also a question of whether he can keep the middle curb cut open until the road is built and the State closes it. Mrs. Maher suggested Mr. Greer be asked to use the cheapest method to close it now. other members felt a one- year waiver on the stipulation would be OK. rant a one vear waiver to Greer's on the ssed 2. Continue site plan application of Paul Choiniere for con- struction of a 900 sq. ft. addition for automobile service, PJ's Auto Villaae. Williston Rd. Mr. Burgess noted the remaining issue is type and value of landscaping including that to be put in under the previous approval. Mr. Steel said there is a new feature in the plan, a juniper hedge, 18-24" high in a continuous line on the green space S'(' "�' GREER' S HOUSE OF DRYCLEAN I NG, INC. 10 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 802/864-7381 `E AUGUST 91 JOSEPH WEITH CITY PLANNER CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 575 DORSET STREET SO BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 MR. WEITH: PLEASE CONSIDER THIS AS AN APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO REMOVE THE CONDITION THAT THE MIDDLE CURB CUT AT 10 DORSET STREET BE CLOSED. AFTER CONFERRING WITH PAUL HORTON, CHIEF RESIDENT" ENGINEER WITH THE STATE AGENCY OF TRANSPORTATION, IT IS OUR FEELING THE CURES CUT DOES NOT NEED TO BE CLOSED AT THIS TIME. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS, MR HORTON FEELS IT WOULD BE ADVANTAGEOUS TO HAVE TWO CURB CUTS ALLOWING THEM TO CLOSE OFF ONE AND DETOUR TO THE SECOND AND VICE VERSA TO FACILITATE TRAFFIC MOVEMENT. AS THE MAJORITY OF CONSTRUCTION BEING DONE THIS YEAR INVOLVES UNDERGROUND WORE'., AND THERE WILL BE NO ADVERSE EFFECT BY LEAVING THE CURB CUT AS IS, WE RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU REMOVE THE CONDITION TO REMOVE. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME IF I CAN BE OF FURTHER ASSISTANCE. MR. HORTON CAN ALSO BE CONTACTED FOR MORE INFORMATION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS MATTER. SINCERELY, -'' FRED GREER GREER'S HOUSE OF DRYCLEANING, INC. 10 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Joe Weith, City Planner DATE: September 13, 1991 RE: September 17, 1991 Agenda Items 3) GREER, REQUEST TO ELIMINATE CONDITION OF APPROVAL Mr. Greer received site plan approval on 12/5/89 to construct a 2,020 square foot addition to the Mills and Greer building on Dorset Street (minutes enclosed). Condition #3 of the approval required closure of the existing middle curb cut prior to occupancy of the addition. This curb cut is to be closed as part of the Dorset Street project. Approximately seven months after the above approval, Mr. Greer requested to keep the curb cut open until such time as it was closed as part of the road improvement project. The commission voted on 8/21/90, under other business, to grant a one-year waiver on closing the curb cut (minutes enclosed). It was intended that the Commission review the traffic access situation after one year for a final determination. Mr. Greer is now requesting that the curb cut remain open until closed by the project (letter enclosed). He has discussed this issue with the Vermont Agency of Transportation and they recommend it remain open so that during construction one curb cut could be closed while traffic is detoured to the other and vice versa. Staff concurs with this recommendation. Having two curb cuts here at City Hall has been very advantageous for the reason stated above. The project is expected to be complete by the end of next summer. At that time the curb cut will be closed. 4) L&M PARTNERSHIP/MARIE UNDERWOOD - 2 LOT SUBDIVISION - FINAL nr.nm This proposal consists of the subdivision of a 127.39 acre parcel into two (2) lots. Lot A, being the northerly half of the lot and consisting of 66.69 acres, is to be retained by L&M partnership. Lot B, being the southerly half of the lot and consisting of 60.7 acres, is to be retained by Marie f City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 January 23, 1990 Mr. E. Frederick Greer 10 Dorset Street. South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Addition, 10 Dorset Street Dear Mr. Greer: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed as requested is a copy of the approval motion for the above referenced project. Please note that these are my notes and that the exact wording of the approval motion may be slightly different. I will send you a copy of the meeting minutes as soon as they are available. If you have any questions, or if I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. S' rely, Joe T-W e i t h City Planner 1 Encl JW/mcp Planning Commission 17 September 1991 page 2 3. Consider request of Earl Greer to eliminate a condition at- tached to his approval for a 2020 sq. ft. addition at 10 Dorset St. which required closure of a curb cut: Mr. Burgess noted that the State will ultimately close one curb cut when construction is complete on Dorset St. Mr. Greer asked to keep it open one year, until the construction is done. Con- struction is still not complete, and he still wants to keep it open. Ms. Peacock moved to grant another two years waiver to Greers' on the stipulation regarding closing of the curb cut. Mrs. Maher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 4. Public Hearing: Final Plat application of L & M Partnership for subdivision of 127.4 acres of land into two parcels of 66.7 acres and 60.7 acres, Spear Street: Mr. Milot said it is basically the same plan as preliminary plat. Legal work has been worked out and the applicants are in agreement with the stipulations of preliminary plat. Ms. Peacock said she is concerned that Stipulation 2 may result in 100 units being built without a second access. Mrs. Maher asked that the minutes show this is clearly not the Commission's intention. Mr. Burgess asked that the City Attorney check to be sure of this. Ms. Peacock moved the Planning Commission approve the final plat application of L&M Partnership for subdivision of 127.4 acres of land into two (2) parcels of 66.7 acres and 60.7 acres as depicted on a two (2) page set of plans, page one entitled "Now - land Property II, Subdivision Plan," prepared by Fitzpatrick - Llewellyn, Inc, and dated March, 1991, last revised 6/13/91, with the following stipulations: 1. Legal documents for the proposed 80 ft. r.o.w. shall be sub mitted to the City Attorney for approval prior to recording the Final Plat. These include the irrevocable Offer of Dedication, and roadway and utility construction agreement (Development Agreement) described in the Preliminary Plat approval dated 6/25/91. Both documents shall be recorded in the South Burling- ton Land Records within 90 days. 2. Not withstandina the wordina of the draft Development Aqree- ment, a development of 50 units or more shall have two separate accesses for purposes of adequate emergency access as required in the subdivision regulations. The Development Agreement shall be, revised to indicate this requirement if determined necessary by the City Attorne PLANNER 658-7955 Earl Greer 10 Dorset Street South Burlingtc.)n, City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT05403 FAX 658-4748 Verniont. 05403 January 29, 1992 Re: Middle Curb Cut, 10 Dorset Street L>ea--Mr. Greer: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision on the above referenced project. if you have any questions, please give me a call. in erel , J e Weith, City Planner 1 Encl JW/mcp City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 January b, 1992 Earl Greer_ 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont. 05403 Re: Middle Curb Cut, 10 Dorset. Street Dear Mr. Greer: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is a copy of the September 17, 1991 Planning Commission meeting minutes. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Si .ere y, J e Weith, �.ity Planner 1 Encl JW/mcp r A- t-7 Ai �/ 71g 3 11-A X- 10 7"1 1) City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 February 6, 1990 E. Frederick Greer 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Addition, Dorset Street Dear Mr. Greer: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Fnclosed are the December 5, 1989 Planning Commission meeting minutes. Please meet the stipulations contained in the approval motion before applying for a building permit.. Please call if you have any questions. C' cerely, !.� JU) oe Weith, City Planner 1 Encl Jw/mcp r M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, City Engineer Re: December 5, 1989 agenda items Date December 1, 1989 4) EARI, GREER, DORSET STREET 1. Plan r,.iust show where proposed catch basin will drain. 2. Plan conforms to the proposed Dorset Street widening. The planting and yard lighting along Dorset Street should be complet- ed after the Dorset Street widening. 3. Plaii should delineate what will be constructed along Dorset Street as part of the building addition and what will be done as cart. of: the Dorset Street project. 4. New underground service should come directly from pole 2-12 instead or adding a new pole. 5) U.V.M. PARKING LOT BEHIND SHERATON, WILLISTON ROAD 1. Access drives and parking lot should include some lighting. 2. A pedestrian pathway should be included at least along the East. Avenue acces , di-ive. -Planning File Data for Computer Input 1. Original Property Owner_ 2 Developer's Name 3 Name of Development, - - ------- 4. Address of Development or Project 5 Type of Project � /� �r�.er-> Minor Subdivision (i4��)� Major Subdivision (MS) Site Plan (SP) 6. Zoning District I - I Zoning District, 2 8. Zoning Board Approval date if Required y. Date of Planning Commission Hearings/Meetings Site Plan Date or Sketch Plan Date io. Preliminary Plat date 11. Final Plat Date II"evised Final Plat Date 1 (if applicable) i 't�\�ised Final Plat Date 2 (if applicable) x 4 Acreage of Total Project 1 5 . of' Land I Ce- (2--- 7r-as lf.. U-t, of land 2 t' land 3 land .1 1 14 1 j III he r of Lots U. I, cif S i n gy I o I- r i m i I Y ('nits f; i I ('I) i t 0 23. Size of Building (Square footage) �020_t�l' 24. Streets City Street CS Private Street PS 25. Date of Acceptance of streets by City 26. Bond -Landscaping 27. Bond -Streets 28. Bond -Sewer 29. Bond -Water 30. Bond -Other 31. Date Mylar Due (90 days after approval)' 32. Date Recorded - . 33. Expiration date of Approval 34. Date of First Building Permit 34. Tax Map Number 1%- 36. Map File Location 1 37. Map File Location 2 38. Map File Location 3 Other fees (Type and amount) _ Preparers Name: — Date: Posted in Computer (Name, Date):_____ I 12/5/89 `TW MOTION OY APIIROV1 _: I move the South Burlington Planning; Commission approve the Site Plan application of E. Frederick Greer for construction of a 2,020 square foot addition for retail use as depicted on a plan entitled "Earl and Kathryn cheer, 10 Dorset Street, South Burl- ington, Vermont," prepared by Adams Construction l�'c:[?, il1jl and dated 10/12/89, last revised 11/22/89, with the following stipu- lations: 092� oo� 1. The applicant shall post a ;ss6f)�3-year landscaping bond prior to permit. "zw,164W 1--ces s<z,a�(. --- -' e The plan shall be revised prior to permit to show the follow- ing: 1) Where the proposed :patch basin will drain. This shall be approved by the City Engineer. 2) New underground service from GMP pole 2-12 instead of a new pole. 3) A clear delineation of improvements to be constructed as part of the Dorset Street project (i.e. sidewalk, bike path, curb cuts, etc.). Qi Y A building permit must be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void. City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 August 22, 1990 Mr. Frederick Greer 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Addition, 10 Dorset Street. Dear Mr. Greer: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 The Planning Commission reviewed your letter dated 8/15/90 re- garding the addition to the above referenced property. This was reviewed at the 8/21/90 Planning Commission meeting. In regards to the condition requiring you to close the middle curb cut prior to occupancy of the addition, the. Commission voted to extend the closure deadline to one year after occupancy of the addition. This will give the Commission an opportunity to review the traf- fic access situation after one year and decide whether closure is necessary. I will send you the minutes of the 8/21/90 meeting as soon as they are available. Please call if you have any questions. erely 9e,1c 'V� in�eit.h, City Planner JW/mcp City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 August 29, 1990 Mr. E. Frederick Greer 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Findings of Fact, Addition at 10 Dorset Street Dear Mr. Greer: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact issued by the Planning Commission on the above referenced project. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Raymond J. Belair, Zoning and Planning Assistant 1 Encl RJB/mcp CITY- OF SOUTH BURI,INGTON S ITF_. PLAN APPI, I CATION i 1) OWNER OF HECOHD (name, address, phone Ir 2) APPLICANT (name, address, phone 4tn_�e�c 60 co 3) CONTACT PERSON (name, address, phone #) E—.F__�___ C' r R<r' cc d? --- --- 4).PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 10 5) LOT NUMBER (if applicable) 6) PROPOSED USE(S) 2 • t, rnn=X�•2� r 7) SIZE OF PROJECT (i.e. total building square footage, # units, maximum height and # floors, square feet per floor) Is 13 9 D 8) NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES Z L: 9 ). LOT COVERAGE: building I ,. %; landscaped areas / �% building, parking, outside storage% 10) COST ESTIMATES: Buildings $ %SCE l"( -, Landscaping $ Other Site Improvements (please list"with cost) $ i ); -r I., --I ,.t') -;� s,. - ) S-U, Ue:Yv- - --- 11) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE:W /P 12) ESTIMATED AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (in and out) Estimated trip ends (in and out) during the following hours: Monday through Frid y /` 11-12 noon_/; 12-1p.m..7iy 1-2 p.m. �� 2-3 p.m. 3-4 p.m._; 4-5 p.m.3 d 5-6 p.m. 6-7 p.m. / 13) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: / Z 14) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: uF s.qr3�T�l� uO oA-11 DATE OF SUBMISSION SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE OF HEAR I NG PLEASE SUBMIT FIVE COPIES AND ONE REDUCED COPY (8 1/2 X 11 OR 8 1/2 X 14) OF THE SI`I`E PLAN WITH THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: Lot drawn to scale (20 foot scale if possible). Location of streets, abutting properties, fire hydrants, existing buildings, existing landscaping. Existing and proposed curbcuts, pavement, walkways. Proposed landscaping plan (number, variety and size) equal to of greater than the required amount in the Zoning Regulations. Number and location of Parking Spaces: (9' x 18') with 22 or 24 foot aisles as required. Number and location of compact car spaces. (This requires separate Planning Commission approval). Number and location of handicapped spaces as required. (13 feet by 20 feet in size, one per every fifty spaces). Location of septic tanks (if applicable). Location of any easements. Lot coverage information: Building footprint, building, parking and outside storage, and landscaped areas. Location of site (Street # and lot #). North arrow. Name of person or firm preparing site plan and date. -2- City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 August 6, 1991 Mr. Frederick Greer 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Addition, 10 Dorset Street Dear Mr. Greer: /CJ, l dx7` Jf ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 This is to bring to your attention a condition of approval for your recent addition which was amended on August 21, 1990 giving you a one (1) year extension in which to close your middle curb cut. You have until August 31, 1991 to meet the condition and close off t-he middle curb cut. If you feel that the traffic situation is not adversely affected by this curb cut you should apply to the Planning Commission to remove the condition that it be closed. Should you wish to make an application, please contact this office as soon as possible. If you have any questions, please give me a call. S' erely, 'Al�- e Weith, City Planner JW/mcp I City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 September 13, 1991 Mr. Earl Greer 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Middle Curb Cut, 10 Dorset Street Dear Mr. Greer; 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, September 17, 1991 at 7:30 PM to represent your request. 70e cerly,(z- -Weith+' City Planner JW/peh City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 December 1, 1989 Mr. E. Frederick Greer 10 Dorset. Street South Burlington, Vermont 0514-03 Re: Addition, 1.0 Dorset Street Mr. (;reer : ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is the agenda for next. Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting and my comments to the Planning Commission. Also en- closed are Bill szymanski's and Chief Goddette's comments. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, December 5, 1989 at 7:30 P.M. to represent your request. Siricerely, :ioe Weith, City Planner Encls JW/m^r- G�' TO: FROM: RE: DATE: I nutl� urtingt n Ntre Department 575 Burnet �#reet 3uutlt furling#un, lRermun# 115403 1 (802) 658-7960 SO. BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION CHIEF GODDETTE TUESDAY DECEMBER 5,1989 AGENDA WEDNESDAY NOVEMBER 29,1989 1. EARL & KATHRYN GREER ADDITION 10 DORSET STREET PLANS HAVE BEEN REVIEWED BY THIS DEPARTMENT AND AT THIS TIME I DO NOT SEE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THE ADDITION FOR THE DEPARTMENT IN GIVEN EMERGENCY PROTECTION IF NEEDED. eK x Ar q, vo�-1 /� I � - �,e, leeo.) 0 v )A "ll , /Zldpolt-�-o % ir�2q(�Q7)C IS 36en4 6:,� /sy Y. 0� 71-- I�-,�7 y y,Yo-( = 7i C3 -2-( � \ A TELEPHONE MEMO Name: &&4 Date'' Contact: — Subject y / mAj)�L u�e , � -� J -----_- 6/x^, -�������-` / / "-- -----T— - -----7TT---------_._____ature ' Si�n IL �. TELEPHONE MEMO a0a I 144A Name: Date: Contact: Subject Will lid WE . .. .. ..... Si naeture I -3- Mr. Newman said I didn't see the pictures but I saw the house and I don't know that the pictures convey that there is no better way but to take the house down. The house was decaying. There was no structure of the house and there was just no other way to do it. You need certain elements in order to build a house upon and there was just nothing there. I appreciate the lengths he went through to comply with the law. I would move to see the board allow him to put a house up. The house was a mess. Mrs. Judy Newman said it was really as he said - kind of astounding. If someone's house burned to the ground it would not be fit for living. It's almost the same thing. It's unlivable - it's a wreck. Mr. Nelson said I worked with the City when they set about a criteria for the Q.C.P neighborhood. I can really speak for a lot of people in the neighborhood in what he is trying to do to try to save the house and it's absolutely impossible. There was some discussion as to the correct way to vote on this. The appeal was granted unanimously. No. 2 Appeal of E Frederick Greer Appeal of E. Frederick Greer seeking a variance from Section 19.00 Non -complying structures sub section 19.002, request is for permission to remove 1672 square feet (front portion, westerly side) from an existing structure and replace with an addition of 2040 square feet (20' x 102' addition, northerly side) to a structure which is non -complying to dimensional, lot coverage and landscaping requirements on a lot containing 1.4 acres, located at 10 Dorset Street. Mr. Ward said the area is zoned C-1 District. Section 19.00 Non -complying structures sub section 19.002 alterations. Section 18.00 Dimensional requirements: setback 57 feet from planned r.o.w. - existing 40 feet"proposed 47 feet. Lot coverage 70% maximum, existing 90.5% - proposed 82%. Section 19.104 sub section (b) "not more than 30% of front yard" for driveway and parking. Total front yard 13,160 square feet. 70% = 9177 square feet - proposed 1440 square feet approximately .109%. Proposed remove front portion 1672 feet. Replace with 20' x 102' addition 2040 square feet - two story. Estimated cost $150,000. The building will get a complete new look. Mr. Ward said for the record this addition is the result of the Dorset St. widening but the City Council and the Planning Commission will not get involved. They are not supporting this or opposed to it. They are taking the land and he has to do this. Mr. Blais said what you are suggesting tonight is if the City was successful in securing the land for that road widening. Mr. Greer said it is necessary for us to make this modification to continue in business. Mr. Ward said this eventually will have to have a variance. Mr. Graf said if they go ahead with this widening are you saying that Mr. Greer would have to abandon this business. Mr. Ward said he wouldn't have a place in the front to pull into his -� property. Mr. Blais asked who created the hardship? Mr. Ward said Mr. Stitzel -4- looked at this plan and he said we're still in negotiations and we will not be a part of this. Mr. Chamberland said if the building had been complying would there be a hardship. It's non -complying now. Mr. Ward said the City has taken 2 takings already. Mr. King said the City created the hardship. Mr. Walter Adams said what we have attempted to do is to create some additional green space in the front and some islands to allow for snow removal. What is shown there now is the actual proposed taking line and what it would look like after the taking. Mr. Graf asked will there be access to the Texaco Station? Mr. Adams replied yes. One of the issues that came up for the Greers is that this building is in 4 pieces. It started out as a carwash and has grown into what is there now. This proposal came about making this building a 2 story building. I have prepared a list to match the 5. Criteria. (1) That there are unique physical circumstance or conditions, including irregularity, narrowness, or shallowness of lot size or shape, or exceptional topographical or other physical conditions peculiar to the particular property, and that the unnecessary hardship is due to such conditions, and not the circumstances or conditions generally created by the provisions of the zoning regulations in the neighborhood or district in which the property is located. This was not created by the ordinance. This will be the third taking by the City. This is the primary issue here. They have not created the 9' additional front yard. The buildings have been there over 10 years now. This site communicates to the Texaco. The space in the back is used for truck turn around space. Mr. Greer said we also have an agreement with 100 Dorset St. (2) That because of such physical circumstances or conditions, there is no possibility that the property can be developed in strict conformity with the provisions of the zoning regulations and that the authorization of a variance is therefore necessary to enable the reasonable use of the property. The existing building would be 28' from the new lot line instead of 57 It would be much more in compliance. The building is made up in 20' pieces and they would be taking 19' off. The proposed lot coverage would be 822'. This site seems to have grown and is 90% asphalt and by putting in green space they will have 82% lot coverage. (3) That such unnecessary harship has not been created by the appellant. Hardship has been created by the taking of the land. (4) That the variance, if authorized, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or district in which the property is located, nor substantially or permanently impair the appropriate use or development of adjacent property, nor be detrimental to the public welfare. Front yard coverage 70% of the front yard would be grass. Existing 92-93% asphalt. They would be getting 9'. Proposed curb and green space behind it. Mr. Graf said the front of the building will still be facing Dorset St. Mr. Adams said the entrance for the laundromat will be on the side of the -5- building. Only the entrance remaining in the front will be the dry cleaning. The front will still be on Dorset St. Mr. Randazzo said you're saying this may not be a dry cleaning. Mr. Adams said not right now but at some point in the future. Mr. Blais said what does this do for you if you got an approval tonight. Mr. Greer said it looks like they are going to sign with us this Wednesday night at the meeting. The City told us that they would like the signature. I don't think we're going to build this building until the City signs this. Mr. Adams said when Mr. Greer came to me he said I've got to do something and not wait forever. I don't think that they are making a proposal tonight and should you choose to approve this is the only possibility. Something that allows the Greers whether the City signs or not I don't think it would increase the value of their property. Mr. Graf said if for some reason tomorrow morning the City would say we don't want the 10', do you still want to change the building? Mr. Greer said the reason we're changing the building is because of the taking of the road. Mr. Adams said there have been 2 takings already. Mr. Graf said I don't see a hardship right now if there is not going to be a taking. Mr. Adams said the last addition to the building was in 1978 and the last taking was about 5 years ago. The hardship has been created since the last addition to the building. Mr. Graf assumed the chairmanship in order to allow Mr. Blais to make a motion. Mr. Blais said I would like to make the motion that if this variance is granted that it is subject to the taking by the State and City of private land owned by the Greers for the public good. This was seconded by Mr. Randazzo and 4 voted aye and 3 voted nay. Mr. Thibault moved that the Planning Commission review this project for off -site traffic circulation to its satisfaction. This was seconded by Mr. Blais and all voted aye. The appeal was granted unanimously. The Vice Chairman turned the chair back to the chairman. Mr. King moved that we accept the findings of fact and the minutes of October 23, 1989. This was seconded by Mr. Austin and all voted aye. Mr. Austin moved for adjournment. This was seconded by Mr. Thibault and the meeting adjourned at 8:55 PM. Clerk STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DECISION & FINDING OF FACT On the 13th day of November, 1989, the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment heard evidence regarding the appeal of Fred- erick Greer, 10 Dorset Street based on the following facts and findings: 1) Due to previous takings, hardship has been created by the City. 2) Will enhance district, create more green space and more parking. 3) Traffic flow will improve with new design. 4) Character of neighborhood will not be altered. Based upon the above stated facts and findings the appellant's request for a variance is hereby approved. Stipulations: That if this variance is granted that it is subject to the taking by the State and City of private land owned by the Greers for the. public good. That the Planning Commission review this project for off -site traffic circulation to its satisfaction. Chairman of the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment i PLANNING COMMISSION Site plan review, addition to Greer's al JUNE 13, 1978 Mr. Page showed the Commission the site on the slides. Per. Greer said they wanted to put storage room to the rear of the present building. The rock in front of the building will be removed and a tree put in. A small grey building on the land will be removed after the addition is completed. The addition will be 60' x 801. Mr. Levesque asked if the shortcut around the intersection would be blocked and was told it would not be. Mr. Greer said that they presently rent space on San Remo Drive and that would be dropped. He felt adding storage to the building would cut down on the traffic since they would not have to go back and forth to the storage center. He said they might rent space to ENS also. Mr. Wessel asked about the three curb cuts and was told by Mr. Page that he did not see any improvement in circulation if one of them were closed. Mr. Greer said that they had tried closing off one of them but that it had not worked. The landscaping plan will be revised to allow access to both the Texaco station and 100 Dorset Street. Mr. Woolery moved that the South Burlington Planning Commission approve e site plan of the addition to Greer's per the drawing of Earl B. Greer, dated 4 25 78, a_t 81_0_Dorset Street_ for a storage facility with the following stipulations: 1. That a landscaping bond of $1500 beposted. 2. That the landaca�ing_be inl,talled in such a manner as to maintain t-be_ twoacce_s-s points to 100 Dorset Street and the Texaco station 3. That _all- the parking spaces be striped _and be perpendicu_lear_ to_ the building. 4. This approval shall expire in 6 months from this date. The motion was seconded by Mr. Poger. Mr. Greer stated he would curb the landscaping to the front of the building in order to protect it from cars. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting was declared adjourned at 10:00 pm. Clerk ADMINISTRATIVE CHECKLIST PROJECT NAME/FILE REFERENCE Greer's Addition 1. LETTER OF NOT I F ICAT ION & APPROVAL MOTION OR F IND f G S & ORDER 2. BONDING OR ESCROW AGREEMENTS LANDSCAPING SEWER WATER STORM DRAINAGE ROADS CURBS SIDEWALKS (NOTE ALL RELEASES OR AGREEMENT REVISIONS) 3. LIST APPROVALS GRANTED, WITH DATES, AND PERMITS GRANTER & SITE INSPECTIONS COMPLETED, ETC.: J 4. UTILITY EASEMENTS *, BILLS OF SALE RECORDED ACCEPTED 5. CERTIFICATE OF TITLE x 6. ROADWAYS DEEDS FOR CITY STREETS ACCEPTED PRIVATE ROAD & WAIVER AGREEMENT x 7. FINAL PLAT OR RECORD COPY - STAKED . SIGNED, & FILED OR RECORDED 8. PEDESTRIAN EASEMENTS ACCEPTED & RECORDED FILED 9. MISCELLANEOUS AGREEMENTS LAND FOR ROAD WIDENING OFFER OF IRREVOCABLE DEDICATION FUTURE ACCESS POINTS SHARED ACCESS POINTS OTHER 10. COPY OF SURVEY TO ASSESSOR (IF CHANGE IN PROPERTY LINES) 11. FEES - PAID/DATE HEARING BU I LD ING P ERMIT ENGINEERING INSP. SEWER RECREATION (RECORD CALCULATIONS AND DEPOSIT IN ACCOUNT) 12. IMPACT FOLLOW UP i.e., "ON LINE" EVALUATION: SCHOOL KIDS CAR COUNTS SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE In accordance with the South Burlington Zoning Raitions and Chapter ula II Title 24, V.S.A. the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearng at the South Burlington Municipal Offices, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on Monday, November 13, 1989 at 7:00 P.M. to con- sider the following: 1) Appeal of Rudolph and Iris McDonald seeking a variance from Section 24.50 Non complying structure, sub section 24.501(c) of the South Burlington Regulations. Request is for permission to remove an existing sin- gle-family dwelling con- taining a footprint of 1357 square feet and re- place with a new dwell- ing containing a footprint of 1080 square feet on a lot 2880 square feet lo- cated at 80 Control Ave- nue. 2) Appeal of E. Frederick Greer seeking a variance from Section 19.00 Non complying structures sub section 19.002 altera- tions of the South Burling- ton Regulations. Request is for permission to re- move 1672 square feet (front portion, westerly side) from an existing structure and replace with an oddtiion of 2040 square feet (20' x 102' addition northerly side) to a structure which is non complying to dimen- sional, lot coverage and landscaping requirements on a lot containing 1.4 acres, located at 10 Dor- set Street. Richard Ward Zoning Administrative Officer City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 October 30, 1989 E. Frederick Greer 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Zoning appeal Dear Mr. Greer: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Be advised that the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the City Hall, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street on Monday, November 13, 1989 at 7:00 P.M. to con- sider your request for a zoning variance. Please plan to attend this meeting. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer 1 Encl RW/mcp City of SouKh Burlington Application to Board of Adjustment Date OCTOBER 24, 1989 Applicant E. FREDERICK GREER Owner, leasee, gent / Address S. BROWNELL ROAD Telephone # Landowner EARL & KATHRYN GREER O '_cial Use APPLICATION # HEARING DATE FILING DATE FEE AMOUNT �6'1 - 7 Address S. BROWNELL RD/WILLISTON Location and description of property 10 DORSET STREET Type of application check one ( ) appeal from decision of Administrative Officer( )request for a conditional use (XX ) request for a variance. I understand the presentation procedures required by State Law (Section 4468 of the Planning & Development Act). Also that hearings are held twice a month (second and fourth Mondays). That a legal advertisement must appeal a minimum of fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing. I agree to pay a hearing fee which is to off -set the cost of the hearing. Provisions of zoning ordinance in question 1) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE 2) FRONT YARD SETBACK 3) FRONT YARD COVERAGL Reason for appeal THIS PROJECT WILL IMPROVE THE EXISTING -CONDITIONS, AND EXISTING COVERAGES The owner or applicant should submit along with this application (8 copies) plans, elevations, landscaping diagrams (drawn to scale) traffic data and any other additional information which will serve as support evidence to the Board. Hearing Date Signature of A'15pellant Do not write below this line ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE In accordance with the South Burlington Zoning Regulations and Chapter 117, Title 24, V.S.A. the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington Municipal Offices, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on Day of Week at to consider the following: Month and Date Time Appeal of T/,1 4�.c.. f.. seeking a A91—A4,A41,,., from Section I 00 of the South Burlington Regulations. Request is for permission to 1) REMOVE 19 FT FROM THE EAST SIDE (FRONT) OF THE BUILDING 2) ADD 20 FT'TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THE REMAINING STRUCTURE 3) PR_OVI_DE ADDITIONAL GREEN SPACES 4) RECONSTRUCT THE EXISTING BUILDING TO ALLOW A FUTURE 2ND FLOOR 70111 ADAMS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY_ INC_ 1720 HEGEMAN AVENUE • P.O. BOX 728 • ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 • 879-2811 ADJOINING LANDOWNERS TO PROPERTY OWNED BY EARL AND KATHRYN GREER CHAMPLAIN OIL CO. INC. BOX 2126 SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT OS403 RBS REALTY CORP. ATTILLIO PETROCELLI 110 E. 59 ST. NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK 10022 LODGING NORTH, INC. GARY FARRELL 870 WILLISTON ROAD SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 INVESTORS MANAGEMENT CO. INC. BOX 515 WILLISTON, VERMONT 05495 MERLIN, INC. BOX 993 BURLINGTON, VERMONT OS401 STRAN-STEEL BUILDINGS ... FOR INDUSTRIAL, COMMERCIAL AND FARM USE... � � 3REERS HOUSE OF DRYCLEANI� � 8 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 24 OCTOBER 89 RICHARD WARD, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DORSET STREET SO BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 RE: EARL B AND KATHRYN D GREER - 8 DORSET STREET MR. WARD: WE PROPOSE TO RECONSTRUCT THE EXISTING GREERS DRYCLEANING BUILDING AS A RESPONSE TO THE TAKING OF LAND FOR THE EXPANSION OF DORSET STREET. THIS TAKING WILL BE THE THIRD TAKING OF LAND AT THE FRONT OF THIS SITE FOR ROAD EXPANSION. WE FEEL THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE LOOKED UPON FAVORABLY FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. FRONT YARD SETBACK WILL BE INCREASED FROM 40 FEET EXISTING TO 46 FEET NEW, DESPITE THE LOSS OF 10 FEET OF LAND DUE TO THE ROAD PROJECT. 2. THE EXISTING FRONT YARD COVERAGE, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 20% GREEN IN LIEU OF THE REQUIRED 70%, WILL BE INCREASED SLIGHTLY AND ADDITIONAL GREEN WILL BE PLACED AT THE BUILDING FRONT. 3. THE EXISTING SITE HAS 90.5% TOTAL LOT COVERAGE. THE PROPOSAL ADDS 400 SQUARE FEET OF BUILDING, REDUCES THE LOT SIZE BY 3000 SQUARE FEET, YET DECREASES THE LOT COVERAGE TO 82%. WHILE THIS IS STILL ABOVE THE 70%, IT IS A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT OF THE EXISTING SITUATION. 4. THE PROPOSED ISLANDS, GREENERY AND ADJUSTMENTS TO THE BUILDING ENTRANCES WILL ALLOW A BETTER CIRCULATION AND DEFINITION OF TRAFFIC FLOW ON THE SITE. THE PROPOSED RECONSTRUCTION OF THE EXISTING BUILDING WILL ALLOW A STRUCTURE MUCH MORE IN KEEPING A "CITY CENTER" WITH COLORED ROOF, WOOD ACCENTS, ROOF OVERHANGS, AND NEW SIDING AS WELL AS A STEEPLY PITCHED ROOF.` THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPING PLAN INDICATES THE RELOCATION OF EXISTING PLANTS AND NEW NURSERY STOCK TO PROVIDE SCREENING OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING AND TO PROVIDE SCREENING FOR THE HVAC EQUIPMENT LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME IF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS NEEDED. SINCERELY, E. FREDERICK BREER Mr. Earl Greer 8 Dorset Street South Burlington, Dear Mr. Greer: Vermont 05401 February 8, 1979 Be advised that the City Council has approved your request for a conditional use (according to the proposal of record) with the following stipulations: 1) any additional signs shall be erected in conformance with the City sign regulations. 2) the proposed use (air-conditioning subcontractor) is the only use permitted, prohibiting any retail sales. 3) that upon termination of the proposed use, that portion of the building involved will revert back to warehousing. All proceddings, findings and final action will be on file with the City Clerk. If you have any questions feel free to contact me. Very truly, Richard Ware, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mcg SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOT T^E i 1 In accordance with the oouth Burlington Interim Zoning Regulations and Section 4447, Title 24, V.S.A. the South Burlingtrn City Council will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington City Offices, Conference Room, 1175 Williston Road, South Burlington, Vermont on Monday January 22, 1979 — 7:30 p.m._ to consider (day of week) (month and da (time) the following: #1 Application of Earl B. Greer seeking approval under Section 5 a, Conditional Uses of the South Durlinaton Interim Zoning Regulations. Request is for permission to operate a heating sub- contractor business from an existing structure in conjunction with sporting goods store and laundromat, at 8 Dorset Street. 2 Ap-lication of James Meunier seeking approval under Section 5 a, Conditional Use of the South Durlington Interim Zoning Regulations. Request is for permission to convert the lower level of an existing structure at 10 Patchen Road to office use, and retain the upper level as an apartment. r3 Ap,-lication of R. Gordon and Joyce Hurley seeking approval under Section 5 Conditional Uses of the South Durlington Interim Zoning Requlations. Request is for permission to construct a medical and dental clinic, approximately 7,000 square feet, at 595 Dorset Street. Richard S'lard, Zoning Administrative Officer January 6, 1979 DW/1/29/79 SUGGESTED MOTION OF APPROVAL Earl B. Greer 8 Dorset Street That the South Burlington City Council approve the conditional use application of Earl B. Greer, 8 Dorset Street allowing for the operating of a heating subcontracting, in conjunction with the existing sporting goods-laundermat business, according to the proposal of record, based on the following findings and subject to the following stipulations: Findincs: The proposed use is consistent with the health, safety and welfare of the City of South Burlington and standards 2, 3 and 4 of Section 5 of the Interim Zoning regulations. The proposed use is consistent with standards 1 and 5 based on the evidence presented by the applicant, that there shall not be more than four vehicles involved with the proposed use. Stipulations: 1. Any additional signs shall be erected in conformance with the city sign regulations. 2. The proposed use (air conditioning subcontractor) is the only use permitted, prohibiting any retail sales. 3. That upon termination of the proposed use, that portion of the building involved will revert back to warehousing. M E M 0 R A N D U M To: South Burlington City Council From: Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator Re: Conditio-aal use application Earl Greer - 8 Dorset Street Date: January 10, 1979 Under the 1974 zoning regulations the area in question is zoned Business -Retail District. On May 15, 1978 the applicant was granted a variance allowing for the construction of a 641 x 801 addition, to be used for storage in conjunction with Mills -Greer and Eastern Mountain Sports. This request is for permission to lease a 201 x 60 portion of the warehouse to Air Comfort (a heating sub -contractor;. Air Comfort employs five people of which one would be full time using a 12' x 12' office, the remaining area is a repair shop and storage area. Be advised that Air Comfort is presently operating from this location. Upon notification by this office of the vio- lation, Mr. Greer informs me that he was aware that he was violating City regulations and has co-operated fully with us on this matter. Having investigated and observed this operation I find no serious problem. POWACO ---------- 7-2 ec" BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE ur- in pccordonre NLo the R"p IoBons lington Interlm Zoning ReaS.A_ the Viand Section µl7. Tittoncit will South Burlington Cn9-� the Sough hold a Public hea Conference ton-Cov'Otfices.R�d _South .Burlir1 ton- Williston Mpndov• rli Room• ton.' Vermont on 7;10 Pm, to con- . Bung 1979. - sl n r, e IlowIng' - Gree( seek, tic th ll Aovii�pI under5edion 5• Condi- VO in9 avP pI the South Buriln uest tion°I Us u^ing Re9ulatlons. Rea Interim Z ate a. he°t-' is for DermISM to oDer pntunction IM s�pcphtrattor husiness.1 Ilion structure In loun- exisiln oAliW goods store and -. with 5D at 6 Da I Street. ;Meunier drolnaDtic otlon of u � esSection 5• 2) S seeKlnO rovol aPV se of the South Burling• } Conditional U pping Regulations. ton Intertm Z rmisStan to convert' for Pe stNC- gU141 Is is pry Ice the lower IevatchennRood n .lure at 10 P r. level os on. fie• pnd fltaln the uPDe ppprlment. R Gordon and 3) APDticalion pking ooDroval un- Hurtev se 1 Uses_ot Jovice tlon 5.ICondltiOno Zoning, der Sec urtlnpton Interlm J%e Sputn B . Rea , is for . o n i Regul°dons. ruCi o medico) and Isslon to co ely Mal ctlniC�� po 1 Street- square feet. Richprd Word ZIc a 'dminlstrottve. _. Officer Jonuory b. 1479 GREER, Frederick 10 Dorset Street Area zoned C-1 Distz-Lct. Section 19.00 Non -complying structures sub section 19.002 altera- tions. Section 18.00 Dimensional requirements. setback 57 feet from planned r.o.w. - existing 40 feet proposed 47 feet. Lot coverage 70% maximum, existing 90.5% - proposed 82%. Section 19.104 sub section(b) "not more than 30% of front yard" for driveway and parking. Total front. yard 13,160 square feet. 70% = 9177 square feet. - proposed 1440 square feet approximately .109%. Proposed remove front portion 1672 square feet. .Replace with 20' x 102' addition 2040 square feet - two story. Estimated cost $150,000. NOTICE OF APPEAL SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT I hereby appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for the following: conditional use, variance, decision of administrative officer. Property Owner t� Y/ -) 6 Y e e Y' 'Property location & description Variance of Section (number) (title of section) Basis of appeal I understand the regular meetings are held twice a month on Monday at 5:00 p.m. at the City Hall, Conference Room. The legal advertise- ment must appear in the Burlington Free Press a minimum of fifteen (15) days before the hearing, I agree to pay a fee of $30.00 which fee is to off -set the costs of advertising and the hearing. Hearing Date Signature of Appellant L ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE In accordance with the South Burlington Zoning Regulations and Chapter 117, Title 24 V.S.A. the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington City Offices, Conference Room, 1175 Williston Road, South Burlington, Vermont on , at to consider the (day of week) (Month and date) (time) following: Appeal of �AA F seeking a (1_1/UaAAef�. , , from Section Lt-a of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations. Request is for permission to .J i i SOUTN BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE in accordance with the South Bur- lington Zoning Regulations and Chapter 117, Title 24 V.S.A. the South Burlington .Zoning Board' of Adiust- ment will hold,a Public hearing at the South Burlington City Offices, Conference Room, 1175 Williston Road, South Burlington, Vermont on Monday, January 8, 1979, at 5:00 P.M. to consider the following: I. APPeol of Coleman Parker seeking a variance from Section 11.00, Dimensional requlrmenfs of the South Burlington Zoning Regu- lotions..Request Is for Permission to construct a 28, x 36' addition to within ten (10) feel of the easterly side yard at, Aamco Transmissions, ' 19M Williston Road. I. Appeal of Earl P. Greer, seeking o variance from Section 11.15, Multiple 'Uses of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations. Request is for Per- mission to operate a heating sub contractor's business, occupying a 1200 sQuare foot space, within an ex- c Ishng structure which is presently also occupied by a loundromot and sports store of 8 Dorset Street. Robert M. Martineau, Chairman, Zoning Board of Adlustment December 23, 1978 January 8, 1979 Mr. Earl Greer 8 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Mr. Greer: Be advisee that the South Burlington City Council will hold a public hearing at the City Hall, Conference Room, 1175 Williston Road on Monday, January 22, 1979 at 7:30 p.m. to consider your request for a conditional use as set -forth in the attached legal notice. The application is reviewed based on the enclosed listed criteria. If you have any questions feel free to contact me. r Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning .Administrative officer RYT/mcg 2 Encl. Y Y APPL ICAT ION FOR COt:D IT IO1?AL U S L SOUTH BURLINGTOIJ CITY COU_1CIL I hereby apply to the City Council for conditional use aprroval under the Interim Zoning Regulation. Property Owner Property location F description Section Conditional U I understand the regular meetings are held twice a month on Monday at B:00 p.m. at the City Hall, Conference Room. The legal advertisement must appear in the Burlington Free Press a minimwn of fifteen (15) days before the hearing, I agree to pay a fee of $30.00 which fee is to off- set the costs of advertising and the hearing. Hearing Date Signture of Ap7 ellent SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE In accordance ,with the South Burlington Interim Zoning Regulations and Section 4447, Title 24, V.S.A. the South Burlingtn City Council will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington City Offices, Conference Room, 1175 Williston Road, South Burlington, Vermont on 'z a to con s id er (day of week) (matt end dath (tin{e; the Following: .'/ Apr.lication of A4,_,_.�.►� seeking alp--roval unuer Section of the South Lurlincton Interim Zoning �:egulations. Request is for permission to 7 C.�.� •C� � �` -44 i ee mac.. ✓�-�" ..u-�,+...�,.°�.w.� �a,�'�..�; ,,,ef,d�1 j.' 0_�,.cl ..��r ate- -�"'�► s a; December 26, 1978 Mr., Earl Greer 8 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Mr. Greer: Be advised that the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the City Hall, Conference Room, 1175 Williston Road on Mondayo January 8, 1979 at 5:00 p.m. to consider your request for a zoning variance. Please ,plain to attend this meeting. Very truly, Richard ware, Zoning Administrative Officer RTI/mcg 20 DECEM8ER L978 I8ING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SOUTH BURLlNGTU0, VERN0NT GENTLEMEN: AT THE REAR OF MY BUILDING ON 8 DOR5ET STREET l SEEK PERMISSION TO RENT A 20' X 60` PORTION OF MY NEW WAREHOUSE TO AIR COMFORT, A HEATING SUB CONTRACTOR. AIR COMFORT EMPLOY 5 PEOPLE OF WHICH $ WOULD BE FULL TIME USING A 12' X 112' OFFICE. PRACTICALLY NO CUSTOMER ACTIVITY WOULD BE CALLING AT THEIR OFFICE/ THEREFOR GENERATING NO ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC OR PARKING. VERY TRULY YOURS, ^EM� � t /\MERN GREER GREER 10 Dorset Street Area zoned B-R District Section 13.00 Non -conforming uses and structures Building is nos -conforming to set bac'r'l,_ Minimum 751 - existing 5,11 Proposed addition Si' x 301 storage - buildinc for Greer's and other tt E. i,.T. S. Multi-ole use (Section 11.15) 1 - Sport equipment sales (3) 2 1 D Z y c I a a n e r z 2 u n (��, r - 7 --m a 3 S-ICo-;.-ac7,e are,:,, ZSIL-AmaiZ-ej�, cost. Of adcii--io-1 $3,55,000 F.M.V. of building $63,750 LEGAL NOTICES SOUTH SURLINGTC i ZONING NOTICE In accordance with the South Bur. iington Zoning • Regulotio-!,,s and Chapter 117, Title 24 V.S.A. tht, South. Burlington Zoning Board of Adjust- ment will hold a public hearing of the South Burlington City Offices, Conference Room, 1175 Williston Road, South Burlington, Vermont on Monday, May 15, 1978, at 5:00 a.m. to consider the following: - No.1 Appeal to Harry Wallace, McDonald's Corporation seeking a variance, from Section 11.00, Dimensional requirements of the South Burlington Zoning Reou lotions. Request Is for permission to construct a entrance vestibule, 3' X 37', to within forty seven feet (47 (47) of the -required front Yard at 12205 Williston 'Road. ' - No. 2 Appeal of Rinold and Beatrice Precourt seeking a variance, from Se Section 13.00, Non -conforming uses and structures and Section 11.15 Multiple uses of the South Burlington . Zoning Regulations. Request Is for permission to construct a second level containing approximately 3,400 square feet; to operate a retail shop and parts and service shoo In con- junction with existing retail busl- nesses at 1174 Williston Rood. No. 3 Appeal of Lynford and Edna Roya seeking a variance, from Sec - Non 11.00, Dimensional requirements 6 Section 13.00 Non -conforming uses G structures of the South Burlington, Zoning Regulations. Request is for permission to construct on addition T X 16' to the northerly side of an existing 20' X 24' garage to within ' thirteen (13) feet of the required rear yard, at 1% Dorset Street. No. 4 Appeal of Joyce P. Desseau seeking a variance, from Section 11.00, Dimensional requirements of the South Burlington Zoning Regu- lations. Request Is for permission to 1 construct an attached 14' X 24' ga- 1 rage to within seven and one half (7S) feet of the northerly side yard 1 and nineteen (19) feet of the required front Yard, at 14 Maplewood Drive. No. 5 Appeal of Robert and Patricia Moore seeking a variance from Sec- tion 13.70, District Boundaries and Section 11.00 Dimensional require- ments of the South Burlington Zoning REgulations. Request is for per- mission to remove an existing cot- toge and construct a single family dwelling, approximately 34' X 40' to within twenty-four (24) feet of the. mean hlgh water level, at lot No. 9 Brigham Rood No. 6 Appeal of Rene Berard and Donald O'Brien seeking a variance , from Section 10.00, Permitted uses of the South Burlington Zoning Real- lations. Request is for permission to - construct 50' X 110' building and use sold building as a gymnastic and fit - re. center on lot no 13 Beard In- dustrial Park. ' No 7 Appeal of Earl B. Greer seek- ing a variance, from Section 13.00, Non -conforming uses & structures and Section 11.15 Multiple uses of the South Burlington Zoning Regu- lations. Request is for permission to construct an 64' X OS 8 0' addition to the rear of on existing structure and use sold addition as a storage build- ' ing In confunction with present uses located at 8-10 Dorset Street.. -. t ;- Robert M. Martineau, Chairman south Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment April 29. 1978 May 16, 1978 Mr. Earl Greer Mills & Greer 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Mr. Greer: Be advised that the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment has granted your request for a zoning variance. Your proposal is subject to site plan review under Section 11.70 of the Zoning regulations. Please contact Steve Page at this office in order to establish meeting date. If you have any questions feel free to contact me. Very truly, Richard Ward Zoning Adminitrative Officer R14/mcg May 2, 1978 Earl B. Greer 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Mr. Greer: Be advised that the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the City Hall, Conference Room, 1175 Williston Road on Monday, May 15, 1978 at 5:00 p.m. to con- sider your request for a zoning variance. Please plan to attend. Very truly, Richard Ward Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mcg NOTICE OF APPEAL SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT I hereby appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for the following: conditional use, variance, decision of administrative officer. Property Owner 11-4112z-1_ o Property location & description In Variance of Section /3, o U , 2�Z-44 (nur9ber) (title of s tion) Basis of appeal I understand the regular meetings are held twice a month on Monday at 5:00 p.m. at the City Hall, Conference Room. The legal advertise- ment must appear in the Burlington Free Press a minimum of fifteen (15) days before the hearing, I agree to pay a fee of $30.00 which fee is to off -set the costs of advertising and the hearing. Hearing Da e " Signature of Appellant SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE In accordance with the South Burlington Zoning Regulations and Chapter 117, Title 24 V.S.A. the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington City Offices, Conference Room, 1175 Williston Road, South Burlington, Vermont on , at to consider the (day of week) (?Month and date) (time) following: -017 App e a t of �g�s, .(.� eel 14u4 1.. seeking a/Q.�..� frbn1 Section /3 a 0 ,.tAr�'�, I�Kif'FL�I _ Q^*1--�/ ^ii't•I'o,r.' �,/�� / J ,,.t.GG—e4 of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations. Request is for permission to _'-e- por eb'#W - brlw, 5 � Z , 2,6, 4 roll top v 'Oors Date Received 117176_ BY -66M P— Date Applicatio( -'ompleterand Received BY BY CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW 1) NAME, ADDRESS, AND PHONE NU14BER OF: (a) (Xiner of Record t= a v13 6 ),- 9- 9 (b) Applicant -s� G'f? (c) Contact Person -8 CY ee Y 2) PROJECT STR-EET ADDRESS 3) PROPOSED USE (S) -5-�6-- 4) SIZE OF PROJECT (i.e., of units, floor area, etc.) yd Xe; 5) NUMBER OF E24PLOYEES (full & part time) 6) COST ESTrmATES: (a) Buildings aao. 0-0 (b) Lanascaping 0'5-0 (c) All Other Site Improvements (i.e., curb work) 7) ESTE-MTED PROJECT COI.1PLETION DATE /-/ 8) ESTI14ATM AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (in & out) /&/, added 9) P 7-AR' HOUR (S) OF OP ERAT ION ' - O G ' /14 ,j.',3 0 10) PEAK DAYS OF OP &R2WION A'y - 111ya �y G � G95 DATE SIGNATliRE OF APPLICANT PLANNING COMISSION Site plan review, addition to Greer's 4. ,TUITE 13, 1978 Mr. Page showed the Commission the site on the slides. Mr. Greer said they wanted to put storage room to the rear of the present building. The rock in front of the building will be removed and a tree put in. A small grey building on the land will be removed after the addition is completed. The addition will be 60' x 80'. Mr. Levesque asked if the shortcut around the intersection would be blocked and was told it would not be. Mr. Greer said that they presently rent space on San Remo Drive and that would be dropped. He felt adding storage to the building would cut down on the traffic since they would not have to go back and forth to the storage center. He said they might rent space to ENS also. Mr. Wessel asked about the three curb cuts and was told by Mr. Page that he did not see any improvement in circulation if one of them were closed. Mr. Greer said that they had tried closing off one of them but that it had not worked. The landscaping plan will be revised to allow access to both the Texaco station and 100 Dorset Street. Mr. 'Boolery moved that the South Burlington Planning Commission approve e site plan of the addition to Greer's per the drawing of Earl B. Greer, dated 4/25 78, at 810 Dorset Street for a storage facility with the following stipulations: 1. That a landscaping bond of $1500 be posted. 2. That the landscaping be installed in such a manner as to maintain the two access points to 100 Dorset Street and the Texaco station. 3. That all the parking spaces be striped and be perpendicular to the building. 4. This approval shall ezpire in 6 months from this date. The motion was seconded by V11r. Poger. Mr. Greer stated he would curb the landscaping to the front of the building in order to protect it from cars. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting was declared adjourned at 10:00 pm. Clerk ar f Memorandum Re: Next meeting's agenda June 8, 1978 Page 2 Green Mountain Drive Commercial Storacre and Distribution Facility Access, parking, and circulation are ok. Landscaping and build- ing siting are good in that an existing drainageway and black locust grove are protected. There is adequate room for building expansion and additional parking as well. Greer's Addition The proposed addition is for storage and is located at the very rear of the lot. Since the front yard has only nominal cir- culation area (due to land being taken for widening of Dorset St.), I do not feel closing any curb cuts will improve access. Parking is adequate. Landscaping is improved significantlyy. n o connections to the Te:iaco station, as well as the link to 100 Dorset Street, are and should be retained. SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE The South Burli -tor,! Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing.:,at the South Burlington City Offices, Con- ference Room, 117' Williston Road, South Burlington, Vermont.on Wednesday, October 3, 1973 at 7:30 P.M. to consider the following: #1 Appeal of PJ's Auto Village, John Buffum seeking a variance from Section 12.25, Front Yard Requirements of the South Burlington Zoning Ordinance. Request is for per- mission to construct an addition containing approximately 1300 square feet to the easterly side of present structure, to within sixty three (63) feet of the front property line, also a variance from Section 12.35 Site improvements, request to use entire front yard for display and customer parking at 2073 Williston Road. #2 Appeal of Earl Greer seeking a variance from Section 12.20, Front Yard Requirements of the South Burlington Zoning Ordinance. Request is for permission to construct an addition, containing 2880 square feet to the northerly side of present structure, to within sixty (60) feet of the front property line, also a variance from Section 12.35 Site im- provements, request to use entire front yard for customer parking, at 10 Dorset Street. #3 Appeal of James Schoudel seeking a variance from Section 12.55, Swimming Pool Regulations of the South Burlington Zoning Ordinance. Request is for permission to construct a swimming pool, 16' x 32' to within nine (9) feet of the rear yard property line, at 3 Yandow Drive. ZONING BOARD OF AW USTMENT Sept. 27, 1 973 Richard A. Myette, Chairman October 4, 1973 Mr. Earl Greer Mills & Greer 10 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05401 Dear 7r. Greer: Be advised that the Zoning Board of Adjustment has gCanted approval of your requ�,st for a zoning, variance. The Board is concerned laith the fact that cars are parking on the sidewalk. As a safety measure, it is recommended that a buffer strip of three (3) feet be installed, with the use of a on bumper to prevent vehicles -Pr on the sidewalk. bumper 4- . parking directly A permit will be issued upon your request, if you have any questions -feel free to call me. Very truly, Richard Ward Zoning Administrative Officer Rw/j Bepterabor 2P,, 19?3 Nills er Creer 16 Dorset Street South Purlin,,cEton, V- 05'401 .L Attention: 111r. Ear]- Greer I If Dear Mr. Greer: 13e advised that the; South Durlin,,ton Zoning 'poard of Act just- menu will holcl a public hearing at the City Hall Conference 9 Room, 12.75 Williston Ecad on IiIednesday, October 3, 1073 at 7:30 P.n. to consiCler your request for a zonj.nC v ar ca n c e ?lease plan to attend. Very truly, 'F ichard Ward z,,Y oning Administrative Offieer 2, j 9�' rA ID,07 C J5 Hearing Date Advt. Date Advertise 6 days prior to meeting. South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment South Burlington, Vermont Gentlemen: I hereby appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for the following, variance. I understand that regular meeting dates are the first and third Wednesdays of the month at 7:30 p.m. at the South Burlington City Hall, Conference Room. The legal advertisement shall appear as below, and I agree to pay, either now or before the ad appears, a fee of $30..00 which fee is to off -set costs of holding said hearing. Signature and Address Date SOUTH BUR LINGTON ZONING NOTICE The South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington City Offices, Conference Room, 1175 Williston Road, South Burlington, Vermont on , day of week at to consider the following: month and date Mime Appeal of seeking a • name variance from Section s'. -Z a , tr� --�� of number title orf section the South Burlington Zoning Ordinance. Request is for permission to Ot- ��"" ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT October 26, 1967 Mr. Earl Greer c/o Greear' s .dry Cleaning Company Williston road South Burlington, Vermont Near Mr. Greer: This is to notify you that the South Burlington Board of Selectmen will consider your request for a change of zoning for final passage at their meeting to be held on Tuesday, November 7, 1967 at 7:30 P.M. at the Town Office Building, 555 Dorset Street. Please plan to attend the meeting. Very truly yours, Henry LeClair Town Manager HL/h O R D I N A N C E AN ORDTN NCE TO AMEND "THE SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING ORDINANCE BY CREATION OF AN ADDITIONAL AREA OF BUSINESS DISTRICT A." The Selectmen of South Burlington hereby ordain: Sscticn 1. The South Burlington Zoning Ordinance adopted February 28, 1964, and the official zoning map adopted in connection thara;,.i'uh is l er3by amended by nhangii,g the ln_ zd use of the followi.ng described land frWn tiesid-nt-T al B to Business Distri.ct A s`^=_o of land located on the easterly side of Dorset Street s'arting at a .tint 150 ft. southerly of the intersection of Dorset Street and Williston !toad, thence, perpendicular to sa_d Dorset Street in an easterly direction 185', thence, in a southerly direction and paralell. with a Dorset Street line 174 "t. thence in a southerly direction 185 ft. to the easterly side line of Dorset Street, thence, along Dorset Street in a northerly direction 178 ft. to the point of be _inn-ng. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect from its passage. Approved 1967 Vincent J. Acuti , Chairman G. Blais Frederick Ashley Robert K. T. Stannard Augustus Stephen M. Whi ttlesey SOUTH BURLINGTON BOARD OF SEi�ECTMEN