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 - 0087 Meadowland Drive
PLANNING & ZONING August 1, 2016 Re: #SP-16-51 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. S/yvmond , R J. Belair Administrative Officer Encl. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com }A southbrurlington PLANNING & ZONING Permit Number SP-4.- oalyj APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW o Administative 0 Developnient Review Boari 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 #): Phi,lilp M. Drumheller, 87 Meadlowland Drive, South Burlington, VT 05403 802-863-5555 Fax 802-264-1485 2. LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED(S) (Book and page #): 3. APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #): The Lane Press, Inc., 87 Meadowland Drive, South Burlington, VT 05403. 802-863-5555 Fax 802-264-1485 4. CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from. Staff, Include name, address,plione&fax4): Nancy M. Villemaire, The Lane Press, Inc., P.O. Box 130 Burlington, VT 05402. 4a. CONTACT EMAH, ADDRESS:: villernaire�ianepress.corn 5. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 87 Meaowland Drive, South Burlington, VT 05403 & TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office): 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802-846.4101 www,sburl.com a. General project description (explain what you want approval for): Remove six dead trees, Replace with nine trees per attached documents, ting Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use): M,, printer. c- Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing Uses to remain): No change, d. Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain): No change. (See Page 3.) e. Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine): 27 feet f. Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain): N/A g. Number of employees (existing and proposed, note office versus non -office employees): 200 employees. h. Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable): Site Plan Appfibafkn Form. Rev. 12-2011 TOW Parcel Size: 1, 3 8 4, 54 0 adstizig 12.89 % Proposed —% Sq. Ft. 178,470 Sq. f b. Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing 28.1 %/ 390,298 q. Proposed / sq. c. Front yard (along each street) Existing N/A % / sq. Proposed % / sq. ft. d. Total area to be disturbed during construction (sq. ft.) 'I Wqjects 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): $ N/A b.1..andscaping: $6,400.00 c. Other site improvements (please list with cost): 10. ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a. P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out): 7: 00 a. m. - 5: 00 p. m. 11. PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 7.- 0 0 . - m, - b; 0 0 p ,12, IPF* A K DAYS OF OPERATION: Moriday through Friday 0 J # I I IN 0 )1 I* St"IT,'PLAN AND FEE A site plan shall be ubmitted which shows the information required by the Cit) ,!',,Land Development Regulations. Five(S)l egular size copies, one reduced copy (111, x 17"), and one digital (I'DF-fonnat) copy of the site plan must be submitted A site Plan application fee shall be paid t() tho (.-,ity at the tune of submitting the site plan application in accordance with the city's fee " Administrative site plan applications 'require three (3) regular size copies, one reduced copy (I I" x 17'), and one digital (PDF-tormat) copy, S110 Plan APP[imtbn FOM Rev. 12-PO I I E N0'11�: NO of ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS: Notification of adjoining property o-kvners, 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 compiele. ffic Administrative Officer will provide the applicant with a draft meeting agendas or public bearing 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 certi 1, that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to 0he best of my knowledge. OP-APP41CANT PRINTNAML,' Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: REVIFM AI]THORITY: El Development Review Board Administrative Officer I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: The app.lic:°rant or permittee retains the obligation to identify, apply.for, and obtain relevant state permits for this project. Call (802) 8 79-56 76to speak with the regional,Perinit Specialist. 4 Site Plan Application Form, Rev. f 2-2011 ti f , ZONINGPLANNING & December 7, 2015 Re: #SP-15-77 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. 4aymnd . B Administrative Officer Encl. 15 V10 V3 /,,v l ( `AAJ v 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com #S P-15-77 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING THE LANE PRESS, INC. — 87 MEADOWLAND DRIVE SITE PLAN APPLICATION #SP-15-77 FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION The Lane Press, Inc., hereinafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking approval to amend a previously approved plan for a 170,444 sq. ft. light manufacturing building. The amendment consists of revising the landscaping plan, 87 Meadowland Drive. Based on the plans and materials contained in the document file for this application, the Administrative Officer finds, concludes, and decides the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Lane Press, Inc. is seeking approval to amend a previously approved plan for a 170,444 sq. ft. light manufacturing building. The amendment consists of revising the landscaping plan, 87 Meadowland Drive. 2. The owner of record of the subject property is The Lane Press, Inc. 3. The subject property is located in the Industrial — Open Space Zoning District. 4. The application was received on November 19, 2015. 5. The plan submitted consists of a four (4) page set of plans, page one (1) is entitled "Lane Press 87 Meadowland Drive S. Burlington, VT 05403", prepared by the applicant, dated 9/16/15, and last revised on 10/27/15. DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS 6. No change in coverages proposed. 7. Setback requirements will continue to be met. SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Vehicular access 8. No changes proposed. Circulation 9. No changes proposed. Parking - 1 — #SP-15-77 10. No changes proposed. Landscaping 11. The applicant is proposing to remove six (6) Pine trees and replace them with six (6) Red Pines and three (3) crabapple trees. The cost of the replacement trees is $2,400. The City Arborist in an email dated 12101/15 to staff indicted that the plans were acceptable. Outdoor Lighting 14. No changes proposed. Pursuant to Sections 14.06 and 14.07 of the Land Development Regulations, the following review standards shall apply to site plan applications: Traffic 15. No changes proposed. (a) The relationship of the proposed development to goals and objects set forth in the City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan, 16. No changes proposed. (b) 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, 17. This requirement is being met. (c) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings 18. No changes proposed. (d) 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, 19. No changes proposed. (e) Newly installed utility service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground, 20. No changes proposed. - L e #SP-15-77 (f) The combination of common materials and architectural characteristics, landscaping, buffers, screens, and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings or different architectural styles shall be encouraged. 21. This requirement is being met. (g) 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 22. No changes proposed. In addition to the above general review standards, site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards set forth in Section 14.07 of the 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 or collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve genera/ access and circulation in the area. 23. No changes proposed. (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, 24. This requirement is being met. (c) A// dumpsters and other facilities to handle so/id 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). 25. No changes proposed. DECISION Based on the above Findings of Fact, the Administrative Officer herby approves site plan application #SP-15-77 of The Lane Press, Inc., subject to the following conditions: All previous approvals and stipulations which are not superseded by this approval shall remain in effect. -3— #SP-15-77 2. This project shall be completed as shown on the plan and shall be on file in the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning. 3. Prior to permit issuance, the applicant must post a $2,400 landscaping bond. This bond must remain in full effect for three (3) years to assure that the landscaping has taken root and has a good chance of survival. 4. The applicant shalt obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months pursuantto Section 17.04 of the Land Development Regulations or this approval is null and void. 5. The applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy from the. Administrative Officer upon completion of installing the new trees. 6. Any change to the site plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Development Review Board or the Administrative Officer. ��Signed on this � day of , 2015 by Raymond I Beiair, Administrative Officer PLEASE NOTE: Pursuant to 24 VSA §4465, an interested person may appeal this decision by filing a Notice of Appeal with the secretary of the Development Review Board. This Notice of Appeal must be accompanied with a $233 filing fee and be filed within 15 days of the date of -this decision. 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. NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SITE PLAN / BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT APPROVAL PROPERTY OWNER uj4k����i //V"'• ISSUE DATE EFFECTIVE DATE APPLICATION Nl TNMER A zoning permit must be obtained prior to comr.�er�ceixlext i1i acccirclarce with the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. Post this card on the construction site in full view of the : ublic. This permit shall take effect on the effective date above, unless appealed to the South Burlington Development Review Board prior to that date. The applicant or permitf,�e 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. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com July 15, 2016 Nancy M. Villemaire The Lane Press P. 0. Box 130 Burlington, VT 05402-0130 Re: Expiration of #SP-15-77, 87 Meadowland Drive Dear Ms. Villemaire: Please be advised that site plan approval #SP-15-77 issued to you on 12/07/15 to revise your landscaping plan became null and void on 6/07/16. This approval became null and void due to noncompliance with condition #4 of said decision which required that a zoning permit be issued for the approved site modification within six (6) months of the date of the decision or the approval would become null and void. Therefore, if you wish to pursue this project, reapproval of the site plan is required. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Since, ly, Raymond I Belair' Administrative Officer 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburi.com December 7, 2015 Re: #SP-15-77 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. Sincerely, d2aymond J. B air Administrative Officer Encl. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburi.com ti ic southburiington PLANNING & ZONING Permit Number SP--- (o�ce APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN RE VIE W administrative o 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 #): Philip M. Drumheller, 87 Meadlowland Drive, South Burlington, VT 05403 802-863-5555 Fax 802-264-1485 2. LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED(S) (Book and page #): 3. APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #): The Lane Press, Inc., 87 Meadowland Drive, South Burlington, VT 05403. 802-863-5555 Fax 802-264-1485 4. CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, address, phone&fax #): Nancy M. Villemaire, The Lane Press, Inc., P.O. Box 130 Burlington, VT 05402. 4a. CONTACT EMAIL, ADDRESS:: villemaire@lanepress.com 5. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 87 Meaowland Drive, South Burlington, VT 05403 6. TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office): 575 Dorset Street South Burlington. VT 05403 te1 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com 7. PROJECT DESCRIPTION a. General project description (explain what you want approval for): Remove six dead trees. Replace with nine trees per attached documents. b. Existing Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use): Magazine printer. c. Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain): No change . d. Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain): No change. (See Page 3.) e. Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine): 27 feet f. Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain): N/A g. Number of employees (existing and proposed, note office versus non -office employees): 200 employees. h. Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable): 2 Site Plan Application Farm. Rev. 12-2011 8. LOT COVERAGE Total Parcel Size: 1,181,540 Existing 12.89 % I Proposed % / Sq. Ft. 178,470 sq. ft. sq. ft. b. Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing 28.1 390, 298 sq. ft. Proposed % / sq. ft. c. Front yard (along each street) Existing N/A % / sq. ft. Proposed % / sq. ft. d. Total area to be disturbed during construction (sq. ft.) 81 * 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): $ N/A b. Landscaping: $6,400.00 c. Other site improvements (please list with cost): 10. ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a. P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out): 7: 00 a.m. - 5: 00 p.m. 11. PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 7 : 0 0 a.m. - 5 : 0 0 p.m. 12. PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: Monday through Friday 13. ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: 14. SITE PLAN AND FEE A site plan shall be §ubn itted which shows the information required by the City's Land Development Regulations. Five (,9 egular size copies, one reduced copy (11" 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 o su witting the site plan application in accordance with the city's fee schedule. �✓y�,A) % V �_; � Administrative site plan applications require three (3) regular size copies, one reduced copy (1 V 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. ,. SIGNAAJRE O�PXZOPERTY OWNER PRINT NAME Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: REVIEW AUTHORITY: ❑ Development Review Board Zdministrative 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 LEGEND HANDICAP PARKING �- FIRE HYDRANT I BIKE RACK P SNOW PILE LOCATION NOTES: 1. PARKING SPACES: 311 REGULAR, 5 HANDICAP. 00 NOT SCALE DRAWING loom s u NO rrc *r® M ■.mAM Wa W D/27/i JAH REMOVE ALL BURRS AND SHARP EDGES SIGN PILE 1DCATONS MATERIAL: — ADDED CRAM= Fr M KWAN, ADDED sHM a PER 0/1311 JAH FINISH: — vWAN "ni PMWE PER EM 9/1e/1D JAH NOIA TOIE .005 UNLESS )M- SPEDIFIEER .1ooc....t.DDa 1a_.t.os ANGUTAP—.S1/z REVISION DATE BY 87 MEADOWLAND DRIVE S. BURLINGTON, VT 05403 802-264-1601 WWW.1,ANEPRESS.COM LAYOUT, OVERALL SITE (TREE REMOVAL PERMIT) JAH I DAZE 9/16/16 1 SNEEE 1 DF 4 1 DPAVANG NUA : EOH JDAM 9/18/15 seAE: NONE I LP5151-1 C h n 1 g r y L71 y f ` 1 x 24 k g • +� T{� #7k i'" eye M1p �..�. � .-_, eT '.: fix,. .a:.. a> � 1. •• DO NOT SCALE DRAWING D _ _ _ C AMM O MORE Fun PM TFM Pm XMM. FEvsm 10/27/15 JAH REMOVE ALL BURRS AND SHARP EDGES 87 MEADOWLAND DRIVE S. BURLINOTON, VT03403 SNOW PRE LOCAT1ON9 MATERIAL: — 802-264.1601 WWW.LANEPRESS.COM B Wmm aWJ= Fmu KAYAK AMM sN[[t 4 p9t 10/13/' aAH T K'^"" FINISH: — SITE PLAN, LANE PRESS A W_ n& RELEA'E Pm MH 9/16/15 JAH NOTE TOL:L.005 S UNLESS 5P¢Yil@ 0�/0 JAH GATE: 9/19/16 SNEEf 2 OF 4 m� M� .7O0CJOL...t.04 �. AwpREDH LP5151-2 REV REVISION DATE BY AN9uL/A....t1/7 I JDAM 9/16/1e IWAM NONE I I NOTES: 1. MEASUREMENTS OF TREE DIAMETER TAKEN FROM 24" ABOVE THE GROUND. 2. TREE LOCATIONS ARE +/- 36". 3. REFER TO LP5151-1 FOR LOCATION OF THIS VIEW ON THE SITE PLAN. MP POST 13.50 w LEGEND TREE TO BE REMOVED • TREE TO STAY P PINE TREE S SPRUCE TREE D DECIDUOUS TREE PIV SPRINKLER SHUT OFF VALVE -XXO DIAMETER OF TREE + I FIRE HYDRANT Kathleen Ryan ADDED WME RED PNE 16LL8 PUt «ARAM BMYiD 10/27/1 JAN L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T 3KOW PEE IDOAl1m 274 Moplc Slrw�, 6udingtun, VT 05401 (802)86J-4091 kr.lnrburlingmr�ciccom.ocl t PAM bcoflheAmd�i�m S—yofLmdxpeAmb,m IOOFD ONYIOES FROM KJHNk ADDED BiEEf ER 0/13/1 JAN 71TI,G 1GRY1N LAYOUT, TREES REMOVED SOUTH SIDE PM lmrf6E PER K6 8/18/16 JAH unJN1 DAW, 8/16/16 8HEET 3 OP 4 BFS+r REVISION DATE BY ^^1 IQt DAM 8/16/158G18: NONE LP5151-3 C LANE PRESS PLANTING PLAN QTY. BOTANICAL NAME LATIN NAME SIZE SPEC 6 RED PINE PINUS RESINOSA 5-6 FT B&B 3 SPRING SNOW' CRAB MALUS 'SPRING SNOW 2" CAL B&B NOTES: 1. MEASUREMENTS OF TREE DIAMETER TAKEN FROM 24" ABOVE THE GROUND. 2. TREE LOCATIONS ARE +/— 36". 3. REFER TO LP5151-1 FOR LOCATION OF THIS VIEW ON THE SITE PLAN. LEGEND PROPOSED TREES • TREE TO STAY P PINE TREE S SPRUCE TREE D DECIDUOUS TREE PIV SPRINKLER SHUT OFF VALVE -XXO DIAMETER OF TREE + FIRE HYDRANT _ - - Kathleen Ryan L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T AWED rt< ktey Rm a KoPie rPER K R wt Rm cw N RED 0/27/1 JAH AWED R[ 274 Me01e St— H, l,,g— V 05401 (802)96.7.4091 kr W&b,d,,gkmmlac —t A Mmb—fd.Avmigo Sxi fyalL�& pn Amlu'hcb' Amm awm FROM KXVJ% ADDED am 4 PER o/ta/t JAH Trite �' LAYOUT, TREES ADDED SOUTH SIDE NWL MEW Pm KR 9/16 15 / ,IAH WO JAH wTc t1/te/1e sHeer 4 or 4 _ tm I LP5151-4 Q REVISION IDATE By, Ago KR — 9/io/16 wAm. NONE Appraisel of Monetary Value of Trees to be Removed 10/14/2015 as developed by the Purdue University Extension Services Replacement Red Pine New 6 foot Red Pine 5" cal cross section area value per sq.inch Base value of existing trees Deperciation appraised value of each tree Cost of Replacement trees* total value of replacement trees value value of existing pines removed $200.00 size in caliper/inches total 11.5 12 14.5 15.5 18.5 19 91 square inch size of section 19.6 sq " 103.9 103.9 165.13 188.69 268.8 283.5 $10.20 $1,059.78 $1,059.78 $1,684.33 $1,924.64 $2,741.76 $2,891.70 Species class 60% $635.87 $635.87 $1,010.60 $1,154.78 $1,645.06 $1,735.02 conditions -poor 20% $381.52 $381.52 $606.36 $692.87 $987.03 $1,041.01 location 60% $228.91 $228.91 $363.81 $415.72 $592.22 $624.61 $228.91 $228.91 $363.81 $415.72 $592.22 $624.61 Total value of removed trees $2,454.19 size each total 7 Pinus Resinosa Red Pine 6 ft $200.00 $1,400.00 2 Malus Crab 2 inch cal $500.00 $1,000.00 * includes installation $2,400.00 Lane Press Planting Plan PLANT LIST # Latin Name Common name size spec 6 Pinus resinosa Red pine 5-6 ft B&B 3 Malus 'Spring Snow ISpring Snow' Crab 2" cal B&B ray From: Craig Lambert Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 11:09 AM To: ray Subject: RE: Lane Press Revised Landscaping Plan Ray, Those plans are fine, sorry I thought I sent comments but it must have slipped through the cracks. Craig Lambert South Burlington City Arborist 104 Landfill Rd South Burlington, VT 05403 Ph: 802-658-7961 Fax: 802-658-7976 email: clambert(@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: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 9:02 AM To: Craig Lambert <clambert@sburl.com> Subject: Lane Press Revised Landscaping Plan Craig, I sent you some plans on 11/19 showing changes Lane Press wants to make to their landscaping. Just wondering if you have had a chance to review those plans? Thanks. Ray Belair Administrative Officer City of So. Burlington 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 802-846-4106 www.sburi.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. Appraisel of Monetary Value of Trees to be Removed 10/14/2015 as developed by the Purdue University Extension Services Replacement Red Pine New 6 foot Red Pine 5" cal cross section area value per sci.inch Base value of existing trees Deperciation appraised value of each tree Cost of Replacement trees* value Value of existing pines removed $200.00 size in caliper/inches total 11.5 12 14.5 15.5 18.5 19 91 square inch size of section 19.6 sq " 103.9 103.9 165.13 188.69 268.8 283.5 $10.20 $1,059.78 $1,059.78 $1,684.33 $1,924.64 $2,741.76 $2,891.70 Species class 60% $635.87 $635.87 $1,010.60 $1,154.78 $1,645.06 $1,735.02 conditions -poor 20% $381.52 $381.52 $606.36 $692.87 $987.03 $1,041.01 location 60% $228.91 $228.91 $363.81 $415.72 $592.22 $624.61 $228.91 $228.91 $363.81 $415.72 $592.22 $624.61 Total value of removed trees size each total 7 Pinus Resinosa Red Pine 6 ft $200.00 $1,400.00 2 Malus Crab 2 inch cal $500.00 $1,000.00 $2,454.19 $2,400.00 total value of replacement trees * includes installation Lane Press Planting Plan PLANT LIST # Latin Name Common name size spec 6 Pinus resinosa Red pine 5-6 ft B&B 3 Imalus 'Spring Snow ISpring Snow' Crab 2" cal B&B f tit " +f P`in j f f r • ° i 4 s3�F , t r • r 1P � �' � ,, i' \� �' 1 'y1' � t' 1 t ' 6 •1 1 � p , f' ir �`• �,x t t � , Y ? Y. c ,, �� s � K t y• Y •4 s r y :e a �, r ✓.i,{7�$ .v� r. i'• r a ` "_,,. F' r"! d�'� �ut:��J� x+9,,� :r� r�'p r.. •r t, Imo. � Qii�I i ; � r ,. b f r w J y, y � r ; � • ^� ,•; „'n . �w'�,�a Yet � t sr �i aiw,re { b� �r� r•,, • d t W i � p i �" J c b s,,.rt .y �L • y� L yth � 'f •r �. y,� d y f ,"44"y,3 rx r , t '•FF�� ,r ,�,t y�T 1 t'r.:'. � �} a ki•t� a�lr,�`�+if � B. y' aw.{t�•K t «� "� i4 r� V it 7 n } F . t ` d 1 yy ` �.4i�9�44d�y �„�_,• • '•*� :r to � �,'$ 7'+ ri. i },+;� tY a oaf+ i:: .•>,-.;; +.Y• '....` rAY,. " �; v''C ,i$.i a ° a"r Atx� tit>• ,i`arr iqy y+y s , ti >rony of v: i j • y'� M rf iE,= " ,t :' r� " ',1:"t y, yyN-y' w aJaa, th �'.+ �4 b� � � p'S 2tS Kf t � 9 h^xg k +*vbC �� t t�.•� r�` M; ��, S �a c� 4 r d* `� "� "? r� �((hhh � y K} r°�"r�y��'t �i� a� y, b�"" °�``a r r '� r•I r> If r"I €'�.•^'. :r. ,:� e ' a wart :ew n, t+, ~•:r +3 ,a by 'r f•` K .w 4 §t� a 2 ..! k�, � F�� � (r .� Y },, ��. r ... �� rq t Y i x 1� r�� 0 of .. . ®rmi, I r r it r rF 1 e� r µ e,, v' "a S F �. { .` ,'fr # y � ^ 4 t�� 4 � y, yi b ��� 6 '> ,. . �� ��� �: � �. ��_: � � , " ,d 'rx� �; k'{ yq ,`, �; a '� ' �' ` a4 �i 4 Y� _, � , ,I'' x ,�. Pry Y �� y if�i f � L � fl ��� J� ..�� + � .,^ �. A � j,MQ '�i d- � YM�ti• �, yr 4. ��i � A f ^ � � �{ ��e `1Y ���� � �� �� �n yyy i?l _ ' ' +� },` ri e � �' i``4 iA � '', � Ott Y t� � r, l � i � k �' A R� f '! � � � � t �y i� w 1 ',^# , w 'Y . i V IV ,v�"�,� h� k�`r�� f'y�'+�±tr,T•)t��yrr!'1%' t, fT a,. r r s a i ^ r r •�" I *,u � 1 h reµ. eai 7 11W"; "a ^ } n _ .ae,r � w r it ;.q � a r r ; �' � •, w cx k M , e, a k , M1_ f r� P'al • t y r s } „ i, It t ti No Text { t H y *yy I tr s Jf� 4 & V9 r it 1. 1 it 1� n # s a,..r • " F ! V No Text No Text No Text 1 f 11 w� r+ a .r; s ryy dtiR Y k i f I S 1 1 i 1� t+ d. 5 ,owl �. a M-1 a 7M 01/03/2012 16:33 FAX 802 862 7512 DOWNS RACHLIN MARTIN 19002 DOWNS RACNGIN MARTIN PLLC MARL B. HEATH mheath@dTm.com Tel: (802) 846-8306 Fax: (802) 962-7512 January 3, 2012 VIA FACSIMILE Ray Belair South Burlington Sign Ordinance Code Officer Fax: (802) 846-4101 Re: Appeal #A0-11-05 The Lane Press, Inc. Vermont Route 116 (Hinesburg Road) Dear Mr. Belair: In light of the City of South Burlington's position that The Lane Press, Inc. has no right to appeal the issuance of a wanting notice, and in reliance on your counsel Amanda Lafferty's representations that the City will not in subsequent proceedings relating to this matter assert waiver, estoppel, or any other claim arising out of The Lane Press, Inc.'s withdrawal of its appeal at this stage of this matter, The Lane Press, Inc. hereby withdraws its appeal of the issuance of the warning notice in this matter. The Lane Press, Inc. reserves its rights to pursue all remedies available to it by law in any stage of this matter. Thank you for your prompt and professional handling of this matter. Sincerely, arc Heath Co. Amanda Lafferty, Bsq., Stitzel, Page & Pletcher P.C. COURTHOUSE PLAZA ■ 199 MAIN ST. ' PO 8OX 190 ■ BURINGTON, VT ■ 054ON190 • T: +1.802.863.2375 V F: +1.802.862.7a12 m WWW-DRM.COM ERATTLEBORO, VT BURLINGTON, VT ■ LESANON, NH ■ MONTPELIER, VT A PLATTSBURGH, NY ■ ST. JOHNSBURY, VT 01/03/2012 16:33 FAX 802 862 7512 DOANIS RLCHLIN MARTIN. I A FAX TRANSMITTAL MEMO TO: COMPANY: PRONU: Raymond J. Belair City of South Burlington CC: Amanda S.E. Lafferty Esq. Ffi M: Stitzel, Page & Fletcher, F.C. FAX: (802) 660-2552 tl ()OWNS RACHLIN MARTIN PLLC (802) 846-4106 (d) Main Igo.: (802) 660-2555 x43 FAX #: (802) 846,4101 This communication may contain confidential and/or privi leged information intended only for the addressee. D© NOT read, copy or disseminate this this communication in error, please Contact the sender immediately and communire on unless you are the intended addressw. If you have received discard all copiers. Reviewed and DATE: January 3, 2012 approved for facsimile FROM. Marc Heath transmission by: OPERATOR: Irene B. Weisburgh CLIENTIMA.TTER: 05052-0000007 PAGES: 2 (including cover The Original will not be sent. If the copy is illegible or incomplete, please call the operator at (802) 846-8603_ Comments COURTHOUSE PLAZA • 199 MAIN ST. ■ PO BOX 190 • BURLINGTON, VT • OM-0190 ■ T: +1.802.863.2375 ■ F: +1.602.8e2.7512 v Www.DRM.COM BRATTLEBORO,VT ■ BURLINGTON,VT 0 LEBANON,NH ■ MONTPELIER,VT 0 PLATTSBURGH.NY 0 ST. JOHNSBURY, VT Pagel of`2 ray From: Marc Heath [nheadh@dnn.com] Sent: Tuenday, January03 2012411 PM To: ray Cc: 'Amanda Lafferty'; Raymond Sun Subject: RE: Lane Press Sign Ordinance Warning Notice Appeal Um - I spoke with Attorney Lafferty this afternoon about our appeal from the warning notice. She confirmed your position that there is no right or obligation to appeal a sign ordinance warning notice. Attorney Lafferty also confirmed that in the event the City issues a sign ordinanc.e violation complaint to The Lane Press, the City will not claim that The Lane Press waived any rights to contest that citation by failing topursue anappeal ofthe warning notice. Therefore vvSare h&byvvi1hdravvingtheappe8|vve filed Onbehalf ofThe Lane Press from the notice ofwarning. This withdrawal ofour appeal iswithout prejudice to any and all rights the Lane Press has to contest any complaint ` the City might have in connection with The Lane Press' sign. VVe xvi~ U be faxing you a letter sliertlytothis same effect. � Amanda: | trust this email accurately reflects our conversation. |vvou|d! appreciate Gconfirming email to that effect back from you. If you disagree with my representations, however, please let me knowand|vvouldbehappytOCOrr8Ctanynmisstatennents. ' ` Sincerely, ' '- - Marc ' . . Marc B. Heath | Downs RachUin Martin PILILC ' Director | Litigation Group _ 199 Main Street, pO Box 190 | Burlington, vT0S40z'u1yo � Direct: aoz'846'8]06| Moin:8oz'o63'a375 | pux:noz'osa'7szz ' = 0�N�0 | ' � ' ` ^ From: ray[nlaiKo:rbelair@sbuM.con] Sent: Friday, Oacember3O, 2011 I:S9 PM To: Marc Heath ' Subject: Lane Press Appeal ' . - Hi Marc, . . ' Attached please find ocopy cfmycomments hothe OR8and the agendafor next Tuesday night's meeting. l/3/20l2 Page 2 of 2 Fax: 802.846.4101 rbelair@sburl.cont w7mv.sburl.coin 1/3/2012 FILED � APR 1 0.2006 - STATE OF VERMONT • ENVVIRONMENTAL COURT EI�►IRONMEN AL COURT } Appeal of Wesco, Inc. } (Warning -Notice re: Sign Ordinance Violation) ) Docket No: 208-10-05 Vtec } Entr�,� Order on Motion to Alter or Amend and Revised Decision and Order on Cross-Mofigns for Summary- Tudgment Appellant Wesco, Inc., filed an appeal in this Court from -a decision of the Development Review Board (DRB) of the City of South Burlington, taken under the City's Sign Ordinance. Appellant is represented by Marc B.. Heath, Esq.; and William E. Simendinger, Esq.; the City is represented by Amanda S. E. Lafferty, Esq. The Court issued its decision and order on the parties cross -motions for summary judgment on December 28, 2005. The City moved to alter or amend that decision in several . respects, although not -to alter -the. judgment. The City is concerned that this Court's statements not prejudice the City's arguments. in. any other forum. The Court in writing the decision was and is equally concerned to explain itself adequately so that this Court's statements would not prejudice any party in another forum, having been the unintended cause of collateral estoppel in one.previous case. See Bowman V. Ackerman, et al„ Docket No. 2003-133 (Vt. Sup..Ct., Oct. 2, 2003) (mem). Accordingly, we are editing.and reissuing the December 28, 2005 decision and order to make it as clear as possible what is and is not being decided by that decision. The amended decision follows: The parties have moved for summary judgment; the following facts are undisputed unless otherwise noted. The City of South Burlington adopted a Sign Ordinance under 24 V.S.A. Chapter 59 and §2291, not as a zoning ordinance under 24 V.S.A. Chapter 117, and repealed any inconsistent zoning ordinances. The Sign Ordinance was adopted effective June 3, 2002, and was amended on Apri1.8, 2003, and March 8, 2005. Section 24 of the Sign Ordinance pertains to Non -Conforming Signs. On December, 5, 2003, under. the City's. Land Development Regulations, the Development Review Board (DRB) approved a .site plan . for.-1118 Williston Road. Appellant -Applicant asserts that that site plan showed a free-standing sign in a location in which such.'a sign had existed.for many years. No party appealed that site plan approval, nor a subsequent Certificate of Occupancy. Accordingly under 24 V.S.A. f 4472(d) neither the site plan approval nor the Certificate of Occupancy can be contested,: directly or . indirectly, either by Appellartt.or by the City. The factual question of whether there was a pre-existing sign in that location, and the legal question of whether 24 V.S.A. §4472(d). . applies beyond the forum ofthe Environmental Court, are not decided by this Courtin this decision. On September 2, 2004, the Issuing Municipal Official under the Sign Ordinance, who is the same individual who is also the Zoning Administrator, issued a sign permit allowing placement of the -sign that is the subject -of the:present appeal. The sign permit did not attach a copy of the approved site plan. The fact that -A -single individual holds two municipal -offices and has authority to take action under two ordinances does'not transform action -taken under:the sign -ordinance to action taken under the zoning. ordinance. Cf., In `re Randolph Town Office Zoning Avg, Docket No.106-6-05 Vtec, slip op. at 3 (Vt.-Envd.. Ct:, Mar. 30, 2006). Similarly, evidence as to the course of dealings between Appellant's representatives and City .officials regarding the issuance of the sign 'permit is not relevant to the- question of whether the .-Environmental Court has jurisdiction over the present asserted appeal. On November 22, 20Q4, the new sign was erected ' in the location claimed by Appellant to be the same location as:the previously existing sign. The .cost of sign materials and labor is also not relevant to the present asserted appeal. On July 15, 2005, the Code Enforcement Officer (the same individual as the Issuing Municipal Officer -and the Zoning Administrator) issued a written warning that the new sign was erected less than 20 feet from the Williston Road right-of-way, asserting a violation of §9(c) of the Sign. Ordinance; a section adopted in 2002. A month later the Code Enforcement Officer issued a Vermont municipal complaint regarding the claimed sign violation. That complaint is. within the jurisdiction of the Vermont Judicial Bureau. Appellant filed an appeal of the Warning Notice with the Development Review Board, which is the body designated under the Sign Ordinance to hear municipal appeals under that ordinance, as well as the: body which hears municipal zoning appeals. In the present action Appellant sought to appeal to this Court the DRB's denial of its appeal under. the Sign Ordinance. Appeals of actions of municipal officials or boards taken under ordinances adopted. under 24 V.S.A. Chapter 59, if appealable, must be filed. in Superior Court under V.R.C.P. 75 (or 74). They are not appealable to this Court unless they are taken under 24 V.S.A. Chapter 117 or Chapter 61, subchapter 12.' 4 V.S.A. §1001(b). This is the case despite the fact that a single individual -may carry out municipal responsibilities under both ordinances, 'or, indeed, despite the fact that a single municipal panel, the DRB, is the municipal appeals board under.both ordinances. Accordingly, the. City's Motion for Summary Judgment must be granted and this appeal must be dismissed in this Court, without prejudice to any filings' -that may be made in Superior Court in any appeal under the Sign Ordinance, before the Judicial Bureau in any action to enforce the Sign Ordinance, or in any other action in Superior Court. Accordingly, based on the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the City's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, without prejudice to Appellant's No Text CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD IN RE: THE LANE PRESS, INC. ) Appeal #AO-11-05 (Vermont Route 116 ) January 3, 2012 Hinesburg Road) ) Appeal of Decision of South Burlington Sign Ordinance Code Officer MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO WARNING NOTICE The Lane Press, Inc. opposes the October 27, 2011 decision of the South Burlington Sign Ordinance Code Officer ("the Code Officer") to issue a warning notice against it for violating the South Burlington Sign Ordinance ("the Ordinance"). The Lane Press maintains that this decision was both illegal and contrary to good policy, and urges the Development Review Board ("the Board") to reverse it and vacate the warning notice. I. RiEht and Obligation to Appeal The Lane Press is obligated by law to appeal the Code Officer's decision to the Board at this stage. Under 24 V.S.A. § 4472(a), appeal to the municipal board of the decisions of the Code Officer is the only way to challenge those decisions. If The Lane Press had failed to appeal at this stage, it would have given up its right to make its challenge in any subsequent enforcement action under 24 V.S.A. § 4472(d), as the Vermont Supreme Court ruled in Town of Charlotte v. Richmond, 609 A.2d 638 (Vt. 1992). In Charlotte v. Richmond, the Charlotte town zoning administrator issued a notice of violation to a used car dealership for violations of the town zoning ordinance. The used car dealer did not appeal to the town board, and the town then initiated an enforcement action in Superior Court. In that enforcement action, the used car dealer attempted to challenge the zoning administrator's decision, based on both the language of the ordinance and on constitutional grounds. The Court looked to 24 V.S.A. § 4472(a), which provides: "The exclusive remedy of an interested person with respect to any decision or act taken, or any failure to act, under this chapter or with respect to any one or more of the provisions of any plan or bylaw shall be the appeal to the appropriate panel under section 4465 of this title, and the appeal to the environmental division from an adverse decision upon such appeal under section 4471 of this title." The Court also looked to 24 V.S.A. § 4472(d), which provides: "Upon the failure of any interested person to appeal to an appropriate municipal panel under section 4465 of this title, or to appeal to the environmental division under section 4471 of this title, all interested persons affected shall be bound by that decision or act of that officer, the provisions, or the decisions of the panel, as the case may be, and shall not thereafter contest, either directly., or indirectly, the decision or act, provision, or decision of the panel in any proceeding, including any proceeding brought to enforce this chapter." Reading those two statutes together, the Court held that if any interested person failed to appeal a decision by an administrative officer to the appropriate municipal board, that interested person would be barred from contesting that decision in subsequent enforcement proceedings. The Court reasoned that this interpretation was consistent with the purpose of the statutes, which is "to require all zoning contests to go through the administrative review process in a timely fashion." Charlotte v. Richmond, 609 A.2d at 638. The question of whether The Lane Press should appeal at this stage is really the same question that the Court resolved in Charlotte v. Richmond. This case also involves a notice issued by an administrative officer, and this case is also a challenge to the administrative officer's application of the ordinance. Here, a threshold question here is whether The Lane Press is an "interested person." If it is, 24 V.S.A. § 4472 applies to it. The term "interested person" is defined by statute, in 24 2 V.S.A. § 4465, which provides that "[a] person owning title to property, or a municipality or solid waste management district empowered to condemn it or an interest in it, affected by a bylaw, who alleges that the bylaw imposes on the property unreasonable or inappropriate restrictions of present or potential use under the particular circumstances of the case" is an interested person. Here, The Lane Press owns an interest in the property affected by the enforcement of the ordinance at issue, and alleges that enforcement imposes unreasonable or inappropriate restrictions of present or potential use of the property. The Lane Press is therefore an "interested person," and 24 V.S.A. § 4472 applies to it. Thus, under the Vermont statutes and the Vermont Supreme Court's ruling in Charlotte v. Richmond, The Lane Press's appeal of the Code Officer's decision at this stage is not just proper; it is actually mandatory. If the Lane Press had failed to pursue this appeal, it would have lost its only opportunity to make it substantive challenges to the Code Officer's decision. II. First Amendment Right to Commercial Speech Signs like The Lane Press's that communicate a business interest fall into the category of "commercial speech" under the First Amendment. Commercial speech doesn't get full protection the same way, for example, political speech does. Governments are allowed to regulate commercial speech in some ways. But the First Amendment, as interpreted by the Vermont Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of the United States, still imposes certain limits how far governments can go in regulating commercial speech. The Ordinance, as applied to this particular sign, goes too far, and violates the Lane Press's First Amendment right to engage in commercial speech. The Lane Press does not argue that the entire Sign Ordinance is unconstitutional. The City of South Burlington is certainly allowed to regulate signs with its borders as a general 3 matter. The Lane Press merely maintains that the enforcement of the ordinance in this particular case is an impermissible restriction of a Constitutional right. The Vermont Supreme Court tackled a very similar case involving the Town of Manchester in 1995. In In re Deyo, 164 Vt. 613 (1995), Manchester attempted to enforce its sign ordinance, which prohibited on -premises signage advertising the sale or lease of the premises, against a property owner who was using a removable -lettering sign to advertise office space for lease. The Court found in favor of the property owner, ruling that a city sign ordinance violates First Amendment protections on commercial speech if the ordinance's restrictions on commercial speech reach further than necessary to achieve the ordinance's purposes. Though the particular ordinance provision at issue here is different, the underlying principle is the same: the enforcement of an ordinance must fit its purposes. Section 2 of the South Burlington Ordinance states that its purposes are (1) to promote public safety by reducing signs that could distract drivers or obstruct road views to cause traffic accidents, (2) to promote public safety by reducing signs that present a safety hazard because of disrepair or faulty construction, and (3) to preserve the aesthetic beauty of the community. Enforcement against The Lane Press in this case fails to achieve any of these goals, and only succeeds in interfering with The Lane Press's legitimate commercial free speech rights. The Lane Press's sign does not distract drivers or obstruct road views to such a degree that it could pose any risk of a traffic accident. In fact, The Lane Press's sign actually promotes traffic safety. The Lane Press has multiple shipments coming in on 18-wheelers every day, most of which come from I-89 via Route 2 and Route 116. If these trucks were to miss the turn off 116 because of insufficient signage, they would have to drive all the way to the intersection of 116 and 2A, miles down the road, to turn. Even if The Lane Press's sign posed some marginal 4 traffic safety hazard — and The Lane Press maintains that it does not — the hazard that could potentially be created by removing it would be far worse. Significantly, this sign has been in existence for approximately 25 years, and to date The Lane Press is not aware of any accidents attributable to this sign. Publicly available reports of traffic accidents along 116 from 2003 to 2010 confirm that the sign is not a traffic hazard. The Lane Press's sign also does not pose a safety hazard to the public because of faulty construction or lackadaisical maintenance. As the photos of the sign show, it is well -constructed and well -maintained, from the sturdy cobblestone pillars to the tidy evergreen landscaping. Nor does the sign in any way detract from the aesthetic beauty of the community. Again, we refer the Board to our photos, which plainly show that the sign is in fact quite aesthetically pleasing. This sign cannot be considered an eyesore to citizens of South Burlington. To The Lane Press's knowledge, none of its neighbors have complained about the aesthetic impact of the sign. The sign isn't some tawdry billboard or tacky advertisement. The Lane Press is proud of this sign and the clean, tasteful professionalism that it embodies. Enforcement of the Ordinance against The Lane Press in this case would not serve any of the Ordinance's stated purposes, nor any conceivable substantial governmental purpose. Because of this, enforcement would be an unconstitutional restraint on The Lane Press's right to engage in commercial speech under the First Amendment. III. Equal Protection and Common Benefits Additionally, enforcement of the Ordinance against The Lane Press in this case would constitute discrimination in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and in violation of the Common Benefits Clause of Article 7 of the Vermont Constitution. This warning notice prohibits The Lane Press from maintaining an off -premises 5 sign, but businesses in the Dorset Street/City Center Sign District are allowed to reap the benefits of off -premises "directory signs" under Section 6 of the Ordinance. When a law effectively creates two different classes of citizens in this manner and applies itself unequally to them, the Fourteenth Amendment requires that the classification must be rationally related to a permissible government interest. See, e.g., Nichols v. Hofmann, 2010 VT 36, ¶ 16-17 (discussing the federal constitutional standard for equal protection); Badgley v. Walton, 2010 VT 68, ¶ 21 (discussing the state constitutional standard for common benefits). In this case, imposing a different, harsher set of requirements upon The Lane Press than on the businesses on Dorset Street would not be a rational way of furthering any permissible government interest, for reasons essentially the same as those already discussed in the First Amendment context. Thus, it would be a violation of The Lane Press's Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection under the law. IV. Conclusion For all of these reasons, The Lane Press asks the Board to reverse the decision of the Code Officer and to vacate the warning notice. Dated at Burlington, Vermont this day of January, 2012. 4836258.1-MBH THE LANE PRESS, INC. f By: - Marc B. Weafh Downs Rachlin Martin PLLC ATTORNEYSFOR THE LANE PRESS, INC. 199 Main Street, P.O. Box 190 Burlington, VT 05402-0190 Tel. 802-863-2375 0 MEMORANDUM To: Development Review Board From: Raymond J. Belair, Code Officer Date: December 30, 2011 Re: Appeal #AO-11-05 Appeal #AO-11-05 of The Lane Press, Inc. appealing the issuance of a Warning Notice by the Code Officer for maintaining an off -premise sign, 85 Meadowland Drive. BACKGROUND 1. On October 28, 2011, the Administrative Officer issued a Warning Notice to The Lane Press for maintaining an off -premises free-standing sign on property owned by Burlington Properties Limited Partnership at 85 Meadowland Drive.(exhibit #1) 2. A Notice of Appeal (#AO-11-05) was submitted on November 10, 2011 appealing the decision of the Administrative Officer to issue a Warning Notice regarding the sign in question. (exhibit #2) 3. A public hearing notice that a hearing on the appeal would take place on January 3, 2012, was published in The Other Paper on 12/15/11.(exhibit #3) 4. The appellant Lane Press is located at 87 Meadowland Drive and the Lane Press sign is located at 85 Meadowland Drive.(see exhibit #4) NO RIGHT TO APPEAL The Administrative Officer is authorized to issue and pursue before the Judicial Bureau a municipal complaint. See Section 30(a). The Sign Ordinance requires the Administrative Officer to issue a written warning for a violation of the Sign Ordinance before issuing a municipal complaint for a first offense of the Sign Ordinance in any calendar year. See id. The written warning does not impose a fine or require any other action but merely warns someone who has violated the Sign Ordinance of the existence of the violation and that further violations shall be subject to a civil penalty. See Exhibit #1. The Sign Ordinance only provides the opportunity to appeal any "action" of the Code Officer to "any person aggrieved by any action of the Code Officer". Appellant has not attempted to and cannot demonstrate that it is "aggrieved" or in any way injured by the issuance of a Warning Notice that imposes no punishment, financial or otherwise. Appellant has failed to state a claim for which relief can be granted. For these reasons, the Development Review Board should dismiss Appellant's appeal. APPELLANT'S SIGN CONSTITUTES A VIOLATION OF THE SIGN ORDINANCE 1. Section 20 (m) of the South Burlington Sign Ordinance states "off - premises signage shall not be permitted". (see exhibit #5) 2. Section 24 (a) of the South Burlington Sign Ordinance states "on or before JUNE 3, 2009, all non -conforming signs shall have been removed, lawfully replaced, or otherwise altered so as to comply with all applicable provisions of the South Burlington Sign Ordinance in effect as of that date". (see exhibit #6) 3. The sign in question occupies the lower half of a free-standing sign located at 85 Meadowland Drive with the upper half occupied by a sign panel for Dynapower. (see exhibit 7) 4. Signs must be located on the same premises as the thing that the sign identifies, advertises or promotes. The appellant Lane Press is located at 87 Meadowland Drive. The sign for Lane Press is located on different premises at 85 Meadowland Drive. As a result, the Lane Press sign constitutes off -premise signage. 5. An off -premises sign constitutes a violation of the South Burlington Sign Ordinance. 6. As noted above, the Sign Ordinance requires the Administrative Officer to issue a written warning of a violation before issuing a municipal complaint for a first offense of the Sign Ordinance in any calendar year. EXHIBIT CITY OF SO. BURLINGTON WARNING NOTICE 575 DORSET ST., SO. BURLINGTON, VT 05403 IN VIOLATI N OF MUNIC[PAL ORDI ANCE: I have Just and reasonable grounds to believe the defendant named above committed this violation. I served the warning notice by: ❑ DELIVERY IN HAND �JZL „DATEFIRST CLASS MAIL/ /�dyJ/ {-� /�,I[� �� ,/JQFFICIAUS NO - -Tr AiAheC / Ct: a_h/N` /'Jt s°-, "Y \ �j / vrr� ALL ),GNAT E 7- �f EJIAt iJ i� A f yJ Any further violations shall be s bject to a civil penalty of p to $500 per day for each day that the violation continues. Failure to correct this violation may result in the City taking civil action in accor- dance with State Statues and Vermont Traffic and Municipal Courts. EXHIBIT CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD IN RE: THE LANE PRESS, INC. ) (Vermont Route 116 ) DOCKET NO. Hinesburg Road) ) Appeal of Decision of South Burlington Sign Ordinance Code Officer THE LANE PRESS, INC.'S NOTICE OF APPEAL The Lane Press, Inc., by and through its attorneys, Downs Rachlin Martin PLLC, hereby appeals the October 27, 2011 decision of the Sign Ordinance Code Officer of the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning, a copy of which is attached, as follows: The Appellant, The Lane Press, Inc., has its address at 87 Meadowland Drive, South Burlington, Vermont, 05403. 2. The Lane Press, Inc. maintains a sign located at the intersection of Meadowland Drive and Hinesburg Road. The issue on appeal is whether this sign complies with the applicable regulatory provisions. 3. The regulatory provisions applicable to this appeal include, but are not limited to, the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, the South Burlington Sign Ordinance, and the Vermont Statutes. 4. The Lane Press, Inc. requests that the Development Review Board reverse the decision of the Code Officer to issue a Notice of Violation of the South Burlington Sign Ordinance in connection with the aforementioned sign. DowNs RACHLIN MARTIN PLLC 5. The Lane Press, Inc. maintains that the requested relief to be proper under the circumstances because the aforementioned sign complies with the applicable regulations and laws. WHEREFORE, the Development Review Board should reverse the decision of the Code Officer. Dated at Burlington, Vermont this ✓(/ day of November, 2011. THE LANE PRESS, INC. RE Downs Rachlin Martin PLLC ATTORNEYSFOR THE LANE PRESS, INC. 199 Main Street, P.O. Box 190 Burlington, VT 05402-0190 Tel. 802-863-2375 4747187.1 DOWNS RACHLIN 2 MARTIN PLLC C The -Other Paper • www.otherpape PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC HEARING SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD The South -Burlington Development Review Board will hold a public hearing in the South Burlington City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on January-3, 2012 at 7:30 P.M..to consider the following: Preliminary & final plat application #SD-11- 44 of David Shenk for a planned unit -devel- opment to construct a six (6) unit multi -fam- ily dwelling, 42 Airport Road. Appeal #AO-11-05 of The Lane Press, Inc. appealing the issuance of a Warning No- tice by the Code Officer for maintaining an off -premise sign, 85 Meadowland Drive. Mark Behr, Chairman South Burlington Development Review Board Copies of the applications are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall December 15, 2011 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD NOTICE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY CERTIFICATION CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON BIOSOLIDS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Public notice is hereby provided for the pub- lic comment, period for the fact sheet and draft certification related to an application by the `City_of South Burlington, Vermont, to the Vermont Agency of -Natural Resources for certification of a wastewater treatment sludge management program. The applica- tion -proposes the treatment of sludge via advanced anaerobic digestion to produce a biosolids product that can be marketed and distributed to the general public as an un- regulated commodity. The application has pity members are welcome. Check out the Alumni website for the schedule of events and for . ticket information. Go to www.sbschools.net look for Alumni un- der the "Community" link. (12/02) VOLUNTEER DELIVERY DRIVERS: Can you help a senior near you get food? South Burlington, VT - CVAA is looking for vol- unteers to help seniors in the South Burlington community. Two senior women are looking for volunteers to go grocery shopping for them once per week. If you can help one of these women or know someone who could, contact Jen Manosh at 865-0360 ext. 1058 or via e-mail at jmanosh@cvaa.org. The schedule is flex- ible, and you can make a friend and a dif- ference at the same time. (12%15) READING GROUP MEMBERS WANTED: The Road Less Traveled book discussion series to begin in January. Ever wonder, why life seems to be so difficult? Why a loving relationship is so .challenging? What steps youcantake to be a more ef- fective parent? If you do, please consider joining a small group of adults in reading and discussing what Scott Peck, the au- thor of the longstanding best seller "The Road Less Traveled," has to say about these and other associated topics. An 8- to 10- week small group discussion based on the chapters in book will begin on Sunday evenings in January and end in March. A companion guide will be used by group leader and SB resident, Tim Hess, to help frame weekly discussions. Faith United Methodist Church willprovide copies of the book free of charge for participants. Please contact Tim at 846-5243 if you are interested or have questions. The first ori- entation meeting will be held at Faith United Methodist Church (899 Dorset Street; SB) on Sunday evening, January 8 at 6 p.m. Copies of The Road Less Rav- eled will be distributed at that time. FREE [ REE TOP CONDOMINIUMS 7,000 square feet, grouricl floor flat. 2 bedrooms, l bath. {open living, propane; licai, wood stove. 'file/ carpet, pool, tennis. New vinyl sidjog. $ ]:!9,900. 802-877-1 529. INK: EPSON C-60.ink cartridges: Three color and three black, new in packaging Work great. New, $8.95 and $9.95, askin; $5 each. 863-6501 (12/15) .ITEMS: Four (4) 164nch aluminum rim off of a Ford F150. $150; Two (2) 10-ind table saws. $75 each; Shop §mith saw (dri press; saw, sander,' lathe). Lots of extr pieces. $250; Lots of extra tools also fo sale. 864-6201 (12/01) ITEMS: Blue upholstered Lazy Boy re clines. _$75; Ergonomic task chair, blac cloth, upholstered. $50; 40s green plastic upholstered, occasional chair. $35. 862 4966 (12/15) ITEMS: New stoneware 4qt berry bean pc in box.. $30; Samsonite leather beige sui case with suit compartment. Good cond tion. $15; New ladies warm heavy bad robe. Never worn. 100% cotton. Bathrot is black with white designs and belt. $2 New ladies beautiful light purple hat wil brim and ear flaps. Never_worn. Size 71,, $15; New plastic Tupperware juice col tainer with cover. $5. 658-1636 (12/15) KEYBOARD: Yamaha Digital, YPT-22 Used 1 week. Great gift for someone lean ing. $30. 363-0636 (12/15) OIL BURNER: Beckett, model AFG. Use less than one season. Excellent conditio $85 or best offer. 864-7214 (12/15) ORGAN: Casio, portable. Purchased Costeo last year (new. $160). Rarely use $80. 862-7271 (12/01) EXHIBIT '570,00 (h) No sign may be erected if it is so located as to be primarily readable from a limited access facility as defined in Title 19, V.S.A. (i) No display of pornographic or lewd signs shall be permitted. (j) No sign shall be affixed to a handrail or fence. (k) No sign shall be attached to a water supply tank, and no sign shall be painted on a water supply tank except for governmental or operational identifications or notices, which are to be as minimal in size as practicable. (1) No sign shall be attached to a utility cabinet other than identification or required operational signs installed by the owner of the cabinet. No advertising signs shall be installed on any cabinet. ____> (m) Off -premise signage shall not be permitted. (n) The use of parked or stationary motor vehicles to display temporary signs, such as but not limited to. stickers, banners, drapes, and placards, for advertising purposes, shall be prohibited. For purposes of this sub -section such temporary signs shall include but not be limited to those signs that would not remain affixed to the vehicle when the vehicle is moving, or that would constitute a hazard to safe operation of the vehicle, and other similar cases as determined by the Code Officer. SECTION 21. Li2htin� . (a) Except as provided elsewhere in this Ordinance, indirect or interior lighting may be used to illuminate any sign provided that the source of light shall concentrate the illumination upon the area of the sign so as to prevent glare upon the street or adjacent property. Except in the Dorset Street/City Center Sign District, fixtures should not be placed any nearer than five (5) feet to the property line. (b) It shall be unlawful for any person to erect, alter, maintain or relocate any sign employing the use of luminescent lights as defined in this Ordinance, except where such luminescent elements are shielded from direct view by a separate translucent material. (c) No sign of any kind shall be left illuminated after ten o'clock P.M. (10:00 PM) in any residential zoning district, and no sign of any kind shall be left illuminated after midnight in any non- residential zoning district unless the premises are open for business after midnight, in which case, no sign_ of any kind shall be left illuminated after the premises are closed for business. Notwithstanding the above, a wall sign may be left illuminated, if the Code Officer determines that it is necessary for the protection of the property from theft or vandalism, and such determination is made a part of the permit. (d) String lighting shall not be allowed except for a non -permanent, seasonal or charitable business with permit by Code Officer. (e) In the Dorset Street/City Center Sign District, internally illuminated signs shall utilize opaque backgrounds and translucent letters, logos and/or graphics, so as to insure that the lettering, logos and/or graphics are illuminated rather than the background. Translucent backgrounds utilizing dark colors may be used with white, clear or other light translucent letters, logos and/or graphics, provided the Design Review Committee determines that the effect will be consistent with the intent of this provision. South Burlington Sign Ordinance Effective May 3, 2010 Page 35 EXHIBIT (s) Signs designated as "historic" by the Vermont Division for Historic Preservation (or its successor) or the National Register of Historic Places. Alternations to such signs shall only be permitted if the entire sign becomes compliant with these regulations or if the proposed alterations are approved as remaining "historic" by the above -named bodies. (t) Informational signs affixed to the principal face of a propane gas cagt containing safety information, the manufacturer's name, the manufacturer's logo, and/or emergency contact information. Lettering, numbering, or logos shall not exceed three (3) inches in height. (u) One (1) restaurant menu not exceeding two (2) square feet in size per restaurant, affixed to a wall that adjacent to a door that leads directly into such restaurant. No lettering or numbers shall exceed one (1) inch in height. No such menus shall be internally illuminated. Any other lighting shall be downcast directly onto the menu. SECTION 24. Non -Conforming Signs (a) On or before JUNE 3, 2009, all non -conforming signs shall have been removed, lawfully replaced, or otherwise altered so as to comply with all applicable provisions of the South Burlington Sign Ordinance in effect as of that date. (b) A "conforming sign" shall become a non -conforming sign on the effective date of an amendment of this ordinance that establishes a standard or requirement with which the sign does not conform. A conforming sign shall be: (1) Any sign in existence on June 3, 2009, that on such date was in full compliance with all requirements of this ordinance as it was then constituted; or (2) Any sign first constructed after June 3, 2009, in strict compliance with a permit issued under this ordinance; or (3) Any sign altered or relocated after June 3, 2009, in strict compliance with a permit issued under this ordinance. (c) Within five (5) years of the date a sign becomes non -conforming, it shall be removed or, following issuance of a permit, be altered or relocated to comply with this ordinance. SECTION 25. Unsafe and Unlawful Suns If the Code Officer shall find that any sign is unsafe or insecure, or is a menace to the public, or has been constructed, erected or is being maintained in violation of the provisions of this Ordinance, he shall immediately give written notice to the owner thereof and shall have said written notice served by certified mail with return receipt requested. If the owner failed to remove or alter the structure, so as to comply with the standards herein set forth, at the discretion of the Code Officer after receipt of such notices, said sign or structure may be removed by the Code Officer at the expense of the owner of the sign and owner of the property upon which it is located, such expense of removal to be the joint and several liability of all such owners. The Code Officer may cause any sign which is an immediate peril to person or property, to be removed summarily and without notice. South Burlington Sign Ordinance Effective May 3, 2010 Page 39 t� Y�el� �, r' il► � �' Y Pe kh y • C> R 7 Y N i . 21. y an 1 a - Easement Not6,( - Zoning Data - + - Legend - E1. A 20-foot-wide easement for future recreation path i . ROPOSED serving the "INDUSTRIAL -OPEN SPACE" DISTRIG r SUBJECT PROPERTY LINE City of South Burlington. LOT AREA 3 AC. - - OTHER (APPROX.) PROP. LINE E2. 10-foot-wide easement for electric & communication lines conveyed to Green FRONT SETBACK 50' EASEMENT Mountain Power Corp. (GMP) and New England Telephone &Telegraph Co. (NETT) SIDE SETBACK 35' Vol. 176 Pg. 138). - -SS- - GRAVITY SEWER LINE E3. 30-foot-wide easement for gas serving Vermont Gas Systems,lnc. (Vol. Pg. ) REAR SETBACK 50' - -G - - GAS LINE and waterline conveyed to City of South Burlington (Vol. Pg. ). BUILDING COVERAGE 30% E4. 50-foot-wide easement for access, snow storage, electric & telephone line LOT COVERAGE 50 % - - W - - WATER LINE conveyed to (Vol. Pg. ). FRONT YARD COVERAGE 30 % - _ UE - - UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC E5. 20-foot-wide sewer easement conveyed to City of South Burlington - - UT - - UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE OWNER of RECORD (Vol. 179 Pg. 510), IPF/CIPF O IRON PIPE /CAPPED IRON PIPE FO E6. 20-foot-wide power &communications easement serving Green Mountain BURLINGTON PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Power Corp. and New England Telephone & Telegraph Co. (Vol. 275 Pg. 464) A 85 MEADOWLAND DRIVE IRF/CIRF 0 IRON ROD / CAPPED IRON ROD F E7. 10-foot-wide easement for gas serving Vermont Gas Systems, Inc. SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 CMF 0 SQUARE CONC. MARKER FOUND (Vol. 274 Pg.587) I I I IRS (D IRON ROD SET (NOTE 5) E8. 20-foot-wide waterline easement, 30-foot-wide sewer easement and 0 CMS O CONC. MARKER SET (NOTE 5) 30-foot-wide combined water and sewer easements across Landrum to serve Dynapower building. (Vol. 278 Pg. 120) QI WGM ASSOCIATES I AG / BG ABOVE / BELOW GRADE E9. 20.foot-wide sewe r easement running southerly and easterly from 0 V. W5 P.10 E14 E3 CORRESPONDS W/ EASEMENT NOTE pump station, conveyed to City of South Burlington (Vol. 651 Pg. 140) ¢ I V. M P. 550 I Also sewer line easement (12 feet wide) conveyed to Summer Ice Joint 2 0 SEWER MANHOLE Ventures by Burlington Properties LP (Vol. 651 Pg, 140), apparently for 2 CNF 3 cr1F the same sewer line. = aJ• ec a4' Ac 1 Ne9roT10'E 727.I4 E10.30-foot-wide water and sewer and access easement to um ro _ _`--------- P P - ---"=w---- ----_-w--_-_-_-_w LANDRUM station conveyed to City of South Burlington (Vol. 178 Pg. 516). I °------------` -- -' - -' -- a - E11. 200' x 25' easement for electric & telephone conveyed by V. 218 PZ14 Burlington Properties Limited Partnership to Green Mountain Power Corp. _ _ _ I "� Lwm Press' and New England Telephone, dated 4/12/1989 (Vol. 281 Pg. 221-22). E12. Sewer Pump Station (conveyed in fee) and 69 x 100' easement Q { oL conveyed to City of South Burlington (Vol. 176 Pg. 516). S y t� I LOT 1 ' �► �� '- \wr El 3. Sewer line easement (20 feet wide) for possible future use, -9+ 0: 8.34 Ac. conveyed to City of South Burlington (Vol. 176 Pg. 518). W x E14. 15-foot-wide pedestrian trail easement conveyed to City of 6 ^� � I 14783Y South Burlington (Vol. 176 Pg. 514). m �I I SOB Wlg'E ,, E15. A 20' x 42' sewer easement conveyed by Burlington Properties W 50.51' Limited Partnership to CEA Properties, LLC, dated 1f7/20G8 (Vol. 804 Pg 519-20). --(,+r. E16. Agreement for utilization of signage between Burlington FLC., R-411.BC Properties LP and Lane Press, Inc. (Vol. 280 Pg. 398). ,.,,� yru- - _ � - Highway or Street Notes: H.1. Meadowland Drive (f/k/a Swift Street Extension) an 60-foot- wide right-of-way is subject to an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication from Burlington Properties Limited Partnership to the City of South Burlington, dated 9/12/1995 (Vol. 384 Pg. 104-108). This Irrevocable Offer of Dedication apparently supercedes a previous Irrevocable Offer of Dedication recorded (Vol 175 Pg. 518) H.2. Hinesburg Road (VT Rte. 116) is a public highway or street with a right-of-way width of 4 rods (66 feet) per record found in Volume Page , _ City _ Records. H.3. Interstate Highway 89 is a public highway with a variable -width of right-of-way. Reference Volume 48 Page 489 ,City Land Records, and Reference Plan I. No access to 1-89 from Lot 4. HA. Thompson and Bowdoin Streets are 60.foot-wide rights -of -way subject to an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication from Burlington Properties Limited Partnership to the City of South Burlington, dated (Vol. _ Pg, �. II ' G. ELTABBAKH L V. BOBP. 24 EAST MOUNTAIN VIEW, LLC V. 754 P. 53 - Survey Notes - -------------- _ - _ _ NB9'O:rgi Wa77 AC MUNSON WTHMOVING CORP. V. 651 A 152 1. Purpose of this survey and plat was to: 5. Iron pipes found are typically described with inside diameters. Iron rods found are a.) Retrace, document, monument and perpetuate the perimeter boundaries of land typically described with outside diameters. Comer or line markers (monuments) set or conveyed to Burlington Properties Limited Partnership by deed of Orchard Lake Road proposed shall typically consist of 40" x 5/8" diameter steel reinforcing rods or 4" square Properties, dated 12/15/1998 and recorded in Volume 273 Page 265 of the South Burlington reinforced concrete markers with aluminum caps embossed "CIVIL ENGINEERING Land Records. ASSOCS. - VT LS 597", typically set Flush with existing grade. New markers set in b.) Depict the proposed subdivision of the surveyed parcel into four (4) lots as shown. woodlands are typically set with 4" - 10" of reveal. Other neighboring property lines may be shown approximately and are for reference purposes only. 2. Field surveying was conducted during January 2010 and consisted of a closed -loop traverse utilizing electronic total -station and GPS instruments unless otherwise noted. Bearings shown are from Grid North, Vermont Coordinate System of 1983 L- Adjustment) based upon our GPS observations on or near the site. 3. Some dimensional information shown hereon may differ significantly from existing land records, plats or deeds, due to differences in orientation or methods of measurement 4. Areas of proposed Lots 2 and 3 are calculated to the sidelines of Meadowland Drive, as shown. 6. The subject property MAY be subject to buried utilities, easements, rights -of -way, restrictions, covenants, licenses, permits, regulations and/or set -back lines not readily apparent from normal inspection of the property or land records. No liability is assumed by Civil Engineering Associates, Inc., or the undersigned, for any loss associated with the existence of any undiscovered easements, uses, or restrictions on use of the property which are not evident in the record or are not readily apparent from normal inspection of the property or land records. APPROVED BY RESOLUTION OF THE SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD, ON THE DAY OF 2 SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF SAID RESOLUTION. SIGNED THIS DAY OF 2 BY CHAIRPERSON. � T � o R-4WMr5 A- STq�r UND Ell E12 V yBpF19M, OUND 20' Ac GRID NORTH \ SEE NOTE -- c--r__ "` TO47001411 TE1-0' � ` Sjy,7g7 k / 0 a / crrF IC6AC / IN LOT 3 27.78 Ac. / I.0' AC I _ ______________ _ _ _ __ ___________� } __ W _ _ -------------------------------- - t _ CIRF t�a.47 5/9- CIRF 701.I8' 0.4' Ac I 0.6' AC y i The ROCK of GREATER I I 3 SB2 sea. w BURLINGTO 745 R 44N Inc. a I co i sa.aa Z I y - Reference Plats or Maps - A. "Consolidation of Lot 8 & 9 Meadowland Business Park for Birchwood Burlington, LLC" , last revised 9/16/2003, by Civil Engineering Associates, Inc. Recorded in Map Slide 534.3 South Burlington Land Records. B. "Boundary Plat - Linus & Sue Wiles" , dated March 11, 2003, by Trudell Consulting Engineers, Inc. Vol. 425 Pg. 3 South Burlington Land Records. C. "Meadowland Business Park - Subdivision Plat ", last revised 8127/1996, by Trudell Consulting Engineers, Inc. Vol. 386 Pg. 98 (now Map Slide 193) South Burlington Land Records. D. "Landrum and Orchard Lake Road Properties ", last revised 2/0311988, by Trudell Consulting Engineers, Inc. Vol. 252 Pg. 72 (now Map Slide 208.5) South Burlington Land Records. E. "Plat of Land of Semicon Components, Inc. ", last revised 8/29/1986, by Trudell Consulting Engineers, Inc. Vol. 200 Pg. 71 South Burlington Land Records. F. "Plat of Land of Mitel, Inc. ", last revised 5/21/1984, by Trudell Consulting Engineers, Inc. Vol. 193 Pg. 33 (now Map Slide 170.4) South Burlington Land Records. G. "Mountain View Industrial Park ", last revisedl2/03/1981, by Trudell Consulting Engineers, Inc. Vol. 173 Pg. 42 ;now Map Slide 153.4) South Burlington Land Records. H. "Property Sur✓ey - Wright Farm ", dated February 7,1979, by Engineers Incorporated of Vermont. Vol. 173 Pg. 22 (now Map Slide 150.1) South Burlington Land Records. I. "Interstate Project in the Towns of Williston & South Burlington - Project 1-89-3 (14) ", Sheets 15-16 of 115, circa April 1961, by Boswell Engineering Co., VTrans District 5 Engineers Office. BIRCHWOOD BURLINGTON, LLC V. 022 P.87 -�r LOCATION MAP NOT to SCALE E19 EXHIBIT ( I I z Z LOT 4 V7 38.55Ac.I� RECEIVED MAR 10 2010 (City Of S0. Budington ' I Sd7M'02'W 60.BE (I 5/a" CIRF (LUSH P cw ses ursew maw 6' AC I.J• AG ® SUPER -TEMP REALTY I BI I COMPANY, Inc. I I I V. 755 A 158 $I GRAPHIC SCALE ( IN FELr ) I Inch - 150 ft. SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CLERK'S OFFICE RECEIVED FOR RECORD This day of , 2010, at _ o'clock _ minutes _M and recorded in map slide_ page/number_ Attest City Clerk To the best of my knowledge & belief this plat properly depicts the results of a survey conducted under my direct supervision, based upon our analysis of record and physical evidence found. Existing boundaries shown are substantially consistent with the record unless otherwise shown. This plat is in substantial compliance with 27 VSA 1403. This statement valid only when accompanied by my original signature and seal. R.Cowan VT LS 597 SURVEYED HY: f F CIVIL ENGINERING ASSOCIAI CMS. INC, 10 MANSFIELD VIEW LANE SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 PHONE 802-W2M FAX 90"04-227/ :DPYRIGRT (D ZO 0 -ALL RIGHTS RBSERI MJWlTRC JLM ApmvRn TRC CH'rH R[VISIOR PROPOSED 4-LOT SUBDIVISION BURLINGTON PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 85 MEADOWLAND DRIVE SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT un nwRwc xRImRR MAR. 10, 2010 nwGmALHGAr� P 1 1" = 150' PR . NO. 09202 �6-l' - 637""' RM DOWNS RACHLIN MARTIN PLLC MARL B. HEATH mheath a drm.com Tel: (802) 846-8306 Fax: (802) 862-7512 November 10, 2011 VIA HAND DELIVERY Clerk City of South Burlington Department of Planning & Zoning 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: In re: The Lane Press, Inc. (Vermont Route 116 Hinesburg Road) Dear Sir/Madam: RECEIVED NOV 10 2011 City of So. Burlington Enclosed for fling please find The Lane Press, Inc.'s Notice of Appeal along with a check in the amount of $233.00 to cover the cost of filing. Please feel free to call me with any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Marc He/ MBH/ibw Enclosures cc: Raymond J. Belair COURTHOUSE PLAZA ■ 199 MAIN ST. ■ PO BOX 190 ■ BURLINGTON, VT ■ 05402-0190 ■ T: +1.802.863.2375 ■ F: +1.802.862.7512 ■ WWW.DRM.COM BRATTLEBORO, VT ■ BURLINGTON, VT ■ LEBANON, NH ■ MONTPELIER, VT 0 PLATTSBURGH, NY 0 ST. JOHNSBURY, VT CITY OF SO. BURLINGTON WARNING NOTICE 575 DORSET ST., SO. BURLINGTON, VT 05403 WA TA 0 /i . A Of F, 1�4 �2v�r 5___ Wf J�m T T� k l� IN VIOLATI N OF10LJ NICI PA L OR11 NCE��� :3b!� I have just and reasonable grounds to believe the defendant named above committed this violation. I served the warning notice by: ❑ DELIVERY IN HAND D 1111W RED T � (� DATA �: FIRST CLASS MAIL L-(/ /Yf� ICIA�S NO OFFIC) NAME inted) OFFI AL'S I NATIp E �7 Any further violations shall be s bject to a civil penalty of p to $500 per day for each day that the violation continues. Failure to correct this violation may result in the City taking civil action in accor- dance with State Statues and Vermont Traffic and Municipal Courts. Vol. .v , P �T' �& CIZWS OFFICE "4= ceived L2-i earded in Vol. DpnifQ I ;o. Burlington AGREEMENT FOR THE UTILIZATION Off' ff4A #d, City Clerk ev, I THIS AGREEMENT made this day of easy, 1989, by and between BURLINGTON PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a limited partnership organized and existing under the laws of the State of Michigan, with its principal place of business in Farmington Hills, Michigan, and LANE PRESS, INC., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Vermont, with its principal place of business in South Burlington, Vermont. W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, BURLINGTON PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ("BPLP") is the owner of certain land and premises in the City of South Burlington, which are more particularly described in a Quitclaim Deed from Orchard Lake Road Properties, dated December 15, 1988, and of record at Volume X73 , Pages aeY-6y, of the City of South Burlington Land Records ("BPLP's property"), and WHEREAS, LANE PRESS occupies certain lands and premises adjoining said parcel, which were acquired by Warranty Deed of Semicon Components, Inc. to Landrum, dated December 30, 1986, and of record at Volume 218, Pages 514-19, of the City of South Burlington Land Records, and WHEREAS, BPLP is the owner of a sign, sign pedestal, and display along and adjacent to a public highway known and referred to as Vermont Route 116, the Hinesburg Road, so-called, and WHEREAS, Dynapower Corporation, a Michigan corporation, intends to occupy a building on lands and premises of BPLP and Vol. e: 1 Page.-5 further intends to utilize the aforementioned sign, and WHEREAS, LANE PRESS wishes to obtain the right to display a name and/or logo and/or other approved descriptive language (herein collectively referred to as "name") on said sign on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns, and WHEREAS, BPLP is agreeable to having the name of "LANE PRESS" or its successors and assigns displayed on said sign. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of TEN DOLLARS AND OTHER GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1) LANE PRESS, its successors and assigns, may display a name, and make use of the sign owned by BPLP situated on Route 116, a public highway, adjacent to the current access entrance from Route 116 to LANE PRESS and to the BPLP parcel, subject to and upon the following terms and conditions: 2) The parties hereby set forth their understanding that the present useable square footage of the sign available for display is approximately forty (40) square feet on each side of the sign. Based upon such present square footage, LANE PRESS shall be entitled and authorized to utilize such present useable square footage on each side of the sign as is directly proportional to the number of separate subdivided parcels of land comprising the original 111.26 acre parcel formerly owned by Semicon Components, Inc. that use the access or right of way adjacent to the location of the sign. For illustrative purposes, in the event there are two subdivided parcels on the original 111.26 acre parcel that use the access or right of way, e.g., LANDRUM or BPLP, LANE PRESS shall be entitled to utilize up to -2- Vol.. ) Page r one-half (1/2) of the present useable square footage of the sign. In the event there are three subdivided parcels on the original 111.26 acre parcel that use the access or right of way, LANE PRESS shall be authorized to use up to one-third (1/3) of the present useable square footage of said sign. However, in no event shall LANE PRESS' share be less than one -fifth (1/5) of the useable square footage of the sign, or less than the proportional share utilized by any other entity named on the sign. For example, should there be three subdivided parcels of land that use the access road, but only two entities using the sign, LANE PRESS' share shall be one-half (1/2) of the useable square footage of the sign. 3) The authority of all users to utilize the sign in the manner set forth in the foregoing paragraph shall be limited to a horizontal plane on said sign. LANE PRESS' placement of a name on the sign shall at all times be placed below names used by BPLP, Dynapower, their assigns, grantees, and/or tenants. 4) The effective date of this Agreement shall commence on the date of the receipt by BPLP or its assigns and grantees of a certain Deed and Grant of Easements from Landrum and its mortgagees to BPLP relating to easements for utilities (including telephone, electric, water and sewer). 5) The parties agree that LANE PRESS' entitlement to utilize the present sign can be moved from the present location and transferred to another location on BPLP's property (whether or not still owned by BPLP) on the following terms and conditions: (a) At all times, Lane Press shall have the entitlement -3- Vol. Page to have a sign of the same size as the sign that would otherwise be available to it, said relocated sign to be at the location of the intersection of any public highway and the access road or right of way to LANE PRESS, premises, as said right of way now exists or as it may be relocated in the future, as is more particularly described in the following Warranty Deeds: (a) Semicon Components, Inc. to Landrum dated December 30, 1986 and of record in Volume 218, Pages 514-519 of the City of South Burlington Land Records; and (b) Semicon Components, Inc. to Orchard Lake'Road Properties, Inc., dated December 3, 1986, and of record in Volume 219, Pages 162-68, of the City of South Burlington Land Records; (b) In the event LANE PRESS, sign rights are moved from the present location and transferred to a location described in Subsection (5)(a) hereof, and in the further event BPLP does not erect a sign pedestal or sign display at such intersection, LANE PRESS, its successors and assigns, shall have the right to erect, at its own cost and expense, a sign devoted to its name, which name shall not be larger than the signage authority which it would have otherwise had available to it under the terms of this Agreement. In addition, all terms and conditions of this Agreement, including without limitation, Section 7 of this Agreement shall be specifically applicable to the erection of any such sign, sign pedestal, display, sign base or sign support. Should LANE PRESS erect a sign at its own cost or expense, -4- Pa other entities shall have the right to use the sign, sign pedestal, display, sign base or sign support with the permission of Lane Press which permission shall not be unreasonably denied, delayed or withheld and provided further that such other entities shall pay a proportionate share of the cost and expenses of the sign, sign pedestal, display, sign base or sign support. Notwithstanding the foregoing, LANE PRESS shall not be required to grant permission to other users of the sign referred to in this Subsection 5(b) if the result thereof would reduce the available display area for Lane Press below that which it would otherwise be entitled to under this Agreement. In the event other entities use the sign, sign pedestal, display, sign base or sign support the provisions of this Agreement shall be fully applicable. 6) LANE PRESS shall be solely responsible for all maintenance of its name on the sign and shall be responsible for obtaining, at its cost and expense, all necessary permits and authorizations from all governmental authorities having jurisdiction of the subject matter, which may be needed to use and maintain its name on the sign. 7) LANE PRESS shall provide BPLP with twenty (20) days prior written notice of the specific size, design, layout, color, highlight, and background of any sign and name which it intends to place on the sign pedestal. The approval of BPLP of such sign and name will not be unreasonably withheld or delayed, it being recognized by LANE PRESS that BPLP shall have the right to -5- require that all details of LANE PRESS' sign and name are consistent with any signage to be installed by BPLP, its grantees, successors and assigns. Any changes in the sign shall be subject to the same provision. 8) This Agreement is irrevocable and shall be for the benefit of and shall be binding upon the parties hereto and their grantees, successors and assigns. Either party shall have the right to fully enforce the provisions of this Agreement. 9) This Agreement and the rights set forth herein shall not constitute an easement or any other interest in the land and premises of BPLP, its grantees, successors and assigns. However, this Agreement may be recorded in the Land Records of the City of South Burlington by either party to provide notice to all successors and assigns of either party. Dated at J0!41 __ ��C+/, /�Y/1`", Vermont this ! day of T- iLIy', 1989. BURLINGTON PROPERTIES LIMITED PATete By ollakl Partner Dated at b , Vermont this day of 1989. �— TH P S By: Phil p Drumheller, Vice President and Duly Authorized Agent -6- END OF 'DOCUMENT CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD IN RE: THE LANE PRESS, INC. (Vermont Route 116 ) DOCKET NO. Hinesburg Road) ) Appeal of Decision of South Burlington Sign Ordinance Code Officer THE LANE PRESS, INC.'S NOTICE OF APPEAL The Lane Press, Inc., by and through its attorneys, Downs Rachlin Martin PLLC, hereby appeals the October 27, 2011 decision of the Sign Ordinance Code Officer of the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning, a copy of which is attached, as follows: 1. The Appellant, The Lane Press, Inc., has its address at 87 Meadowland Drive, South Burlington, Vermont, 05403. 2. The Lane Press, Inc. maintains a sign located at the intersection of Meadowland Drive and Hinesburg Road. The issue on appeal is whether this sign complies with the applicable regulatory provisions. The regulatory provisions applicable to this appeal include, but are not limited to, the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, the South Burlington Sign Ordinance, and the Vermont Statutes. 4. The Lane Press, Inc. requests that the Development Review Board reverse the decision of the Code Officer to issue a Notice of Violation of the South Burlington Sign Ordinance in connection with the aforementioned sign. DOWNS RACHLIN MARTIN PLLC 5. The Lane Press, Inc. maintains that the requested relief to be proper under the circumstances because the aforementioned sign complies with the applicable regulations and laws. WHEREFORE, the Development Review Board should reverse the decision of the Code Officer. Dated at Burlington, Vermont this (i' day of November, 2011. THE LANE PRESS, INC. LIN Downs Rachlin Martin PLLC ATTORNEYSFOR THE LANE PRESS, INC. 199 Main Street, P.O. Box 190 Burlington, VT 05402-0190 Tel. 802-863-2375 4747187.1 DOWNS RACHL IN 2 MARTIN PLLC CITY OF SO. BURLINGTON WARNING NOTICE 575 DORSET ST., SO. BURLINGTON, VT 05403 IRA �OA- / 0 W6 14-667Y 04XED AV r XWArA .a I have Just and reasonable grounds to believe the defendant named above committed this violation. I served the warning notice by: DELIVERY IN HAND DD T /} f /' DATE &KFIRST CLASS MAIL 9 /h� II /�li/G'!/t!`�,cl t �',✓ /! I� dI/t,— QC^f Any further violations shall be s bject to a civil penalty of p to $500 per day for each day that the violation continues. Failure to correct this violation may result in the City taaing civil action that in the dance with State Statues and Vermont Traffic and Municipal Courts. MARL B. HEATH mheath@drm.com drm.com Tel: (802) 846-8306 Fax: (802) 862-7512 November 10, 2011 RM DOWNS RACHLIN MARTIN PLLC .EEV ED Raymond J. Belair NOV 10 2011 Administrative Officer City of South Burlington Department of Planning & Zoning 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: In re: The Lane Press, Inc. (Vermont Route 116 Hinesburg Road) Dear Mr. Belair: Pursuant to 24 V.S.A. §4465(a), please find enclosed a copy of the Notice of Appeal that The Lane Press, Inc. is filing with the City Clerk in connection with your October 27, 2011 decision to issue a Notice of Violation regarding the sign at the intersection of Meadowland Drive and Hinesburg Road. Sincerely, Marc Heath MBH/ibw Enclosure COURTHOUSE PLAZA ■ 199 MAIN ST. ■ PO BOX 190 ■ BURLINGTON, VT ■ 05402-0190 ■ T: +1.802.863.2375 ■ F: +1.802.862.7512 ■ WWW.DRM.COM BRATTLEBORO, VT ■ BURLINGTON, VT ■ LEBANON, NH 0 MONTPELIER, VT 0 PLATTSBURGH, NY 0 ST. JOHNSBURY, VT MARC B. HEATH mheath@drm.com Tel: (802) 846-8306 Fax: (802) 862-7512 November 10, 2011 VIA HAND DELIVERY Clerk City of South Burlington Department of Planning & Zoning 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: In re: The Lane Press, Inc. (Vermont Route 116 Hinesburg Road) Dear Sir/Madam: Enclosed for filing please find The Lane Press, Inc.'s Notice of Appeal along with a check in the amount of $233.00 to cover the cost of filing. Please feel free to call me with any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Marc MBH/ibw Enclosures cc: Raymond J. Belair.. COURTHOUSE PLAZA ■ 199 MAIN ST. ■ PO BOX 190 ■ BURLINGTON, VT ■ 05402-0190 ■ T: +1.802.863.2375 ■ F: +1.802.862.7512 ■ WWW.DRM.COM BRATTLEBORO, VT ■ BURLINGTON, VT 0 LEBANON, NH 0 MONTPELIER, VT ■ PLATTSBURGH, NY ■ ST. JOHNSBURY, VT (h) No sign may be erected if it is so located as to be primarily readable from a limited access facility as defined in Title 19, V.S.A. (i) No display of pornographic or lewd signs shall be permitted. (j) No sign shall be affixed to a handrail or fence. (k) No sign shall be attached to a water supply tank, and no sign shall be painted on a water supply tank except for governmental or operational identifications or notices, which are to be as minimal in size as practicable. (1) No sign shall be attached to a utility cabinet other than identification or required operational signs installed by the owner of the cabinet. No advertising signs shall be installed on any cabinet. (m) Off -premise signage shall not be permitted. (n) The use of parked or stationary motor vehicles to display temporary signs, such as but not limited to stickers, banners, drapes, and placards, for advertising purposes, shall be prohibited. For purposes of this sub -section such temporary signs shall include but not be limited to those signs that would not.remain affixed to the vehicle when the vehicle is moving, or that would constitute a hazard to safe operation of the vehicle, and other similar cases as determined by the Code Officer. SECTION 21. Li2htin . (a) Except as provided elsewhere in this Ordinance, indirect or interior lighting may be used to illuminate any sign provided that the source of light shall concentrate the illumination upon the area of the sign so as to prevent glare upon the street or adjacent property. Except in the Dorset Street/City Center Sign District, fixtures should not be placed any nearer than five (5) feet to the property line. (b) It shall be unlawful for any person to erect, alter, maintain or relocate any sign employing the use of luminescent lights as defined in this Ordinance, except where such luminescent elements are shielded from direct view by a separate translucent material. (c) No sign of any kind shall be left illuminated after ten o'clock P.M. (10:00 PM) in any residential zoning district, and no sign of any kind shall be left illuminated after midnight in any non- --- residential zoning district unless the premises are open for business after midnight, in which case, no sign_ _ of any kind shall be left. illuminated after the premises are closed for business. Notwithstanding the above, a wall sign may be left illuminated, if the Code Officer determines that it is necessary for the protection of the property from theft or vandalism, and such determination is made a part of the permit. (d) String lighting shall not be allowed except for a. non -permanent, seasonal or charitable business with permit by Code Officer. (e) In the Dorset Street/City Center Sign District, internally illuminated signs shall utilize opaque backgrounds and translucent letters, logos and/or graphics, so as to insure that the lettering, logos and/or graphics are illuminated rather than the background. Translucent backgrounds utilizing dark colors may be used with white, clear or other light translucent letters, logos and/or graphics, provided the Design Review Committee determines that the effect will be consistent with the intent of this provision. South Burlington Sign Ordinance Effective May 3, 2010 Page 35 rr 1P �% �► s® southburlinton PLANNING & ZONING January 28, 2009 Earl Harris PO Box 130 Burlington, VT 05402 Re: Site Plan Application #SP-09-06 Dear Mr. Harris: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision rendered by the Administrative Officer on January 28, 2009. 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, Jana Beagley Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846,4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburi.com Site Plan Application 64 431, PON, .MAN 1WE 5000-ww southburlingon PLANNING & ZONING Permit Number SP- 6 / - 6 'c 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 #): 80-2-- PO 3�5555 3o V1 Inrvi- Vt O'S you 2. LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #): Vo Iume c 3. APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #):� T�L 555 To RaX 4. CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, address, phone & fax #): ar\ orr,5 �1 qo-L- 5555 VT 0S!J02 a. Contact e-mail address: hu.cr`,Se6?4.�e.s�.c�H. 5. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 8� 6. TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office): 06(D® °-t) 1.000 7. PROJECT DESCRIPTION a. General project description (explain what you want aDDroval for): 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com Site Plan Application 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): 0o�, t- 'S►r►oW ni. 5y.�\der d. Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain): "Ta \ 1 '- L- e Fe'V e. Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine): �so oos SF.��ec '.S `1`J. rJ 1ncl�es 1r,;o�, 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): QL`-'V-j 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:1, 361, (,$5, Sq. Ft. a. Building: Existing IQ.15Q- % / 110? LAIR A sq. ft. Proposed sq. ft. b. Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing OCVY) % / a®1,'�-►j� sq. ft. Proposed @LTV-,+ % sq. ft. c. Front yard (along each street) Existing % / sq. ft. Proposed % sq. ft. 2 Site Plan Application d. Total area to be disturbed during construction (sq. ft.) _ -7 Sg * 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): $ 10, 00 0 b. Landscaping: $ _D c. Other site improvements (please list with cost): IOne_ 10. ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a. Average daily traffic for entire property (in and out): 4--Ir5 b. A.M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): 1-15 c. P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out): kOO 11. PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: S cAM ka 12. PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: 13. ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE:,1,, 14. ABUTTERS (please list all abutting landowner. Include mailing address. Also include those across a street or right-of-way. You may use a separate sheet if necessary) 3 Site Plan Application 15. SITE PLAN AND FEE A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (11" x 17") of the site plan must be submitted. A site plan application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the site plan application (see Exhibit A). 4 Site Plan Application I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of y knowledge. q SIGNA URE OF APPLICANT SIGI4ATURE OF PR •n04 Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: I d -S)Q d etL PRINT NAME REVIEW AUTHORITY: ❑ Development Review Board (❑'Administrative Officer I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: VComplete ❑ IQcomplete IN of Planning & Zoning or Designee ate 5 Site Plan Application 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 #): Landrum, T T P D. Rnl)—Rfi�-555 I PO Box 130 F: 802-264-1412 Burlington. VT 05402 2. LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #):Volume 218, Page 514 3. APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #): The L ne PrigS Inc PO Box 130 Burlington VT 05402 802-863-5555 f: 802-264-1412 4. CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, address, phone & fax Terry Rodger. PO Box 136 Burlington, VT 05402 P- 80 - 64-1500 F: 802-264-1528 a. Contact e-mail address: r e d g P r s P l a n ew e s s E e m 5. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 87 Meadowland Drive South Burlin 6. TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office): 0860-01000 7. PROJECT DESCRIPTION a. General project description: outdoor smoking shelter that will h o unattached to the'uilding No Power nr hen Will hee led Site Plan Application 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): outdoor smok'n d. Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain):- 1 7 n� 4 4- e e t n rnrinc�a h l to 6 �� agar e—=�}� e. Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine): 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): _.2 7 eece mP s 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:1 , 361 , 685 .6 Sq. Ft. (31 .26 acres) a. Building: Existing 12 .52 % / 170,444 sq. ft. Proposed _% ! 5 7 .5 sq. ft. b. Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing 2 7 . 3 3 % / 2 01 , 716 sq. ft. Proposed 2 7. 3 3 7 %/ 201 , 7 7 3 sq. ft. c. Front yard (along each street) NA Existing _% / sq. ft. Proposed % sq. ft. 2 Site Plan Application d. Total area to be disturbed during construction (sq. ft.) 72 s Q f t * 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): $ 10,000.00 b. Landscaping: $ 0 c. Other site improvements (please list with cost): 10. ESTIMATED TRAFFIC none a. Average daily traffic for entire property (in and out): 2 7 5 b. A.M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): 175 c. P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out): 100 11. PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION. 8 am to 5 pm 12. PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: Monday to Frida 13. ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: Jul y 1 . 2008 14. ABUTTERS (please list all abutting landowner. Include mailing address. Also include those across a street or right-of-way. You may use a separate sheet if necessary) 3 Site Plan Application 15. SITE PLAN AND FEE A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (11" x 17") of the site plan must be submitted. A site plan application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the site plan application (see Exhibit A). 4 Site Plan Application I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. SIGNAI"Ugl� OF PROP TURE OF APPLICANT Do not write below this line l 3)ru m kt l il - PRINT NAME %.r I to-4"al ru.M DATE OF SUBMISSION: � & U REVIEW AUTHORITY: ❑ Development Review Board P Administrative Officer I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: V Complete _ ❑ Incomplete C r f Planning & Zoning or Designee 5 5-IA116e December 15, 2008 Terry Rodgers The Lane Press PO Box 130 Burlington, VT 05402-0130 Re: Expiration of Site Plan Approval #SP-08-52 Dear Mr. Rodgers: Please be advised that site plan approval #SP-08-52 issued to Lane Press for the construction of a 57.5 sq. ft. smoking pavilion at 57 Meadowland Drive has become null and void. This approval has expired due to the failure of obtainin a zonin six (6) months as required by condition #4 of said approval. g g permit within Should you wish to proceed with this project, you may re -apply at any time. Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions. Sincer r aymond J. Belair Administrative Officer 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com r c_—VATION A ELEVATION B FASCIA WITH 4' OVERHANGS A WALL 1 SYSTEM BEYON81 1 I 92 CKRESr -_-_ / CLEARANCE5 NOMINAL HEIf,Hr BENCH ;{r':;_;; H I I I L_ I Ij I--1-42' OPENING I--60'L 138- OUr-TO-OUT FASCIA OUT To our: I © F ICA 7'-8' NOMINAL II OPEI' BENCH ® OPEN 0 PLAN VIEW - �144- ELEVATION D 5' 0" Op ELEVATION C (ccw`rl' ACRYLIC DOME ROOF B �B C 7 J/4' TYP T38"� DRAIN HOLE (1 " D!A) 4X RECOMMENDED LOC4770N (INSTALLED BY OTHERS IN FIELD) ANCHORING DETAIL �mpl IN I 1 I I • •! Nwt - B.— ProOuUf d._ Pr.Prt.t-y rig t. " t.. in,�.w d o K. a;1q. w—t- o�hy mW mq rot e. wd. .w. w n Poo. to rtw"W«W. ary! p .IwIMr « nol .nv.n N.ith- III-( Y t or 6.cb..d boa-- PiUwul apt at.� P.rm�ssb" from Beres Proe„cb. ALUMINUM FASCIA PAINTED J,(lj I TO MATCH EXTERIOR FINISH 3 BENCH SEAT VIEW -A-A 16-1/2" T1 18 1/2' 4 S"--j �j A.F.G. UPPER PANEL ALUMINUM EXTRUDED HORIZONTAL WALL MIJLUON WALL 3" 4 LOWER vlEw B-B WALL PANEL ALUMINUM EXTRUDED 3" INTERIOR EXTERIOR HORIZONTAL WALL MULLION _ T tt WALL SECTION DETAIL 1 ANCHOR SHOE 110 x I' HEX SELF TAPPING SCREW �- WITH NEOPRENE WASHER 6X 1/4' x 2' DRNE PINS 6x ANCHOR SHOE TYPICAL 6 REINFORCING MESH "� CONCRETE SLAB NOTE: CONCRETE SLAB DESIGN BY OTHERS -DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE RECOMMENDED MIN. SIZES ONLY O p O O 0 0 O p 0 0 VIEW C-C ANCHOR SHOE VIEw D-D N7 >, p E c In o V Ila MC ,c F 0 C 0 M L U o' 10 m N o o W a, ° ` M o ® � U Q p o u a V7 0 '> i 0 cq Y- fni 01 a y E Ilil!IIII (7 Z u Q -- ./ 3 TITLE: 5' -0' X 11'-6' ALUMINUM SHELTER xe NO, XXXXXX LOCATION: xxxx xx MOO C5HM5122WO COLOR. QUAKER BRONZE DATE xx.xx.xx DRAWN BY; XXX APPROVED BY: SCALE: 1 /4' = 1' Wig. — ewco Products Cum: p.eprietay rights in the Wotmutlon disclosed on this drewing. It is issued p+ enfidu,ee Iw e. W—;',g ;t,to—tiwn o" and nvy not he used. in what. w in port, to ngnuloclure wything who~ w not ah— he•son, repruc oded ordisdee esto onyone without diesct still" GENERAL SHELTER SPECIFICATIONS: p It —moo P'.duct* A. GENERAL: Unassembled modular shelter is fabricated from low maintenance, lightweight corrosive resistant aluminum (factory fabricated). Site assembly required. DIMENSIONS: 5'-0" wide x 11'-6" long, 95 1/2" (2425.7 mm) nominal exterior height. O2 FRAME: 6063-T6 aluminum alloy extrusions with standard QUAKER BRONZE finish. Framing assembled using internally located mechanical fasteners. Exposed fasteners on froming system ore not acceptable. Standard 7 3/4" ventilation space at bottom of unit. OROOF: Constructed using 3/16" HIGH IMPACT ACRYLIC DOME. Roof drains into full perimeter gutter system. OWINDOWS: Fixed windows ore single pone 1/4" (6.35 mm) mininum clear tempered safety gloss, glazed within wall system extrusions and not fastened to exterior wall. Glass sealed with concealed gasket system. OANCHORING: Shelter installation requires concrete pad to be 12" minimum larger than shelter in both length and width dimensions. Pod must be level within 1/2" over length and width of structure. Shelter to be anchored to pad using height adjustable aluminum boot and anchored down using 2" x 1/4" expansion anchors. OBENCH: (1) 7'-8" nominal bench length shall be supplied, shipped loose and installed by others in field. DESIGN LOADS WIND LOAD: 90 mph SNOW LOAD: 40 psf U) E it C 111 p V " E 0 = C too J o V V J i I. 0L) �do °un o m m Nc; o 0 ma=� ea C CO W Cn aD A o. n7 U) 0 MM aoX�; M I r .2 ; C CO — V O N 77 /fin v Z Q U >< TITLE; 5' X 1l'-6" ALUMINUM SHELTER roe rq. XXXXXX XXXXXX XX NOD No: 05HM5122WD COLOR: QUAKER BRONZE DATE: xx.xx.xx DRAWN ev: SLH nPPnovco er SCALE: 1/4 1' SHEET: 1 OF 2 C p -7O6V"W- A southburlineton CY PLANNING & ZONING June 5, 2008 Terry Rodgers PO Box 130 Burlington, VT 05402-0130 Re: Site Plan #SP-08-52 The Lane Press Dear Mr. Rodgers: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision rendered by the Administrative Officer on June 3, 2008. Please note the conditions of approval including that you must apply for a zoning permit 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 tell 802.846,4106 fax 802.846.4101_ www.sburl.com City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 May 19, 1998 Walt Adams The Lane Press P.O. Box 130 Burlington, Vermont 05402 Re: Additions, 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Mr. Adams: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658- 7958 Enclosed is a copy of the April 14, 1998 Planning Commission meeting minutes and the Findings of Fact & Decision on the above referenced project approved by the Planning Commission on April 14, 1998 (effective 5/12/98). Please note the conditions of approval including the requirement that a zoning permit be obtained within six (6) months or this approval is null and void. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Si cerely, Jo Weith, Cit Planner JW/mcp Encls PLANNING COMMISSION 14 APRIL 1998 The South Burlington Planning Commission a held a meeting on Tuesday, 14 April 1998 at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: William Burgess, Chair; Gayle Barone, Dan O'Rourke, John Dinklage, Mac Teeson, Mark Crow, Marcel Beaudin Also Present: Joe Weith, City Planner; Walter Adams, Greg Rabideau, Lou Bresee, Randall Kay, Dave Marshall, Alan Palmer, Hubie Norton, Kit Mattthews, John Magnus, Jim Carroll; Roger Farley, The Other Paper 1. Other Business: Mr. Weith advised that the City Council will be continuing dis- cussion on the view protection zone and auto zone amendments on Monday. He asked Mr. Burgess to attend to help explain the Com- mission's position. 2. Review Minutes of 10 March, 17 March, and 24 March: Mr. Teeson moved the Minutes of 10 March be approved as written. Ms. Barone seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Teeson moved the Minutes of 17 March be approved as written. Ms. Barone seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Teeson moved the Mintues of 24 March be approved as written. Ms. Barone seconded. Motion passed 4-0 with Mr. Beaudin abstaining. 3. Report on recent site plan decision issued by City Planner: a) Site plan application of Robert J. Perry to amend a previously approved plan for a 7300 sq. ft. building with 3500 sq. ft. for warehouse use and 3800 sq. ft. for office use. The amendment consists of modifica- tion to coverage, parking layout and landscaping, 85 Green Mountain Drive. APPROVED No issues were raised by the Commission or by the audience. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Final plat application of Lane Press to amend a previously approved plan for construction of 3 additions totaling 54,261 sq. ft. to an existing 136,357 sq. ft. manufac- turing/printing building, and relocation of the driveway, 1000 Hinesburg Road. The amendment consists of constructing 3 additions totaling 34,087 sq. ft. instead of 54,261 sq. ft: PLANNING COMMISSION 14 April 1998 page 2 Mr. Adams said they are scaling back the original plan. The L- shaped addition was scaled down as well as 30 ft. from the north end of the building. The driveway has also been reduced slightly. They will make use of their own driveway until it crosses onto the property. This eliminates the need for any approvals from Dynapower. The parking configuration and lighting will remain the same. Some trees will be removed, and new landscaping will be provided. They are planting a lot more trees than required. Mr. Adams said there will be no trailers parked on the lot. No issues were raised by the Commission. Ms. Barone moved the Planning Commission approve the final plat application of Lane Press to amend a previously approved plan for construction of three additions totaling 54,261 sq. ft. to an existing 136,357 sq. ft. manufacturing/printing building, and relocation of the driveway, 1000 Hinesburg Road. The amendment consists of constructing three additions totaling 34,087 sq. ft. instead of 54,261 sq. ft.,as depicted on a 3 page set of plans, page one entitled "The Lane Press 1998 Addition," prepared by Walter Adams, dated September 5, 1997, with the _following stipulations• 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not superseded by this approval shall remain in effect. 2. Prior to issuance of a zoning permit, the applicant shall post a $24,500 landscape bond. The bond shall remain in effect for three years to assure that the landscaping takes root and has a good chance of surviving. 3. All new exterior lightinq shall consist of downcastin shielded fixtures so as not to cast light beyond the property line. Any change in lighting shall be approved by the City Planner prior to installation. The existing 24 foot light poles shall be reduced in height to 20 feet. 4. For the purpose of calculating road impact fees under the South Burlington Impact Fee Ordinance, the Planning Commission_ estimates that the expansion will generate 25.6 additional vehicle trip ends during the P.M. peak hour. 5. The planting of landscaping on top of water and sewer lines shall be avoided. 6 Prior to permit issuance, the applicant shall provide to the City Water Department a copy of any water main relocation plans. PLANNING COMMISSION 14 April 1998 _page 3 7. The final plat plan (sheet SP 1.0) shall be recorded in the land records within 90 days or this approval is null and void. The plan shall be signed by the Planning Commission Chair or Clerk prior to recording. Mr. Dinklage seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Final Plat application of Century Partners, LP to amend an approved planned unit development consisting of 96,800 sq. ft. of general office and shopping center use in four buildings 100 Dorset St. and 2 Market St. The amendment consists of minor modifications to the footprint of Building B, lot cov- erage and landscaping: Mr. Weith noted that the applicant was not present. He said they have been trying to arrange a meeting with the applicant and City Manager which hasn't happened yet. The applicant doesn't seem imterested in trying to come to a deal and wants the city to make a decision. Mr. Burgess said he would like to know if the city is willing to pursue condemnation. He said he was uncomfortable without input from the City Council. Mr. Weith said that Green Mountain Power has estimated a cost of $15,000 to move the transformer in question. Members felt the item should be continued until there has been discussion with the City Council. Mr. Dinklage moved to continue the application of Century Partners until 12 May. Mr. Beaudin seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Site plan application of New England Telephone & Telegraph Co. to construct a 216 sq. ft. public utility substation (tele- communications hut) on a lot developed with a single family dwelling, 8-10 White St: Mr. O'Rourke stepped down during this discussion due to a conflict of interest. Mr. Norton said the property is located on the corner of White St. & Williston Rd. and is at the back corner of the lot. The structure would be a small concrete building, ll'xl7' and would comply with setbacks. The lot is developed with a single story home. The proposed building would house electronics/communication equipment. No employees would be stationed there. The applicant will landscape the area with northern white cedar City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 April 10, 1998 Walt Adams The Lane Press P.O. Box 130 Burlington, Vermont 05402 Re: Additions, 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Mr. Adams: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting and my comments to the Planning Commission. Comments from City Engineer Bill Szymanski and the Fire Department were sent to you at an earlier date. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, April 14, 1998 at 7:30 P.M. to represent your request. If you have any questions, please give me a call. JW/mcp Encls Come Back," in particu- a.m: Cable is full of enry shows up in s" (TNT) and "War and Channel); his son, Rider" (VH 1). he Place o Gal.71b6 T after returning. Poitier and Tom Be- renger try to rescue a hr oe in the mountains. The story i )od-enough adventure; the interplay oetween Poi - tier and Berenger is superb. John Walsh night, all night: At 9 p.m. on Fox, Walsh hosts "America's Most ------------ rnu%'Ics In which Daniel Travanti and JoBeth Williams played Walsh and b; wife. "Adam" (8 p.m.) centers on tl- disappearance of their young son; ".Adam: His Song Continues" follows Walsh's early campaign to change laws and attitudes. — Mike Hughes, GNS Homemade Mashed HIM, Potatoes every ICE Blring night! Middkbu,y' Landmark Restaurant hh Any appetizer, dessert, & cappuccino FLEE! Ire: �y 1 due! Purchase 2 dinner entrees and receiver A �(+ 2 r �� 1 � one . Not valid dessert a capp discounts, 1$ J free. Not valid n h other discounts 7 or on holidays - NG GUIDELINES on the ad content. In the interest of maintaining our stan- dards of accuracy and good taste, we reserve the right to refuse, cancel or edit advertising at any time. Tbt t$urtington JFree pregg MMUN . N aTE ENTER. s dancers/mo- Jo more shows ether co. in VT. 1 for bachelor, 1 on 1's. 365-2069. `OT LOVEH T SASE to: >RO Box 5456 t05453-5456. _D DANCERS s, Strip-O- achelor (ette). -1377 0�� 0 K DRIVER !SCHOOL 1-9353 B. Bus & -,s Training `1ATI V E ANCE ANIES OLDERS MEETING Jers of the Insurance 'e invited to at the poli- nual meet - neon. The ig will be ay April 7. LEGAL 11 NOTICES a previously approved plan for construction of three (3) additions total- ing 54,261 square feet to an existing 136,357 square foot manufactu- ring/printing building, and relocation of the driveway, 1000 Hines- burg Road. The amend- ment consists of con- structing three (3) additions totaling 34,087 square feet instead of 136,357 square feet. 2) Final plat application of Vermont National Country Club, Inc., to amend an approved Planned residential de- velopment consisting of 173 single family lots, 16 duplex lots and 40 multi family units, and an 18 hole golf course, Dorset Street. The amendment consists of: 1) amend conditions of #14 of the 6118'96 approval, and 2) install communication equipment in the vicinity of Dorset Street/Now- land Farm Roadintersec- tion. Copies of the application are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall. William Burgess Chairman, South Burlington Planning Commission March 28. 1998 LEGAL 11 NOTICES District 4 Environmental Commission ("Commis- sion"), issued a Memo- randum of Decision and Order,denying M.L. As- sociates' ("M.L.") appli- cation to amend ("Appil• cation") Land Use Permit #4C0948-EB (Altered) ("Permit") pursuant to 10 V.S.A. Chapter 151 ("Act 250"). M.L.'s Application seeks to amend the Per- mit to incorporate a certi- fication process which would allow phased de- velopment of a 221 unit planned residential de- velopment consisting of 161 single-family lots and 60 multi -family units off Dorset Street in South Burlington, Vermont ("Project"). On March 18, 1998, M.L.., by their attorneys, Gravel and Shea, filed an appeal with the Environ- mental Board ("Board") contending that the Com- mission was in error', when it denied M.L.'s re» quest for a permi, amendment on th grounds that the Pemit— Conditions 17 and 1( prohibit the Commission from granting the pro- posed change. The Chair of the Boar or her duly authorize delegate will meet with the parties and those seeking to participate as parties, or their repre- sentatives, at a prehear ing conference on Fri; day, April 10, 1998 at 10:00 a.m. at the Envi ronmental Board's Con- ference Room, National Life Records Center Building, National Lite Drive, Montpelier. Ver- mont. Swim Program! April 21 25 TI to Ih YMCA Splash is a free water -safety program c children who do not have the opportunity to p swim lessons. During the spring school vacatil in five days of swim lessons and water s Registration begins ill Space is limited. For more information, call 1 YMCA Splash is made possible through fund YMG4 Partner mth Youth Campaign and the upcoming K The Greater Burling IV266 College St. Bu YMCA 862-962; We build moult Iddr, (wdio, -uma cammunin- EMPLOYMENT 12 EMPLOYMENT 12 AUTOCAD DESIGNER ADMINISTRATIVE architectural design ASSISTANT position. Strong s a must. sdelsign, Comprehensive Benefits Residential build - Administrator Inc. is seeking an organized/ ing code, and wood frame detail oriented individual construction knowledge essential. Au - with secretarial back- ground. Proficiency in toLISP exper, desired. MS Word & Excel re- STAFF ENGINEER PE and structural exper. quired. Experience in req'd. Responsible for group insurance busi- ness helpful. Send re- code compliance of log building sume to: plans; plan checking; handle all code CBA Inc. Ann: Controller related/structural ques- tions. AutoCAD, NDS, PO Box 2365 So Burlington VT 05407 CABO code exper de - sired. ADMINISTRATIVE Send resume w/cover ASSISTANT letter w/ salary require - ments to Design, PO Box Trinity College of Vermon seeks an enthusiastic high-energy person wh can manage multiple pri- orities and has excellent word processing and spreadsheet skills to as- sist the Graduate Educa- tion Director in the admin- istration of the Education Department's field -based graduate education pro - ram and the Professional eveIopment Outreach Center. Experience with www browsers and Mi- crosoft Front Page pre - erred. Must display strong interpersonal and ommunication skills. As- ociates degree or equiv- lent experience required. xcellent benefit package. end resumes and names f 3 references by April 10 r Human Resources Trinity College of Vermont 208 Colchester Avenue Burlington, VT 05401 AA/EOE ADMINISTRATIVE AS- 202, Hartland, VT 05048. t AUTO GLASS INSTALLERS o Looking for a great working environment? _ Triumph Auto Glass has immediate openings for full time mobile glass in- stallers in established - Burlington location. Ex- cellent salary, benefits and 401 K. If you have a Positive working attitude, and a minimum of 2 years auto glass experi- ence, join our outstand- ing team. Call i 1-800-834-1917 AUTO MECHANIC Must f have 10 yrs exper, also refs. Mon -Fri 8 am-4:30 Pm. Sat. 8 am-12 noon. B Apply at Riverside Re- pair and Welding in Rich- c ford, VT. Or contact Jo- A seph Guilmette, owner s days at 802-848-3730 or eves at 802-848-3755. Automotive AUTOMOTIVE SALES Business is growing and we are looking to add one more Salesperson to our I Sales Team! No experi- ence necessary Aggres- sive pay plan Medical & I is EMPLOYMENT 1 AUTO SALES We're looking for a sp cial sales person. Can yo work with people wh have credit problems? you are that person, w can offer a 40 hr. wor week & a substanti above average income Auto sales experience helpful, but not required Interested? Call Jim a Burlington Hyundai -Sub aru for confidential inter- view, 660-8099. AUTO TECHNICIAN Clark's Sunoco, Willis- ton. Domestic and for- eign repairs, alignment. Must own tools. Top pay and excellent benefits. Call Shawn at 878-4430. AVON $ SALES 1-800-662-2292 Avon Inds ancient Sales Must be 18 to sell AVON. 1-800-545-8390 BARTENDER Sweetwaters is accept- ing resumes for a fast, professional, energetic and entrepreneurial bar- tender. 2 years of experi- ence and a strong work- ng knowledge of food, wine and spirits is pre - erred. Apply in person, 2 - 5 pm daily, at 120 Church St. ILLING CLERKS Sought for busy motor arrier freight terminal. pply by mail or in Per- on 8am-5pm, Mon -Fri. TO: Land Air Express 9 Ave C Box 503 Williston, VT 05495 BODY SHOP TECHNICIAN Heritage Fora._ looking for an expen- EMPLOYMENT 1; e u o CASHIER If Heritage Toyota.... e is seeking a cashier for k its' service department. al Must be able to perform multiple tasks and be customer service ori- ented. We offer great t benefits. Please call for an interview or apply in person to our Human Resources Dept. 865- 8270, 1600 Shelburne Road, So. Burlington. CASHIERS Regular hours. DELI 11am-7pm, Tues-Sat, full time. DELI 11 am-7pm, Sun & Mon, part time. Flexible hours, can be worked out. Apply at Si- mon's Plaza, Taft Cor- ners. Childcare Caregivers needed. 1 PT infant/ toddler, 1 FT preschool opening. Competitive wages, paid time off. Call Mindy 985-3456. CHILDCARE POST. TIONS Education, expe- rience and flexibility needed. Benefits. Call 864-3323. CHILDCARE POSI- TIONS In licensed center. Full-time care giver for pre-schoo, program. Ex- perience necessary. Part- time position to work with all agges. Must be 18 years old. 893-1942 CHIROPRACTIC ASSISTANT Chiropractor in Shel- burneseeks reception- st/assistant Knowledge i of chiropractic care a plus. Computer skills i nPr;PCSSi r�C�nr'. raci,mc. THE LANE PRESS, INC. Printers since 1904 April 23, 1998 Attached is a copy of The Lane Press's application to use a portion of its property that has been classified as a Class 2 wetland. In the process of relocating our driveway we will be using 3500 square feet of the wetland for the drive way. We expect no impacts to the balance of the wetland, as the design allows water treatment and storm flow storage to be maintained. The design has the potential to create more wetland than is being lost because of the soil type and vegetation in the newly created detention area. If you should have any questions please contact me at the numbers above, or e-mail me at adamsg anofess:com. walm� Ss L4 Walter M. Adams Jr. Facilities Manager The Lane Press P.O. Box 130 Burlington, VT 05402 (802)863-5555 Shipping Address: 1000 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 INTRODUCTION The following .questions must be -answered in order for this application to be considered complete. .If you have questions on -any portion ofthis form; please call the Vermont Wetlands Office -at ._(802) 241-3770 for assistance. NAMES 1. Applicant: P2g5INC. Address: p,6. bok 13b 009LiNLrnry , T 0 402 _ Phone: �g027 SCfl3 - 55sS 2 . Landowner (if different) Address: 2RAgg j&!Lo AC> 5 tit OS. 2 Phone: si 3. Representative: -i%uRkxf_-R.- LA P(I�SS Address: Phone: 2 "Y 711 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4. Location: (Street .Address) IaOO i� 1NrcSgUn..C4 �p � �y 2U W LoCDT`1 . VL2lMCYJ'r 5. Acres owned by applicant and landowner at project site:.3�,2(� Acres involved in project: 6. Project purpose:-x7A1JSitiN o#� A. P21r�C�f�C9 �?l.A1uT' 1 7. General project description (include number' and size of buildings; number of .lots; Length- of roads; type 'of sewage disposal; etc.) 34t06h S�.fC Q�111t�N "tb t3� ODO Sc:i • By1l..OitJtn� 2�1:c5CAl'10itJ bF' IZOb t� 6� OQ.111 �c�A..�P � �0 A,�'DI �i�t�•L1f.� �At1.�C�N(n SPACE 5 _ . 1 OTHER=INFORMATION... 8. Are any other federal; state, or local ;permits required .for :this >project, =and: if .so.', they been applied for .or obtained? Applied: Required for .Obtained: Us Army Corps of Engineers Permit - . [ : ] [ ] [ ] 401.Water.Quality Certification .VT Act 250 .Permit - VT.Stormwater Discharge Permit [�C] r i f l VT Lakes and. Ponds Permit l J.: ' VT Stream Alteration Permit [ ] ] [ ] [ ] Local Zoning Permit Other: Lbc, 9. Attach the following information to the application:: [✓] Location map (project area marked.on a.USGS topographic _map or Vermont Significant Wetlands Map) [✓] Site plan(s) including existing conditions, proposed work, erosion controls,.and wetland and. buffer .zone boundaries (see Sections 3.2 and 4.6 of the Vermont Wetland Rules for description of methodology). [✓f Any other narratives or documents that the application intends to rely upon in :support of the proposed Conditional Use. Photos of wetland, 'if available: 10. List the names and complete mailing addresses of all persons owning property within or_adjacent to the wetland or .buffer zone in question. Name Mailing Address with Zip Code Pa box 9 2l • ComQlete:the; following for.:the wetlana . in queszivn. a. =Size of ;'wetland {to nearest 1/2 acre) : AC.�L6 S . b Check ,the dominant type of*wetland present. open water;. marsh.. X we meadow shrub swamp forested swamp bog or fen beaver influenced wetland other (explain): c. Name of..all.streams,-rivers, lakes, and ponds adjacent. to the wetland and approximate. distance from proposed activity: .VQAtQS V) I_AAU!DCff B .On1C l4 inn c_E M Approximate the percentage of each of the following cover types -in the area surrounding the wetland: 20 forested agriculture old field open water _ lawn _ Z,© residential �p commercial or industrial 1O road other (specify) 12. Complete the following for the portion of the wetland and buffer zone in the area of proposed impact. a. Area of impact. in wetland (sq ft) : 3..00 Area of impact in buffer zone (sq fi):0,qO . b. 'Check the type of wetland present (check all that apply) wet meadow open water marsh X shrub .swamp forested swamp.. bog.or fen beaver influenced wetland other (explain) c. M e. Description of dominant vegetation: Cnr.A55 Descriptior► of soils in the. -wetland -and buffer zone (from soil Conservation Service soil surveys or site investigations) : Ve b, V6 L(A*_: M P_ Gl.(�`� Check the characteristics'of the wetland which apply: -flooded most of the time standing water during at least part,of the ;growing .season water impounded by beavers soiis are.saturated during at least part of�the`, growing season' dry most of the year 3 f. `..Description of ;the buffer zone: 4RASS.�NA`el�.l_Q .4 .. .`•o. ..: .` 13: Describe in detail: all-workithat•is.proposed within -the wetland or buffer -zone; :.including .erosion control measures; referencing.. attached.plans where appropriate. gv bk, I N s tac 4n Td eft A.t �l -M,AQED AONE- 14: Before this section is completed it will be necessary.to determine for -which functions the wetland in :question is ` significant. The functional.criteria for evaluating a wetland's significance are described in Section 5 of the Vermont Wetland Rules.` The Vermont Wetland Evaluation form is available through.the.Wetlands Office.to help determine which functions may be significant. Demonstrate how the.project as proposed will avoid any undue adverse impacts on each of the functions. Refer.to_plans and other attached documents.as necessary. a. Water storage for flood water and storm runoff: See_ b. 'Surface and ground water protection: NIA - c. Fisheries habitat: d. Wildlife and'migratory bird habitat: ) I PC e. Hy c rophytic vegetation habitat: f. g. Ed c, eatened and endangered species habitat:. Ps tion and research In.natural science: _ .4 15. Demonstrate by narrative and reference to plans that the following mitigation measures have.been used to achieve no .undue -adverse -impacts to the protected wetland functions. a. Can the proposed activity practicably be located.on*an upland portion of the site or on another site owned, controlled or available to satisfy the basic project purpose? (Explain). 2eA� 12E�aGAC1a>tS rawows i"4s &oOtinbt.*) M 40rwa. A.C. a%Po W, e\CiW_A_ Ft)A) _P_ dD (71 (1 nit C to U 1 c v Mr, rLn &r% !r�ry i1 t.�d?' A9� ►�.08 cam. b.. Demonstrate how all practicable measures been taken to avoid or minimize adverse impacts on protected. functions,.including project redesign or project scale back. C. For wetlands that have,.been-disturbed, what steps will be taken to restore impacted functions (e.g. plantings, seeding, mulching exposed soil, removal of fill, etc.) Srr % Gt� v r L-4-.1vw .- 114.-v-% .tsv—' GL,a vNyV__ 16. Wetland compensation (creating replacement wetlands) is a. measure to mitigate adverse impacts on protected functions: that will only be possible in rare cases for specific functions (see Section 8.5c of the Vermont Wetland Rules). If a compensation plan is part of this proposal, demonstrate by narrative and reference to plans'"how the steps in Section 8.5c(1)-(.7) will be -met. DISTRIBUTION 17. Submit the original request for -conditional use determination to the Wetlands office, Division of Water': _ 5 Quality, 103.8outh'Main street ,.10 North., 2nd Floor, Wdterbury,.Wi.05671-0408: ..Notification of receipt,will.be sent :,to: the:':a 1icant. once .a=_complete application .has been received b tYie `Wetlands Off ce: y. - 18. After:receiving;:notification-of completeness from the Wetlands.office, send a complete copy of the. application. to - the Town Clerk.and Regional Planning Commission. Also, send copies-of`the location map; a'description of the specific action(s).for which conditional use determination is sought, the supporting narratives, -and a listing of where complete copies of the request have been filed to: a.', _the municipal planning commission and/or conservation, commission; and b. all persons owning property within or adjacent to the wetland or buffer zone (item 10. of.the application). SIGNATURES 19. -I hereby certify that theinformation provided above or attached to this application is true and accurate to the Zenepc dge. pplicant Datelicant's epresentative Date aigJ094-0314.94 - 6 - Apri121, 1998 Department of Environmental Conservation Water Quality Division, Wetlands Office 103 South Main Street, Waterbury, VT 05671-0408 Conditional Use Determination Application Narrative Applicant: The Lane Press 1000 Hinesburg Road So. Burlington, Vermont 05403 Narrative: As part of a building expansion from 136,000 square feet to 170,000 and an increase in parking of 50 spaces The Lane Press wants to relocate its driveway to the south, and in doing so will cross a narrow finger of a class 2 wetland. The total impact to the wetland is 3500 square feet and to the 50' buffer is 17,900 square feet. The entire site has two different areas of wetland, as shown on our plan ST 1.2. To the west of the proposed construction is a Class 3 wetland of about 5 acres. This area is in a depression and collects storm drainage from the surrounding terrain, and is the drainage area for the majority of the roof drains, and storm drainage from the parking areas following treatment in a large detention area. As part of the construction we will be excavating a utility trench for electrical and telephone services and closing the same day along the edge of this class three wetland. The relocation of the driveway, and its resloping will increase the treatment of the storm flows from this area into this wetland as the water will flow to the south across a grass area, through a culvert and then into the wetland. Currently the water flows over about 20 feet of shoulder to the wetland. The unused portion of the old driveway will be returned to grass, and allowed to grow wild. To the west of the project a class 2 wetland exists that is about 50 acres in size, of which about 2.5 acres are on this site. This wetland is in a low area that collects drainage from surrounding areas and has Potash Brook as its outlet under Interstate 89. A stem of that wetland extends to the west on the adjacent land of Burlington Properties, and a finger from that stem extends to the south edge of our truck dock area. It is this finger that Lane Press proposes to disturb by placing our relocated driveway in this wetland. The relocation of the driveway was part of the need to increase the parking spaces, and to allow future expansion of the building to the south. The building sits on a knob of high ground with lower ground on three sides and the Interstate setback on the forth Following this proposed expansion, which goes to the west as much as practical, the next additions will be to the south. By moving the driveway we allow that expansion to occur without having to relocate the driveway again. This relocation also allowed the expansion of the parking into the only areas where it could occur without building iip wetland areas or in areas where it would have to be relocated in the future . Our proposal would build our driveway across this Class 2 wetland. Because all the soils in the area of this wetland are Vergennes soils, and because of the storm water draining into this area we expect that the undisturbed wetland area will grow in size, especially as we will be leaving this area natural, except for a 5-6 foot mown area on each side of the road. Following the site visit by Karen Bates, we have placed the wetland boundaries based on plant type per the discussion I had with her. She indicated that if the Class 2 wetland had narrowed to 20' that the finger that extended onto our property would be Class 3. My assumption is that once the culvert is in place that the trapped wetland would become a Class 3. We have relocated our truck dock entrance to the east to remove it from the wetland area, however it does not function well to move it further east out of the setback area. The primary uses of this finger of wetland are water quality protection and storm water flow control. Our proposal provides similar areas to allow this treatment to occur, and because the area surrounding the driveway will be allowed to grow wild, instead of being lawn the ability of this area to provide water quality protection and storm flow control will be enhanced. The last area of Class 2 wetland impacted is to the west of the finger that extends to our truck dock. The Class 2 extends to our property boundary for a length of 160 feet. The new driveway is located 30' from the boundary and its side slopes come within 20 feet of the wetland. Our intent is that the storm drainage from this part of the roadway will flow north into the depression trapped by the driveway, across the field grass and to the culvert. While this area of the Class 2 wetland setback is being used there should be no impact to the adjacent wetland. And water quality and storm flow management will be preserved. (Note: The area impacted in this setback is included in our permit application.) The Lane Press has created a site plan that allows good storm water management, provides excellent water treatment before it reaches the wetlands, and allows expansion of its facility, now and in the future, to met its growth plans while minimizing our impact to existing wetlands. The Lane Press is a privately held corporation. The Lane Press leases its facility from Landrum, a land holding partnership The signature of Philip Drumheller as applicant is on behalf of Lane Press, as president, and Landrum, as general partner. Completed by: Walter M. Adams Facilities Manager, The Lane Press State of Vermont AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES 103 South Main Street Waterbury, Vermont 05671-0408 WETLANDS OFFICE FIELD LETTER To: �-CA 5 .�, t �; c S I, - La" g&.ew eo �u VIT Subject: Dear M r, f t �� 6�l S Department of Environmental Conservation WATER QUALITY DIVISION Building 10 North 802-241-3770 Fax:8)02-241-3287 Date: [ A site visit has been conducted on �( for the above -referenced property, and it has been determined that [ ] no wetlands are present. [ ] Class Three wetlands are present and protection of their functions will be addressed under Act 250 and/or a Section 401 Water Quality Certification or a waiver, thereof. See comments below. !j %] Class Two wetlands, which are protected under the Vermont Wetland Rules, are present. Any activity, other than Allowed Uses listed in Section 6.2 of the Rules, in the wetland or the 50 foot wetland buffer zone requires a Conditional Use Determination from the Agency of Natural Resources. See comments below. Comments: Q Inr A4" , ' )_di , p_, t 5 6 C A &'i 4o cc: Wetlands Office File •� i73 CHITTENDEN COUNTY, W )ONT — SHEET NUMBER 39 Ny HnC HnB ' ; ti H B Lh Pew �t +c: t '': dy,rtr • . �, ��Ve6 r: Y�r y.: . c VeD.. Q '., i - 116 J/ ,z• .r•7 sa . ~}'S, - VeB °v VeB Site LocationCv m, { J c +VeC i The Lane Press k4 U s I .'VeC FaC � - VeC 1 1 F tVeB ram. lfaC V t, VeB r 1,. , ` Cv .�,�. Fdc :FaC Lh O x Cv _ ; ..VeB.° �+• rn L �h VeB y.�t3 c T SuB. VeCFaC fe y SuB. rF.VeB- VeB / VeB t # L o. TCv FaC Cv ub 1 FeC' Ew S ! / o. _t Ve-B c \ t I B FaC' a� " Cv 77 �,. VeC VeB Sub t. ;yeC VeB Cv 1 _ - C`lVLF LK �,x 4 E N V SxC CV K [I c �FaC J �6V r:. r`- t.SuC . pVeD VeB F Lf VeB t VeB Lk 'v VeB/ 3r' / t y VeD ri VeC / FadFaE r I Le Cv ; I SFaE Cv /tea O' 1 t Cv VeB FaE i16 �.,. m s Cv h0 Cv Ve6 SYG v L SuB �,� �. ,a V - `� ac' • ' FaC v Ve6 VeB FaC Cv v G� �4 k State of Vermont WATER SUPPLY AND WASTEWATER DISPOSAL PERMIT .rr _c7 T + LAWS/REGULATIONS INVOLVED Environmental Protection Rules Effective August 8, 1996 Case Number: WW-4-0604-1 PIN: EJ96-0217 Landowner: Landrum and The Lane Press Address: 182 Harbor Road P.O. Box 130 Shelburne, VT 05482 Burlington, VT 05402 This project, consisting of constructing a 34,087 square foot addition with no changes to the exterior sanitary sewer or water supply to the building referenced in Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit WW-4-0604 and Certification of Compliance #4C0473, served by municipal water and sewer services, located off 1000 Hinesburg Road in the city of South Burlington, Vermont is hereby approved under the requirements of the regulations named above, subject to the following conditions. This permit does not constitute approval under Act 250 case number 4C0473. This permit does not relieve the permittee from obtaining all other approvals and permits as may be required from the Act 250 District Environmental Commission, the Department of Labor and Industry -phone (802) 828-2106 or (802) 658-2199, the Water Supply Division - phone (802) 241-3400 and local officials prior to proceeding with this project. 2. The project shall be completed as shown on the following plans which have been stamped "approved" by the Wastewater Management Division: Sheet SP 1.0 "Site Plan" dated September 5, 1997 prepared by Walter Adams, Facilities Manager. The project shall not deviate from the approved plans without prior written approval from the Wastewater Management Division. 3. No alterations to the building that would change or affect the exterior water supply or sewage disposal, or the approved use of the building shall be allowed without prior review and approval from the Agency of Natural Resources. 4. The Wastewater Management Division now reviews the sewage and water systems for public buildings under 10 V.S.A., Chapter 61 - Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit. 5. By acceptance of this permit, the permittee agrees to allow representatives of the State of Vermont access to the property covered by the permit, at reasonable times, for the purpose of ascertaining compliance with Vermont environmental/health statutes and regulations, with this permit. Water Supply & Wastewater Disposal Permit WW-4-0604-1 Landrum and The Lane Press Page 2 6. All conditions set forth in Certification of Compliance 94CO473 and Water Supply & Wastewater Disposal Permit #WW-4-0604 shall remain in effect except as modified or amended herein. 7. A copy of the approved plans and this permit shall remain on the project during all phases of construction and, upon request, shall be made available for inspection by State or local personnel. Dated at Essex Junction, Vermont on April 10, 1998. Canute E. Dalmasse, Commissioner Department of Environmental Conservation By Ernest P. Christianson Regional Engineer c For the Record South Burlington Planning Commission & Select Board Walter Adams, Facilities Manager Act 250 coordinator-#4C0473 Department of Labor & rndus'r—y Water Supply Division Y V , • ` V� i MOTION OF APPROVAL LANE PRESS 4/ 14/98 I move the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the final plat application of Lane Press to amend a previously approved plan for construction of three (3) additions totaling 54,261 square feet to an existing 136,357 square foot manufacturing/printing building, and relocation of the driveway, 1000 Hinesburg Road. The amendment consists ofconstructing three (3) additions totaling 34,087 square feet instead of 54,261 square feet, as depicted on a three (3) page set of plans, page one (1) entitled "The Lane Press 1998 Addition," prepared by Walter Adams, dated September 5, 1997, with the following stipulations: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not superseded by this approval shall remain in effect. 2. Prior to issuance of zoning permit, the applicant shall post a $24,500 landscape bond. The bond shall remain in effect for three (3) years to assure that the landscaping takes root and has a good chance of surviving. 3. All new exterior lighting shall consists of downcasting shielded fixtures so as not to cast light beyond the property line. Any change in lighting shall be approved by the City Planner prior to installation. The existing 24 foot light poles shall be reduced in height to 20 feet. 4. For the purpose of calculating road impact fees under the South Burlington Impact Fee Ordinance, the Planning Commission estimates that the expansion will generate 25.6 additional vehicle trip ends during the P.M. peak hour. 5. The planting of landscaping on top of water and sewer lines shall be avoided. 6. Prior to permit issuance, the applicant shall provide to the City Water Department a copy of any water main relocation plans. 7. The final plat plan (sheet SP 1.0) shall be recorded in the land records within 90 days or this approval is null and void. The plan shall be signed by the Planning Commission Chair or Clerk prior to recording. MEMORANDUM To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Joe Weith, South Burlington City Planner Re: April 14, 1998 agenda items Date: April 10, 1998 3) CITY PLANNER REPORT Enclosed are the Findings of Fact and Decision for the following site plan application: a. Site plan application of Robert J. Perry to amend a previously approved plan for a 7300 square foot building with 3500 square feet for warehouse use and 3800 square feet for office use. The amendment consists of the modification to coverage, parking layout and landscaping, 85 Green Mountain Drive. APPROVED 4) LANE PRESS - EXPANSION - REVISED FINAL PLAT This project consists of amending a plan previously approved on 1/13/98 (minutes enclosed) for construction of three (3) additions totaling 54,261 square feet to an existing 136,357 square foot manufacturing/printing building and relocation of the driveway. The amendment consists of constructing three (3) additions totaling 34,087 square feet instead of 54,261 square feet. This property located at 1000 Hinesburg Road lies within the I-O District. It is bounded on the north by New England Telephone and I-89, on the east and south by Dynapower and on the west by several single family residences. Access/circulation: Access is via a r.o.w. from Hinesburg Road. No changes proposed�,,ow,. i Coverage/setbacks: Building coverage is 12.5% (maximum allowed is 30%). Overall coverage is 27.3% (maximum allowed is 50%). Setback requirements will be met. Memorandum - Planning April 14, 1998 agenda items April 10, 1998 Page 2 Parking,: A total of 148 parking spaces are required and 298 spaces are available including seven (7) handicapped spaces. Landscaping: The minimum landscaping requirement, based on building costs, is $24,500 which is being met. Proposed plantings include Ash, Crabapple, Yew, Austrian and White Pines, Red Maple and Blue Spruce. Traffic: ITE estimates that the current facility generates 101.99 vehicle trip ends (vte's) during the P.M. peak hour and with the addition to generate 127.59 vte's which is a 25.6 vte increase. The applicant should be aware that the road impact fee is zero (0). View Protection Zone: The easterly portion of the property lies within the Hinesburg Road - North View Protection Zone. No portion of the addition or any of the new or relocated plantings will be within this zone. Sewer: No additional allocation needed. Lighting_ Existing exterior lighting consists of the following: --- 13 - 100 watt high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures (bollards). --- two (2) twin 100 watt high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures mounted on 24 foot poles. --- 18 - 400 watt single high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures mounted on 24 foot poles. --- two (2) 400 watt twin high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures mounted on 24 foot poles. --- eight (8) 100 watt building mounted lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures. Proposed exterior lights consist of the following: --- four (4) 100 watt high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures (bollards). --- eight (8) twin 250 watt high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures mounted on 20 foot poles. --- 14 single 250 watt high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixture mounted on 20 foot poles. 2 Memorandum - Planning April 14, 1998 agenda items April 10, 1998 Page 2 The Performance Standards in Appendix B of the zoning regulations limits the height of pole lights to 20 feet. Applicant will replace the existing 24 foot poles with 20 foot poles. C.O. District: The plan shows the C.O. Districts corresponding with the drainageways westerly of the parking area. These C.O. Districts will not be impacted by the proposed expansion. 5) CENTURY PARTNERS L.P. - SITE MODIFICATIONS - REVISED FINAL This application was continued from the January 13, 1998 meeting (minutes enclosed) to provide staff an opportunity to obtain a legal opinion from the City Attorney. This project consists of amending an approved planned unit development consisting of 96,800 square feet of general office and shopping center use in four (4) buildings. The amendment consists of minor modifications to the footprint of building `B", lot coverage, and landscaping. The requested modifications have already been made. This property was last revised on 7/8/97. This property located at 100 Dorset Street and 2 & 4 Corporate Way (now Market Street) lies within the C1 and CD Districts. It is bounded on the north by a commercial building used for personal service and retail, on the east by the Ramada Inn and undeveloped property, on the south by the Anchorage Motor Inn and Market Street, and on the west by Dorset Street. Proposed Mary Street Extension: Enclosed is a letter from the City Attorney regarding the placement of a transformer in the proposed Mary Street Extension r.o.w. Basically, the City has three (3) options: 1) approve the plan as proposed which would require the City to pay the cost of relocating the transformer when the r.o.w. is obtained and the road constructed, 2) deny the application which would start the time clock for condemning the land for the road. The applicant would be responsible for removing the transformer. The cost of condemning the land may or may not exceed the cost of moving the transformer, 3) approve the application with a condition that the applicant pay the cost of moving the transformer if and when the road is constructed. If the applicant appeals this condition, the City may or may not win the appeal. If the Commission decides to go with option #2, I suggest you hold off on a decision in order to give staff time to find out if the Council is willing to pursue condemnation. 3 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 January 9, 1998 Walt Adams The Lane Press P.O. Box 130 Burlington, Vermont 05402-0130 Re: Additions, 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Mr. Adams: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting and my comments to the Planning Commission. Comments from City Engineer Bill Szymanski and the Fire Department were sent to you at an earlier date. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, January 13, 1998 at 7:30 P.M. to represent your request. If you have any questions, please give me a call. in erely, Joe eit , City lanner JW/mcp Encls PROJECT REVIEW SHEET 7 THIS IS NOT A PERMIT �U TOTAL # DEC PERMITS 'S C" PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW RESPONSE DATE 3o PENDING APPLICATION # uJ DISTRICT TOWN PIN # I —ami l 1l OWNER OF PROJECT SITE: I APPLICANT OR REPRESENTATIVE: NAME: (-A)U4OUM NAME. !I>r -Awp- A2Cs 5 ADDRESS: LFZ 14AR6oA kA. ADDRESS. 0,O . 6 P-� /30 SM6( ySukrUF I V'r D &-YPz IL(1R w 0, 1 r !,o fiw. 0 544 Z- TELEPHONE: 9,�5-- 17V(o % TELEPHONE. Q(,3 - S S^S S" Based on information provided by a,4,0 received on 7— a project was reviewed on a tractAracts of land of 31. Z L acres, locate on /4/K1r1 iSu�eQ —7—� The project is generally described as: P"SGD 44Ae7r0ti DF 3`�/ 997 S.F. ?o !4£ 6VS%iPJ 41td � IIUCzQ. ACC r04#P1luG 4,er4 y7 SAACLS• PO 11JCR-,C45f- /XJ 6h44y 6C r-uYuOQr (2k"74 , ,Uo C9AICt o MuN,e-'1AC ,jgr4re1sK_,jte Prior Permits From This Office: C � ,17S. G i u l -q- 4 6 o PERMITS NEEDED FROM THE DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICE PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION I - — ::1 1. ACT 250: THIS IS A JURISDICTIONAL OPINION BASED UPON AVAILABLE INFORMATION. ANY NOTIFIED PARTY OR INTERESTED PERSON AFFECTED BY THE OUTCOME MAY APPEAL TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD (ACT 250) WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE ISSUANCE OF THIS OPINION (10 V.S.A. SEC. 6007(C)). Commercial, residential or municipal project? Length of new/improved road(s) Has the landowner subdivided before? When/where/# of lots AN ACT 250 PERMIT IS REQUIRED: ✓ YES NO, Copies sent to Statutory Parties: YES NO COMMENTS: Aar: ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIO '^ Fg H"A,, '"5 DISTRICTS #4, 6 & 9 SIGNATURE: 5 Z� 111 WEST STREET %DATE. � 9® ADDRESS (IF DIFFERENT a t►��+7ln�l 1�i n�a52 ( District oordinator Telephone � y- c 2. WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION REGIONAL OFFICE: PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRED �- YES NO Water Supply & Wastewater Disposal Subdivision &/or Exemption Deferral of Subdivision Tent/Travel Trailer Campground Mobile Home Park _Floor Drains (UIC) Sewer Extension REGIONAL ENGINEER ASSIGNED: AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATIC SIGNATURE: C1., DATE: 3 ADDRESS: Environmental Astiistance Division 111 WEST STREET Wastewater Management Division Telephone: q 7 y - �5 4 <,- �; E$$EX JCT., VT 05452 THIS IS A PRELIMINARY, NON -BINDING DETERMINATION REGARDING OTHER PERMITS WHICH YOU MAY NEED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION. PLEASE CONTACT THE DEPARTMENTS INDICATED BELOW AND ON THE REVERSE SIDE. 0 WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION, ANR (802-241-3822) Contact: Discharge Permit; pretreatment permits; industrial, municipal L-- Stormwater permits state and federal, UIC) Indirect discharge permit Residuals management sludge disposal OVER OT I PERMITS AND REVIEWS YOU MAY NEED. Winued) ^ AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION, ANR (802-241-3840) Contact: l�ti, . _.�}; r c . d,� FYI-�/4Old -5S"-�S'�i L' Construction/modification of source Open Burning Furnace Boiler Conversion/Installation Industrial Process Air Emissions Diesel Engines (> 200 bHP) 5. WATER SUPPLY DIVISION, ANR (802-241-3400) Contact: Well head protection areas Bottled Water New Hydrants Sprinkler Systems Construction Permit, water system improvements Permit to operate New Source �. WATER QUALITY DIVISION, ANR ContacteA J izli � Hydroelectric Projects (241-3770) Use of chemicals in State waters(241-3777) Shoreland encroachment (241-3777) Aquatic nuisance control (241-3777) ✓ Wetlands (241-3770) Section 401 Water Quality Certificate; (241-3770) Stream Alteration (748-87871786-5906) Water Withdrawal (241-3770) 7. WASTE MANAGEMENT DIVISION, ANR Contact: Hazardous waste treatment, storage, disposal facility certificate (241-3888) Hazardous waste handler notification requirement (241-3888) Lined landfills; transfer stations, recycling facilities, drop off (241-3444) Disposal of inert waste, untreated wood & stumps (241-3444) Waste oil burning (241-3888) Underground Storage Tanks (241-3888) Asbestos Disposal (241-3444) Composting Facilities (241-3444) HW transporter certificate (241-3888) 8. FACILITIES ENGINEERING DIVISION, ANR Contact: Dam operations (greater than 500,000 cu. ft.)(241-3451) State funded municipal water/sewer extensions/upgrades and Pollution Control ystems (241-3750) 9. )POLLUTION PREVENTION HOTLINE (1-800-974-9559) 7 Contact:r ric ll_A RECYCLING HOTLINE (1-800-932-7100) Contact: SMALL BUSINESS COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM Contact: Judy Mirro 802-241-3745 10. DEPARTMENT OF FISH & WILDLIFE, ANR (802-241-3700) Contact: Nongame & Natural Heritage program (Threatened & Endangered Species) Stream Obstruction Approval 11QDEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY (802-828-2106) or District Office# C✓ Construction Permit fire prevention, electrical, plumbing, accessibility (Americans h Disabilities Act) 61 Storage of flammable liquids, explosives LP Gas Storage Plumbing in residences served by public water/sewer with 10 or more customers Boilers and pressure vessels 12. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH (800-439-8550 in VT) (802-863-7221) (Lab 800-660-9997) Contact: Food, lodging, bakeries, food processors Program for asbestos control & lead certification Children's camps Hot Tub Installation & Inspection - Commercial 13. AGENCY OF HUMAN SERVICES Child care facilities (241-2158) Nursing Homes (241-2345) 14. AGENCY OF TRANSPORTATION Access to state highways (residential, commercial) (828-2653) Signs (Travel Information Council) (828-2651) Development within 500' of a limited access highway (828-2653) Construction within state highway right -of way (Utilities, Grading, 15. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Use/sale of pesticides (828-2431) Milk processing facilities (828-2433) Golf courses (828-2431) Green Houses/Nurseries (828-2431) Contact: Residential care homes (241-2345) (Dept. of Aging & Disabilities) Therapeutic Community Residence (241-2345) Contact: Junkyards (828-2067) Railroad crossings(828-2760) Airports and landing strips (828-2833) etc.) (828-2653) Contact: Slaughter houses, poultry processing (828-2426) Animal shelters/pet merchant/livestock dealers (828-2421) Weights and measures, Gas Pumps, Scales (828-2436) Retail Sales/Milk/Meat/Poultry/Frozen Dessert/Class "C" Pesticides (828-2436) 16. PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD (802-828-2358) Hydro projects Sells water to 1 or more persons 17. DIVISION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION (802-828-3226) Historic buildings Archeological sites 18. DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR CONTROL (1-800-832-2339) Liquor licenses General Info (1-800-642-3134) 19. SECRETARY OF STATE (1-802-828-2386) Business registration Professional Boards (1-800-439-8683) 20. DEPARTMENT OF TAXES (802-828-2551) Business taxes (sales, meals & rooms, amusement machines) 21. DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES (802-828-2074) Fuel taxes; commercial vehicle Franchise tax/solid waste 22. OCAL PERMITS (SEE YOUR TOWN CLERK, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, PLANNING COMMISSION, OR PUBLIC WORKS) 23. FEDERAL PERMITS U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, BLDG 10-18, CAMP JOHNSON, COLCHESTER, VT 05446 (655-0334) 25. OTHER: REVISION DATE: Form Date 11/97 AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES (ANR) AND ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD (ACT 250) 13 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Subdivision Application - FINAL PLAT 1) Name of Applicant 'T",—F- LAME- P?-z- 55+ ZNr, 2) Name of Subdivision fte:-ss 3) Indicate any change to name, address, or phone number of owner of record, applicant, contact person, engineer, surveyor, attorney or plat designer since preliminary plat application NO Iyf- 4) Indicate any changes to the subdivision, such as number of lots or units, property lines, applicant's legal interest in the property, or developmental timetable, since Preliminary plat application: 5) Submit five copies and one reduced copy (11 x 17) of a final plat plus engineering drawings and cRntaini.ng all information required under Section 202.1 of the subdivision regulations for a minor subdivision and under Section 204.1(a) for a major subdivision. F) Submit two draft copies of all legal documents required under Section 202.1 (11) and (12) of the subdivision regulations for a minor sudivision and under Section 204.1(b) for a major subdivision. V� 3 h h(i (Signature) applicant or co tact person Date PUBLIC HEARING SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION The South Burlington Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington City Hall, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on Tuesday, April 14 at 7:30 P.M.. To consider the following: 1) Final plat application of Lane Press to amend a previously approved plan for construction of three (3) additions totaling 54,261 square feet to an existing 136,357 square foot manufacturing/printing building, and relocation of the driveway, 1000 Hinesburg Road. The amendment consists of constructing three (3) additions totaling 34,087 square feet instead of 146,3-5-Tsquare feet. 2) Final plat application of Vermont National Country Club, Inc., to amend an approved planned residential development consisting of 173 single family lots, 16 duplex lots and 40 multi family units, and an 18 hole golf course, Dorset Street. The amendment consists of. 1) amend condition #14 of the 6/18/96 approval, and 2) install communication equipment in the vicinity of Dorset Street/Nowland Farm Road intersection. Copies of the applications are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall. William Burgess Chairman, South Burlington Planning Commission March 28, 1998 L — — — — — 423.00 I.06' 164. 16'28'W A 5+ 59 ' 39" _ — — — R= 4683.75' / — L= 490.01 1141.28 ' S85+39 '34'E './ — — '— • � Hole in rock —�----•—L.••—r'--• •� I � RTH I 1 _ _---- / — 600.00 56+24 ' 12"E II r I M-—Y • — / �_ — _ — I li i I I i , III III II I i I I I I III it I I I Gravel roadway to pump stot ion I If � I �727 .00�+_ —17 _ ___ _ _ _ 1 ................... 169.94 NO6»2a'S1"E b'}1 \le 1 % / \ a- ------------.- -- / 7 40Water, Gas &EIect'PcEasement / V / 10'electrical easement i 10 snow removc eosement / I / I / 7 / I I I I 30'roadway easement 10'snow removal easement _— \ I 815.40' S19»a3'D2'w — J �1473.40' N75+55'48'W------------ DynoDa.er\ .. I 1 Bundlrp ;r. 4W Notes: 1. Boundoryandeasement information fromaplanby Trudel l Consulting Engineers Inc. last revised 8/29/56. 2. Dynopower dr iveaoy andbuilding information frmoplanby Trudel I Consulting Engineers, Inc. lost revised 9/ 15/88 3. Sw i ft Street extent ion and relocated Lane Press access per p I ans by Trude I I Consulting Engineers, Inc P1 ast revised B/B/96 and P6 lost revlssd 9/7/96. S1to Data Lot size: 31.26 acres Buildings: Ex Tst ing: 136,357 sq.ft . Addition: Phases 27,367sgft Addition: Phase 6,720sgft TOTAL 170 ,444 sq ft Asphp It area : Ex Tst ino: 170,771 sq ft Aca't ion: 23,870 sq ft Add Tt ion: Phase 3 NO CHANGE TOTAL 194 ,641 sq f t WoIkwoys,storoge: Existing 5,950sgft Addition: 1,125 sq ft TOTAL 7,075 sq ft TOTAL Lot coverage Total park Tng spaces 298 Truck doors 9 Phase 3 3 Totol 12 Zon Tng Distr Tct: Industrial/Open Space 12 .52r. 14 .29, 52. 27.33% (7 HCP) 4 Revised Dui ldi, 3 Buo Dte ds; ildup APR ac 2 no trc i for Dort Coneervot ion zc 1 Trai for Dark inc Park,r lot sir' Ro motor Dyele! De.C1 iD1 ion Rev is1— Project T itle The Lor 1998 k Dr . by : Wo I te' Foc i I The Lc Date Septe Scale : V=8 Site SP 61.06 N 64. 16 28'' W _ A 5. 59' 39'' _ \ R= 4683.75' 1141.28 ' S85w39 '34' E / _ — — — L= 490.01 Hole in rock _ffi •�` IS RTH�- �' 600.00 S6.24 '12- -E I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Grave l roadway to pup stet for 1 I I I I 1 I I l I l I I 1 I I I I ---- _---------------- -- --- --- _-------- ---- — _ — — — — - - - - - - -- -- - - , ....................... 169.94 N06+24 'S1"E mow/ .o` I ;> -. 40Woter,Cos&Electric Easement 815.40' S19.43'02'W _ _ ._ _— I7 1473.40' N75-55'48'W • _ _ • _ _ — • — _ � / evlmly \ w wo 10'electr1col easement .+ 10' snow removo l easement 5 ` / 30'roodway easement 10 'snow r- ovo I easement S � / / r0 a / / � I I /D 70 I / o I Q / I V---500.00 ' I Landscaping notes: Planting scheduIe,existing New I Ondscap ing has a circle around the plant ident i f Ier . Al I areas tlistrubetl by the construct ion w i I I get 4-6" of topso i I, I ime, Pert i I izer , seed mulch os soon cs Doss Ible during the construct ion process to prevent so i I erosion Doub I stoked hoybo I s i It fences w i I 1 be plWed al Ong the south edge of the new construct ion and 3 vee shaped fences wi I I protect the or a, rage areas to the north a' the project. As the new storm water drop in Iets are instal Ied the grate w 111 be covered w ith f' I ter fobr is unt i I paving and grass has been estobl ;shed. P I ant ing schedu I e , new Ltr ouanit it new Description Si new e Notes 81 g White Pine 6-8' New pall and bur lop. tr iple stake C1 55 Ash 2-21/2" F1 A Flowering Crabapple 2-2 1/2" K1 9 Red Maple 2-21/2' L1 38 Common Yew 18-24" R1 12 IS ue Spruce 6-8' S7 20 Austr ion. Pine 6-8' and Ltr Duan itity existing DescriptJon Size eaisti Notes A 3 Red Map le 3" B 74 White Pine 8to 12' C 5D 'Ash 4to 6" New to l l and bur lop, tr ipl a stake D 27 Juniper 3' E 12 Burn ing bush 36• j F 39 F lower ing Crabapple 3.5 to 4" G 1 39 Mugo Pine }to 1' J 4 Sugar Mop le 4" — K 1g Red Maple 3 to 4" L 133 Common Yew 24 to 3V M 1 American Beech 51, R 8 Bl ue Spruce 8to 12' S 12 Aa9tr ian P ine- 8to 12' D 1 1 WeepingWillow 4" omrm/.c 1 e�l,wlgwmn:m.,o va:� 2 c-vot:miorwa. Iran. .. so.iow �r oI w ama«w: Project Title: The Lone Pr• 1998 Add it 1000 H1nesbu, So. Bur Iinc Dr by : Wo l ter t Foci Iit The Lane Date : Septemt Scale: 1"=80 ' Lcndscc PLANNING COMMISSION 13 January 1997 page 7 4. All new exterior li htin shall co shielded fixtures so as not to cast li line. Any changes in lighting shall b Planner prior to installation. The ex shall be reduced in height to 20 feet.y nsist of downcastin -ght_ beyond the property e approved by the City istina 24 foot liaht poles 5. For the pur ose of calculating road impact fees under the South Burlington__Im act Fee Ordinance, the Planning Commission estimates that the expansion will generate 40.69 additional vehicle trip ends during the P.M. peak hour. 6. Prior to issuance of a zoning permit, the applicant shall record a revised plat of the Dynapower property showing the re- vised r.o.w. location which has been approved by the Planning Commission. 7. Culvert and drainage pipes shall be concrete or lastic, not metal or aluminum. 8. Prior to permit issuance, the City Water__DePartment-shall review and,-a,2prove the fire h drant relocation. 9. Any change to the site plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Planning Commission. 10. The final plat plan (sheet S 1.0) shall be recorded in the land records within 90 days or this approval is null and void. The plan shall be signed b the Planning Commission Chair or Clerk_ -prior, to recording. Ms. Barone seconded. Motion passed unanimously_. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. C rk PLANNING COMMISSION 13 JANAURY 1998 page 6 within 90 days or this approval, is null and void. The planshall be si ned b the Plannin Commission Chair or Clerk prior._to, re- cordin Prior to recordin the finalplat._plans_,._ the a licant shall submit a-c02Y, of the survey lat in di ital format. The format of the digital information shall__require approval of the City. Planner. Mr. Dinklage seconded and the motion passed unanimously... 8. Public Hearing: Final Plat Application of Lane Press to amend a previously approved plan for a 135,817 sq. ft. manufacturing/ printing building, 1000 Hinesburg Road. The amendment consists of 1) constructing 3 additions totaling 54,261 sq. ft., and 2) re- locating the driveway: Mr. Crow stepped down due to a conflict of interest. Mr. Adams said there had been a question of the size of the trailer. The recycler said they needed more space, so the area was added to the building. The plan also gives them more space by the dock so they won't have to have empty trailers waiting on the site. Mr. Burgess noted the landscape credit would also increase. Mr. Adams said they did not lose any trees during the recent ice storm although some were damaged. Mr. O'Rourke moved the Plannin ap l ication of Lane Press to a ----------------- a 136,357 sq. ft. manufacturin Road. The amendment consists totaling 54,261 sq. ft., and 2 de icted on a three pa e set o Lane Press 1000 Hinesbur__q_Road re ared b Walt Adams, dated 20 97 , with the following stip g Commission approve the final plat mend -,a --previously approved plan for q printing building,,__ 1000 Hinesburg of 1) constructing three additions ) relocating the driveway, as f plans, page one entitled "The So. Burlington, Vermont 054034 September 5, 1997, last revised ll/ ulations: 1. All 2revious__.a2provals and stipulations which are not su er- seded by this a2prov4l shall remain in effect. 2. Prior to issuance of a zonigg permit, the,a licant shall post a $29,850 landscape -bond. The bond shall remain in effect for three years to assure tha the landsca,Eing takes root and has a good chance of surviving,.- 3. Pursuant to Section 26.105(a) of the zonin re ulations, the South _Burlin ton Planning Commission rants the a licant a 519.5844credit for existinq trees on the site. > %//�� /1s3 �/i�/ys ��y�/�6�35`% SSE % l�A�F�cTu�ia� F���T� -�-/ � 6. 7J ______ ____-.—' � �, �� � ,,\ � � ��. / / l -- �o-��'S©� � �./vr� _ r ���- �� � ��� vie r5/ ,� � � i � l of � �I � � � Frs �, i � '� , � � �- ,� ��`..��" -� � s . � �% �s appeals, the Planning mmi ion may not grant variances, exemption, extra -ordinary relief otherwise alter, amend, enlarge or modify the provisions of the O finance, it being the intent of this se tion to merely rovide fo appeals from the decisions of the C e fficer and no to provi for variances or exceptions heret sically, the Commission an only decide whether or not the C de Of 'cer properl interprete the sign ordinance. It i1 staff'? inter reted by opinion I that the sign ordinance was properly Ze Code Officer. 5 FORM NR-1 �/F 5� //5 �il COMPUTATION OF TOTAL NON-RESIDENTIAL IMPACT FEES PROJECT DATA: (1) "EFFECTIVE DATE" FOR TAX CREDITS: (2) ESTIMATED PEAK HOUR <� / VEHICLE TRIP ENDS d •(a vph (3) ESTIMATED PRE -CONSTRUCTION VALUE IN UNITS OF $1, 000 (From current tax assessment) v units (4) TOTAL FLOOR AREA AFTER CONSTRUCTION (f ®� 1 s . f . r (5) TYPE OF USE (6) TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION S Gfii_ IMPACT FEES: (7) TOTAL ROAD IMPACT FEE (From Form NR-2) FORM NR-2 (1) COMPUTATION OF ROAD IMPACT FEES BASE ROAD IMPACT FEE RATE PER PEAK HOUR VEHICLE TRIP END (2) ESTIMATED PEAK HOUR VEHICLE TRIP ENDS (From form NR-1) (3) BASE ROAD IMPACT FEE (1) x (2) (4) PRE -CONSTRUCTION VALUE IN UNITS OF $1,000 (from line (3) of Form NR-1) (5) CREDIT PER $1,000 OF PRE- $ 226.00 / vte 6d units vte CONSTRUCTION VALUE - 1991 BOND / (From Table ST-9) $ 0-1 / unit (6) CREDIT FOR PAST TAX PAYMENTS - 1991 BOND (4) x (5) $ �J (7) CREDIT PER $1,000 OF PRE - CONSTRUCTION VALUE - 1998 BOND (From Table ST-10) $ 0_01 / unit (8) CREDIT FOR PAST TAX PAYMENTS - 1998 BOND /)' (4) x (7) $ <f (9) CREDIT PER $1,000 OF PRE - CONSTRUCTION VALUE - 1999 BOND (From Table ST-11) $ (10) CREDIT FOR PAST TAX PAYMENTS - 1999 BOND (4) x (9) (11) CREDIT PER $1,000 OF PRE -CONSTRUCTION VALUE - ANNUAL TAX ALLOCATION (From Table ST-12) $ (12) CREDIT FOR PAST TAX PAYMENTS (4) x (11) (13) POST -CONSTRUCTION VALUE IN UNITS OF $1,000 (From line (8) on Form NR-3) (14) CREDIT PER $1,000 OF POST - CONSTRUCTION VALUE - 1991 BOND (From Table ST-13) / unit / unit units $ �67 / unit FOAM NR-2 (continued) (15) CREDIT FOR FUTURE TAX PAYMENTS - 1991 BOND (13) X (14) (16) CREDIT PER $1,000 OF POST - CONSTRUCTION VALUE - 1998 BOND (From Table ST-14) $ (17) CREDIT FOR FUTURE TAX PAYMENTS - 1998 BOND (13) x (16) (18) CREDIT PER $1,000 OF POST - CONSTRUCTION VALUE - 1999 BOND (From Table ST-15) $ (19) CREDIT FOR FUTURE TAX PAYMENTS - 1999 BOND (13) x (18) (20) CREDIT PER $1,000 OF POST -CONSTRUCTION VALUE - ANNUAL TAX ALLOCATION (From Table ST-16) $ (21) CREDIT FOR FUTURE TAX PAYMENTS (13) x (20) (22) TOTAL ROAD IMPACT FEE (3) - (6) - (8) - (10) - (12) - (15) - (17) - (19) - (21) / unit / unit / unit FORM NR-3 ESTIMATION OF POST CONSTRUCTION VALUE (1) TYPE OF USE4p ( From line ( 5 ) on form NR-1) (2) TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION { ( from line ( 6 ) on Form NR-1 f (3) TOTAL FLOOR AREA (From line (4) on Form NR-1) (4) ESTIMATED IMPROVEMENT VALUE PER SQUARE FOOT (From Table ST-17) (5) ESTIMATED VALUE OF IMPROVEMENTS (3) x (4) ( 6 ) LAND VALUE (From current tax records) (7) ESTIMATED POST -CONSTRUCTION VALUE (5) + (6) (8) ESTIMATED POST -CONSTRUCTION VALUE IN UNITS OF $1,000 (7) / $1,000 / ��^ 6�'....units General Information: The Lane Press is making application to expand its facility at 1000 Hinesburg Road. This expansion has two major phases, a 34,087 square foot building expansion, and a site work portion, whose major component is the relocation of the driveway. The building expansion provides additional space for bindery, consolidation of mailing / shipping / distribution, and mechanical space. The result of this expansion will be the elimination of storage trailers parked in the driveway. We are not expecting a specific employment change, however, the company's growth plan will involve increases in employment, of 20 people, primarily on second and third shift as production workers by next July. Current three shift employment is 360, with about 90 on second and 50 on third shift. Parking and Utilities: The site work relocates the majority of Lane Press Drive to within 30' of our southern boundary. The expansion, because of its location and size, eliminates 53 parking spaces in the existing parking lot. The relocation allows for the creation of replacement and new parking spaces to increase our parking from 251 to 291 spaces (plus seven handicap and three motorcycle spaces). The driveway relocation allows landscaping space to be maintained around the building, and enhances the visual separation of the driveway from the building. This relocation also allows future expansions to occur with only minor site work changes. This construction will cause the relocation of the primary electrical service, the incoming telephone service, relocation of two fire hydrants (to clear asphalted areas) and the raising of two sewer manhole covers. The relocation of the driveway also allows for new road base and asphalt depths to handle the existing 70 million pounds of paper traffic, and future increases to 140 million pounds. The Lane Press owns and operates one van, used for local pickups and deliveries, to be parked in a space next to the new truck loading area. Landscaping: We plan to use this opportunity to tree line the driveway, as well as expand on the successful tree planting between the parking areas. Our new landscaping budget is about $23,000. (We have included a copy of North Country Landscaping's proposal per our plan). Pedestrian Circulation This project will provide 150' of 5' concrete sidewalk for use by employees to get to the employee entrance, reducing the number of pedestrian/vehicle conflicts from the current system of walking in the drive aisles. In addition we will continue to offer bicycle parking, and we are providing a place with concrete paving for motorcycle parking. Lane Press Addition Exterior Lighting: The following chart identifies existing exterior lighting and changes proposed: Existing Proposed Location bollards bollards Existing pole lighting Proposed pole lighting East side 12 No 2- 24' with twin 250W Same lighting 100 watt change HPS cutoff on 2' Cut pole to 20' HPS arms West side 1 5 5- 24' with single 8- 20' with twin 250 at parking 400 HPS HPS on 6' arm 2- 24' with twin 4- 20' with single 250 400 HPS HPS on 6' arm Along 6- 24' with single 3- No change Roadway 400 HPS 3- 20' with single 250 (Not in our control) HPS on 6' arm 7- 24' with single (w Dynapower app) 400 HPS 7- 20' with single 250 HPS on 6' arm On Building 8 Down lights various No change types max 100 watt (No picture) Our new lighting will eliminate the scattered light from the existing fixtures, provide more usable light, illuminate more parking spaces, and use less electricity. We would not change the last three pole lights as we expect they will be removed when this portion of the driveway becomes Swift Street. Storm water: The new building and parking areas storm water will be split between an existing retention basin to the west of the facility and a new area being created to the south. Each uses grass area remediation and sand filtration to clean and delay the storm water per state of Vermont requirements. Sewer allocation: Currently The Lane Press has a 12,000 GPD sewer allocation. Our 1996 sewer usage averaged 12,360 GPD and we expect out 1997 usage to be about 12,080 GPD. Our new employment and given future employment possibilities we should ask for an additional 1000 GPD of sewer allocation. This new addition and newly installed equipment will reduce our usage during Lane Press Addition 2 the next year by 2,000 GPD, so even with our new employment, we will be using less than today. These changes include a new larger capacity cooling tower so we will not have to use domestic water to cool with on hot summer days. (Our June, July, and August usage is higher because of this factor.) In addition our new computer to plate maker will substantially reduce our water usage for film and plate development and will, eventually, eliminate it completely for 60- 70% of our work. SW ubmitt((e'� Id by: �� Walter M. Adams Jr. �\-? I I Facilities Manager, The Lane Press March 2, 1998 Lane Press Addition 3 09102/1998 89:42 March 2, 1998 8028?893=1 Walter Adams Facilities Manager The Lane Press Post Office Box 130 Burlington, Vt 05402 Planting List: NO COUNTRY LANDSCAPE NORTH COUNTRY LANDSCAPE & GARDEN CENTER 39 TALCOTT ROAD WILLISTON, VT 05495 (802) 878-7272 LANDSCAPE PLANTING PROPOSAL For 1998 Building Addition (55) .Ash (10) Flowering Crabapple (38) Common Yews (20) Austrian Pines (8) White Pine (9) Red Maples (12) Blue Spruce Total For New Planting 2-21/2" 2" (0106 a> = 18-24"��q� 6-8' C-Y�y`d 6-8' P ?'5 2-21/z" P/d'`?s: 6-8"& - -. $23,485.00 6o PAGE 01 G194�' ** Note: Total cost include all labor, equipment and materials for installation. All plant stock carry a full one year guarantee. Thanks, M &' — Mike Fulchino O1 LJ 1 1 5 1311 111 �o 1 me 32' Q 32' 32' 32' 72' 72' 10 11 3 s 13 .ro•v .� I O I I I I ---------I r ' — J L----------------------- � I _` 27Fi' I I � I I � mM I r I I I I vrn I I I \\ I I 1 ' i I I 14 i 1 ---------r nra. otra I — I li � n I � i I � Gr,reln rwn [ufrtem d— Cl e Hunt II I, L_ 32' ID rxe Aeon I I I I eL Nw I I ' LI rer 0 •i I' wmrwi.« uRn b Mnvx 32' Statklr� i I I I I � rN a• vroex<w d'nn mom Aren I I I ' i me IorA wo �« .X O— I ______i �__. Gan [wt. III I I I � •I I I II I Lwx knee IrG<p btl'« wo x 32' awve, nrAxoon i l i � i i i � � nmr AAtn r� r snw« ImArA omev 21'4' eta E��,r j twnw n X424R000S vnStE st orr,r NuER M TOTES ROOM ^ -'I n. I �p ' I I 'J N boaNt I I I I t o 'J �I wrlram I I I I—' L�AOINE 7 �C O— TRUCK BAY �I_—� • • � • • • � % 16 IE 9 20 AI I ,,2,��4 �• i O O O O O O PRESS ROOM n. a pif I G <W I wlNrxlta RWl 9 ttuw --- n. fi,E RrIR Mitt ryrltt BALER ROOM I L [ACpx �'I�ILAutn yrl[[ tr MMARA �J ail ettIMnw vo-•m Iw, �' orl¢ 14=92c0, rIWW[[ RfIR atA lA a a �— • a o o . t 729,EU0, ( • ao o!V x* n. vtGYG£ AA[slttw> 237,600 lJ iNlii O 216Ra, SECOND FLOOR PLAN (D--� V V �l V IB 11 12 13 I4 f5 S Machine layout 3/2/98 wr No Description Date By Revisions: ProjectTTtle: The Lane Press 1998 Addition 1000 Hinesburg Road So. Bur l 'I ngton , VT Or by Wo I te, Adams Facilities Manager The Lane Press Date July 18, 1997 Scale: 1''=30' Floor Plan 4 e G 400 T: q, }91.5.. 1w . 3.. P.iilA'inq 376 •0'• ( H 1 Co I umn L i ne 8 WE UNION -- NUNN 011111 I IMINIIIIIIIINIM INUM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIImIIIIIIIIIIII North Elevation Ma i n Bu i l d i ng West - 1 evat ion Mecnan I ca I and Ma in building G G.2 10" 5ID"1 21 ID.-111/4" 11 V4" I zi•o•• —lj I I unde.s Ide or roof deck Y 399 I TI I I I I I � I I I 2 '4" I I — 1.2" V6 N-+h E I t" t z �J J 12 H 2 e V Y Coium�ii��Z.S �J Q OnO Tir � F —1 7rriF 7 F —1 � I I I I1111 I I I 1L_rL.1L_ f11_11L_rLJC_i1. South Elevation Main Building IMders i de of roof deck ns w qr"t9 or _ eva Ion Sou .h E I evat Ion at co 1 Umn I i ne 15 .8 at co I umn I i ne 14.5 South E I evat 1 on 1 ns i de dock West E I evat i on i ns 1 de dock Q Q I City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 March 17, 1998 Walt Adams The Lane Press P.O. Box 130 Burlington, Vermont 05402 Re: Additions, 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Mr. Adams: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are preliminary comments on the above referenced project from City Engineer, William Szymanski, the Fire Department and myself. Please respond to these comments with additional information and/or revised plans, if appropriate, no later than Friday, April 3, 1998. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincerely, Raymond J. Belair, Zoning and Planning Assistant RJB/mcp Encls Preliminary Memo - Planning April 14, 1998 agenda items March 16, 1998 Page 2 ALAN PALMER - BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT - SKETCH PLAN the revised final plat should include metes and bounds information and lot size for lot #2 and the S.M.S. Realty Partnership lot. NEW ENGLAND TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH COMPANY - TELECOMMUNICATIONS HUT - SITE PLAN — provide size of proposed plant material. — if an exterior light will be used, provide a cut -sheet and show location on the plan. — show parking spaces for maintenance person and the two (2) spaces required for the dwelling. LANE PRESS - EXPANSION - REVISED FINAL PLAT — the bike rack should be labeled. 2 M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, South Burlington City Engineer Re: April 14, 1998 Agenda Items Date: March 13, 1998 LANE PRESS ADDITION - HINESBURG ROAD 1. Planting On top of sewer and water lines should be avoided. 2. Water Department should receive copies of any water main relocation plans. LIME ROCK VILLAGE - AIRPORT PARKWAY 1. The City requests a 301x 30' easement along east side just before the bridge for a turnaround. 2. Site plan should have contour elevations noted on it. NEW ENGLAND TELEPHONE - TELECOMMUNICATIONS SITE - WHITE STREET There exists a eight (8) inch sewer main in the proximity of the nine (9) foot wide right-of-way. This main may conflict with the proposed telephone manhole. This sewer main should be located and shown on the plan. There also exists a water service in the area which also should be shown. ALAN PALMER & S.M.S. REALTY PARTNERSHIP - WILLISTON ROAD Site plan showing boundary adjustment dated September 9, 1997 prepared by Vermont Land Surveyors is acceptable. MEMORANDUM To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: South Burlington Fire Department Re: April 14, 1998 agenda items Date: March 11, 1998 1. Lane Press 1000 Hinesburg Road Acceptable 2. Alan Palmer 15 Palmer Court Acceptable 3 Far Water, Ltd Airport Parkway Dated 3/3/98 Dated 2/27/98 Dated 2/26/98 The cul-de-sac on the easterly side of the development should have an emergency access drive to Airport Parkway. The cul-de-sac on the westerly side is too small to accommodate the tower truck. 4. NET & T Dated 3/2/98 8-10 White Street Access road needs to be wider unless there is another access through the bank property. iv nu� i I 600.00 S6-24 12"E i I — -- — .................. . _ .. . ................. 169.94 ' N06-24 '5 P'E �r 40Water, Gas& Electric Easement 10'electricaleasement 10 snow removoI easement f i I / I I I I i I / I •...— _ --I N\ \ 423.00' \ I \ \ I �\ I \ I--500.00 I — — `� 61.06 111, 16 28" W 5+ 59 39" _ — — • — — — R= 4683.75 ' IP — — �� r— 1141.28 585+39-34'E � — — — — —' ' — , \ L= 490.01 -------- i I I I % I � / I I I I Gr vei roa woy io pimp s a -on I —" I / � I � I I � I I I I I I ` 1 I— i Closs2 — I Wetland 50-60 acres ' POWH - -r I _ I 1 oub lg stoked� -io les —._. �' 1473.40 N75;55 '48' W _ 10 50 200 No Description Dote By • — • Edge of wetlands Rev is ions: i '1 New contours 2 ' interval Project Tl le: The Lane Press — — — — — — Ex i st Tng contours 1998 Addition 1000 Hinesburg Road So . Bur I i ngton , VT Dr by WoIter Adams Facilities Manager The Lane Press Date April 18, 1998 Scale:, 1"=80 ' Erosion controls A 1 02 1/13/98 MOTION OF APPROVAL LANE PRESS I move the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the final plat application of Lane Press to amend a previously approved plan for a 136,357 square foot manufacturing/printing building, 1000 Hinesburg Road. The amendment consists of: 1) constructing three (3) additions totaling 54,261 square feet, and 2) relocating the driveway, as depicted on a three (3) page set of plans, page one (1) entitled, "The Lane Press 1000 Hinesburg Road So. Burlington, Vermont 05403," prepared by Walt Adams, dated September 5, 1997, last revised 11/20/97, with the following stipulations: 1) All previous approvals and stipulations which are not superseded by this approval shall remain in effect. 2) Prior to issuance of a zoning permit, the applicant shall post a $29,850 landscape bond. The bond shall remain in effect for three (3) years to assure that the landscaping takes root and has a good chance of surviving. 3) Pursuant to Section 26.105(a) of the zoning regulations, the South Burlington Planning Commission grants the applicant a $19,584 credit for existing trees on the site. 4) All new exterior lighting shall consist of downcasting shielded fixtures so as not to cast light beyond the property line. Any change in lighting shall be approved by the City Planner prior to installation. The existing 24 foot light poles shall be reduced in height to 20 feet. 5) For the purpose of calculating road impact fees under the South Burlington Impact Fee Ordinance, the Planning Commission estimates that the expansion will generate 40.69 additional vehicle trip ends during the P.M. peak hour. 6) Prior to issuance of a zoning permit, the applicant shall record a revised plat of the Dynapower property showing the revised r.o.w. location which has been approved by the Planning Commission. i6 7) Culvert and drainage pipes shall be concrete or plastic,,metal or aluminum. 8) Prior to permit issuance, the City Water Department shall review and approve the fire hydrant relocation. 9) Any changes to the plat plans shall require approval of the South Burlington Planning Commission. 10) The final plat plan (sheet S 1.0) shall be recorded in the land records within 90 days or this approval is null and void. The plan shall be signed by the Planning Commission Chair or Clerk prior to recording. 2 Memorandum - Planning January 13, 1998 agenda items January 9, 1998 Page 8 8) THE LANE PRESS - ADDITION - REVISED FINAL PLAT This project consists of amending a previously approved plan for a 136,357 square foot manufacturing/printing building. The amendment consists of: 1) constructing three (3) additions totaling 54,261 square feet, and 2) relocating the driveway. The sketch plan was reviewed on 10/28/97 (minutes enclosed). This property located at 1000 Hinesburg Road lies within the I-O District. It is bounded on the north by New England Telephone and I-89, on the east and south by Dynapower and on the west by several single family residences. Access/circulation: Access is via a r.o.w. from Hinesburg Road which will be slightly revised to accommodate the revised driveway location on the property. The project must include a revised survey plat for the Dynapower property showing the revised r.o.w. location. This plat will require Planning Commission approval. Circulation on the site is adequate. Coverage/setbacks: Building coverage is 14% (maximum allowed is 30%). Overall coverage is 28.6% (maximum allowed is 50%). Setback requirements will be met. Parking: A total of 148 parking spaces are required and 301 spaces are available including seven (7) handicapped spaces. Landscaping: The minimum landscaping requirement, based on building costs, is $29,850 which is not being met. This is $2350 more than at sketch plan due to the increased size of the building expansion since sketch plan review. At sketch plan the Commission indicated a willingness to approve a credit for the shortfall of $17,234, now $19,584, to cover the value of the relocated plantings. The Commission also indicated that the bond should be for the entire landscaping requirement of $29,850. Memorandum - Planning January 13, 1998 agenda items January 9, 1998 Page 9 Traffic: ITE estimates that the current facility generates 10 1. 99 vehicle trip ends (vte's) during the P.M. peak hour and with the addition to generate 142.68 vte's which is a 40.69 vte increase. The applicant should be aware that the road impact fee is zero (0). View Protection Zone: The easterly portion of the property lies within the Hinesburg Road - North View Protection Zone. No portion of the addition or any of the new or relocated plantings will be within this zone. Sewer: No additional allocation needed. Lighting: Existing exterior lighting consists of the following: --- 13 - 100 watt high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures (bollards). --- two (2) twin 100 watt high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures mounted on 24 foot poles. --- 18 - 400 watt single high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures mounted on 24 foot poles. --- two (2) 400 watt twin high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures mounted on 24 foot poles. --- eight (8) 100 watt building mounted lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures. Proposed exterior lights consist of the following: --- four (4) 100 watt high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures (bollards). --- eight (8) twin 250 watt high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures mounted on 20 foot poles. --- 12 single 250 watt high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixture mounted on 20 foot poles. The Performance Standards in Appendix B of the zoning regulations limits the height of pole lights to 20 feet. Applicant will replace the existing 24 foot poles with 20 foot poles. C.O. District: The plan shows the C.O. Districts corresponding with the drainageways westerly of the parking area. These C.O. Districts will not be impacted by the proposed expansion. 6 PLANNING COMMISSION 28 October 1997 page 2 may go in. Mr. Burgess asked about fire protection for those lots. Mr. Rowe said it would be the same as for any rural lot. Mr. Duppstadt added they are larger lots with more space between them. Members had no problem going directly to revised final plat. 3. Sketch plan applicationof Lane Press to amend a previously ap- proved plan for a 135,817 sq. ft. manufacturing/printing building. The amendment consists of 1) constructing a 47,141 sq. ft. addition and 2) relocating the dri Veway, 1000 Hinesburg Road: Mr. Adams said Lane Press currently shares its driveway with Dynapower. Because of the building expansion they will lose a parking lot. To compensate, they.will move the driveway to within 30 ft. of the boundary with Dynapower. This will allow expansion of the parking lot. They will create another truck dock under cover so it is not seen from the outside. They will eliminate 2 outside docks. Power lines will be moved alongside the existing parking lot. They will add a few feet of water line as well and will move two fire hydrants. There will be a number of lighting changes. Lights will all be downshielded and will not be blocked by trees as they are now. There will be only 20 poles. Only two poles will not be re- placed as they were already changed. The employee entrance will be moved and two sidewalks will be added going to that entrance This will provide better access from the parking lot. Mr. Dinklage said the Commission will want the tractor trailers to be removed. Mr. Adams said they had no problem with this. With regard to landscaping, Mr. Adams said the site now has more than 500 plants. They are proposing a row of trees along the new driveway and some new trees near the cafeteria location. There will be a total of 50 new trees. They will also relocate about 100 plants. There will be plantings to shield three outside trailers. They are asking for credit for the moving of some of the trees. Mr. Weith said the site is quite well landscaped and he had no problem with allowing the credit. Mr. Dinklage sug- gested a bond to cover the relocation of trees to be sure they survive. Mr. Adams had no problem with this. Mr. Burgess asked about the trailers. Mr Adams explained that PLANNING COMMISSION 28 October 1997 page 3 there is a recycler on the premises who alternates trailers back and forth. They will be outside but will not be visible to people driving by because of landscaping. There will be no other trailers on the lot. Mr. O'Rourke had no problem with the waiver in this case, but he wanted to be sure that in the future the moving of trees is not considered in meeting a landscaping requirement. Other members agreed. No further issues were raised. 4. Site plan applicatiion of Chittenden Construction & Design to construct a 300 sq. ft. addition for animal hospital use to a 5095 sq. ft. building which includes 3970 sq. ft. of animal hospital use and 1125 sq. ft. of residential use (2 dwelling units), 1693 Williston Road: Mr.Nestork explained that the addition will improve working conditions for the staff and also the flow for the client traffic. They will also now be in compliance with ADA requirements. Lighting will be changed to downcasting shielded fixtures. Mr. Weith said the site is very well landscaped and he didn't know where any more plantings could go. The applicant noted they had gotten Zoning Board approval to expand this non -conforming use. Mr. O'Rourke moved the Plannin Commission a rove the sitelan implication of Chittenden Construction & Desi n to construct a 300 sq. ft. addition for animal hospital use to a 5,095 sg. ft. building which includes 3970 s ft. of animal hos ital use and 1125 sq. ft. of residential use (two dwellin units), 1693 Wil- liston Road.,._as depicted on a plan entitled- "Green Mountain Animal Hospital Addition 1693 Williston Rd, South Burlin ton, VT" prepared by Chittenden Construction & Design dated October 20, 1997. with the followina stipulations: 1.. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not super- seded by this approval shall remain in effect. 2. For the _Purpose of calculatin road im act fees under the South Burlington Impact Fee Ordinance, the Planning Commission estimates that the addition will generate zero additional vehicle trip ends during the P.M. 2eak hour. 3. Any new exterior lighting or changes to existing exterior lightinq shall consist of downcasting shielded fixtures. _Any — 1141.28 ' S 83*09 '3T'%' Is in rock - --- --------- ------ --- I ---------------------- I f, ---- -------------- .................... ............. D .............. ............. -D Locus V= I mile (Kt' ;A;. 11 '(11- W ---- --------- .............. ... ............ ........................ ............................. ............... ........ 170.00 .................................... ............... .......... 40 ' Water , Gas & Electric Easement 10 :electrical easement 10 snow remova; easement 'roadway easement 'snow remova: easement --- - ------ — — --------------------------- ------ - ........................ ----------- ------- L423.00' R83.06'48"E 9 . 1 1. — ----------------- -- I ---- - ----------- ------ --- ------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------- -IE-14-7-3,.40-'-,S 87*06 '4'3"'E Site Datc 61,06 ' N 64- 16 28" W Rz 4683.75 , L= 490.01 I roadway to poop stat(on �--815.4C ' S 6.32 '07" W -------------------------------------- I -- ---------- Lot size: 31.26 acres Buildings: Ex i sting: 136 357 sq. ft . Addition: 47 14 1 sq ft TOTAL 183.498 sq ft 13.48% Asphalt area: Existing: 170 ,771 sq f t Adt ion 23,100 sq ft TOTAL 193 ,871 so. f t 14 .23% Walkways storage: Existing 5,950sgft Addition: 925 sq ft TOTAL 6 875 so, ft .50% TOTAL Lot coverage 28.20% ToT.oi pork-ing spaces 301 HCP) -rock, doors 9 Zoning District : :ndustri a i/Open Space Notes 1. Bowdar) and easement inforeation frmop;wby7rucIe:: Comjlt;N Engineers inc. last revised 8129,'86. 2. Dynopowerdrivew� ardbD iWing information from a p:.by'rude: ; ComultingEngineers. :m lost re. ised 3. Swift Street exten-,ion and re; oca-,ed:.aneDress occeSS per p.ons byTrude; ! CDmj!tiNEN;nears . ;m. PI lost re: isedkfS.'96 wdD6 ast re. ised Q Z/96. 1000 Hinesburg Rocd So. Bur I i ngton Vermont 05- D3 S Ite Plan S 1.5 Dr By : Walt Adams Date: September 5 , '99' Revisions: Dcze : parking sir iping. bike rack, motor cyc!es 17/97 L 0 x 0 W so 0 W 200 400 Sccle 1" = 60 0 0 -s h S LA In Cr to z m 0 0 0- In 0 c S v a1 k- tl AA. Y.'TA' ■ .w � 00, Landscaping notes e a se. . . — — — Reisting londecoa inn isslug thacircleannals-in7 gt epla trymI. R.locatad landscap inn is eho.meitha hwsagan .arras- inn ttr Dlonf cpbol . Nee I.dcaQ irq i. j4t tt. p 1.t symbol . All orem distr,ee�br the mrm�ctian sill yeti-6•aftapsail,lir.fertilizer wed.otw-th---.pp—awibt."inngqth,—tr.ti-proc.s+. Scale V=60' Do bi. Staked hoybo le Slit few. i I1 be I aced al..g the eoath dg. of th, iee contract ion o�d 3 v...ha>9 fencws • 111 prat-t the dra inoge a.m to tlr mrth o! tle project.. As thsne sta s water trap inbse ar. natal I.d tla grate . i I I be eovared . ith filter fabric ant i I. Dar inn and grows how bwn wstab I i.led . a 3 to a c z 0 C. i 2.Oynmmrerdrivav��I.trwised/�/yyodbuildTnginforenttmfrmaplmbyTrudellCo Itingbginsem.Inc. Scale 1'' = 60 —500 � 3. Swift eift Street ez en8lm and relocated Lane Preee access per p l— by Trudel I Camel t ing Enq i—, Inc. P t I mt rev teed B/B/96 and PS I mt —iced 9/7/98. ECE .9^�rD A;m JAN 0 5 1998 of So. Burlipa` 0 S u A 5* 59' 39" --500.00 ' Landscap i ng notes i Existing landscaping is shownwith a circle surrounding the plant symbol. e n a m ro m m ww Me ao Relocated landscaping is shown w ith a hexagon surrounding the plant symbol . New landscaping has a circle around the plant identifier. n All areas d istrubed by the construct ion w i I I get 4-6" of topso i I , I ix, fert i I izer , seed, and mulch as soon as possible during the construction proce_c . n Double staked haybo le silt fences w i I I be placed along the south edge of the new construction and 3 vee shaped fences w i I I protect the drainage areas - the north of the project.. SCa I e 1' '- 60 ' i As the new storm water drop in lets are instal led the grate w i I I be covered with filter fabric unt i I paving and grass have been establ !shed. * r C® 5 1998 N 1� RTH 600 M ' S 4-46 '55'' E F-727.00 ' S 83. 11 - 0 1- - W L --------------- =-==- ' Water, Gas& Electric Easement Hole in rock --------------- 170 .00'--- 4b W. C 10 :electrical easement 10 snow removo: easemen "-30 roadway easement 10 snow removal easement no C 9. ........ ... ------ 0 ...... ------- ........ -7 ....................... .. ZN ------------------------------ ------ --------- .. .... ................................. --------------------- --------------------- ------------- 423.00 N83* 06 48" E -500 .00 S5*59 2 '."E it 1141.28 ' S 83*09 3T, v., ------------------- ------------ -------- li ! a * - 09 00( 18" RCP N 64* 16 '28" W ------- R= 4683.75 01641 L= 490.01 49 OP....... ........ 00-.6 150 'Setbac;.. from 189 c j Oft 401 ---Grove i roadi% aY to PLIMP station ------------ ----------- ex 8 15.40' S 6-32 -0 RCP ------------ 1473.40 S 87-06 '43" E SOW, Planting schedule " " in e� let ing y Lt, ndi 'la )-rit r ed relocated new A 2 s ling -�-.ted s :1 new Notes Redflaple 3" 8 66 35 White Pine C 6 to 1.2 39 5 38 it Ail 4 to 6" 2.5 to 3'. E 12 12 Burn ing 6... 1 0 Hine 0 ted 1000 Knosburg Road rg R [Lan:ds:c�a0p:In F 33 5 36 24 to 301-Go. Burlington, Vermont MW03 V 9 - Burlin ton, rmon Flower ing ' Cr.bapp,� 3.5 to 4" G M Mug. Pine 3 to 4 Landscaping Plan Plan Sugar Maple K 2. L 6 9 ,Red Maple Dr. B J to 4" Wad Adams tuber s, 1097 L 66 50 coma, r., Re'A "ns: 24 to 30'• Notes icon Beech cu; ver I anjngsAmer 975 9 Spruce S Bt. 12' ;,us:rian 3 iper u -Onascop ing notes Exist ing :ondsccp ing is shorn A i th C c7rc -e surroinc ini zfw p!ont spbo:. t Re.oca so 1.ndc.O.Ping *.5 5hawn % ith a hexagon 0 20 40 60 80 100 150 2D0 300 400 surround ng I hwp:.nt symbol. Ne, land—p-ng . -Cs around t p._gr.L type des ig— 9=F areas d;strubea b; theconstruct it. an .;.: get 4-6" f topsal i.e,,fe,t is icer, Ised, and,. ch as soon 50�:o Stoked haybole s i l t fames w i j I be as passible d.r:rg paced along VC S?ut', edge a, 1�' mu construct or.- As the now Store motor drop insets a , the construct !on process. Scc: e 60 vie E%bad 'C� pr.,,c-, t�! dro7no;e re insta. lid the grze i i; I be Covered ith % ore., north of Om projc; fl: ter fabr Ic ot Pa. ing and gross ra,. bed,, estab: Isbed. City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 February 17, 1998 Walt Adams The Lane Press P.O. Box 130 Burlington, Vermont 05402 Re: Additions, 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Mr. Adams: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is a copy of the January 13, 1998 Planning Commission minutes. Please note the conditions of approval including the requirement that the final plat plan be recorded within 90 days (4/20/98) or this approval is null and void. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Joe eith, Citv Planner JW/mcp 1 Encl FOUND AND NEEDS GOOD HOME Male b( agle, tri-colored, small medium size, approx. 3- yrs. of age (?) Ver sweet, very friendly, ver loving. Extremely friendl with other cats and dog,, Wants to be loved. 98E 2248 o�r/849-2369. LOST-13UNNIE Friendly tan, lop eared bunny, i the South End of Burling ton area on 12/23 Please call 863-2257. LOST DOG $500 rewarc Been missing for month from Fairfax area Pure bred black lab, 91 lbs.. name is "Oscar" Greatly loved an( missed! 879-4226. LOST DOG 9 year ok male, Shar-Pei. White. Ir Mallett's Bay on 12/21 Reward! Call 863-0316. LOST DOG Lost on December 19 it the West Milton area, < 15 pound Pomeranian He is off-white in color wearing a red harness REWARD. Call any hour day or night, 893-0041. LOST OLYMPUS CAMERA & BLACN CASE Lost in shop• ping mall parking lot on Friday 12/19. Con• tains priceless grand• daughter pictures. Reward. 759-2767 LOST PUPPY 4 mo. old, female Basset Hound, answers to name "Molly". Ran off late Xmas night with older dog & didn't return. Lost in Burlington/S. Burling- ton area near Rice Me- morial School. If found call Marlene at 658-4941. PERSONALS 6 ADOPT: Happy couple would love to become a family. We can give your baby love, security & a bright future. Expenses paid. Call Sandy & Tim 1-800-895-7439 ADOPT: Your baby will be the center of our life. Ex- penses paid. Call Diana & Charlie 1-800-727-5420. CELTICS TICKETS Knicks 1/26, Washingg. 1/28, Dallas 2/4, Kin 2/ 25. Great seats 888-5557. CELTICS TICKETS (2) Og Celtics - Timberwolves, January 2 (evening) at Fleet Center in Boston, $210 value, best offer. Call 453-3840. MYSTERY Do you know why the Goose Club of the Aloha Inn celebrates Sherlock Holmes' birthday every year on Jan. 6? For details of the dinner and entertainment on Tuesday, Jan. 6, call 878-8070 by Jan. 4 for reservations. ADULT 8 ENTERTAINMENT HARDBODIES #1 exotic dance co. Quality dancers for all events. 1-800-370-2223 MODELS & MORE Where fantasy & reality', meet! Outcall on y^ Now Morrie L 1-800-9d6- WANT LEGAL P)19tIC HEARING UTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION The South Burlingto Planning Commissiol will hold a public hearin, at the South Burlingtoi City Hall, Conference (loom, 575 Gorse Street, South Burrington V�rmont on Tuesday Jaluuary 13, 19 8 at 7:31 P.M, to cons er the fol lowiil\e`_/ 1) Final plat applicatior of Lane Press to amen( a previously approve( plan for a 135,81 square foot manufactu ring/printing building 1000 Hinesburg Road The amendment consist; of: 1) constructing three (3) additions totaling 54, 261 square feet, and 2 relocating the driveway. 2) Final plat applicatior of Summer Woods Com- munity Association, Inc.. to amend two previous subdivision approvals: 1; subdivision of a 15.11 acre parcel into 2 lots of 14.79 acres and 0.32 acres, and construction of a 38 unit planned resi- dential development on the 14.79 acre parcel - granted approval on 3/7/89, and 2) subdivi- sion of a 40,600 square foot lot into 2 lots Tare and 12,000 square feet granted approval on 10/17/89. The amend- ment consists of creating separate lots under the footprint of each unit in- cluded in the 38 unit PRD and under each duplex unit located at #9-11 and #15-17, Arbor Road. 3) Final plat application of Century Partners, LP to amend an approved planned unit develop- ment consisting of 96,- 800 square feet of gen- eral office and shopping center use in four (4) buildings, 100 Dorset Street and 2 Corporate Way. The amendment consists of minor modifi- cations to the footprint of Building B, lot coverage and Landscaping. 4) Continue preliminary plat application of John Larkin to expand an existingg 89 room hotel and 225 seat restaurant facility, One Dorset Street. The expansion consists of adding 71 rooms for a total of 160 rooms. Copies of the applica- tions are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall. William Burgess Chairman South Burlington Planning Commission December 27, 1997 SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE n accordance with the South Burlington Zoning Regulations and Chapter 117, Title 24, V.S.A., the _n...h D...I�nnlnn nn,nn m ents, contractor; equipment service an repair and associated ac cessory uses, located lot #28, CommerciE Avenue, Ethan Allen Industrial Park. #2 Appeal of Vincent 1 Morin & Gerald Kaigl agent seeking a variant from Section 25.00 Di mensional requirement sub -section 25.101 fron yard setback of th, South Burlington Zonim Regulations. Request i; for permission to recon struct a 5'x27' porcl which will create a zer( setback and results in re moval of the porch fron within the street right -of way, located at 316 Patchen Road. Richard Ward, Zoning AdministrativE Officer December 27, 1997 STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA COUNTY OF WILLIAMSBURG GEORGE K. HOWLE AND PAMELA B. HOWLE, PLAINTIFFS, VS. BETHANY CHRISTIAN SERVICES OF SOUTH CAROLINA, INC., BILL DOE REPRESENTING AN UNKNOWN FATHER WHO LIVES IN BURLINGTON, VERMONT, AND BABY BOY DOE, A MINOR UNDER THE AGE OF EIGHTEEN (18) YEARS, DEFENDANTS. IN THE FAMILY COURT THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT 97-DR-45-676 SUMMONS AND NOTICE OF FILING TO THE ABSENT DEFENDANT, BILL DOE, REPRESENTING AN UNKNOWN FATHER WHO LIVES IN BURLINGTON, VERMONT, ABOVE NAMED: SUMMONS: YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to answer the Complaint in this action, the original of which has been filed in the Office of the Clerk of Court for Williamsburg County, on the 31 st day of October 1997, a copy of which will be delivered to you upon request; and to serve a copy of your Answer to the Complaint upon the undersigned at- torney for the Plaintiffs at Jenkinson & Jenkinson, P.A., Post Office Drawer 669, Kingstree, South Carolina 29556, within thirty (30) days following the date of service upon you, exclusive of the day of such service; and if you fail to answer the Complaint within the time stated, the Plaintiffs will apply for judgment by default against the Defendant for the relief demanded in the Com- plaint. NOTICE OF FILING: YOU WILL PLEASE TAKE NATICF that rho MEMO To: Ray Belair, So. Burlington Planning From: Walter Adams Subject: Revisions to The Lane Press site plan Date: November 21, 1997 Following our preliminary hearing, we had some conversations with American Paper Recycling. The outcome of that conversation is additional construction on the south east corner of the building. This addition doubles the size of APR's space and provides them 3 truck dock doors. This will eliminate the need for trailer storage on site. This addition adds 6720 square feet to the building but actually reduces the amount of asphalt. In addition on the north west corner of the building we have added a 5' x 80' piece to the building so that the new office space doesn't interfere with proper equipment layout in the bindery. Some landscaping plants have been relocated to accommodate these changes, and an additional drop inlet would be installed in the truck dock to keep excess storm water from crossing the entrance to the truck docks. We are providing a revised floor plan so you can see the changes internal to the building. No Text �) .1J' I 32' iC' iP iG' 1 aF �� ��� �G •7G' iG' �' _. _.... 9P, lA �— yyRr I' 55 95 t5 5 1 KY ••0•!•.Ilti trr •y � Wik 27' yr It 19V rtw Pon 30' 27b' .le �l 15 �— rr.rt a•r Np 30' rrt. ra �. �~ 1•a•rn1 lo•I 16 c ^ I p rmO� r°°' Gletw• V i l•Ily W O:c j !bV M.r •s OY•� I I �W 11.•.O K 9oa R.v 9m: I rr T� FE w. j I Y•Irr - W 32' i ? 9� rot• ' It•• 1.r. may„ rl. Ct How i ' �•. �a j r.•.r mro Itr• 1,•.9.................................. LL tkQrrr r So1n Ulu, laser IYrc i ovw rma °fP" p� 9tlr r90 ICPpY Poa 32 to rm•t 9Ne "a— l 9wt/N Yr•r••m ❑............... ..................... ....:. ❑ g Pop Rml �•V4 trs•r ..................................... .... t IT I G rt t L-0 r+�us u 1•I 1•hr Mi,r ❑ D i Xo-- TRUCK BAY PRESS ROOM ©— BALER ROC91 uxm too 06 ® Im w 16 11 O 19 O O 7 w, • • —i T 1 wl-� `l ImWIC/� maIYLIL • L a O c Lr Mt9• IrTIQ r R{7Q QF7Q 6T1Q • • —0 [Fn O x iO1 AaDNT a Wai am w, o 0 91 3wa wm va m liner • . o o t.a Ll2I MARNIM O SECOND FLOOR PLAN -O �� l✓ V b V ID Il 12 13 14 S ro rp U., a I JD D ;U O O CL LA O C S - -- -- -- -- - 61.06 ' N 64s 16 ' 28" W 5s 59 ' 39" — -- - R= 4683.75 ' I re t rav 1 swi it/99/8®: c n I 1, DynuNaxer dr lvuwuyy atW Uulluiay l nronnutlan rIuiiuplwIpyU wlell CuugNl t l ny tiy0�eo�a, hw' JLIaU 1'' - VlI I ast rev i sed 9/ 15/B8 ~-500.00 , 3. Swift Street extent ion and relocated Lane Press access par p l ans by Trude l I Cons i t ing Engineers . Inc. i P1 last revised 8/8/96 and P6 lost revised 9/7/98. No Text Coverage/setbacks: Building coverage is 9% (maximum allowed is 20%). Overall coverage is 34% (maximum allowed is 40%). The coverage information provided on the revised final plat should include the bank property and not include the area of Fayette Road. Since the date that this development was first approved, the Commission has changed its i`terpretation of how to apply density/coverage requirements t mixed residential/commercial PUD's. In this district, the m ximum residential density is 7 units/acre. The maximum buildin and total coverage is 20% and 40%, respectively, for resident al use, but is 30% and 70% respectively, for commercial uses. The question had been raised as to how these different coverage equirements should be applied within a mixed use development if p oposed. Two (2) years ago, the Commission developed a new pol cy on how to apply these requirements to mixed -use developme ts. Since such developments are encouraged, the Commission deci ed to apply the residential density a d on the entire size (i. ., acreage) of the PUD. The maximum ove ge is to be limited to t e more restrictive coverage limitat'ons, i this case 20% buildin and 40% overall. Parking: The pro sed 60 multi -family u its require a total of 135 parking paces. he revised final at should show the 135 addition a spaces re ired. A bike rack hould also be provided as required nder Sectio 26.253(b) of the oning regulations. Landsca in : The revi d final plat lans should include a landscaping plan showing a existing and roposed landscaping in the develop nt. Traffic: Th applicant should bmit an u dated traffic impact analysis. A vety detailed sign opti 'nation analysis was conducted in c j nction with the Pom a /Hannaford project to the north. Th traffic analysis for the L&M Park application should build upo the Pomerleau traffic analysis. Sewer: The revise final plat submittal should include the sewer allocation request. Lighting: The revi d final plat plans should include details (cut -sheets) of existing and proposed exterior lights and show locations on the plans. Impact fees: The new residential buildings will be subject to the school, recreation and road impact fees. Revised final plat: The revised final plat plans should comply with the information requirements provided in Section 204.1(1) of the subdivision regulations. Wetland buffer: The northern most building is proposed to be located in very close proximity to a wetland buffer area. This 3 xAu� G�Ess l r ,y i �1G / ell' //V9 INVESTORS CORPORATION OF VERMO --- dumpster storage area 1 approval). --- three (3) crabapple tr (tFation wo (2) trees nex (1ee at the northwi --- thl n should be i to of the bike ri & OFFICE USE - SITE PLAN t be scree es shown on th to the dumpste t corner of the _vised to accui VA (condition of last plan do not exist area and the one uilding). a ely depict the C PUBLIC HEARING SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION The South Burlington Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington City Hall, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on Tuesday, January 13, 1998 at 7:30 P.M. to consider the following: 1) Final plat application of Lane Press to amend a previously approved plan for a 135,817 square foot manufacturing/printing building, 1000 Hinesburg Road. The amendment consists of: 1) constructing three (3) additions totaling 54,261 square feet, and 2) relocating the driveway. 2) Final plat application of Summer Woods Community Association, Inc., to amend two previous subdivision approvals: 1) subdivision of a 15.11 acre parcel into 2 lots of 14.79 acres and 0.32 acres, and construction of a 38 unit planned residential development on the 14.79 acre parcel - granted approval on 3/7/89, and 2) subdivision of a 40,600 square foot lot into 2 lots of 28,600 and 12,000 square feet - granted approval on 10/17/89. The amendment consists of creating separate lots under the footprint of each unit included in the 38 unit PRD and under each duplex unit located at #9-11 and #15-17, Arbor Road. 3) Final plat application of Century Partners, LP to amend an approved planned unit development consisting of 96,800 square feet of general office and shopping center use in four (4) buildings, 100 Dorset Street and 2 Corporate Way. The amendment consists of minor modifications to the footprint of Building B, lot coverage and Landscaping. 4) Continue preliminary plat application of John Larkin to expand an existing 89 room hotel and 225 seat restaurant facility, One Dorset Street. The expansion consists of adding 71 rooms for a total of 160 rooms. Copies of the applications are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall. William Burgess Chairman, South Burlington Planning Commission December 27, 1997 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 December 19, 1997 Walt Adams The Lane Press P.O. Box 130 Burlington, Vermont 05402 Re: Additions, 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Mr. Adams: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are preliminary comments on the above referenced project from City Engineer Bill Szymanski, the Fire Department and myself. Please respond to these comments with additional information and /or revised plans, if appropriate, no later than Monday, January 5, 1998. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincerely, /ayy2nd J. Belair, Zoning and Planning Assistant RJB/mcp Encls MEMORANDUM To: Applicants/Project Files„ From: Raymond J. Belair, Zoning & Planning Assistant Re: Preliminary Comments, January 13, 1998 agenda items Date: December 19, 1997 THE LANE PRESS - ADDITION - REVISED FINAL PLAT — the revised final plat should include a revised survey plat for the Dynapower property showing the revised r.o.w. location. A building permit will not be issued until the revised Dynapower plat is approved and recorded. — the Dynapower property owner should submit a letter agreeing to the revision of their plat. — plan should show the location of the view protection zone boundary. JOHN LARKIN - HOTEL EXPANSION - PRELIMINARY PLAT — at the last Planning Commission meeting, the Commission stated that the Arborvitae hedge along the U-Mall property is to remain "as -is". The plan should be revised to accommodate this request. — plans need to be revised to show 71 rooms otherwise the applicant must begin the review process anew. — the traffic impact study should be revised to reflect this current proposal. — the applicant should be aware that one of the conditions imposted on the recent U-Mall expansion allows the Planning Commission to close their new north entrance. — provide estimated cost for each phase. — provide number of hotel employees for each phase. — revise plan notes to show current lot size of 243,500 square feet. — show location of the easterly proposed pedestrian access to U-Mall. — the plans should show a pedestrian connection between new lobby and the Dorset Street sidewalk. — have building elevations changed since last submittal? — provide sewer allocation requested for each phase. — include north arow on each plan Memorandum - Planning October 28, 1997 agenda items October 24, 1997 Page 2 Mailbox cluster: The mailbox cluster along Fieldstone Lane should be relocated outside of the storm easement. 3) THE LANE PRESS - ADDITION - SKETCH PLAN This project consists of amending a plan previously approved on 4/13/93 (minutes enclosed) for a 135,817 square foot manufacturing/printing building. The amendment consists of: 1) constructing a 47,141 square foot addition, and 2) relocating the driveway. This property located at 1000 Hinesburg Road lies within the I-O District. It is bounded on the north by New England Telephone and I-89, on the east and south by Dynapower and on the west by several single family residences. Access/circulation: Access is via a r.o.w. from Hinesburg Road which will be slightly revised to accommodate the revised driveway location on the property. The revised final plat should include a revised survey plat for the Dynapower property showing the revised r.o.w. location. Circulation on the site is adequate. Coverage/setbacks: Building coverage is 13.5% (maximum allowed is 30%). Overall coverage is 28.2 (maximum allowed is 50%). Setback requirements will be met. Parking: A total of 148 parking spaces are required and 301 spaces are available including seven (7) handicapped spaces. Landscaping: The minimum landscaping requirement, based on building costs, is $27,500 which is not being met. Proposed landscaping which includes Ash, Burning Bush, and Sugar Maple is $14,883 short of the landscaping requirement. Applicant is requesting a credit for existing trees to make up the shortfall. Traffic: ITE estimates that the current facility generates 101.1 vehicle trip ends (vte's) during the P.M. peak hour and with the 2 Memorandum October 28, October 24, Page 3 - Planning 1997 agenda items 1997 addition to generate 137.0 vte's which is a 35.3 vte increase. The applicant should be aware that the road impact fee is zero (0). View Protection Zone: The easterly portion of the property lies within the Hinesburg Road - North View Protection Zone. No portion of the addition or any of the new or relocated plantings will be within this zone. Sewer: No additional allocation needed. Lighting: Existing exterior lighting consists of the following: --- 13 - 100 watt high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures (bollards). --- two (2) twin 100 watt high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures mounted on 24 foot poles. --- 18 400 watt single high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures mounted on 24 foot poles. --- two (2) 400 watt twin high pressure sodium lamps with. downcasting shielded fixtures mounted on 24 foot poles. --- eight (8) 100 watt building mounted lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures. Proposed exterior lights consist of the following: --- four (4) 100 watt high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures (bollards). --- eight (8) twin 250 watt high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixtures mounted on 24 foot poles. --- 12 single 250 watt high pressure sodium lamps with downcasting shielded fixture mounted on 24 foot poles. The Performance Standards in Appendix B of the zoning regulations limits the height of pole lights to 20 feet. Applicant should replace the proposed 24 foot poles with 20 foot poles. Other: --- the plan should note that there is a C.O. District extending 50 feet either side of the minor streams westerly of the building. 3 M E M O R A N D U M TO: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, South Burlington City Engineer Re: January 13, 1998 Agenda Items Date: December 19, 1997 LANE PRESS - 1000 HINESBURG ROAD 1) Culvert and drainage shall be concrete or plastic not metal or aluminum. 2) City Water Department shall review the relocation of fire hydrants that the site plan calls for. SUMMER WOODS CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT - PATCHEN ROAD 1) Plan should show Patchen Road and the adjacent property owners. 2) Roads should include curve data so they can be established if the need arises. HOWARD JOHNSON - DORSET STREET/WILLISTON ROAD Preliminary site plan prepared by Gregory Rabideau Architect dated 11/8/96 is acceptable. JUDGE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - CORPORATE WAY Site plan dated 12/8/97 titled Expand Shopping Center Site Plan Phase II is acceptable. DORSET FARMS - DORSET STREET Site plan for revised layout prepared by Lamoureux, Stone and O'Leary is acceptable, however, Floral Drive in three locations will be confusing. MEMORANDUM To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: South Burlington Fire Department Re: January 13 , 1998 agenda items Date: December 17, 1997 1) The Lane Press Dated 12/3/97 1000 Hinesburg Road Acceptable 2) Howard Johnson's Expansion Dated 12/4/97 1 Dorset Street The access between this property and the U-Mall property should be relocated approximately 70 feet to the north to facilitate access by emergency vehicles. 3) Summer Woods Dated 12/12/97 Arbor & Larch Roads Acceptable 4) Dorset Farms Dorset Street Acceptable 5) Century Partners 4 Corporate Way Acceptable Dated 12/5/97 Dated 12/10/97 M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, South Burlington City Engineer Re: October 28, 1997 Agenda Items Date: October 9, 1997 LANE PRESS - HINESBURG ROAD 1. Drainage pipe shall be concrete or plastic not metal or aluminum. 2. City Water Department should review the plan because there are hydrants that have to be moved. JOHN LARKIN - CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON LAND SWAP - BARTLETT PROPERTY - SHELBURNE ROAD Subdivision plan prepared by Krebs & Lansing dated September 8, 1997 is acceptable. GREEN MOUNTAIN ANIMAL HOSPITAL - WILLISTON ROAD 1. There exists a sewer easement (101) across the front of this property, it should be shown. 2. Water and sewer lines serving the property should be shown. OLD STONE HOUSE LANE - VAN SICKLEN ROAD 1. Off street sewer manholes must be accessible by mobile cleaning vehicles. 2. Emergency access drive between road A and B should be maintained by the home owners not the City. 3. A copy of the detail plans shall be forwarded to the City Water Department for their review of the water main layout. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Subdivision Application - FINAL PLAT 1 ) Name of Applicant LANDRUM, INC 2 ) Name of Subdivision SEMICON/THE LANE PRESS 3) Indicate any change to name, address, or phone number of owner of record, applicant, contact person, engineer, surveyor, attorney or plat designer since preliminary plat application NONE 4) Indicate any changes to the subdivision, such as number of lots or units, property lines, applicant's legal interest in the property, or developmental timetable, since preliminary plat application: ADDED - CONSERVATION ZONES AT STREAMS. 6720 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION ON SOUTHEAST CORNER WITH 3 ADDITIONAL TRUCK DOCKS. 400 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION NORTH WEST CORNER LANDSCAPING RELOCATION TO ACCOMMODATE ADDITIONS. TWO TRAILOR PARKING SPACES ARE ELIMINATED. 5) Submit five copies and one reduced copy (11 x 17) of a final plat plus engineering drawings and c ntaining all information required under Section 202.1 the subdivision regulations for a minor subdivision and under Section 204.1(a) for a major subdivision. 6) Submit two draft copies of all legal documents required under Section 202.1 (11) and (12) of the subdivision regulations for a minor sudivision and under Section 204.1(b) for a major ubdivisio . �t 2Co R (Signature) applicant or co tact person Date City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 October 24, 1997 Walt Adams The Lane Press P.O. Box 130 Burlington, Vermont 05402 Re: Addition, 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Mr. Adams: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting and my comments to the Planning Commission. Comments from City Engineer Bill Szymanski and the Fire Department were sent to you at an earlier date. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, October 28, 1997 at 7:30 P.M. to represent your request. If you have any questions, please give me a call. in erely t Joe Weith, Cit Planner JW/mcp Encls PLANNING COMMISSION 23 March 1993 page 8 - - Motel - Addition to Bonanza re pared b Gordan G. Woods, Assoc- ip------- by..Gord --- fates and dated 9 90, last revised 1 20 93, with the following stipulations: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which_ are not___s_u__p_e_ r_-__ seded by this approval shall remain in effect. .r. 2. The cedar hedoe toWbe planted alon_q_ he_fence lineonthe res- identialWorooerties to the south shall b_eWplantedWprior to or at the same time construction begins. The plan shall be revisedto show 8' to 10' hioh cedars_ to be planted. Applicant shall obtain Eermissi_onWfrom Wadloining landowners_ to plant the landsca pingW Prior_ to_issuance of_a zonincg-/building permit-, the applicant shall Wsubmit toWthe �City Planner a list of those adjoining pro- perty owners �who_approveWplanting on their property The appli- cant shall be required to post a bond tocoverthe costofthe ce_dar_Whed_ge._The Wbond shall remain in effectfor a periodWof three yearsWto�assure Wthat Wthe Wcedars Wtake Wroot and have�a good chance of surviving. The residents_ will be responsible for main- tainiingWtheWcedarsWafter the three ears. 3. All exterior__lighting shall be downcastinq and shielded and shall not cast light_ beyond the_ pro ep rty line. Any Chan e in ex- isting lightingor new lighting shall be approved by theCity Planner�prior WtoWinstallation. W 4. T_he_Wapplicant Wshall �obtain_a_zoning/building permit within six �W months �or�this .2,MEovalWis null and voider 5. The applicantWshallWobtain a Certificate of Occ_uoancy from the Administrative Officer prior to occupancy of theWbuildincg._ 6. The sit_eplanWshallWnot be revised_ without�first obtainiWng_ap- -.y.y.�.....,..._-- WWWWW�W�� proval_Wbv�the PlanningWCommission.WW Mrs. Maher Wseconded _the_ motion which then passedW5_-1 with Mr. Teeson-opposing--12 Mr.�Sheahan abstaining. Sketch plan application of Landrum for construction of a 15,820 sq. ft. addition to an existing 120,537 sq. ft. building used for manufacturing/printing, Lane Press, Hinesburg Road: Mr. Weith noted that the relocated water main must be at least 20 ft. from the addition and hydrants must be relocated. The appli- cant agreed to this. Mr Weith also noted the applicant is requesting a landscaping credit. $12,500. is required. Mr. Sheahan said he would like to see some landscaping on the south side. Mr. Adams said there are 700 plants on the site, and they will spend $6,000-$7,000 to move PLANNING COMMISSION 23 March 1993 page 9 landscaping from the area where the addition is going. Mr. Weith suggested more landscaping between the sewer line and the south property line. He recommended a mix of evergreen and deciduous trees. Members agreed to require $6,500 in new landscaping. Mr. Adams noted the curve of the road will move out slightly. No other issues were raised. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 11:00 pm. Clerk General Information: The Lane Press is making application to expand its facility at 1000 Hinesburg Road. This expansion has two major phases, a 47,000 square foot building expansion, and a site work portion, whose major component is the relocation of the driveway. The building expansion provides additional space for bindery, consolidation of mailing / shipping / distribution, and additional inventory space. The result of this expansion will be a reduced number of storage trailers parked in the driveway and fewer exposed truck/trailers loading and unloading as another concealed truck dock is being created. We are not expecting a specific employment change, however, the company's growth plan will involve increases in employment, of 20 people, primarily on second and third shift as production workers by next July. Current three shift employment is 360, with about 90 on second and 50 on third shift. Parking and Utilities: The site work relocates Lane Press Drive to within 30' of our southern boundary. The expansion, because of its location and size, eliminates 53 parking spaces in the existing parking lot, and would be less that 1 foot from the existing driveway on the south. The relocation allows for the creation of replacement and new parking spaces to increase our parking from 251 to 294 spaces (plus seven handicap and three motorcycle spaces). The driveway relocation allows landscaping space to be maintained around the building, provides three landscaped trailer storage spaces, and enhances the visual separation of the driveway from the building. This relocation also allows future expansions to occur with only minor site work changes. This construction will cause the relocation of the primary electrical service, the incoming telephone service, relocation of two fire hydrants (to clear asphalted areas) and the raising of two sewer manhole covers. The relocation of the driveway also allows for new road base and asphalt depths to handle the existing 70 million pounds of paper traffic, and future increases to 140 million pounds. The Lane Press owns and operates one van, used for local pickups and deliveries, to be parked in a space next to the new truck loading area. Landscaping: We plan to use this opportunity to tree line the driveway, as well as expand on the successful tree planting between the parking areas. Our new landscaping budget is about $11,200 and we will also be spending more then $10,000 to move the landscaping indicated in the relocated column on the landscaping plan. We would ask that you give us credit for this relocation, as this additional value is reflective of the gain in value the trees have incurred since original planting. If you can't give us this credit then we would propose to cut this material down and move its smaller replacements to the new column to get to the required $17,500 requirement. (We have included a copy of North Country Landscaping's proposal per our plan). Pedestrian Circulation This project will provide 150' of 5' concrete sidewalk for use by employees to get to the employee entrance, reducing the number of pedestrian/vehicle conflicts from the current system of walking in the drive aisles. In addition we will continue to offer bicycle parking, and we are Lane Press Addition providing a place with concrete paving for motorcycle parking. Exterior Lighting: The following chart identifies changes in the exterior lighting: Existing Proposed Location bollards bollards Existing pole lighting Proposed pole lighting East side 12 No 2- 24' with twin 100 Same 100 watt change UPS cutoff on 2' UPS arms (Sheet 1) West side 1 4 5- 24' with single 8- 24' with twin 250 at parking 400 UPS BPS on 6' arm 2- 24' with twin 2- 24' with single 250 400 UPS BPS on 6' arm (Sheet 2) (Sheet 3) Along 6- 24' with single 4- No change Roadway 400 HPS 2- 24' with single 250 (Not in our control) BPS on 6' arm 7- 24' with single 8- 24' with single 250 400 HPS BPS on 6' arm On Building 8 Down lights various No change types max 100 watt (No picture) Our new lighting will eliminate the scattered light from the existing fixtures, provide more usable light, illuminate more parking spaces, and use less electricity. We would not change the last four pole lights as we expect they will be removed when this portion of the driveway becomes Swift Street. Storm water: The new building and parking areas storm water will be split between an existing retention basin to the west of the facility and a new area being created to the south . Each uses grass area remediation and sand filtration to clean and delay the storm water per state of Vermont requirements. Sewer allocation: Currently The Lane Press has a 12,000 GPD sewer allocation. Our 1996 sewer usage averaged 12,360 GPD and we expect out 1997 usage to be about 12,080 GPD. Our new Lane Press Addition 2 employment and given future employment possibilities we should ask for an additional 1000 GPD of sewer allocation. This new addition and newly installed equipment will reduce our usage during the next year by 2,000 GPD, so even with our new employment, we will be using less than today. These changes include a new larger capacity cooling to so we will not have to use domestic water to cool with on hot summer days. (Our June, July, and August usage is higher because of this factor.) In addition our new computer to plate maker will substantially reduce our water usage for film and plate development and will, eventually, eliminate it completely for 60- 70% of our work. Submitted by: Walter M. Adams Jr. Facilities Manager, The Lane Press October 17, 1997 Lane Press Addition 3 Page No. of Pages NORTH COUNTRY LANDSCAPE & GARDEN CENTER 39 Talcott Road WILLISTON, VT 05495 (802) 878-7272 PROPOSAL )UBMI FTED TO PHONE DATE ----- (0S 0CT. " i STREET JOB NAME CITY, STATE and ZIP CODE JOB LOCATION c t V ARCHITECT DATE OF PLANS JOB PHONE We hereby submit specifications and estimates for: rr1 i L • 1\ k r a ........................1 .. M..e.........................J��.Z_......................................5.��n.. r-D u ........_.. .................................�.�.rn...)-�.......... Z.'.. Z. z �j //A 5'-.... 5........................................................................ c�............. ........................................SCI...... J.......... s 1........... ...................... c�r-.....e.....................2-.Z.._............. ................... ....1��....-...-........................................................................... ...............Z.....a�...-...:...—........:.......:. /% . Wr VrupM hereby to furnish material and labor — complete in accordance with above specifications, for the sum of: Payment to be made as follows: dollars ($ ). All material is guaranteed to be as specified. All work to be completed in a workmanlike manner according to standard practices. Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs will be executed only upon written orders, and, will become an extra Authorized 1p1 Signature charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire, tornado and other necessary insurance. Our workers are fully covered by Workman's Compensation Insurance. Arreptanre of Proposal— The above prices, specifications Note: This proposal may be withdrawn by us if not accepted within and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized Signature to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above. days. )j Date of Acceptance: Signature 8802 863 8100 MAY 15 ' 89 12 : 16 WALSH I. iTR I C BURL, 802-863-81006 17 - e 7 9 - 1 . 4'46 P.2/3 2 4.75" 117.11110m) !p, 5,76" (22,2oml big. lam■ Aatwa FTI Cover Vpp- 1(,7ts" HousiAQ (14.ieen} Copeefing Reflector o„ Lamp 22,lom1 �. Internal �j� t• �s•,�% Support Lena �� � Dtetrlhuttne Mif*etor Units M+ ■vollobse In ahola of Mole 42" I1074m) 3Y' (llam? U.4. Patens NO.•*lien 30324797 a Lbted lasltaat suppers Lower Houtina • •- Tie Rods Anchor oese ' got Baits A e. AMOM Bohr v q `` .a. '�; v, `' , •: a -,A;. The Lane Press .M �� ,�t• ♦ i1 t M =a,Z-1 • Pq f Seem 31000 Mund 35115070MOOW Hipp Flimnure &Wlum I ODW Mercury Vapor Upper housing is fabricated all aluminum construction with heavy extruded aluminum tides and flat sh*et aluminum lamp access cover secuned by means of Allen•heod set screws, The housing is securely supported by rnsans of an internal support structure. The housing encloses the collecting reflector and if fully paaketed for bug -tight, woathertlght operation. Lamp (by others) is concealed by the upper housing and is vertical burning bale down, For selection, w chart on reverie side. Lens Is rugged, injection molded acrylic and It tasted in an unttrelted position betwe*n the upper and lower housings. This design feature grestly increases the %hock resistance of the Ions and prevents secondary damage to the housing. The lens section Is fully gatketed for bug -tight, iVgathertight operation. Optional polycerhonte lens Is avallabid, Opticnl system (U.S. Patent Numtxr 383N767) is "sharp Cutoff" dual reflector typo consisting of colloCting and distributing reflectors designed to provide broad and efficient distribution of illumination. Reflectors are spun Aluminum with specular Aizak finish, Ballast Is mounted to en Internal support bracket within the lower enclosure, The batlost is high power factor, type CWA, dolignod for -200'F. operation, Lower housing is extruded aluminum with a cast alUrninum, base ring Internally welded. Four (4) 0,375" (0.9$cm) diameter high strength coated stevl tie rods enclosed within the lower houting secure the upper housing and lower housing structural elements to thn base ring. Fmir (4) concealed 0,375" (O.R6cm) set bolts contained within the base ring engage the under surface of the cast aluminum anchor bate to seourw the entire structure. The cast aluminum anchor base is secured to a foundation (by others) by moans of four (4) 0,6" (1,27cm) O.D. by 12" (30.48cm) long hot dipped galvanized anchor bolts, Sao reverse side for details. FI1111h; Units are available In a choice of powder, coatings and anodic finishes, See revers* side for desalts, Sheet 1 The Lane Press Sheet 2 Vertical Forward Throw jht VFT Series External Photocell' (factory installed) For fixtures w/1000W,120V 1 P For fixtures w/480V 5 P T 'Note: All fixtures with factory- installed photocell will be supplied with single voltage ballast. Accessories Catalog Number Backlight Shield SBL-22 R axa 2-Level lighting option available for 250thru400W I ixtures. See page HID 98for order information. Housing The seamless, die cast aluminum housing is standard with our exclusive DeltaGuard'm finish featuring an E-coat epoxy primer and medium bronze acrylic powder topcoat. Consult factoryfor availability of otherfinish colors. Size: 22" square x9' deep. Back box adds 2" to the overall height of thefixture. Optics The VFT Series fixture features a 700 main beam. Inside the housing, the lamp is tilted 200 from vertical toward the house -side of the fixture. The Vertical Forward Throw is ideal foruse in wide roadway areas, car lots, and largepparking areas. It provides goodhouse-side cutoff, low nadir candlepower and great forward and lateral distribution. Lens A clear sag lens (acrylic on 250 and 400W fixtures and glass on 1000W fixtures) is held securely in a recessed, die cast doorframe. The sag lens allows the tilted lamp to be positioned properly. The lens frame is supplied with mounting clips for the Backlight Shield accessory. See page HID 67 for details. Ballast All fixtures are standard with a high power factor, multi -tap ballast (120/208/240/277V). Ballast options include:480V and Tri tap (120/277/347V). An energy efficient low loss 277V bal last is available on many Metal Halide fixtures —consult factory. Lamps The Vertical Forward Throw Light accommodates 250, 400and 1000W MH or 250, or 400W HPS mogul base lamps. (An ED28lamp is standard in 400W MH fixtures; a BT37lamp is standard ir}1000W MH fixtures.) Gasketing Complete silicone gasketing - around lens frame and at mounting provide a watertight seal. _ Labels The Vertical Forward Throw Light is U.L. listed for wet locations, CSAcertified, and enclosure classified IP54 per IEC S29. Mountings Close Pole MountA ■ 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. The arm measures 11/2" L x 41/2"H. Extended Pole Mount A ■ Mounting Code "2" ■ Extruded aluminum mounting arm attaches fixture in afixed horizontal position to the side of a square pole. A steel backing plate inside the pole secures the fixture. The arm measures 6" L x 41/2" H. Wall Mount. ■ Mounting Code "W" ■ Cast aluminum mounting box with gasket attaches in a fixed position to the side of fixture, utilizing threaded mounting studs supplied. Provided with 4 threaded and closed 1 /2' conduitentries. The Lane Press Sheet 3 !ID 16 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 October 10, 1997 Walt Adams The Lane Press P.O. Box 130 Burlington, Vermont 05402 Re: Addition, 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Mr. Adams: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are preliminary comments on the above referenced project from City Engineer Bill Szymanski, the Fire Department and myself. Please respond to these comments with revised plans and/or additional information, if appropriate, no later than Friday, October 17, 1997. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincerely, Raymond J. Belair, Zoning and Planning Assistant RJB/mcp Encls M E M O R A N D U M To: Applicants/Project Fi es From: Raymond J. Belair outh Burlington Planning & Zoning Assistant Re: Preliminary Comments, October 28, 1997 Agenda Items Date: October 9, 1997 THE LANE PRESS - ADDITION - SKETCH PLAN --- the C.O. District along the I-89 interstate should be labeled as such. --- plan should show all parking spaces. --- a total of seven (7) handicapped spaces are required, these should be shown. --- provide number of company vehicles operating from the premises. --- provide inventory of all existing and proposed exterior lights. --- indicate the number of additional employees anticipated. --- provide a bike rack as required under Section 26.153(b) of the zoning regulations. --- indicate additional sewer allocation requested. --- the minimum landscaping requirement of $17,500 is not being met. Proposed landscaping is $15,500 short of this requirement. Plan should be revised to provide the required amount of landscaping. --- the applicant should be aware that the road impact fee for the addition is $0. --- the landscaping plan should clearly indicate all additional plants to be planted. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON/JOHN LARKIN - BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT - FINAL PLAT --- plat submitted is acceptable. NILE DUPPSTADT - RESUBDIVIDE PRD - SKETCH PLAN --- project statistics should be revised to note that only 55 single family lots are proposed. --- the two (2) private streets at the end of road "B" should be labeled. M E M O R A N D U M To: Joe Weith, South Burlington City Planner From: South Burlington Fire Department Re: Plans Reviewed for October 28, 1997 agenda Date: October 7, 1997 1) John Larkin/City of South Burlington Shelburne Road Acceptable 2) Lane Press 1000 Hinesburg Road Acceptable 3) Green Mountain Animal Hospital 1693 Williston Road Acceptable Dated 9/29/97 Dated 9/30/97 Dated 10/7/97 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Subdivision Application - SKETCH PLAN 1) Name, address, and phone number of: a. Owner of record LANDRUM c/o PHILIP DRUMHELLER 1000 HINESBURG RD; So. BURLINGTON, VT 05403 b. Applicant THE LANE PRESS P.O. BOX 130; BURLINGTON, VT 0540 C. Contact WALT ADAMS FACILITIES MGR 863-5555 x777 �(/y 2) Purpose, location, and nature of subdivision or development, including number of lots, units, or parcels and proposed use(s). 3) 4) 5) 47,000 SQ FT ADDITION TO EXISTING FACILITY AT 1000 HINESBURG ROAD � yl Applicant's legal interest in the option, etc. LEASES FROM LANDRUM property (fee simple, Names of owners of record of all contiguous properties KEITH M. WRIGHT BURLINGTON PROPERTIES LTD; NEW ENGTAND TFT & TEL CO, NVNFX ST. OF VT. DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION (I89) Type of existing or proposed encumbrances on property such as easements, covenants, leases, rights of way, etc. NO NEW EASEMENTS, EXISTING SEWER, WATER, POWER, & ACCESS TO PUMP STATION. 0 1 6) Proposed extension, relocation, or modification of municipal facilities such as sanitary sewer, water supply, streets, storm drainage, etc. 100' MENTION OF WATER LINE, 2 HYDRANT RELOCATIONS. 2 SEWER MH EXTENTIONS. 7) Describe any previous actions taken by the Zoning Board of Adjustment or by the South Burlington Planning Commission which affects the proposed subdivision, and include the dates of such actions: 1987 CHANGE OF USE 1993 EXPANSION 8) Submit five copies and one reduced copy (81 x 11, 8J x 14 or 11 x 17) of a Sketch plan showing the following information: a) Name and address of the owner of record and applicant. b) Name of owners of record of contiguous properties. c) Date, true north arrow and scale (numerical and graphic). d) Boundaries and area of: 1) all contiguous land belonging to owner of record, and 2) proposed subdivision. e) Existing and proposed layout of property lines; type and location of existing and proposed restrictions on land, such as easements and covenants. f) Type of, location, and size of existing and proposed streets, structures, utilities, and open space. g) Existing zoning boundaries. h) Existing water courses, wetlands, floodplains, wooded areas, ledge outcrops, and other natural features. i) Location of existing septic systems and wells. j) Location map, showing relation of proposed subdivision to adjacent property and surrounding area. k) All applicable information required for a site plan, as provided in the South Burlington Zoning Regulations, shall be submitted for subdivisions involving a commercial or industrial complex, multi -family project, planned unit development, or planned residential development. 9/19/97 (Signature) applicant or contact person Date The Lane Press is making application to expand its facility at 1000 Hinesburg Road. This expansion has two major components, a 47,000 square foot building expansion, and a site work portion, whose major component is the relocation of the driveway. The building expansion provides space for additional bindery, consolidation of mailing / shipping and distribution, and additional inventory space. The result of this expansion will be reduced number of storage trailers parked in the driveway and fewer exposed truck/trailers loading and unloading as another concealed truck dock is being created. We are not expecting a specific employment expansion, however the company's growth plan will involve increases in employment, primarily on second and third shift. Current three shift employment is 360, with about 90 on second and 50 on third shift. The site work relocates Lane Press Drive to within 30' of our southern boundary. The expansion, because of its location and size, eliminates 53 parking spaces in the existing parking lot, and would be less that 1 foot from the existing driveway on the south. The relocation allows for the creation of replacement and new parking spaces to increase our parking from 251 to 298 spaces (including six handicap spaces). The driveway relocation allows landscaping space to be maintained around the building, provides 3 landscaped trailer parking spaces, and enhances the visual separation of the driveway and building that exists now. This relocation also allows future expansions to occur with only minor site work changes. This construction will cause the relocation of the primary electrical service, as well as the incoming telephone service. A future southward expansion will necessitate the relocation of the water and sewer lines. We plan to use this opportunity to tree line the driveway, as well as expand on the successful tree planting between the parking areas. All existing nonshielded light fixtures, in our control, (400 watt HPS) will be replaced with a 250 watt BPS shielded fixture on a six foot arm. (see attached fixture cut). The extension arms are needed to move fixtures out of the larger landscaping plants and for better light distribution. The relocation of the driveway also allows for new road base and asphalt depths to handle the existing 70 million pounds of paper, and future increases to 140 million pounds. The new building and parking areas storm water will be split between an existing retention basin to the west of the facility and a new area being created to the south. Each uses grass area remediation and sand filtration to clean and delay the storm water per state of Vermont requirements. This project will provide 150' of 5' concrete sidewalk for use by employees to get to the employee entrance, reducing the number of pedestrian/vehicle conflicts from the current system of walking in the drive aisles. Submitted by: Walter M. Adams Jr. Facilities Manager, The Lane Press LIGHTING INCORPORATED 6" FXTENDED POLE MOUNT bULLt 11N AUL-Ib' 1%J)1 (49�mm) AREA �.�JTOFF FLOOD f SPEC. # WATTAGE CATALOG # (a) VOLTAGE (b) OPTIONS (Factory Installed) 175W MH AC2417 a _ M-120/208/240/277V F - Fusing 250W MH AC2425 ' _ T-120/277/347V Q - Quartz Standby (Relay w/150w quay lamp) 40OW MH AC2440-a — 5 - 480V -5P - External Mounted Photocell for 480V 250W HPS AC2525-a — 50D - 220/240V 50 HZ 40OW HPS AC2540 a _ 8 - 220V 60 HZ (a) Voltage, Housing. Reflector. Seamless, Prefinished semi specular die cast aluminum. diffuse & diffuse aluminum Finish color; bronze. wrapper, and semi specular Ballast aluminum sides. Capacitor Ignitor (Where —� required) �6" (152 mm)� \ 16" (406 mm) ' Lamp 1 (Included). 6.5" (165 mm) 1 1 Lamp - holder 1 1 --- Cord. 24" (610 , r Adjustable 1 mm long). 1 Backlight Shield. 0° to -30°. Ballast Extended Compartment r T— Lens Frame. Pole Mount Cover Die cast aluminum Finish color; bronze. door frame secures Patented lens; sealed with Hinge silicone gasket. Assembly Finish color; black. GENERAL DESCRIPTION: 600 forward throw sharp cutoff luminaire with adjustable backlight control for H.I.D. lamp, totally enclosed. Housing is seamless, die cast aluminum. Lens assembly consists of rigid aluminum frame, high impact, clear tempered glass, and backlight shield. Mount- ing consists of a 1.75" (44 mm) wide by 4.5" (114 mm) high by 6" (152 mm) long extruded aluminum arm. The arm is held in place with two 5/16" (8 mm) dia. mounting rods fastened to a steel backing plate inside the pole, and by two nuts inside the fixture hous- ing. Mounting rods are provided with sealing washers to prevent water leakage. ELECTRICAL: Fixture includes clear, mogul base lamp, 40OW MH utilizes the ED28 lamp. Porcelain enclosed, 4kv rated screw shell type lampholder with spring loaded center contact and lamp grips. Ballast assemblies consist of high power factor Constant Wattage Autotrans- former ballast. Fully encapsulated ignitor included on HPS assembly. (See voltage options). FINISH: Fixture supplied with a bronze durable acrylic thermoset powder finish, with excellent resistance to ultra violet, abrasion, fading and weather. ` LABELS: ANSI lamp wattage label supplied, visible during relamping. Listed in accordance with U.L. Standard #1572 for wet locations, and CSA certified. ACCESSORIES: FWG-16 - Wire Guard Button Photocell - for fixtures set to 120V, specify PC-41/1000VA; for fixtures set to 347V, specify PC*46/1000VA; for all other voltages, specify PC-42/1 OOOVA. E.P.A. RATING E.P.A..95 for single fixture with 0° tilt (Consult factory for E.P.A. rating on multiple units ). 16" (406 mm) AREA CUTOFF FLOODLIGHT APPLICATION DATA 100' W 6a 4a 20' a 2a 40' 60' 8a 10a 100' 80' 60' 40' 20' 0' 20' 4a 60' 80' 1 m 160' 140' 120' 100' 80' 60' 40' 20' 6' 20' an' EMENEEMEMIM SEEMEMEMBE MEMEMEM...,. 15iEFs1MEMEWW MEMO 1111119IR111111II 160' 140' 120' 100' 80' 60' 40' 20' o' 20' Candlepower distribution curve of Isofootcandle plot of 40OW MH Area Isofootcandle plot of 40OW MH Area 40OW MH 16" (406 mm) Area Cutoff Cutoff Floodlight at 25' (7.6 m) Cutoff Floodlight at 25' (7.6 m) mounting Floodlight. mounting height, 0° vertical tilt, with height, 0° vertical tilt, with backlight backlight shield removed. shield located for backlight cutoff. Pole Spacing Example Data 100' 60' 60' 4a 20' a 20' 40' 60' 80' 100' 160' 140' 120' 100' 80' 60' 40' 20' 20' 40' .:" 11411. 1 i®'f®-1, Isofootcandle plot of 40OW HPS Area Cutoff Floodlight at 30' (9.1 m) mounting height, 0° vertical tilt, with backlight shield removed. Catalog Lamp Pole Number Type Lumens Height 25' (7.6 m) AC2440-M 40OW MH 32,000 30' 19.1 n1) 25' (7.6 m) AC2525-M 250W HPS 27,500 30' (9.1 m) 25'(7.6 m) AC2540-M 40OW HPS 50,000 30' (9.1 m) a 100' 8060' 40' 20' 0' 20' 40' 60' 80' 100' "0' 140' 120' 100' 80' 60' 40' 20' 01 20' 40' Isofootcandle plot of 40OW HPS Area Cutoff Floodlight at 30' (9.1 m) mounting height, 0° vertical tilt, with backlight shield located for backlight cutoff. Pole Spacing Avg. Initial Footcandles X Y -2 Fix. Per Pole at 1800 95 (29.0 m) X 135' (41.1 m) 3.37 115' (35.1 m) X 165' (50.3 m) 2,20 95: (29.0 m) X 135' (41.1 m) 3.13 115(35.1 m) X 165'(50.3 m) 1.86 95' (29.0 m) X 135' (41.1 m) 5.69 115' (35.1 m) X 165' (50.3 m) 3.40 1 ) (-41jf- SITE PLAN CHECK LIST L� --- Lot drawn to scale --- Survey data (distances and lot size) --- Contours (existing and finished). --- Existing vegetation and natural features. -� Proposed landscaping (number, variety and size) equal or greater than the required amount in section 19.104 of the Zoning Regulations. Location of streets, abutting properties, fire hydrants, existing buildings. v -� Existing and proposed curb cuts, pavement, walkways. --- Zoning boundaries - Number and location of parking spaces. ( RV parking for multi- family projects over 25 units). v� --- Number and location of handicapped spaces as required. - Location of septic tanks (if applicable). -� Location of any easements. --- Lot coverage information: Building, overall and front yard. --- Location of site (Street # and lot #). --- North arrow ---/ Name of person or firm preparing site plan and date. -`- Exterior lighting details (must be downcasting and shielded). Dumpster locations (dumpsters must be screened). -,;,,,,,Existing and proposed sidewalks (public). --- Sewer calculation --- Height of new construction. -= Setbacks (residential district planned r.o.w., Interstate). -- �r C.O. Zone --�,/- Bike racks --- Traffic generation --- Traffic Impact fees --- PUD/PCD standards --- Airport Approach cone --- Outside storage/display --- F.A.R. --- Lot merger agreement --- Setback from planned r.o.w. --- If boundary line adjustment, need subdivision? --- Nonresidential use setback from Residential District — � 1 x I wdw,,,— DECEIVED SEP 3 0 1997 City of So. Burlington RTH 6DO .DO ' S 4.46 '55" E \ 'I l i i , , i , i i i 30 ' roadway easement 10 'snow renovo I easement - - - -------------------------- ------------------------- -- -- 423.00N83. 06' 48" E 1 w , i —500.00' S5.59 71'E , i' -- -- 61.D6 ' N 64. 16 ' 28" W - R= 4683.75 ' _ -- - - L= 490.01 1473.40 ' S 87-06 '43" E Lot size: 3 Buildings: Ex i s t i ng : 136 ,35 Addition: 47 ,14 ' TOTAL 193,491 AsphoIt area: Existing: 170.77 Addition: 23 ,1DC TOTAL 193.87 Wolkways,storoge: Existing: 5,950 Addition: 925 TOTAL 6,875 TOTAL Lot coverage: Total parking spaces 299 truck doors 9 Zoning District: Indus-riot/Open Space Notes: 1. Soundory a,deosanent inform= ion from a plan by Trudel l Consulting Engineers Inc. lost revised 8/29/86. 2. Dyn�oeer dr ivewooyy and build-^g i nformot ion f ram o p l m by Trude l l Comul t ing Engineers , Inc. 1 ost rev iced 9/ 157 3. Swift Street extent ion and re xated Lau Press access per plus by Trudel l Casulting Engineers. Im. P7 last revised 8/8/96 od PE ast revised 9/7/96. i , , i , I roadway to pump station i i .40 ' S 6.32 '07" W 764 Z9696 � 1000 H inesburg Road So. Bur I i ngton , Vermont 05403 Site Plan Is 1.0 Or B : Walt Adans Date: September 5. 1997 Revisions: Dote: o m u o e m m 2w 3M 4w Scale 1" = 60 ' 727 -00 ' S 83* 11 ' 0 1, - W -------------------------- — ------------------------------------ EW .... . ...... ..... . ....... . ......................................... . .. .. . .......... G................... ..... ................................... 40 ' Water , Gas & E I ectr is Easement DECEIVED SEP 3 0 1997 City of So. Burlington 10 'electrical easement 10 ' snow remova I easement 30 roadway easement 10 snow remova I easement S !,/bI Ali` 8" spr irk I w =to be — atom 3- ------ 364 36 6 ---------------------------------------------- r 31�----------------------------------------------------------- 1 L ------ ------- I....................... 3 1 64 160 ,n ------------- Dynopower \ Building Legend Existing contour �370 Proposed Contour T — Telephone -E- Underground electrical —w— Water line —Q— C I' . 74 C-e,� pFgg" 1000 '-inesburg Road So . Bur I i rgton , Vermont 05403 S i te P [an S 1-1 Dr. By. Wol t Ad-:j�kte: September 12, 1997 Revisions: Date ewer ne Gas I ine Scale 1" = 30 \--1473 ' S 87*06 '43" E SEP 3 o 1997 City of So. Burlington r Grave I roadway to pump stat ion r ; r r ; 8 15 .40 ' S 6*32 '07'' W ; --- Legend %366 Existing contour �370 Proposed Contour T Telephone E Underground electrical W Water line S Sewer line �i Gas I i ne 1000 H i nesburg Road So . Bur I i ngton , Vermont 05403 Site Plan S 1.2 Dr . By . Wa I t Adans Date: Septanber 12, 1997 Revisions: Date: ScaIe 1''= 30' 61.06 ' N 64* 16 ' 28" W h C . En I 7nI I w QED >EP 3 0 1997 f So. Burlington gw& PW,44 esburg Road )n , Vermont 05403 S 1.3 Date: September 12, 1997 Date I i 'ram i = 30 ' v Re lasted landsca: irq is shorn a ith a he.ogon surround ug the plant synbo I. N- I dscaP, ust the plant symbol . A I 1 oreos d iatr by the construct ion • ",'I' I I get 2" of topso i I . I we, f ert i I i=er. . =eed, and eu I ch as soon as puss ib le dv irq the corttr-1 ion process . �i Ooub le stoked hate e silt f cotes • i I I be p laced a lorq the mouth edge of the nee m--.et ion ord 3 ree ahoped tercel s i I I protect the tra iroge areas to the rorth of the project.. As the l— stare der drop inlets are unto I led the grote s i I I be covered with f i I •abr is ant i I pw ing Od grass hwe been estab I ished. Fit f1F,' NF6s'IR'9VW i Scale 1" = 60 ' I City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 June 1, 1993 Leonard Leclerc The Lane Press, Inc. P.O. Box 130 Burlington, Vermont 05402 Re: Addition, 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Mr. Leclerc: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision for the 4/13/93 Planning Commission approval. Please note the conditions of approval and the requirement that you obtain a Certificate of Occupancy prior to occupancy of the new addition. If you have any questions, 1 Encl JW/mcp please g' e me a call. i cerel , -, If L J Weith, City Planner City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 May 25, 1993 Leonard Leclerc The Lane Press, Inc. P.O. Box 130 Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Addition, 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Mr. Leclerc: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed please find a copy of the March 23, 1993 Planning Commission meeting minutes. If you. have any questions, please give me a call. S n erely, 1.4- J1 e Weith,' C ty Planner 1 Encl JW/mcp ... L. .._.. ,�. .,.. .... ...... .....:.... . »...r..,,,......,:...w.w.•.uaw�....wrwr.wus.wr�esam......w...ew...-:w..veaow..v..,w..,. ..... «:.�.�, .... City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 May 17, 1993 Leonard Leclerc The Lane Press, Inc. P.O. Box 130 Burlington, Vermont 05402 Re: Addition, 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Mr. Leclerc: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is a copy of the April 13, 1993 Planning Commission meeting minutes. Please note the conditions of approval and the requirement that a Certificate of Occupancy be obtained prior to occupancy of the addition. If you have any questions, please give me a call. S'n erely, ;-G C�iJ Jo Weith, Ci y Planner 1 Encl JW/mcp PLANNING COMMISSION 13 April 1993 page 2 C. Calkins," prepared bv Vermont Land Surveyors and dated 11 11 92, last revised 2/15/93, with the followinq stipulations: 1._ All previous approvals and stipulations which are_not super- seded by this a roval shall remain in effect,__ 2. The aEP-licant Wshall record the final flat in the South Bur- lington Land Records within 90 days or this approval is null and void The plat shall be si ned bythePlanningCommission Chair or�Clerk_prior�to�recordinqW-- Mrs. Maher seconded. The motion -then -passed unanimously - 4. Revised final plat application of Landrum for construction of a 15, 820 sq. ft. addition to an existing 120,537 sq. ft. build- ing used for manufacturing/printing, Lane Press, Hinesburg Rd: Mr. Drumheller said they have relocated the water line and a fire hydrant and have complied with the requirement for additional landscaping with Austrian pine, red maple and willows. Mr. Burgess noted the applicant is providing $6,500 in new landscap- ing and is requesting a $3,000 credit. Mr. Drumheller said they want to break ground as soon as they get their Act 250 approval, and they hope to be done by the end of June which is when the new printing press is due to arrive. Mr. -Austin -moved -the Planninq Commission approve -the -revised final plat application of Landrum for construction of a 1_5 820 -�- � sU.ftadditionWtoWan existing 120,537 sa. t.�buildinq used for manufacturin /printing as depicted on a two �page�set Wof plans, WW p22e_2n2 entitledW "The" Lane Press Inc_' ,.W1000 _Hinesburgr Road, South Burlin ton, Vermont "-prepared by Adams Construction__, _Inc, and dated 3/3/93 last revised 3 21/93 with the followin stip- ulations:_ 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not s_ u_per_- seded_by this approval shall remain in effect. 2. The Plannin Commission rants a $3000 credit for existing landscapiinq on -the site. _The -applicant shall post_ a $9500 land- scapi--n��bond priorto issuance of a zonin_gZbuildinq permit. The bond shall remain in effect for a period of three years to aa- sure that the landscaping takes_root�and-has-a�good -chance ofW surviving. 3. All ext_erior_lighting shall be downcastinq and shielded and shall_ not cast light beyond theW�ro�ert�Wline.An Chang in existing liqhtinq or new l 2htiin� shall_ be approved�b� the CiLZ Planner rior to installation.W PLANNING COMMISSION 13 April 1993 page 3 4. The aEeLicant shall record the final lat plans in the land records _within W90 dais -or this aroval�is�null and void. The plans shall be sgnod by the Planning Commission Chair or Clerk prior to recordin the plans. 5. The applicant shall_ obtain_ a Certificate_of OcSjuEancy from the Administrative Officer prior to occupancy of the new addition. 6. Any chan es to the final.plat plans shall require approval by the Plannin Commission. Mr. Sheahan seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Request of Skip Vallee to construct a single family house off Spear Street in an area of the Southeast Quadrant designated as restricted area, in accordance with Section 26.501(g) of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations: Mr. Vock said the property is 28 acres, with 17 of them in Shel- burne and the remaining in S. Burlington. Mrs. Maher asked the distance of the proposed house from the Velco line. Mr. Vock said it is approximately 400 feet. No other issues were raised. Mr. Austin moved the Planning Commission a rove the request of Skip Vallee to construct a sin le -family house in an area of the Southeast Quadrant_ District desi nated as restricted area as de- picted on_a plan entitled "Vallee Farm Subdivision,_ Parcel #1, prepared by Civil EEngineerinq Associates, Inc, and dated 10/24/ 91 last revised 10 30 92. It is the Commissi_on's_o inion that the proposed project meets the requirements ofSections25.501( ) and 26.606 ofWthe South Burlington�ZoninWReccfulations. Mrs. Maher seconded. WThe motion thenWpassed_-unanimously.� 6. Preliminary Plat application of Thomas Farrell for a planned commercial development consisting of a new bank building with drive-thru service, existing car wash, existing office building, existing restaurant/bar building and leased parking for the ad- joining Ben.Franklin business, Shelburne Road: Mr. Sheahan expressed concern that the Commission had just been handed the traffic report and has not had a chance to review it. He said he would not want to make a decision without such a re- view. Other Commission members agreed. Mr. Webster then presented the plan. The land is owned by 3 en- tities but will be put together as one entity. There is frontage on Hadley Rd, Farrell St, two frontages on Shelburne St. There M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Joe Weith, City Planner Re: April 13, 1993 agenda items Date: April 9, 1993 3) CALKINS RESUBDIVISION - CALKINS COURT - REVISED FINAL PLAT This project consists of the resubdivision of lots #3 and #6 of a six (6) lot subdivision. The purpose of the resubdivision is to correct an error made in the previous survey which determined the boundary between these two (2) lots and Burlington International Airport property. The Planning Commission reviewed the sketch plan on 2/23/93 (minutes enclosed). This property is located within the IC District. The two (2) lots involved are at the end of the Calkins Court cul-de-sac. Lot #3 is 5 Calkins Court and is developed with a burial vault business and lot #6 is 8 Calkins Court and is undeveloped. The Planning Commission will be reviewing a site plan May 11, 1993 to construct an animal hospital on lot #6. Lot size: This is the only aspect of the subdivision that is being affected by this application. Lot #3 is being reduced from 1.839 acres to 1.77 acres and lot #6 from 3.068 acres to 2.99 acres. The minimum lot size is 40,000 square feet (.918 acres) so both lots will continue to meet the minimum requirement. 4) LANE PRESS - ADDITION - REVISED FINAL PLAT This project consists of the construction of a 15,280 square foot addition to an existing 120,537 square foot building used for manufacturing/printing. The Planning Commission reviewed the sketch plan on 3/23/93 (minutes not available). This property located at 1000 Hinesburg Road lies within the I-O District. It is bounded on the north by New England Telephone and I-89, on the east and south by Dynapower and on the west by several single family residences. 1 "� i,,.� l,G„u.�. �rtsS ��/1-.,mac, � i ��a��/ t�-�-�...�••,._,., ,�-,.� �- Memorandum - Planning April 13, 1993 agenda items April 9, 1993 Page 2 Access/circulation: Access is via a r.o.w. from Hinesburg Roa(,d. No changes are proposed to either access or circulation. Circulation remains adequate. Coverage/setbacks: Building coverage is 10% (maximum allowed is 30%). Overall coverage is 23% (maximum allowed is 50%). Setback requirements will be met. Parking: A total of 122 parking spaces are required and 251 spaces are available including five (5) handicapped spaces. Landscaping: The minimum landscaping requirement for this project '/0 is $9,500. The Planning Commission at sketch plan review agreed ,0) that only $6,500 of additional landscaping would be needed and a $3,000 credit for existing landscaping would be approved. The,. $6,500 amount will be met. Plantings will include Austrian Pine, 3icoa Red Maple and Willow. Traffic: No additional traffic anticipated. The addition will house a replacement printing press with no additional employees. View Protection Zone: The easterly portion of the property lies within the Hinesburg Road - North View Protection Zone. No portion of the addition or any of the relocated plantings will be within this zone. Airport Approach Cone: The proposed addition lies within the Airport Approach Cone. Applicant must comply with the requirements of Section 19.45 of the zoning regulations. Sewer allocation: No additional allocation needed since there will be no additional employees. Lighting: No additional lighting proposed. Two (2) existing 1000 watt high pressure sodium lamps on 25 foot poles will be relocated. n �l 2 `� Y _ ANDSCAPwLo__PLAA1 FLO,t. POLO! b b ooft LO S.Wi \ \ \ b New SID£WAlbc-- , IV TO 0Sexge%L MPRbMT110N' ` -;EAISTIAI (e BU1Lb11V Cn - 120. ' I f20M =" SOL Tb 6' mv, ieAN UAIDEO 6UILDIN I. y I ' 3S 2�L0CATE, 8"DUCTILE ILLN VOATE¢ UNA- R Z HYDRANTS WIL%(INSIO£ ONtY) 0 Q PROPOSED ADDrt'ION TLOWL EL 37"t,D -yemcA1' u Z5'POLE I.DOOW HPS � I �� ti--E°_ftDDF D�ClK1N LINE. 1 -1' ,� I IZ" CoRI►U£L , 9 ^ PLANCMI Y lOc - ZV Z LA LIZ ASPHPALT'.PAVINln ZONc¢E.t£ PAD—...----- -+ _ IIP 1 "a tWISLf sThMU HAYBALES ' sx � ss �-- --- _ 17Z I 970 EXIbTINI. Rbbf DRAW _ __�_ � 6X`JTL f I 3k N D000000Q.00 O S0' 0 15 TyP / w / Z t2�Y ©TY COMMON NAW\E J11£ AlCTgS B _C 10 2£D. ONrC 3" 7 3 SU WN IL MARES 3. K 3 P4-D MAPLE S" S AVST2IAN PIAlB 10, AvsTeIRN. PINE Y IS Lr-D: MAPLE. Z-21h" -N+:W- -.225 311S Z. -R 6 WtL-LOW15 i" _ - titw- 20o 1200 9 WN\CE ZV"CE 6` � �sb NOTES: I. ;ALL PLANTINbS Si4OWN A4E RF-L0(-kTI=O bN Slrra- �m6W LoNSiQUCT10N AREA,, EXCEPT AS NDTf-D !TARTS Tt{£ 4MEP.L� £RC)SION CoNT¢OLS..- `. Fl\VJS' BE. IN PLAZA _.- 3. E.VALIot,3 GbNTRbLS IAIILL 61✓ IN50*-cTED DAILY WIT1 tL£PA1R.S AS N£ED£D 4 ALL SLOPES PVOPOS�D AR£ I oN S OtL Lf_SS � [51QVB£b APLE.AS WILL. ISE &QNN-D,LINrED. FEUILIZE.D AND 5nDf-O AS SOON W5 POSSIBLE.. b„DNCE \1£InAT1CN COVE¢ ESTA61L1S11£5 NO LONG T-Fe-n fZoS10A1 _. _. CONTROLS NEE(SEb. 7. LANDSU\P\Alin VALVES PRDUIDcD BY NORTH CODURLY L0.NDSCAPIN(u, ---3]b. �l(15fIN(e CONTbU2 P2OP051°D LcNTbuiL N 57b SPOT Pe0P03£O ELEVATIOW - EELOCAFED POLE Z-T W ITT IDOLS w 11PS O® =PZLDCAMD LAN135MPIN(c A1Pr\ ASPHALT PAVivatp F 1 L...u...—�11 MAV5TINb ASPHALT MLbCA('EO 8" WATeC LINt O® UF-W LC.AI(15LP PI N 1. PLO \I JT S RECEIVED MAR 2 4 1993 City of So. Burlington J 2 H 2 r a 2 O cj Od I ODD 2 10 eQ V :J N a 00 4 to 8 d J 2 I. V' 0 u1 'd Z d � Q 0 9 QJ Z 2 2 — J J a coco N UTILITIES LANDSC AP IN (a ow�oK�o owr■ CJ�ARU1 10� 1993 40 JO• NO. -930 S _. S2 OM •wam's LV I—. 1 = 1 NULL I N/F NSW E-Wal-AND TPTLE.PHONE. I 6I.o6' / Na9'Ifo•2B'W Afass 7s' L• 190.ol r HoUL IN MILK S 83 09'32• \p4 STATe- OP VERMOtfT - 114\.25• -- SUT£(LSfATe- S9 I � iCLOCAf LD r�20' SfcWER GAS£MINT �- P, ---rum?STATION- N ID• WAT¢¢ I I ,f� ��I EASEMENT 5: ` £XISTINb BUILD%Nfs I STOLMWATEZ PON D tZO. S37P I� I CON SECVATION 2D' SEWEL f20POliD ADDITION I - I I / EASEMENT ZONES So• $ACH � SIDE of CEAITE.R— - G - 15� S 20 i I 25' o I N /} -. Lt1..00AfLD j �i I O/1•• I WATER LIWI. M n(AT£D N NIf K4N1 \NRILHT . (ovs WAftrL £LECTRIL (9 - IEMEWTS �+ EA F� 20' J£W£2 icGSLHrENT 1G'£LIa CTLICAL EAS Mi-� / I 5O' D21VE_ �SS1-3HCW.. ST02Rlot tP.SB11T_=y/ HL31 LDI► /y 1173.40' S i7° OG 4 S 17f 0 100 2cc top N11= v' APOWEZ INC AMD%. \Nt,T tb(oL YESTfZ 4LT£A 2UNWA`( APPQOFU-A A2%A. C�� MAR 2 4 1993 City of So. Burlington LOT DtaTA : 31.2(. A I. 3(ol. (.as"' TOTAL But LOIK)US Ise—fis7t, 10.0%% TOTAL ASPH1a LT 170.7./14' 12.54% TOTAL STOQKot, WALKS 51950%, TOTAL COV EILNIv e_ TOTAL PAftkINU SPACES 251 15 HCP) TOTAL T2•UGIC DOORS 9 LON 1Nt4 M INTILILT t SUDUSTQ-IAL / OP£U SPFCE. E SWALE ELECTRICAL LIWL Ufa WATEfL LINL SEWER LINT. NATJLAL Cak% LIN! CONLQ.ETL MONUMENT PAVED WMAS ?AVINU TO Be. awAoJfLa NEW MUP-MOOT -: OUNDA{rY hND £f�SE.MENT IyfpRMAT10N fR.OM _ A PLAN V 7ILQDELL COt.)SULT INfo Ma INEERS -AWL , LASE-[LEEVISED 6/Z9/S(a REVI01W4A •V a- a• 9a Y-DWAY♦ NTOL. 3-2L93 WA SITE- 'PLAN UJ ?DAMS ON�GK�O pI.T■ mplzU1. "All 5 wu� to _ Jo■ No. _93ob - �N��T SI City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 April 9, 1993 Leonard Leclerc The Lane Press, Inc. P.O. Box 130 Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Addition, 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Mr. Leclerc: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting and comments from City Engineer Bill Szymanski, Fire Chief Jim Goddette and myself. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, April 13, 1993 at 7:30 P.M. to present your request. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Si cere-L r J e weith, C ty Planner Encls JW/mcp PAGE #2 3. 10 5. Ong Chittenden Bank Mai( Drc..i v e R et o catio n Tuesday Apnif- 13,1993 AGENDA Dou et SPLeet This ptan was n.eviewed by the bike department and .the �ottow.i.ng must be co,vAec ted bon emergency pnotec t%on; A. The one way bypass must be no .leas then 12' wide 6or our equipment B. Due to the upgrade on Do&6et Street and the change o4 the main enttcance at Zea,6t one hydrand 6hou,P-d be in,stat2Ped on the paopehty by the main entAance. Lee and 9 PatAic-i.a Cat iiin6 P,%o j ec t# 9242 Ca klf-'ns CouAt Lot #6 At thin time I do not see a probtem with the .tot #6 but ptan6 witt have to be tev-i.ewed when they ate heady to buitd.i.ng a buitding on the pnopetr ty. New Bank Buitd-i.n.g Project #93108 0' Det2. Pa)Lk Pta�i i�Aab reviewed and the bottowing should be done {o,7 emeAgeney protection; A. The main water 6 ystem 6rom Fwftett Road and the 6aetory matt shoutd be a .hoop 6ystem. B. A second hydrant shoutd be in.6tatted neat the new bank and the WVNV buitd,ing. Lane Press 1000 Hinesburg Road Addition Plans were reviewed by this department and plans dated March 10, 1993, last revised on 3/23/93 were found to be acceptable. M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission 4From: William J. Szymanski, City Engineer Re: rreliminary Comments April 13, 1993 agenda items G Date: March 19, 1993 550 HINESBURG ROAD OFFICE BUILDING 1. The existing healthy trees especially along the easterly property should remain. 2. Plan dated 2/18/93 prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere Architects is acceptable. 3. Architect for this project also did City Hall. Planning Commission should ask him why the roof leaks. CALKINS RESUBDIVISION - CALKINS COURT Subdivision plan dated 11/11/92, last revised on 1/11/93 prepared by Vermont Land Surveyors is acceptable. VALLEE FARM SUBDIVISION - SPEAR STREET 1. A driveway 2600 feet long will be expensive to maintain. 2. Drive will require additional culverts which should be shown on the plans. THE LAii- PRFSS, 1000 HINESBURG ROAD Plan dated March 5, 1993 prepared by Adams Construction, Inc. is acceptable. ~ he f3urlington_lfree Jre�, SOUTH BURL HQTON PUBPLANN1140 P.O. Box 10 OMMIS?P C Burlington, VT 05402-0010 ton Buriingwdl The South Planning Commission hearing Cat hold a Public South Burlington Room, the Hall, Conference porset Street. South 57I Burlington,e13 1993 at AP i Tuesday, to consider the I p11NVOICE NO. START DATE 7:30 P. - L S following: a y 7 / fP- 1) plication Revised Finaof nd�lat um or a 15,82 o0 PUBLICA71ON _ construction foot add�710 aguarne square 120,53 u$ed ., existing for r"'' buildin L 1 1 TELEPHONE NUMBER SALESPERSON' foot rintin9, manufacturin9�Hmesi Lane _Press, Road. TIMES LINES CLASSIFIC l—{{ 2) Revised Final ciat Cal- 1 Patricia f of tinsamend a t" six ADD. CHG/CRD. BOX CHARGE tins roved ■ SA previously ial ivi- lot comm0Court ubd (6) Calkins ' j( - sio, Plat aPPli 3) preliminaryoTomas Farrell � cation �anned commercial for a P of - _- T j ment consisting develop with new bank building Service, � _ .. a driveA I 9h - exist yt{tti!r;• existing it exist- ba ing ott'Yestaurant/r I n and leased . Be 1ining .... _. _.v .. _ _... bngark- ao9thbusanss, shel- Franklin e burne Road. Copies of the application available for public are at the inspection on City Hall. south Burling William Burgess Chairmaurlington South B planning Commission March 27, 1993 dj' 6.603 4. Two or more contiguous or no -contiguous lots within the AgR and R1 Districts may be combined for development as a PUD-RR if the Planning Commission determines that such combination will enhance the open space objectives of this section. Maximum development on any lot shall be the permitted density for the AgR District times the total acreage for the combined lots. A base density may be established by the Planning Commission using the formula in Section 19.152. A c) Approval is require on all applicable criteria by both the Planning Commission and City Council. Modification of Standards The following requirements of he zoning regulations may be modified in accordance th the conditions and objectives of this section: 18.00 and 18.108. hstanding this se'Sections ion, maximum density s all be overned by Sect n 6.501b. ARTICLE -VI RESID\;FNTIAL-1 DISTI CT (R1) 7.00 Purpose A Residential-1 District is hereby fo�ied in or� encourage low -density ingle-family residential district is located in\areas where low d sities necessary to protect•sc views and to p ovide compatibility with adjt natural areas. ny expressly permitted arohibited, except th allowed as conditionals. 7.10 Permitted Uses r to This es not hich are The following uses are permi�ted in the Residential 1 District. 7.101 Single-family dwelling 7.102 Customary accessory uses and buildings including private garages and recr ational facilities such as tennis courts and swimmin pools. 17 ��ANF PP�sS z��r��.� CuC��r� /G13b t>- ax> 10(_2 qy(l)( alb( ..... ...... ... M E M O R A N DlU M To: South Burlington Planning Commi From: Wi liam . Szymanski, City Engi Re: Pr liminar Comments April 27, Date: Mar h 26, 19 NO. TEN FARM 1. With th along the Fa 2. Plan dat ELL STREET sion eer 993 agenda items commercial development thin the area a sidewalk all Street ontage is wa ranted. 5/28/86 is ac eptable. AGWAY, BERARD DR VE Plan dated 9/25/8 prepared by Pinkham Engineering is acceptable. r Memorandum - Planning March 23, 1993 agenda items March 19, 1993 Page 11 Setback requirements are being metC The motel addition will not exceed the height limitations so it is setback the 65 foot minimum from the residential district. Parking: No changes will be made to the parking. This project requires 118 parking spaces and 94 spaces are being provided. This 20% shortfall was approved by the Planning Commission due to shared parking opportunities. Landscaping: The conditions of the 6/9/92 approval relating to landscaping have been incorporated into this plan. These include increasing the size of the Norway Maples to 3-3 1/2" caliper, substituting 61- 8' Austrian Pine for Cedar and additional Norway Maples along the southern boundary. The $12,934 short fall has been reduced to $6,180. Traffic: No change in traffic generation since there will be no change in restaurant seats or motel rooms. Sewer: No changes Lighting: No changes Building height: Building elevations now show the motel addition with a maximum building height of 35 feet. This was a condition of the 6/9/92 approval. -- Other: --- a snow storage easement has been recorded allowing the applicant to store snow on the 45 Swift Street property. 6) LANE PRESS - ADDITION - SKETCH PLAN This project consists of the construction of a 15,280 square foot addition to an existing 120,537 square foot building used for manufacturing/printing. The Planning Commission approved a 40,320 square foot addition to this facility on 12/9/86 (minutes enclosed). 11 Memorandum - Planning March 23, 1993 agenda items March 19, 1993 Page 12 This property located at 1000 Hinesburg Road lies within the I-O District. It is bounded on the north by New England Telephone and I-89, on the east and south by Dynapower and on the west by several single family residences. Access/circulation: Access is via a r.o.w. from Hinesburg Road. No changes are proposed to either access or circulation. Circulation remains adequate. Coverage/setbacks: Building coverage is 10% (maximum allowed is 30%). Overall coverage is 23% (maximum allowed is 50%). Setback requirements will be met. Parking: 251 parking spaces are available on the site including five (5) handicapped spaces. Applicant should provide the maximum number of employees in the building at any one time and the number of company vehicles operating from the premises. This information is needed to determine compliance with current parking standards. Landscaping: It is staff's understanding that the cost of the addition will be $500,000 which results in a minimum landscaping requirement of $12,500. Applicant should confirm the projected construction cost. No additional landscaping is proposed. The existing landscaping in the area where the addition is proposed will be relocated in the vicinity of the addition. Staff. - recommends that additional landscaping be planted in the form of a mixture of evergreen and deciduous trees along the south side of the access road between the sewer line and the property line. Traffic: No additional traffic anticipated. The addition will house a replacment printing press with no additional employees. View Protection Zone: The easterly portion of the property lies within the Hinesburg Road - North View Protection Zone. No portion of the addition or any of the relocated plantings will be within this zone. Airport Approach Cone: The proposed addition lies with the Airport Approach Cone. Applicant must comply with the requirements of Section 19.45 of the zoning regulations. Sewer allocation: No additional allocation needed since there will be no additional employees. 12 Memorandum - Planning March 23, 1993 agenda items March 18, 1993 Page 13 Lighting: No additional lighting proposed. Two (2) existing,1000 watt high pressure sodium lamps on 25 foot poles will be relocated. Other: --- sheet S2 should have a north arrow. --- the lot data on sheet S1 should indicate the zoning district as Industrial and Open Space. 13 PUBLIC HEARING SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION The South Burlington Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington City Hall, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on Tuesday, April 13, 1993 at 7:30 P.M. to consider the following: 1) Revised Final Plat application of Landrum for construction of a 15,820 square foot addition to an existing 120,537 square foot building used for manufacturing/printing, Lane Press, Hinesburg Road. 2) Revised Final Plat application of Patricia Calkins to amend a previously approved six (6) lot commercial subdivision, Calkins Court. 3) Preliminary Plat application of Thomas Farrell for a planned commercial development consisting of a new bank building with drive -through service, existing car wash, existing office building, existing restaurant/bar building, and leased parking for the adjoining Ben Franklin business, Shelburne Road. Copies of the applications are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall. William Burgess Chairman, South Burlington Planning Commission March 27, 1993 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Subdivision Application - FINAL PLAT 1) Name of Applicant Landrum 4 2) Name of Subdivision The Lane Press 3) Indicate any change to name, address, or phone number of owner of record, applicant, contact person, engineer, surveyor, attorney or plat designer since preliminary plat application None 4) Indicate any changes to the subdivision, such as number of lots or units, property lines, applicant's legal interest in the property, or developmental timetable since preliminary plat application: None except for minor revisions based on staff recommendations S) Submit five copies and one reduced copy (11 x 17) of a final plat plus engineering drawings and containing all information required under Section 202.1 of the subdivision regulations for a minor subdivision and under Section 204.1(a) for a major subdivision. 6) Submit two draft copies of all legal documents required under Section 202.1 (11) and (12) of the subdivision regulations for a minor sudivision and under Section 204.1(b) for a m�a?jpr sub vis'* in. 3/24/93 (Signature) applicant or contact person Date City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 March 19, 1993 Leonard Leclerc The Lane Press, Inc. P.O. Box 130 Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Addition, 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Mr. Leclerc: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is an agenda for next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting and comments from City Engineer Bill Szymanski, Fire Chief Jim Goddette and myself. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, March 23, 1993 at 7:30 P.M. to present your request. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincerely, 16� oe6?/ Joe Weith,R6Q City Planner Encls JW/mcp 3I23'S3 IBC mL� Gfao OF THE LANE pRESSY INC. Printers since 1904 PHILIP M. DRUMHELLER President March 24, 1993 Mr. Joe Weith City Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Dear Joe: Per your request the following is parking information that you requested: First Shift Employees: 180 (includes office staff) Second Shift Employees: 81 Third Shift Employees: 44 Number of company owned vehicles: 2 Pickup Trucks If you need any additional information please call me. Sincerely, PMD/wkw P.O. Box 130 Burlington, VT 05402 (802)863-5555 Shipping Address: 1o00 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Preliminary Memorandum - City Engineer March 23, 1993 agenda items March 8, 1993 Page 2 5. Trees mush: not be planted on top of water and sewer lines. 6. Drainage lines from City streets that cross lots and vacant land shall include easements for maintenance and repair. L&M PARK,SHELBURNE ROAD Plan for the above referenced project with latest revision dated February 12, 1993 is acceptable. SILVER PALACE RESTAURANT, WILLISTON ROAD New addition shown on plans dated 12/9/92 prepared by Mike Dugan is acceptable. LANE PRESS, HINESBURG ROAD Relocated water main should be at least 20 feet from the proposed expansion. Any future expansion could perhaps go in an easterly direction, this would require the water main to again be relocated. The owner should consider moving the main further east. Plan shows' - planting on top of water main. This is not permitted. Memorandum - Fire Chief March 23, 1993 agenda items March 8, 1993 Page 2 5. LANE PRESS ADDITION - 1000 HINESBURG ROAD This department has reviewed the plans for the proposed addition. We recommend that the two (2) hydrants next to the addition be relocated to the southerly side of the access road. LA 0 — rnrnz � b I Z z rTl J� LA -1 v H S't133N1 %fV3 �N117C�S(Va7 _T34(��I 1 -},B IY�a-�' Wgd3 f4O11tl\N-40S 1QN4 41,73VQNI1� lastwW3d ail Q.L G)Nl ntli ---. cVaae a-anvj - ----- -:: _ ...-- -:.: am- �3 M35- _3CU7_TJad51191____----..-. nn 3NII -VtM 17313 -+'litJ'��tID.1Si1Q1`ff' s�71�1s1��i�lI�D3= �a�rl S7 ;Sz s3�vas �Nlxatld _ �aioi ybb' _ ,.DSV.S _ T?11`CM'9�lD01Y lV1IIl y'bSZI ,�ILL'GLI _._ ---- 11VNdt�-1tl1o1 /.10'OI sLi4'�7CI ._ S�INIa�InB Td101 ,oSH9'19F'r- r�2`1E- �FSC -S VE �1tl 1SZI31PtS 1c4Ow'a3I\ 3Q- -a1't1S uol5uilan8 'oS jo Apo £661 I 18VW (PA'tIDIT�1 rr3a'a sradoaaae --,+.V MCICl'L U31773iS�'S 3� 1c�m _ XtTddZ�� Xtm<a4gz XR- all c• 7ryI1 aalntn • aatnaTa N I I, O 1 N3W3Sf3 33MiC ,OZ I / Q 0 �02951— ' 'aata3� so teals 11Y3W3LY3 /� I„I NOI _ Pl Ol110aV O3Sod0�! X77V T3NCZ _ I1t1A73S 1VG7 W ,pLES'aZn r / ! �NIaII(1g 'g11C 17C3! O NOd Ti1tlMViaO1S' t Aa \ I 1n3W�Stf3 ./n` \ in _ (7) 1NwmmxR o91V7C1a7 -.64,bSosg Q b 711� �`\}\` SNZW3SY�a'dM3S OZ� AS:L- 3 �� ... •.g2' 1b I1 M,ZC.bOs`8 -.Inaa_fit -.naK- \ , -z a1� 73IVONd3'1+si-IIIYV1%lV3 N('3N 31F-i 311VN 1 - I CC,7 n-I m � ^V � 1 w 0 0 �J'.1STmu. SALL ' / y I slew. 1ror wlax � � �`---Lgwcat�e ZS' Poles.. 1DCCYNI NP] ,dam I VEOCAMO Ir _D21JE."PVEL _bEWEE.R7MP3T31.TJ0I4 7.lSTIN(. BUILC11T1A:- -E'K13T1►14 SE`N£1' MIA 1 Mom U►IDEE 6UILDlN14._ Al I - _--JS—?£;IDCATE S" DJCTIL£ It01d wvmm UNE i 1 HYDRANTS r + 1 N -GDAKEES>£ GUtB (1 pas IQfc ONLY 3KOPoseD AoomoN -_ AT$D 25'POtS IDDOW "PS 1 �-Root/ vmlm LINE__. fir, � - +: � a I [Z'-%IIABEC.-.3�PlANiIV�IY -- i .... Zit-1_LA1EtL -ASPIi N.0 PAVINV s Do' Ibc tL»aceESE PAD.. � - qP � i rrr)Ittr=-5TA1cT�0 HAYSwLCS. I � j SS / i72 / r QGCf DQA1N nUQ1LG I � � l �_1T _ Y 3� l 41 l --._---- Tay-- a" CDMAADN NNME J11£ Na7T£S 3 W "ITE- PINE SJ AA D- MA .PLtS MAPLE --SARIo£NT Ct ,? _AVSTUkM S' 3• _3" -- ._. `Y �_ _ --�-OTf- s I. R_.R_s>NTINLS SHOWN P.4E YELocAT£n Ou SIT£ -Pzow ZopSTeVG10N AREA--_-_--_— Z. ,Tkm-s TAEL ii#YBALD SION.-Co NMat- --DAUST:BE. 7N PLAGE-L-= _--- 3. SW1.10 i CC/.1TDMS WILL BE IN YDECTI=D DSILY , \U%.m 4dcPN.12S 31kLL SLOPS P2DP61vr,-D ARE- I ON 3 UL IRSS SYt} 6�6 = AR£#51AtIlL gE GRADED,lIM£D£ZTILIZf D AND St£D£D _A3-50ou AD PO4$SI6LE_ - --- - - b: of�C� U£foATION __GOV££ ESTA6IL\SHtS tjo_ Utj Tfe.W £¢dSlOwl CONTROLS A7£EDED. -=�20—_-. --. 0— p _ - PROP05eM - C_.NTOWL �7D - ___ SroT PeDPOi£D iLEV A?10N o%LP-DZS 0 w YE]DCATzD - V,1ITR " O® �LLDCASED:. LAIVn5CAPINte-:..._... ___ © ►.c W wSPI►ALT PAV %W o - -- EZLOCATEC S" WRTeX U►1t. — RE CE.-N L� MAR 11 1993 City of So. Burlington • ■ J 2 H a 2 tjj O d ca 2 o J d a?iW!!! _UNLITI£S 1-MMSIL IN(n W. ADAPnS cw.c.c.o C+MA¢W to. 2943 .c.0 JO. MO. .w..r S2 PLANNING COMMISSION 9 DECEMBER 1986 2 2. It is the applicant's responsibility to record the final plat within 90 days or this approval is null and void. It shall be approved by the Planner and signed LL the Chairman or clerk of the Commission prior to recording. Mrs. Maher seconded and all voted in favor. 3. Site plan application of Lane Press for construction of a 40,320 square foot addition to the existing building at 1000 Hinesburg Road. former Semicon property) Mr.prumi,,clJae said that Lane Press was a printing company which prints magazineSand is now located in Burlington. They wish to come into the Semicon building and add a 40,320 square foot addition. They plan to move the existing road on the east further to the east approximatly 140 feet. Construction would begin sometime in March with the move planned for July. Mrs. Lafleur noted that they more than met the number of parking spaces and that no additional parking would be needed. Landscaping and sewerage are also adequate. They will be asked to contribute to the fund for improvement of the intersection at Hinesburg Rd. and Kennedy Dr. Mrs. Lafleur said that the policy regarding the sidewalk had not been completed so she wasn't sure how this applicant's amount to the fund will be computed. She suggested that since they didn't have actual frontage on Hinesburg Rd. that the 50 foot right-of-way be used to find the figure. All agreed. Mrs. Hurd asked if the front of the building will be changed to face Hinesburg Rd. Mr.Drumheklec said that it would not but that the large nitrogen tank which is now seen from Hinesburg Rd. will be removed. Mr. Jacob asked if they used any of the chemicals that Semicon now used. Mr.Dr0mt%e-Iles said they wouldn't be using the same chemicals. They use printing ink, solutions to wash presses and photographic chemicals. These are all trucked out. ,e Mrs. Maher asked if what was going into the sewer was OK. Mrs. Lafleur said that that would be reviewed at the Act 250 hearings. They will have to get a discharge permit. Mr. Meador said that that has already been approved. Mrs. Maher asked if our landfill can hold the amount they will »PLANNING COMMISSION 9 DECEMBER 1986 3 be sending to it. Mrs. Lafleur said she didn't know. Mr. Dcumhe&,-said that it was generally office waste. Mr. Adams said that the numbers used for the Act 250 hearings were 7 cubic yards each day. Mrs. Maher said she thought this might be the biggest single generator of waste in the city. Mrs. Hurd asked if there was going to be any outside storage. Mr. Adams said that everything was stored inside including the dumpsters and the trash compactors. Mrs. Maher asked about outside lighting. Mr. . I- said that the current lights will remain. Two lights that are where the addition is to go will be moved to the east. He said that the lights that are there now tend to scatter light outside the parking lot. Mrs. Lafleur asked if Act 250 will ask them to change these. said he wasn't sure. He said that they were going to tell the Act 250 hearing that they will be willing to shut off the front (facing the interstate) office lights after hours. Mr. Dooley asked about lot coverage. Mrs. Lafleur said that their coverage was about 21% which is within the standards. Mr. Dooley said that the footprint of the addition looked bigger than 40,000 square feet. Mr. Adams said that it actually was 45,000 but that part of it was a covered garage so they used it's square footage when they calculated the paved area. Mrs. Lafleur said that it isn't usually done that way but that the numbers still all come within our regulations. Mr. Belter said that he would like to see the plans state the actual square footage of the addition. Mrs. Hurd asked if their address will change when the Swift St. extension is built. Mrs. Lafleur wasn't sure. She said there was a problem with signage as their sign would noW be off their property. She said that Mr. Ward suggested that there might be a sign for the whole development up where the existing Semicon Sign is. Mr. Belter asked if the piece of land created by the right-of-way road and along Hinesburg Rd. was of a conforming size. Mrs. Lafleur sadd that it was not a separate lot and was part of the other lot created when this land was subdivided. Therefore it was conforming. Mr. Dooley moved to approve the site plan application of The Lane Press, Inc., for construction of a 40,320 square foot addition to the former Semicon building at 1000 Hinesburg Road as depicted on a 3 page set of plans entitled "Plot Plan of land PLANNING COMMISSION 9 DECEMBER 1986 4 of Semicon Components, Inc. Optioned to The Land Press, Inc.," prepared by Adams Construction Company, Inc., dated 11/19/86 with the following stipulations: 1. A $15,000 landscaping bond shall be posted prior to permit. 2. Prior to permit a $5227 intersection fee shall be paid the Kennedy Drive Hinesburg Road intersection improvement based on the 82 trip ends'generated by this use. toward fund 3. A fee shall be paid toward the Hinesburg Road sidewalk fund in accordance with a formula established �j the Planning Commission. It shall be based on 50 feet of frontage for this property. 4. The building permit shall be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void. Mr. Belter seconded and all voted in favor. 4. Site plan application of the Davis Company for conversion of the building for use b.L Mid -State Trucking, 10 Farrell Stroet. Mrs. Lafleur said that this has been approved before but f,,r different uses. It is back before the Planning Commission because of change in use. This type of use also needs Zoning Board approval since it is a conditional use. Mr. Ward presented it to the Zoning Board at last nights meeting. The Zoning Board felt they would like to talk to the applicant in person so they tabled it until their next meeting. Mr. Dooley asked if it always is the case that a change in use comes before the Commission for a new site plan. Mrs. Lafleur said that that is what is written in the zoning document. Mr. Dooley asked where the use is recorded. Mrs. Lafleur said that the use should appear in the motion of approval. Mrs. Lafleur said there were two changes from the other sire plan. The first was additional parking in the rear. This parking is next to a drainage area and Mr. Szymanski would like to have this area piped and the drainage plan approved by nim. The second change was a new curb cut on Swift St. at the b,,ttom of the hill. Mrs. Lafleur and Mr. Szymanski asked that thi;; curb cut be looked at closely. Mr. Williams said that these improvements are not required for Mid -State, it just makes it easier for the trucks to get in and out. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Subdivision Application - SKETCH PLAN 1) Name, address, and phone number of: a. Owner of record t Landrum 182 Harbor Road, Shelburne, VT 05482 (802)985-9466 b. Applicant Same C. Contact Leonard Leclerc ,�3 2) Purpose, location, and nature of subdivision or development, including number of lots, units, or parcels and proposed use(s). 15,820 sf proposed addition, one story, manufacturing. (Pressroom) 3) Applicant's legal interest in the property (fee simple, option, etc. Fee simple 4) Names of owners of record of all contiguous properties See attached. 5) Type of existing or proposed encumbrances on property such as easements, covenants, leases, rights of way, etc. Only easements to: Green Mountain Power, New England Telephone, and South Burlington water and sewer. (See plan) 1 6) Proposed extension, relocation, or modification of municipal facilities such as sanitary sewer, water supply, streets, storm drainage, etc. Relocation of water main to 2 hydrants 7) Describe any previous actions taken by the Zoning Board of Adjustment or by the South Burlington Planning Commission which affect the proposed subdivision, and include the dates of such actions: None 8) Submit five copies and one reduced copy (8 1/2 x 11, 8 1/2 x 14 or 11 x 17) of a Sketch plan showing the follow- ing information: 1) Name of owners of record of contiguous properties. 2) Boundaries and area of: (a) all contiguous land belong- ing to owner of record and (b) proposed subdivision. 3) Existing and proposed layout of property lines; type and location of existing and proposed restrictions on land, such as easements and covenants. 4) Type of location, and approximate size of existing and proposed streets, utilities, and open space. S) Date, true north arrow and scale (numerical and graphic). 6) Location map, showing relation of proposed subdivision to adjacent property and surrounding area. (Signature) applicant or contact person 3/8/93 Date 2 c=M _NpiLTft -HOLE IN 20CK 114\. L O CU S I "z I Krw F- N!F K4N% NILIWAT _ I --------------- f i �90' (AA], WAftA iL£CTRIL � CIO �-' EA]I=MENT3 ID 9 / p [/ I � SO' D21V!< it I �n swoW aMw.Ar.t aAsenY NIF NEW F-WaLh.MD TOU'PNONE I 1■0 !� �Wo 2■■ a■O VOWE2 INC — NrT2M%. wtaT ejuaL Y£STYiCT%O 21)NW1k`f APVQOAC.11 A¢.1111A STATE C�F VER.MOtNT S.A1T£2S('AT1= S9 `PUM? STHTION A MBA 09 1993 City of So. Burlington OLINDAQY hND EAaiMtNT INfO¢MATION FQaM _,A PLAU eY TY.VDELL GDAISULTIN(c EN(oINEERS 151L.. LAST REVISED .6[21/66 SIT£ PL?.N1 1 W . ND AMS 1 _MR2CA 5.1113 ■nuu �o■ wo. 1305 Si a• ■w■■t■ —g 1ti � LAT.IDSCAP IIJb PLAN �coJE2 LTe¢ry.'DItPIN Z UYEES F1LG2 fAD�-�L Ot71L INu Cb r.]]CIWCTION I 0 _ 3 S _ b my Q ppIOLmfbIMELT ;h 1AM Lem L.UZD YBL mwe- OCILA¢cn; �. f4d1UT £N1E7--�C,\\ -... , • •l �.-. -p C�/,j") .if t Tiri,�. FBI E LT \ I I �I �I 71 TO Puh.P • \ � STPRIOIJ IF �(i 3 PI I \ I S114k1D ._ 45,;;y AwYbAlss EMPLDr'£ � AI A fel ILI \ - - NNT W Z LINLTO \ 1 LA (.fyisD 1 " D u CT ILG. 1.�tIS[ItJu TRULk GAYS sA ' ?%� I�,4 a ; ; IS. PS Z.0" ADDITION - L-EL 173.0r _ S 1Tf—� PL NI.1 '= Ad c . •i., I � '� � � -H1AY. SLGPL 1 01J 3 &LAOG, L1MG. fECTILIZE 3f8D AS 5.00M hS PoSSMLE -1330P DPLIAI LING \j ¢CL DS WAIT¢ IY/ t� 1 f I � DEAIN M k£Y v'(Y COMNWN AlOeNr.1=. SIZE NOTES G [n BUENII.IIs BUSH Q' G 1 MUuo PIAIES 30" -.L - 3 COMMON Y£WS Z4" ---.� _A) I. AUSNILMN PINS i•b, P 12 SNVCA uT C*tEV V S i I AUSTIDW PtNt. 10' NC)T£S L I. ALL PL. xK)T, 1N(,S SAMOM AM 2SLOCN1-£1) ON SITE -VUA & LOOSTLULTION AREA Z. 6EF0QF.- SITIc %\ORK ,TARTS THE_ 0PY5NLE. PZDSION C01UTQ0LS MUST De. IN PLACE. !. L`O�SION LONTCOLS WU- Bf-- II.ISPECTE_O DNIL`f, , #ND REPAIRED AS I.IE£O£D. 4. ALL SLOPES PMPOSEO AQL I ON 3 of- LLS5. S. DISTR.U1SEb AMAS WIU- BE 6RADEb. LIMLD, F£Q[IL11sl>, AND SEEDED AS 100N AS PO5S1flLE. (o. OIUCE VE(o3kT10N CCVJEP- BSCABII_1SNED NO LONb TE2M ER.OStaw CCNTQZLS NEEOCD, 'LF(o-12-tJD -Sao-- £R 1ST INIo CONTOUR_ --1310}----- PLOPoSeM C.&MTOUR Q E-MSTINIc ZS' POLE . LOOOW )APS • _- MLOCATED 25 POLL. 1000 W )AP-4 NAMcAMD/NEW BOLLACLDS 7OW MIL. /• U-11 ACED LANOSCAP INu _... NLIU ASPrV1LT P1NINU _. P#VINU -IU SL LLMoUeM exlsTlwt. lLSp"UT 300-A. - J'' I - , - v 7-0 �' LIJ MAR 0 9 1993 City of So. Burlington J H � � 2 Ld LJ 2 z z 4 t cJ �oCO Ld In x — UTILITILS LAu05CP.P 10& Or.1.WN IN DAMS awmr.o o�T■ MARCt1 a 1113 I�w�O• .00 ND. 4'SO3 .N..T �.N.■T.]2 L THE LANE PRESS, INC. Printers since 1904 PHILIP M. DRUMHELLER President March 11, 1993 HAND DELIVER Mr. Joe Weith City Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Dear Joe: We contacted the District 4 Environmental Commission and were informed that it is not possible to apply for an Act 250 without already having the South Burlington permit in hand. Therefore our problems are even more pressing then previously thought. Is there any way we can ask for a sketch review this Tuesday? Please let me know what options we can pursue. Sincerely, PMD/wkw P.O. Box 130 Burlington, VT 05402 (802) 863-5555 Shipping Address: 1000 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, V r 05403 THE LANE PRESS, INC. Printers since 1904 HAND DELIVER Mr. Joe Weith City Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Dear Joe: March 11, 1993 We have submitted what we see as a. simple and straight forward application for a permit to construct an addition to our current facility. We also understand the Planning Commission's review process and are aware of the considerable number of applications in the que. However, due to highly unusual circumstances we respectfully request that the planning commission give special and accelerated consideration to our application. This request, for reasons listed below, is of very significant importance to us and, therefore, to the growth of manufacturing in the area. As you and I discussed, this addition is needed to house a new printing press that The Lane Press, Inc. has purchased. This press has just come on the market and will be the first of its kind in the United States. Our plant has been selected to introduce the press to North America. Ordinarily we would have six to twelve months lead time when we order a new press. Unfortunately, in this case we do not. The press has already been built and will ship from Germany on June 1, 1993. Our current facility can not accommodate this press and must be expanded prior to its arrival in late June. If we can not complete the addition on time the manufacturer will select an alternate site for receipt of the press. Lane Press, South Burlington, and the state of Vermont will have missed out on a unique opportunity. As you can see, we are under pressing time constraints. The Lane Press has a considerable investment (several million dollars) in this purchase. We would also point out the minor nature of this addition when considered with respect to our current plant size. Anything you can do to move our application forward would be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, I am available anytime, day or night. My home phone number is 985-9466. PMD/wkw P.O. Box 130 Burlington, VT' 05402 (802)863-5555 Sincerely, K Shipping Address: 1000 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 December 12, 1986 Philip Drumheller The Lane Press Inc. 305 St. Paul Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Lane Press, 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Mr. Drumheller: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the minutes of the December 9, 1986 Planning Commission meeting. Please call me if you have any questions. JBL/mcp la Sincerely, Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner I CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON SITE PLAN APPLICATION 1) OWNER OF RECORD (name, address, phone #) Semicon Components Inc 1000 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, VT 05403, (802) 658-3110 2) APPLICANT (name, address, phone #) The Lane Press, Inc. 305 St, Paul Street, Burlington, VT 05401, (802) 863-5555 3) CONTACT PERSON (name, address, phone #) Philip Drumheller, 305 St. Paul Street, Burlington, VT 05401. (802) 863-5555 4) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 1000 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, VT 05403 _ 5) LOT NUMBER (if applicable) 6) PROPOSED USE.(S) Printing, publishing and bookbinding 7) SIZE OF PROJECT (i.e. total building square footage, # units, maximum height and # floors, square feet per floor) 911217 square feet existing; manufacturing 68,217 sq. ft. - one story; offices 232000 sq ft two story, 26'6". An Otis elevator permits handicapped access to second floor. 40.320 sq. ft. proposed addition; manufacturing one story. 8) NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES 297 as follows: 1st shift - 165. 2nd shift - 68• 3rd shift - 56• weekends - 8 9) LOT COVERAGE: building Existing - 5.97. (78,000); Addition - 2.9% (33,600); Total - 8.87g landscaped areas 11.7 %; building, parking, outside storage 21.7 % 10) COST ESTIMATES• g� di s Addition --foundation, si_tework & landscaping - $250000 Sul+ding - $650, U�O; enovati iT =- �"0-'-f6 CPP, o a pro? ect - 00 Landscaping Required - $17 500• Proposed - $5,000; Requested Credit-�$12.0. 500. D� ,Q—O ' Other Site Improvements (please list with cost) 11) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: August 1987 12) ESTIMATED AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (in and out) 900 Estimated trip ends (in and out) during the following hours: Monday through Friday 11-12 Noon 4 12-1 p.m. 0 1-2 p.m. 20 2-3 p.m. 53 3-4 p.m. 101 4-5 p.m. 11 5-6 p.m. 45 6-7 p.m. 0 13) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 7:00-8:00 a.m. and 3:00-4:00 p.m. 14 PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION:_ Mon hrough Fridav November 20, 1986 i� _ DATE OF SUBMISSION IGNATURE OF APPI.I December 9, 198,6 BATE OF HEARING e ane Tess, Inc. PRINTERS SINCE 1OU:l 305 S'1'. PAUL STREET, BURLINGION, VERMONT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: November 20, 1986 vla. ,v (:()1)E: 802 863-5555 TO: Jane Lafleur, South Burlington City Planner Richard Ward, South Burlington Zoning Administrator FROM: Philip Drumheller RE: Site Plan Application Lane Press hereby requests zoning and planning approval to locate their printing facility within the Industrial and Agricultural District of South Burlington on the 31.26 acre premises currently known as "Semicon" at 1000 Hinesburg Road. Lane Press is engaged in the business of printing high quality, special interest magazines and conducts associated binding and distributing operations, employing approximately 300 people during three shifts of operation. 1986 payroll is estimated to be $5,800,000. To facilitate an administrative review of the project, I provide the following: General Renovation to the interior of the existing building to accommodate a printing operation to commence early 1987. Our needs require a 40,320 square foot addition, scheduled to commence in March and be completed by August 1987. The move from current location to occur between July and December 1987. Traffic Generation A) Ten average daily deliveries by truck are four paper trailers in, two mail trailers out, one scrap paper trailer and various UPS type shipments. B) Customer/visitor traffic negligible (95% of business is conducted out of state). Mailing Address: P.O. Box 130, Budinglon, V Y 0540`L-0130 0 'Telex: 469134 . Nt-%% York C:ily- Y 1"--131-73`_'U Lbe (�ane ?ress, I nc. CONTINUED Jane Lafleur and Richard Ward Page 2 November 20, 1986 C) Employee shifts Current Personnel lst shift - 6:00 a.m.- 2:00 p.m. 23 7:00 a.m.- 3:00 p.m. 52 .7:00 a.m.- 3:30 p.m. 26 7:30 p.m.- 3:30 p.m. 4 7:00 a.m.- 4:00 p.m. 1 8:00 a.m.- 4:30 p.m. 9 8:00 a.m.- 5:00 p.m. 43 8:30 a.m.- 4:30 p.m. 1 9:00 a.m.- 2:00 p.m. 1 9:00 a.m.- 5:00 p.m. 1 12:00 p.m.- 8:00 p.m. 4 2nd shift - 2:00 p.m.-10:00 p.m. 20 3:00 p.m.-11:00 p.m. 29 3:30 p.m.-11:30 p.m. 19 3rd shift - 10:00 p.m.- 6:00 a.m. 20 11:00 p.m.- 7:00 a.m. 36 Weekend shift - Fri 10:00 p.m. -Sat 2:00 p.m. & Sun 7:00 a.m.-11:00 p.m. 6 Sat & Sun 6:00 a.m.-10:00 p.m. 2 Environmental Impact and Municipal Services Lane Press will draw and dispose of a total of 12,000 gallons of water per day through existing connections to the South Burlington municipal treatment plant; 4,500 gallons will be sanitary; 5,000 gallons will be process water, and 2,500 gallons reserve for future growth. Lane Press produces approximately 15 tons of solid waste per day in the form of scrap paper for recycling. Simple trash (non -hazardous) will be approximately 10 cubic yards per day, which is handled by KELCO and will be compacted prior to being disposed of in the South Burlington landfill. Lane Press utilizes chemicals in the printing process which are subjected to silver reclamation, and the effluent is disposed of through the sewer system. Lane Press will continue to handle, store and dispose of these chemicals according to MSDS specifications. Lane Press utilizes approximately 80 gallons of fountain solution per week as a wetting agent for the offset printing process which is disposed and accounted for through the pollution abatement system. Presses are cleaned with 150 gpw of web wash which is applied with cleaning rags. Residual is also accounted for through the pollution abatement system. All of the above are covered by permit. Balance of chemicals are suitable either for direct disposal to sewer or to sewer with pre-treatment to occur within our waste water facility. The rags are stored, picked up and cleaned regularly by Foley Industrial Supplies and then returned to Lane Press. Approximately I T' L'be C-1--ane press, Inc. C O N I IN U E U Jane Lafleur and Richard Ward Page 3 November 20, 1986 55 gpw of waste ink are recycled through our principal ink suppliers. Additionally, Lane Press generates approximately 275 gallons per week of reclaimed condensed ink oil via its pollution abatement system. This ink oil, comparable to No. 2 heating oil, is stored in above -ground tanks and is shipped to appropriate waste oil treatment facilities. In addition to water supply and solid waste and sewage disposal, Lane Press request the South Burlington municipality provide police and fire protection. PMD/mlc JANUARY 1992 APPLICATION FORMS FOR ACT 250 (10 V.S.A., CHP. 151) For detailed instructions, contact the District Coordinator for an instruction booklet. 3/89 : 250APPL.DOC ACT 250 ................................................. .file number date received LAND USE PERMIT .[ ] complete [ ] incomplete init. APPLICATION .date completed 10 VSA, CHP. 151 .coordinator or clerk signature: ................OFFICE USE ONLY.................. NAMES: PROJECT NAME: 1. Applicant(s) name The Lane Press, Inc. Address 1000 Hinesburg Road, Sc R„r1 inc l-on_ VT 0540'1 — Phone 802-863-5555 P.O. Box 130 Burlington• Legal form: [ ] individual VT 05402 [ ] partnership (attach list of partners) [ X] corporation: date formed 1904 place formed Burlington —VT date reg. in Vt. 5/5/24 [ ] municipal gov't [ ] state gov t Legal interest in land: [ ] ownership in fee simple [X] lease agreement [ ] contract to purchase [ ] other: 2. Landowner(s) name Landrum Address 182 Harbor Road, Shelburne VT 09482 Phone 802 985 9466 3. Contact person Leonard Leclerc 05402 Address c/o The Lane Press, Inc P Rnx 130 Rl�rl in Phg VT one 02 863 5555 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 4. Type: [ ] new project [ ] expansion of project previously exempt from Act 250 [X] amendment of existing Act 250 project (permit J14C047373- ) [ ] permit condition modification (permit # ) 5. General description (include number and size of buildings; use of buildings; number of lots; length of roads; etc.): 1 single floor 70' x 226' addition_ of 15,820 sf to for ma i1facruring Total building size will e 144,740 stand no new parking spaces or employees are proposed. 6. Construction duration 4 months Duration of Permit Request 20 years 7. Total acres owned or controlled Acres in additional easements or Acres committed to this project Location: town So. Burlingto Nearby landmark Bridge over Distance from landmark 300 y� by applicant and landowner at rights -of -way 0 31.26 n road Hinesburg Roar3 project site 31.26 acres route number 116 Direction from landmark South 8. Deed(s) : grantee's name as recorded Lane Press Inc. recorded: book(s) 258 page(s) 131-137 date(s) Feb 18, 19f�R town Sout ur ington county Chittenden 3/89 : 250APPL.DOC OTHER INFORMATION: I 9. Are you concurrently applying for a Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit, a Subdivision Permit, or any other permit from the Protection Division of the Agency of Natural Resources? [ ] yes [X] no 10. Have you received local zoning and/or subdivision approval? [ ] yes [X] pending [ ] none needed 11. Attach the following unless waived by the District Coordinator: [X] location map (U.S. Geological Survey map preferred) [X] site plan or plot plan (see instructions) [X] building floor plan(s) (excluding single family homes) [X] building elevation drawings (excluding single family homes) [X] schedule A - fee information [X] schedule B - Act 250 information (see instructions) [ ] schedule C - Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit information (if concurrent application) [ ] schedule D - Subdivision Permit information (if concurrent application) [X] schedule E - adjoiner information [X] schedule F --certification of service [ ] supporting documents as recommended in Schedule B or as needed [X] Act 250 fee (payable "State of Vermont") [X] Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal or Subdivision application fee (payable "State of Vermont") (if concurrent application) SIGNATURES: 12. I hereby swear that the information provided above or attached to this application is true and accurate to the best_o�f my know ed e Signature of applicant(s) ✓���c� date .3-/( —L 13. I hereby certify that I understand that I must not commence construction, demolition, remodeling or commercial use of the property as described in Environmental Board Rule 2(C) until I have received an Act 250 Land Use Permit as required by 10 VSA Sec. 6O83(a). n Signature of applicant(s) �� �—,�c�c�C � �r r� date J `�6' 14. I hereby authorize the processing of this application for the above project on land(s) that I own, contro r have s' ni a t property interest in. (attach letter if easier) G Signature of landowner(s) date -2 1- t3 DISTRIBUTION: 15. SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL AND FIVE COPIES TO THE DISTRICT COORDINATOR. 16. SUBMIT TWO ADDITIONAL COPIES TO THE DISTRICT COORDINATOR IF YOU ARE ALSO APPLYING FOR PERMITS FROM THE PROTECTION DIVISION. 17. SUBMIT ADDITIONAL COPIES TO THE MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL PLANNING COMMISSION, REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION, AND TO ANY ADJOINING MUNICIPALITIES AND PLANNING COMMISSIONS. SCFEEDLU,E A Fee Information ACT 250 Submit with the application a check payable to the "State of Vermont". Municipal and state agency projects are exempt. Not -for -profits are not exempt. Calculate the fee using the following table: 1) Number of lots to be created 0 x $50.00 = $ 0 2) (ravel Pits: $.10/cubic yard of the estimated annual extraction rate $ 0 3) Construction costs (include only common facilities for subdivisions): Site preparation $ 7 4, 0 6 5 Buildi ncrs : a) sq. ft. 15,820 b) $ per sq. f- 2.15 total (a x b) $ 350 .444 Roads and parking $ 16,000 Utilities $ 9,600 Off -site improvements $ 0 Landscaping $ 9,600 Other $ 0 Total costs $ 4 5 9. 7 0 9 4) x 0.00425 = $—L ja . 7 7 _ Total Fee = $1 . 9 5 3 . 7 7 * * Minimum fee of $100 for new applications Minimum fee of $25 for amendment applications Treat expansions of approved projects as new applications SUBDIVISION PERMIT / WATER SUPPLY AND WASTEWATER DISPOSAL PERMIT Submit with the application a check payable to the "State of Vermont" if you are concurrently applying for a Subdivision Permit or Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit from the Protection Division of the Department of''Environmental Conservation, Agency of Natural Resources. Calculate the fee from the following table: Subdivisions: one lot under 10 acres two to five lots under 10 acres six to ten lots under 10 acres more than ten lots under 10 acres each deferred lot Public Buildings, Camp- $100 per grounds, Mobile Home Parks: lot (waste water flaws)* $.22 per gallon of design flow with a $100 $25 minimum Fee attached $ (� * contact the Regional Engineer for the Protection Division if uncertain I attest by my signature that the above is tru to the best of my knowledge i (signature of applicant or agent) 9/91 (a)SCHEDA.DOC JANUARY 1992 AMYL. )N 1 " J nerin PROJECT NAME SCHEDULE 3 Act 250 Infer---tion Before the District Environmental Commission caii issue a land use permit for any project, it must find that the project meets the ten criteria, and their subcriteria listed in this schedule. Under all of the criteria the applicant must provide enough evidence for the Commission to make the necessary findings. Answers to the questions below, a site plan, and other related documents are usually sufficient for the Commission to make a decision. In larger or more complex cases, additional information may be requested by the Commission or other parties. Provide the information requested in narrative form oniseparate ndicate ssheetscor inwhyeispaces provided. If an item does not apply to your project, rj not apply. If you need assistance in understanding the meaning of any of the criteria, refer to the statute or contact the District Coordinator. Attach any supporting documents at the end of the application and make reference to them in your answers below. If your project is sim le in nature with few potential impacts, you may be able to skip over many of the items listed below. The District Coordinator should be able to identify which of the items you may skip over. Read over this schedule and then contact the District Coordinator for assistance. If your project is an amendment to an exietDigtrict1t, only Coordinatotress those. can assistcriteria which are affected by the proposed changes. Th identifying the relevant criteria. If your project primarily involves one of the following, contact the District Coordinator for additional instructions before using Schedule B: [ ] commercial extraction of rock, sand, gravel, or topsoil; [ ] logging above 2,500 feet; 10 t [ ] highway construction; utility line construction; _4pplicable communication towers; [ ] ski trails,'lifts, and related facilities; [ ) construction of lake or pond; [ ] unusual projects; r Cr.iterion 1) Air Pollution. Demonstrate that the project will not create undue air pollution: a) If the project involves manufacturing or industrial processes, describe any process air emissions, odors, or sources of noise and measures proposed to control them. This addition allows for the installation of larger presses to replace existin ones which will increase the hydrocarbon exhaust from the ink drviLane PreS bber b) If buildings will be heated, describe the fuel source and the heating airesystem boiler _-_ , , I— 't'_n+-owl l,v A na`__--- c) Is an air pollution control permit the ArcpollutionNatural ControluDivisionrequired thefor a) or b) above? _Yes or X No? (ContacttheAi what is the Agency of Natural Resources at 244-8731 if you are uncertain.) If yes, status of your application? d) Indicate how dust will be controlled during and after construction. During construction of the addition to the building measures will be taken to revent dust and attendant nuisance. These measures include watering and1 or calcium chloride application. e) Indicate what restrictions will apply to the hours of construction and/or operation and how noise will be controlled, especially in residential areas. Not an issue at this site 7 AM to 6 PM 6 days per week. f) If the project involves any of the following, check them and contact the Air Pollution Control Division of the Agency of Natural Resources at 244-8731 for further directions: [ ] parking for more than 1000 vehicles (existing and proposed), [ ] fuel burning equipment with over 10 million BTUs/hour, [ ] coal burning equipment. g) If the project involves radioactive materials, check here [ ] and contact the District Coordinator for further guidance. riterion 1A) Headwaters. Demonstrate that the project will meet any applicable health or environmental conservation department regulations regarding any reduction of the quality of ground or surface waters in a headwaters area: a) Is the project located in a headwaters area as defined in the statute? (See instructions.) _Yes or X_No? If the answer is yes, be certain to indicate how the project meets the applicable water quality regulations under criteria 1B (waste disposal), lE (streams), and 4 (soil erosion). No change from original permit. Xterion 1B) Waste Disposal. Demonstrate that the project will meet any applicable health or environmental conservation department regulations regarding the disposal of wastes and demonstrate that the project will not involve the injection of wastes or toxic substances into ground waters: a) Describe any method of sewage disposal to be used and how sewage will be treated and isolated from ground waters. (Show location of treatment systems and piping on site plan.) Municipal sewer to South Burlington. NOTE no increase in sewer 11ow trom this project. b) How many gallons of sewage per day will the treatment system be designed and/or approved to handle? tm n otnn gpd? (Contact the regional engineer for the Protection Division in your district for assistance.) c) If an on -site sewage treatment system is to be shared by more than one owner, indicate how it will be maintained and who will be legally and financially responsible for its eventual replacement? (Attach copy of deed restrictions, etc.) Not applicable ' d) If a municipal sewer is to be used, provide the name of the municipal sewage treatment plant and demonstrate that the plant has the capacity to accommodate your project. (Attach a letter from the municipality.) No increase is anticipated --A + u_ ,-o,,, rr,nA i c hP 7 ow allocated 12,000 gallon cap. 3 e) Is a Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit or a Subdivision Permit required from the Protection Division of the Agency of Natural Resources for the sewage disposal system? X Yes or _No? (Contact the Regional Engineer for the Protection Division or the.District Coordinator if in doubt.) IF YES, AND YOU ARE APPLYING FOR THAT PERMIT WITH THIS APPLICATION, BE CERTAIN TO ATTACH SCHEDULE "C" OR "D", THE NECESSARY TECHNICAL INFORMATION LISTED ON THEM, AND THE ADDITIONAL FEE TO THIS APPLICATION AND SUBMIT TWO ADDITIONAL COPIES OF THE APPLICATION PACKAGE. (Contact the Regional Engineer for the Protection Division if you need assistance.) f) Are you relying on a Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit or Subdivision Permit to satisfy this criterion? X Yes or No? IF YES, NO DECISION WILL BE ISSUED UNTIL THAT PERMIT IS OBTAINED AND FORWARDED TO THE COMMISSION. IF NO, AND YOUR PROJECT INVOLVES SEWAGE DISPCSAL, CONTACT THE DISTRICT COORDINATOR FOR FURTHER GUIDANCE ON WHAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO SUBMIT. g) Indicate how stormwater runoff will be disposed of without causing undue water pollution from litter, oil, salt, pesticides, and the like. (Show grass swales, ditches, catch basins, culverts, and other drainage improvements on site plan.) Roof storm water will be directed to same�swales and will travel h) Is a Stormwater Discharge Permit required from the Water Quality Division of the Agency of Natural Resources for the discharge of the stormwater into a stream, river, lake, or municipal storm drain? _Yes or X_No? (Contact the Water Quality Division at 244-5674 if you are uncertain.) If yes, what is the status of your application? i) If the project involves manufacturing or industrial processes, describe what they are, indicate how any wastewater generated will not contaminate ground or surface waters, -and indicate whether all necessary discharge permits have been obtained. (Show location of any discharges on site plan). What is the status of your application? No chap e in t e or aiiantitv j) If storage of oils, fuels, chemicals, cleaning fluids, solvents, batteries, pesticides, or other hazardous materials are associated with this project, indicate what measures will be taken to protect against spills and leaks, especially in a sensitive area such as a municipal watershed or near wells or streams. (Show location of storage on site plan and include details of storage containers, fill pipes, leak detection equipment, containment structures, employee training, etc.) No chap es k) Is a permit from or registration with the Hazardous Materials Division of the Agency of Natural Resources required for the storage listed in j)?- Yes or X No? (Contact the Hazardous Materials Division at 244-8702 if you are uncertain.) What is the status of your applications -- 4 1) Indicate how construction debris, including stumps will be disposed of without creating water pollution. All recyclable construction dehri s (woad, metal and cardboard) will be recycled. A11_ other debris will be land filled at annroazed sites. riterion 1C) Water Conservation. Demonstrate that the project will use the best available water conservation technology: a) Would you agree to a permit condition which read: "The permittee and all subsequent owners shall install and maintain only low -flow plumbing fixtures in any buildings, including toilets with flows not to exceed 3.5 gallons per flush, faucets with flows not to'exceed 3.0 gallons per minute or which have automatic shut off valves and showerheads with flows not to exceed 3.0 gallons per minute." _Yes or _No? If no, indicate why and what water conservation measures will be taken. Not applicable b) If the project involves significant use of water for manufacturing or -other processes, indicate what measures will be taken to conserve water (include recycling, efficient machinery, etc.). Existing permit allows 5,000 gallons_ No change is expected. Criterion 1D) Floodways. Demonstrate that the project will not endanger the health, safety and welfare of the public or of riparian owners during flooding: a) If any portion of the project is in or adjacent to the 100-year floodway as identified on the National Flood Insurance Maps (on file with your municipality), demonstrate that the project will not -involve any filling or construction within the floodway. (Show location of floodway on site plan.) This project is not in or adiacent to a-100-year flood area_ b) If any portion of the project is in or adjacent to the 100-year floodway fringe as identified on the National Flood Insurance Maps, demonstrate that the project will not cause a significant increase in the peak flood levels of the river or stream. (Show location of floodway fringe on site plan.) c) If any fill, structures, storage of materials, or other operations are to be located in the floodway fringe, demonstrate that they will be floodproofed consistent with the National Flood Insurance Program. (Contact the Floodplain Management Section of the Water Quality Division of the Agency of Natural Resources at 244-6951.) 5 Criterion 1E) Streams. Demonstrate that the project will maintain the natural condition of any streams, when feasible: a) Indicate the name and location of streams, drainageways, or riparian wetlands on or near the project site and the distance to the closest construction disturbance. (Show precise location of streams and construction limits on site plan.) Several unnamed tributaries of Muddy Brook`'are,located on or near this s b) If a stream is located within 100 feet of a disturbed area of the project, Vindicate how the stream and the lands along the stream will be maintained in their natural condition. (Show undisturbed buffers, revegetation plans, erosion controls, isolation distances to any sewage systems, and the like on site plan.) Not applicable c) If a section of -a stream must be crossed, relocated, or modified, demonstrate that. there are no reasonable alternatives and then indicate how the crossing or new stream channel will be constructed in a stable and naturalized condition. (Show details of the construction on site plan.) (Contact the District Fisheries Biologist.) Not a licable d) Is a Stream Alteration Permit from the Protection Division of the Agency of Natural Resources required for any work in a stream? _Yes or _No? (Contact the Regional Engineer with the Protection Division of the Agency of Natural Resources.) If yes, what is the status of your application? Not applicable e) If the project involves the withdrawal of water from a stream, river, pond, or lake, check here [ ) and contact the District Coordinator for further guidance. Criterion 1F) Shorelines. Demonstrate that if the project is located along a shoreline, it complies with the four standards relating to the condition of the shoreline listed below: a) Indicate the name and location of any river, lake, pond, or reservoir on or near the project site and the distance to the closest disturbance. (Show location on site plan.) Not an b) If the project is located on or near a shoreline, then answer i) through iv) below: i) Indicate how the shoreline will be maintained in its natural condition. (Show undisturbed buffers, erosion controls, and the like on site plan.) Indicate how and where any existing public access to the water body can be reasonably maintained. (Show details on site plan.) 0 iii) Indicate how the vegetation will be provided or retained to screen the project from the water body. (Show details on site plan.) iv) Indicate how the shoreline will be stabilized from erosion with vegetation. (Show details on site plan.) Zriterion 1G) Wetlands. Demonstrate that the project will meet applicable Water Resource Board regulations regarding any impacts on designated significant wetlands: a) Indicate the location of any wetland areas on or near the project site and the distance to the closest disturbance. (Contact the Wetlands Biologist with the Agency of Natural Resources at 244-6951 for assistance in identifying wetland areas.) (Show location on site plan.) Not applicable b) Indicate how any wetlands and the lands along the wetlands will be maintained consistent with the Water Resource Board regulations, if applicable. (Show undisturbed buffers, erosion controls, isolation distances to any sewage systems, etc. on site plan.) (Contact the Wetlands Biologist for assistance.) c) If the wetland regulations do not apply to any wetlands associated with your project, be certain to address the value of the wetlands under applicable criteria including lE (streams), IF(shorelines), 4 (soil erosion), 8,.(scenic beauty), and 8A (wildlife habitat). ',,Zriteria 2 and 3) Water Supply. Demonstrate that the project has sufficient water available for its needs; and that the project will not cause an unreasonable burden on an existing water supply: - a) Describe the source(s) of domestic water which will be utilized for the project. (Show location of wells, springs, piping, etc. on site plan.) South Burlington municipal water system b) How many gallons of water per day will be needed? 12,000 gpd? How was this figure determined? already permitted c) Demonstrate that the source listed in a) will be of sufficient quantity to meet the daily needs (include nearby well information, pump test results, letter from municipal or private water company, hydrologic study, etc.) Not applicable F d) If a domestic water source is to be shared by more than one owner, indicate who is legally responsible for its maintenance and possible replacement. (Attach copy of deed restrictions or other evidence which will ensure continued maintenance.) Not applicable e) Is Health Department approval necessary for a shared water system or extension of municipal water line? _Yes or gNo? (Contact the Regional Engineer with the Protection Division or the Health Department at 863-7220.) If yes, what is the status of your application? a f) Describe the source of any commercial or industrial water supply (if different from above) and demonstrate that water exists in sufficient quantity for the needs of the project. (Show details on site plan.) Not applicable g) Demonstrate that the use of any of the water sources listed in a) or f) above will not restrict the flow of water to other existing users. (Include location and distance to nearby wells or springs, nearby well information, pump test results, letter from municipal or private water company, hydrologic study; etc.) Not applicable h) If there are any community wells nearby (for example, in mobile home parks, condominium projects, high density subdivisions, etc.) which might be affected by your project, contact the Health Department at 863-7220 to see whether their review is necessary. If their review is necessary, attach a review letter if available. riterion 4) Soil Erosion. Demonstrate that the project will not cause unreasonable soil erosion; and will not cause a reduction in the capacity of the land to hold water so that a dangerous situation results: a) Describe the topography of the project site, the proximity of sloping lands to water bodies and property boundaries, and the potential for soil erosion. (Show contours on site plan in five foot intervals.) (Show precise limits of soil disturbance on site plan.) Gently sloping terrain with rocky rn,t-rrnppino in the center of the site. b) Indicate what erosion control measures will be taken during construction to prevent eroded sediment from reaching a water body or adjoining property. (Include hay bale dams or silt fences, daily mulching, diversion ditches, sediment basins, etc.) (Show details on site plan.) HaV }pail fencing will he inct-alle.0At the bottom of the ro osed slo e. c) Indicate what permanent erosion control measures will be taken after construction to stabilize the site from continued erosion. (Include stone -lined ditches, grassed swales, paving, rip -rap, seeding mixtures, etc.) (Show details on site plan.) None n d) If exterior site work or earth moving will occur between October 1 and April 15, indicate what special erosion control measures will be taken to stabilize bare soils through the winter months. Not applicable_ -- e) How frequently will the erosion controls be inspected during construction and who will be accountable for their maintenance? Daily, by contractor. f) Indicate what percentage of the project site will be covered. with buildings, roadways, parking areas, or other areas impervious to water. (Show on site plan.) 23% g) Demonstrate how the increased rate of stormwater runoff from these areas will not not. create a dangerous or unhealthy situation for adjoining property owners or downstream areas due to streambank erosion or flooding. (Show drainage swales, culverts, and retention basins on site plan.) See site plan h) If the project involves the construction of a permanent dam, check here [ ) and contact the District Coordinator for further guidance. Criterion 5) Highways and Other Means of Transportation. Demonstrate that the project will not cause unreasonable congestion or unsafe conditions with respect to the use of highways and other means of transportation: a) Indicate where vehicles will have access to a state or local highway from this project. (Show location on site plan and on site location map.) Not applicable b) Describe the design of the driveway(s) or road intersection(s) and demonstrate adequate safety (include number of lanes, traffic controls or signals, approach grades, sight distances in each direction along the state or local highway, legal speed limits, etc.). (Show details on site plan.) Not applicable c) Is a permit required from the Utilities Division of the Agency of Transportation for commercial or residential access onto a state highway? _Yes or X No? (Contact the Utilities Division of the Agency of Transportation at 828-2653 if you are uncertain.) If yes, what is the status of your application? d) Is a permit, required from your municipality for access onto a town or city highway? _Yes or X No? (contact the zoning administrator, town manager, or road commissioner). If yes, what is the status of your application? 0 e) If a roadway is involved, indicate the length of the road and the maximum gradient. (show road location, profile, and cross sections on site plan unless waived by District Coordinator) Not applicable f) If a subdivision roadway is involved, is it likely to be turned over to the municipality? Yes or XNo? If yes, will the road be built to municipal specifications. _Yes or _No? Is the municipality likely to accept the road? _Yes or _No? (Include letter from the municipality confirming this.) IF YOU ANSWERED NO EI TO THER QUESTION, BE CERTAIN TO ADDRESS CRITERION 9G (PRIVATE UTILITIES). g) Demonstrate that emergency vehicles and trucks will have sufficient access into the project site and can easily turn around. (Show details on site plan.) See letter from South R„rlin-9tnn h) Demonstrate that adequate parking for peak periods will exist for the project. (Show details on site plan.) No change i) Demonstrate that the traffic associated with the project will not create unreasonable congestion or unsafe conditions on nearby highways or nearby intersections (include traffic counts during peak hours, measurements of delays in entering intersections, recommendations of traffic engineer, etc.) (Contact the District Coordinator for guidance and to determine if a traffic study is necessary.) No change k) If the project involves or may affect a railroad, airport, or other means of transportation not addressed in a) through i) above, check here [ J and contact the District Coordinator for guidance. Criterion 6) Educational Services. Demonstrate that the project will not cause an unreasonable burden on the ability of local governments to provide educational services: a) If the project is residential or involves the creation of jobs, estimate how many school age children will likely result from the project and how that figure was determined. Not applicable b) Demonstrate whether the local schools can accommodate the additional students listed under a) without significant hardship (include school impact form attached to application, letter from school district, estimates of student capacity at local schools, location of existing bus routes, etc.). Not applicable 10 c) Indicate what mitigation measures can be utilized with the project to offset any significant hardships on the local schools indicated above (include impact fees, phasing schedules, etc.) Not applicable rite rion 7) Municipal Services. Demonstrate that the project will not cause an unreasonable burden on the ability of local governments to provide municipal or governmental services: a) Demonstrate that the local fire department can provide fire protection services without significant hardship (include municipal impact form attached to the application, letter from fire department, etc.). See letter from South Burlington b) Is a Public Building Permit for electrical wiring and fire protection required by the Department of Labor and Industry? gYes or _No? (Contact the regional Labor and Industry office.) If yes, what is the status of your application? c) Demonstrate that the local police department, constable, or state police, can provide police services for the project without unreasonable burden (include municipal impact form attached to the application, letter from police department, etc.). Letter from South Burlington d) Demonstrate that sufficient solid waste disposal capacity exists at a local landfill, transfer station, or incinerator to meet the needs"of the project (include municipal impact form attached to the application, letter from landfill operator, copy of state landfill certification, etc.). No change e) Demonstrate that the municipality, or a volunteer organization serving the area, can provide rescue services for the project without significant hardship. (include municipal impact form attached to the application, letter from rescue squad, letter from town, etc.) No change f) Indicate what mitigation measures are proposed with the project to offset any significant hardships on the municipal services indicated above (include impact fees, phasing schedules, etc.). Nnn P - g) Describe any potential impacts 'to services provided by adjacent municipalities as well as appropriate mitigation measures. None 11 riterion 8) Scenic Beauty,Historic e effectnonNatural scenicAreas. or nnaturalrate beautythat ofthe the area, project will not have an undue adverse effect aesthetics, historic sites, or rare or irreplaceable natural areas: a) Describe the visual appearance of the project site and surrounding area as it exists without the project (include open areas, wooded areas, mountains, ridgelines, wetlands, streams or shorelines, existing structures nearby, etc.). (Show existing features on site plan.) These issi1ps were addrpssed in the. ori created_11y tbig addition on b) Demonstrate that the project's visual appearance from a highway, community center, or nearby residences is consistent with the visual appearance of the existing area as described in a) above: ject use (residential, retail, industrial, etc.) is i) Demonstrate that the pro consistent with the existing or planned land uses in the area. Will the project -,generate any significant noise related impacts during and/or after construction? If so, what mitigation efforts are being proposed. No significant ii) Demonstrate that the building size, density, and location are not out of character with the terrain of the site, the size of nearby buildings, surrounding vegetation, and nearby scenic vistas from highways or community centers. (Show details on site plan.) This issue addressed nn on original application. No chap e i materiaT and mass will be used. iii) Demonstrate that the architectural style and building materials and colors are not out of character with the style of area buildings (provide drawings of building) . See iv) Demonstrate that parking areas are designed to minimize their visibility from the highway or nearby residences. (Show on site plan.) No change_ v) Demonstrate that any project signs are designed to minimize their visual impact on the surrounding area (include size, illumination, and colors). (Show location on site plan.) Not applicable 12 vi) Demonstrate that any exterior lighting is designed to minimize its visual impact on the surrounding area at night, and that it will not glare into the highway or nearby residences (include size, wattage, fixture style, and pole height). (Show location on site plan and include manufacturer's specification sheet.) Not applicable,-- vii) Demonstrate that any utilities (propane tanks, trash dumpsters, electric distribution lines and poles, etc.) are designed to minimize their visibility from the highway or nearby residences. Not applicable. viii) Indicate what additional landscaping will be added to the project site to minimize any of the visual impacts discussed above. (Show details on site plan.) Additional landscapin_&i_s propo-s_ed.. south nf- the e zictin,g� building consisting _mainly _-of Red_ 1P and Wi11ow- trees ix) Indicate if any restrictions on tree cutting or earth disturbance will be used to minimize any of the visual impacts discussed above. (Show details on site plan.) None c) Will the project have a significant impact on a historic site identified by the Division of Historic Preservation? _Yes or X No? (Contact the Division for Historic Preservation at 828-3226 for guidance.) If yes, what measures will be used to minimize or mitigate the impacts? d) Will the project have a significant impact on a designated rare or irreplaceable natural or fragile area on or near the project site? (Contact the Vermont Natural Heritage Program at 244-7340 for assistance in identifying natural or fragile areas.) Criterion 8A) Wildlife and Endangered Species. Demonstrate that the project will not destroy or significantly imperil necessary wildlife or endangered species habitat: a) Indicate whether any critical wildlife or endangered species habitat exists on or near the project site (include deer wintering areas, bear feeding areas, pristine rivers or streams, wetlands, or the like.) (Contact the District Fish and Wildlife office for assistance in identifying wildlife habitat.) (Contact the Vermont Natural Heritage Program at 244-8711 for assistance in identifying endangered species habitat.) (Show areas on site plan.) No 13 b) If critical wildlife habitat exists on or near the project site, indicate how the project will not destroy or imperil that habitat, or indicate what mitigation measures can be taken to minimize the impact (prepare response to the subcriteria of Criterion 8(a)). (Show details on site plan and attach review letter from the Department of Fish and Wildlife). Not applicable Criterion 9A) Impact of Growth. Will any increase in population associated with the project create an undue financial burden upon the ability of the town or region to accommodate such growth: a) If the project is residential in nature, indicate how many additional people may live in the project, what portion may be seasonal, and what percentage of the total population of the municipality this project represents (include population or housing statistics, etc.). Not applicable b) Does the municipality have the financial capacity to accommodate this additional population growth or indicate what mitigation measures can be utilized to offset the financial burdens on the municipality (include letter from the municipality, reference answers to criteria 6 and 7, fiscal impact report, etc.)? Not applicable N-1111� Criterion 9B) Primary Agricultural Soils. Demonstrate that the project will not significantly reduce the agricultural potential of primary agricultural soils: a) Does the project site contain primary agricultural soils? If so, indicate how many acres. Has the project been designed to minimize the impact on the future agricultural use,of the soils. (Contact the District Soil Conservationist with the Natural Resource Conservation District or the Land Use Planner with the Vt. Department of'Agriculture at 828-2504 for assistance.) (Show agricultural soils on site plan or attach soil map.) Not aDDlicable b) If the project cannot avoid significant reduction in the potential of the primary agricultural soils as identified in a) above, then answer i) through iv) below: i) Demonstrate that there is no other use of the site which would have less impact on the primary agricultural soils, but would still provide a reasonable rate of return on the fair market value of the project lands taken as a whole, including a scaled down version of the proposed project (include financial analyses of alternative designs of the project and alternative projects which show returns on the fair market value of the land including the investment). 14 ii) Demonstrate that there are no other non -primary agricultural soils owned by the applicant or coapplicant which are reasonably suited for this project. iii) Demonstrate that the project has been clustered or otherwise designed to minimize the reduction of primary agricultural soils in order to retain the better soils in larger, farmable units under unified ownership. (If a subdivision is involved, attach deed restrictions which assure common ownership or control of the preserved agricultural soils.) (Contact the Land Use Planner with the Vt. Department of Agriculture at 828-2504 for assistance.) iv) Demonstrate that the project will not significantly interfere with or jeopardize the continued agricultural use of adjoining lands or reduce their agricultural or forestry potential. Criterion 9C) Forest and Secondary Agricultural Soils. Demonstrate that the project will not significantly reduce the potential of secondary agricultural soils or forest soils: a) Indicate whether the project site (acreage owned by applicant or coapplicant) contains of soils which have long term commercial forestry potential as identified by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service, or by the state County Forester. (Contact the District Soil Conservationist with your Natural Resource Conservation District or your state County Forester for assistance.) (Show forest soils on site plan.) Not applicable b) If the project site does contain forest soils, indicate how the project has been designed to minimize the impact on the future forestry use of the soils. c) If the project cannot avoid a significant reduction of the forest soils as identified in a) above, then answer i) through iii) below: i) Demonstrate that there is no other use of the site which would have less impact on the forest soils, but would still provide a reasonable rate of return on the fair market value of the project lands taken as a whole, including a scaled down version of the proposed project (include financial analysis of project and alternative projects which show returns on the fair market value of the land as a whole). 15 ii) Demonstrate that no other non -forest soils owned by the applicant or coapplicant which are reasonably suited for this project. iii) Demonstrate that the project is clustered or otherwise designed to minimize the reduction of forest soils and to retain the better soils in larger, manageable units under unified ownership. (If a subdivision is involved, attach deed restrictions which assure common ownership or control of the retained forest soils.) (Contact your County Forester for assistance in designing projects.) Criteria 9D and 9E) Earth Resources. Demonstrate that the project will not interfere with the future extraction of earth resources; and demonstrate chat if the project involves the extraction of earth resources that it will not unduly harm the environment or neighboring land uses, and will be reclaimed for an alternative use: a) Does the project site have a high potential for extraction of mineral or earth resources? _ Yes or _LNo? (Contact the State Geologist at 244-5164.) b) If yes, then indicate how access to the resource can be maintained in the future. c) If the project involves the extraction of earth resources for commercial sale, or involves extensive use of borrow material from on site or nearby, answer i) through iv) below: (Contact the District Coordinator if you need assistance.) i) Demonstrate that any proposed blasting will not damage nearby water supplies or structures, and will be limited in duration and size so as to not be a continual nuisance for nearby residents (include blasting plan, insurance information, notification process, hydrogeologic reports, etc.). Not applicable ii) Demonstrate that any trucking of excavated material will not unduly damage area highways, and will be reasonably limited in duration and frequency so as to not be a continual nuisance for nearby residents (include trucking plan, hours of operation, extraction rates, vehicle trips per day, etc.). iii) Describe the reclamation plans for the extraction area and how those plans can be financially assured (include final contours on site plan, landscaping plan, future land uses, bonding plan, escrow contribution schedule, etc.). 16 Zriterion 9F) Energy Conservation._ Demonstrate that the project reflects the principles of energy conservation and utilizes the best available technology for energy efficiency: a) If the project involves commercial, institutional, or industrial buildings, indicate what measures will be used to conserve energy (include details on insulation, windows and doors, heating and venilation, lighting, etc.). (Contact the Public Service Department at 828-2393 or at 1-800-642-3281 assistance.) Insulated closers. Building envelope will be R31 roof, R20 wally and R10 foiindation__ Same as original. H.I.D. liahtinq_ natural Pas boiler. b) If the project involves commercial, institutional, or industrial buildings, demonstrate that electrical use has been limited to those uses for which no alternative energy source is reasonably suited. Lane Press agrees to continue to install enemy efficient motors on all new equil2ment installed in this addition (See letter from Green Mountain Power.) c) If the project involves a residential subdivision or condominiums, would you object to a permit condition which read: "The permittee and all subsequent owners shall install and maintain energy conservation measures in any heated structures, including insulation with a R-value of at least R-19 in the exterior walls, at least R-38 in the roof or cap and at least R-10 around the foundation or slab, with double pane glass or storm windows and insulated doors." _Yes or No? If no, indicate why and what energy conservation measures will be required. Not applicable d) If the project involves a residential subdivision, condominiums or a commercial development, would you agree to a permit condition which read: "The installation of electric resistance space heating equipment in any building is expressly prohibited without prior District Environmental Commission approval"? X Yes or _No? If no, indicate why and why more efficient forms of energy cannot be used for space heating. Criterion 9G) Private Utilities. Demonstrate that any private utilities (shared by two or more owners) will not become a burden on the municipality if it must assume responsibility for them: a) Indicate whether any of the utilities (road, water system, sewer line, septic system, etc.) will be controlled by more than one owner, and if so, indicate who will be legally and financially responsible for ongoing maintenance and eventual replacement. None b) If a private utility will likely,be transferred to the municipality, indicate how it will meet municipal specifications. None 17 c) If a private utility will not be transferred to the municipality, indicate how the utility will continue to be maintained so as to not become a burden for the municipality at a later date. (Attach copy of deed restrictions or other evidence which will ensure private maintenance and eventual replacement of the utilities.) None Criterion 9H) Scattered Development. Demonstrate that if the project is not physically contiguous to an existing settlement, it will not result in greater costs to the municipality than it provides in additional tax revenues and other public benefits: a) Indicate whether the the project site is physically contiguous to an existing settlement (be certain to include site location map). This issue was addressed in the originnl_nPrmit b) If the project is not contiguous to a settlement, demonstrate that the additional tax revenues and other public benefits of the project outweigh the additional costs of providing municipal services to the project (information generated under criteria 5, 6, 7 and 9A.) c) Indicate what mitigation measures can be utilized with the project to offset any excessive costs for the municipality indicated above which are not offset by additional tax revenues or other public benefits (include impact fees, phasing schedules, etc.). --- Criterion 9J) Public Utilities. Demonstrate that the project will not place an excessive or uneconomic demand on any necessary governmental or public utility facilities or services: a) Indicate what governmental services or public utility services are needed and demonstrate that such services can be provided without undue burdens. See letters from Green Mountain Power and Vermont Gas Systems. b) If the project involves commercial, institutional, or industrial uses, indicate how electrical use will be minimized during peak periods of energy demand in the service area for the utility (include major sources of energy usage, letter from the utility serving the project, etc.). Not applicable 18 c) If any utility lines cross the project site other than along the highway, demonstrate that the utility lines will not be significantly affected (include letter from utility company). (Show utility lines on site plan.) Not applicable riterion 9K) Public Investments. Demonstrate that the project will not endanger any adjacent public investment: a) If any public facilities or lands are located adjacent to'or on the project site, demonstrate that the project will not significantly affect those facilities (include highways, parks, schools, fire stations, sewer lines, etc.). _See original permit approval Criterion 9L) Rural Growth Areas. To the extent that the project parcel or any area within the parcel is identified as a "rural growth area," indicate how the project has been clustered or otherwise designed to provide for reasonable population densities and rates of growth to economize on the cost of roads, utilities and land usage. (Contact the District Coordinator if you need assistance.) See original permit Z^riterion 10) Local and Regional Plans. Demonstrate that the project conforms to the municipal plan or regional plan or municipal capital program adopted under 24 V.S.A., Chapter 117: a) Is there a.duly adopted town plan? If so, explain how the project conforms to that plan with regard to land use, goals and objectives, and comments from local authorities (include copy of plan's land use map, relevant plan language on appropriate land uses or building densities, letter from the planning commission, etc.). See original permit - b) Indicate what type of land uses are encouraged or allowed on the project site under the regional development plan if one exists (include copy of plan's land use map, relevant plan language on appropriate land uses or building densities, letter from the regional planning commission, etc.) (Contact your regional planning commission for assistance.) c) Does the municipality have a capital program? If so, indicate how the project conforms to that program. (Note: contact your town planner or planning commission for assistance.) 4/89 19 District Office Use Only Application # EXHIBIT LIST FOR PROJECT DATE NO. ADMITTED BY SUBJECT 2. 4. 5. 6. 7- 8. 9. 10. - 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 20 PAGE 2 EXHIBIT LIST (CONTINUED) PROJECT DATE NO. ADMITTED BY SUBJECT 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. z . 45. _ 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 4/89 cruFnx nnr f SCHEDULE C Rev. 8/1/90 AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ut;rfii:i'tlt tv'i �r itvinv: ; Lr,'i' cuNSEkVA'i'Iurl Peiluit # PERMITS, COMPLIANCE & PROTECTION DIVISION Date Application Received WATER SUPPLY AND WASTEWATER DISPOSAL (Schedule "C" to Master Act 250 Land Use Permit Application) THERE IS TO BE NO SITE WORK OR CONSTRUCTION 'COMMENCED ON THIS PROJECT WITHOUT WRITTEN APPROVAL FROH THE AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES. Name: Address: 182 Harbor Road, --Shelburne, VT U5482 (Mailing) Tele. No.: 802-985-9466 Business Name (if other than above): CO -APPLICANT• Name: The Lane Press, Inc. Address: 1000 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, VT 05403 (Mailing) P 0. Box 130, Burlington, VT 05402 Tele. No.: 802-863-5555 CONSULTANT: (architect, engineer, plumber) Tele. No. 802-879-281 Name: Walter Adams1 Address: 60 Indian Brook Drive, Essex Junction, VT 05452 (mailing)- (Street) (Town) (State) (Zip) A. PROJECT LOCATION: (Attach Map) Town: South Burlington B. When was the parcel created? 1987 Road/Highway: 1000 Hinesburg Road C. List any prior Environmental or Act 250 permits issued for A above: 4CO473 D. Describe the project (be specific: see item #1 on back) (Attach 2 sets of plans) Add 15,820--sf addition to East side of facility. E. TYPE OF WATER SOURCE: (Municipal, offsite, community, onsite) South Bur 1 i n gfi on (Attach approval - see #6 on back) F. Does this water supply serve 2 or more buildings? No G. TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL: (municipal, offsite, community, onsite) South Burlington (if municipal, attach approval - see #5 on back) H. Number of gallons of sewage generated: Existing Flows: 12,000 New Flows: 0 I. APPLICATION FEE: ($0.22 per gallon of design flow of project - minimum fee of $100.00 per application.) Make check payable t \TATE OF VERMONT. r-, (A AHOUNT ENCLOSED $ 2 5 0 0 �'\ \ U \ DATE `" Z"� - C DATE OF SIGNATURE OF CO -APPLICANT PROJECT DiTORMATION SHEET Water Supply and Wastewater Disposai ( ) 1. Description of Project (on application form): Should include number of seats if a restaurant, or number of living units if an apartment complex, number of square feet, number of employees or similar figures, type of water supply, type of sewage disposal, description of process wastes. If project is a change in use, describe current use. ( ) 2. Location of Project on USGS map or Town Highway Map. ( ) 3. Plot Plan (submit 2 copies) by a professional engineer registered in the State of Vermont showing: ( ) building location and lot dimensions; ( ) existing and proposed surface waters and drainage systems; ( ) location of existing and proposed sewage system and/or sewer lines; ( ) location of existing and proposed water system and water supply lines; ( ) five foot contours in the sewage disposal area; ( ) location of all soil testing and bedrock outcrops; ( ) use of adjoining lands and location of their water and sewage.systems. ( ) 4. Floor plans indicating use of each interior space, sanitary facilities and plumbing fixture schedule. Submit 2 copies prepared by a registered architect, engineer or other qualified consultant. ( ) 5. Soil data and sewage system design information by a professional engineer registered in the State of Vermont (submit 2 copies): ( ) test borings and soils description, and percolation tests in the area of the proposed sewage system; �( ) design of the proposed sewage system based on design flows and the soils - information; ( ) design of existing sewage system and statement as to the capability and condition of the system; ( ) municipal approval for connection to sewage system; ( ) building sewergndl1ateralplan, profile, and sections, construction, material and testing specifications. { ) 6. Water supply system designed by a registered professional engineer (submit 2 copies): ( ) approval by Health Department, Water Supply Section required. Contact the Health Department at 862-7220; ( ) water source yield test; ( ) a water supply system design; ( ) report of ( ) chemical and/or ( ) bacteriological testing of water supply; ( ) design of existing water supply system and statement as to the capability and condition of.the system; ( ) municipal approval for connection to water system. ( ) 7. All plans to be dated and signed by designer. ( ) 8. Application Fee: $0.22 per gallon of daily design flow of project - minimum fee of $100.00 per application. Make check payable to the STATE OF VERMONT. SCHEDULE E Adjoiner Information Submit with the application a list of all adjoining landowners with mailing addresses. An "adjoiner" is a person or organization which owns or controls land or easements on lands which physically abut the tract or tracts of land on which your project is located. Be certain to include landowners on the opposite sides of highways, railways, and rivers (unless you can prove the highway is owned in fee by the state or municipality). Also include homeowner associations, utility companies, and others with significant legal interest in the project land. It is very helpful if you indicate the location of each adjoiner on your site plan. If you do not provide a list which is thorough and up-to-date, your application could be delayed because of improper notice distribution! NAME MAILING ADDRESS WITH ZIP CODE New England Telephone 800 Hinesburg Road P 0 Box SRO South Burlington, VT 05403 K&M Wright 900 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Dynapower Corp 1020 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Interstate 89 Attach additional sheets if necessary 3/89 : SCHEDE.DOC I � ACT 250 MUNICIPAL IMPACT QUESTIONNAIRE Applicant to Complete: Applicant Name The Lane Press Inc Municipality South Burlington VT 05403 - Title and Date of Site Plan Reviewed Lane Press P1 nn Sl Revised 3/9/93 Town Manager, Department Heads, or Equivalent to Complete: a. Does the municipality have the capacity to provide the following services without unreasonable burdens for the above project: Fire Protection? s or No? Police Protection? `Yes or No? Rescue Service? T_Yes or No? Solid Waste Disposal? 7 s or No? Road Maintenance? Wes or No? b. If "no", what are the deficiencies? c. If the service is unavailable from the municipality, who provides the service so that the town doesn't have to? 17,5 Q v e� P�z 0 V / 0 C S d. Would the deficiencies occur without this project? _Yes or _No? If "no", what measures can the applicant take to alleviate the deficiencies? e. If the deficiencies are common to many projects, does this project create burdens which are disproportionate to the taxes and user fees to be paid to the municipality?, _Yes or _No? If "yes", does the municipality recommend the imposition of an impact fee or other means to mitigate any unreasonable burdens? I certify that the above information is tru an� accurate to the best of my knowledge. �( Name Position Date Are you available, after sufficient notice, to antes questions related to the above statements at an Act 250 hearing? �fes or No? 3/89 : MUNQUES.DOC z Y b 3 VemwntGas P.O. Box 467, Burlington, Vermont 05402 802-863-4511 March 12, 1993 Leonard LeCiair Lane Press 1000 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05402 Re: Proposed addition to existing building Dear Leonard: In regard to the proposed 15,000 square foot addition to Lane Press, with the anticipated utilization of the existing heating plant, please be advised that service and main capacity for natural gas service is adequate. Vermont Gas Systems can continue to serve this facility without affecting our present firm customers. If we can be of further assistance, please call me at 863-4511. Sincereiy, Michael J. Poirier Commercial Sales Vermont Gas Systems, Inc. GREEN MOUNNTAIN POWER CORPORATION POWERSAVERS e P.O. BOX 658 0 7 ACORN LANE o COLCHESTER, VT 05446 Telephone: (802) 658-8000 ® (800) 750-5674 (in Vermont) * Fax: (802) 655-8540 March 26, 1993 Mr. Leonard Leclerc Lane Press P.O. Box 130 100 Hinesburg Rd. Burlington, Vermont 05402-0130 RE: Large C & I Retrofit Program - Participation Status Dear Leonard: Thank -you for your participation in Green Mountain Power's Large Commercial & Industrial Retrofit Program. To date our records show that Lane Press has signed installation agreements with GMT for Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs), of which a number have been installed and inspected by GMP. Measures identified include: • Lighting retrofits including T-8 lamps and electronic ballast replacements, Mercury Vapor to Metal Halide conversions, and compact fluorescent lamps. • High efficiency electric motor replacements. • Variable speed drive applications on air handlers and pumping systems. • Integrating a lighting control system into the existing energy management system. • Adding two level switching with occupancy sensors to warehouse HID lighting system. • Installing occupancy sensors to control lighting in offices and smaller work areas. • Retrofitting the bindery lighting fixtures with reflectors and electronic ballasts and remove 50% of the fluorescent lamps. GMT appreciates your willingness and commitment to pursue the necessary analysis to implement recommended measures. These measures represent a signifigant reduction in energy consumption for the Lane Press. Thank -you once again for ,your participation in GNIP's Power$avers family of programs. We value this opportunity to work with Lane Press in meeting your energy conservation needs. If you have any questions, please contact me at 655-8454. Sincerely, /� Steven R. Lac Manager of Field Services Energy Management Services cc: J.S. Street Files a 832e607694 f'9/^�F2-29-93 NON 10 <i5 GREEN MOUNTAIN 1-<1IVE P.02 GREEN MOUNTAIN POWER CORPORATION GREEN MOUNTAIN DRIVF. • 13OX 8NL • 5C, 13UHt.ING'li)N. VT u54u'J_ • (K))/)Ki,4 1,M1 March 26, 1993 Mr. Leonard Leclerc Lane Press 1000 Hinesburg road South Burlington, VT 0540'4; Dear Mr. Leclerc: We have reviewed your letter of March 26, 1993, which requests Green Mountain Power's ability to serve the electric load for the proposed addition at your South Burlington, location. As you know, our comments are required so that a meaningful assessment can be made ur►ier 10 VSA Sections 6086 (a) (9) (F) and W. This requirement ca» be supplied from Green Mountain Power's existing and planned generation source:;. We have evaluated the transmission and the distribution system that will be used to serve your projec:.'s requirements and have determined that existing facilities are adequate for that purpose. We do not anticipate that your addition will require distribution or t-ansmission improvements at this time or accelerate routine system improvemerl is planned for the near future. In view of these facts, we conclude that the proposed development will not put an excessive or uneeonoinic demand on Green Mountain Power's facilities Details concerning sE 1'vi.-,e size, scheduling, costs, etc., should be discussed with Bob Gamelin of the Colchester District Office. � Very truly yours '_."'Louis A. Fonte, Jr. Director of Engineering LAF:tcc cc: Eng. File (LDA) J. A. Franc S. M. Thibault D. W. Grimason Bob Gamelin 12/8/86 JBL MOTION OF APPROVAL That the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the site plan application of The Lane Press, Inc., for construction of a 40,320 square foot addition to the former Semicon building at 1000 Hinesburg Road as depicted on a 3 page set of plans entitled "Plot Plan of land of Semicon Components, Inc. Optioned to The Lane Press, Inc.," prepared by Adams Construction Company, Inc., dated 11/19/86 with the following stipulations: 1. A $15,000 landscaping bond shall be posted prior to permit. M 2. Prior to permit^$5227 intersection fee shall be paid toward the Kennedy Drive/Hinesburg Road intersection improvement fund based on the 82 trip ends generated by this use. 3. A fee shall be paid toward the Hinesburg Road sidewalk fund in accordance with a formula established by the Planning Commission. It shall be based on 50 feet of frontage for this property. 4. The building permit shall be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void. 2 M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner aka Re: December 9, 1986 agenda items Date: December 5, 1986 2) BROWN, 100 HINESBURG ROAD Mr. Bernard Brown proposes to subdivide the .6 acre vacant lot on Hinesburg Road into two .3 acre lots (13,000 + square feet). The property received a variance for the 77.49 feet of frontage for each lot. It is zoned R4. There are no major problems with this subdivision. See Bill Szymanski's memo regarding the r.o.w. 3) LANE PRESS, 1000 HINESBURG ROAD Lane Press proposes to construct a 40,320 square foot addition to the eastern side of the former Semicon building. The 31.2 acre property is zoned Industrial -Agricultural and this use was permitted by the Zoning Board. The total building with the addition and including both floors will be 131,537 square feet. Access: Access will remain from the right-of-way provided from Hinesburg Road. Circulation: Circulation will continue on three sides of the building as it presently exists. The eastern driveway will be reconstructed since the addition will be constructed where the driveway is now located. Parking: There will be 300 total employees with 165 in the first shift. Using the requirement of 2 spaces per 3 employees, 200 parking spaces are required. There are 251 provided on the site. Landscaping: A number of trees will be relocated to build the addition. The plans require $15,000 in new landscaping based on the $650,000 building addition and the $100,000 in renovations. The plans show this amount. Other: See Chief Goddette's and Bill Szymanski's comments. The project is expected to produce 82 trip ends during the peak hour of 3 to 4 p.m. This will require a $5227 contribution toward the intersection improvement fund. A 14,000 gallon per day sewer allocation was given to Semicon. Lane Press expects to use 12,000 gallons per day of this allocation. This new lot has no Hinesburg Road frontage. The Commission 1+ 1 should discuss whether this applicant should contribute towards sidewalks on Hinesburg Road. Although I have not completed the revised sidewalk policy, it will be based on frontages. Perhaps the 50 foot right-of-way that serves this property could be considered frontage for this purpose. 4) DAVIS COMPANY, 10 FARRELL STREET The Davis Company proposes to convert 8,000 square feet of the existing 26,250 square foot building for use by Mid -State Truck- ing (sales and service of trucks and truck parts). This requires conditional use approval which will be considered by the Zoning Board of Adjustment on Monday, December.8, 1986. The Planning Commission has already given approval for storage, distribution and manufacturing use. Access: Two curb cuts are proposed on Farrell Street. The applicants also requests a new curb out (26 feet) wide from Swift Street located at the bottom of the hill. One gravel access near the intersection will be closed and seeded. At the previous approval, the two driveways on Farrell Street were approved and and the one on Swift Street was closed. It seems as though strong justification is needed to warrant this third curb cut at the bottom of the hill especially because of the grade out of the lot as well as that on Swift Street. See Bill Szymanski's comments regarding this. Circulation: Circulation is complete around the building. New asphalt will be installed at the rear of the building to allow for additional parking. Parking: Ninety parking spaces are shown. These should be adequate. Landscaping: No construction work is proposed therefore the landscaping formula is not triggered. However, I recommend that the applicant plant the 7 new yews shown on the plan at the very least ($200 value). Other: See Chief Goddette's and Bill Szymanski's comments. 5) NORDIC FORD/TOYOTA, 50 GREEN MOUNTAIN DRIVE f Nordic proposes to use the vacant lot northeast of their Shel- burne Road site as a new car parking lot. It is directly behind the IDS building. The proposed use requires Zoning Board of Adjustment approval since it is a conditional use. Access: Access is shown from the existing Nordic property to the south. No direct access is shown from Green Mountain Drive. Circulation: Circulation is adequate with appropriate aisle widths. 2 Lot C,(Ntr apv- \000 'A' � O'D 1 � v 115� v stl 7; 24; 84 ),ISI MOTION OF' APPROVAL That the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the Preliminary Plat application of Brassard Automotive for a two -lot subdivision located at 1255 Williston Road, as depicted on a plan prepared by Krebs and Lansing Consulting Engineers entitled Preliminary Plat, Brassard Automotive, 2 lot Subdivision" dated June, 1984 subject to the following stipulations: 1. That the final plat show the actual lot sizes after removing the 60 foot right-of-way. 2. That the Street be built by the applicant to City standards from Williston Road to the School District property, and be deeded to the City upon construction on lot #2. 3. That the City street include a sidewalk to the School District Property and a temporary turn -around. 4. That a performance bond for street improvements in an amount determined by the City Engineer be posted prior to permit. 5. That a drainage easement of 10 feet in width on the southern portion of lot #2 be granted to the City. 6. That the legal documents for all easements be submitted for approval by the City Attorney prior to final plat application. 7. That a fire hydrant be placed on the eastern side of lot #2 by the 60 foot right-of-way, and be shown on the final plat. 8. That a sewer allocation of 500 gallons per day be granted in accordance with the South Burlington Sewer Policy. 9. That the final plat be submitted within 12 months. M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, City Planner Re: December 9, 1986 agenda items Date: December 5, 1986 2) BERNARD BROWN PROPERTY, HINESBURG ROAD 1. The 10 foot r.o.w. shall not be used for any future road opening onto Hinesburg Road. 3) LANE PRESS'ADDITION, HINESBURG ROAD 1. Site plan is acceptable. 4) BUILDING AT 10 FARRELL STREET 1. There exists a drainage swale along the easterly property line. This swale drains a large area. The plan shows the parking lot extended on to this swale. It should not be disturbed or pipes should be added. 2. Plan should identify the owner and architect. This is helpful for future reference. 3. Access should be limited to the two Farrell Street openings. The existing Swift Street opening as shown on the plans was never an approved access. Original plans are on record. 5) NORDIC FORD, GREEN MOUNTAIN DRIVE r 1. Curb cut on Green Mountain Drive shall'be closed. 2. Plan not well done. It lacks dimensions, pipe sizes, elevations. 3. Impact on adjacent property and existing storm system resulting from diverting drainage must be made. 4. The long narrow detention basin will be difficult to maintain. It should be designed so that it will completely drain. 1 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 December 5, 1986 Philip Drumheller Lane Press 305 St. Paul Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Mr. Drumheller: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the agenda and my memo to the Planning Commission. Also enclosed are the City Manager/Engineer's comments and Fire Chief Jim Goddette's comments. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, December 9, 1986 to represent your request. JBL/mcp I Sincerely, C SL4tA-A- Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner �lutl� 6itirlittgtvtt lrc Departinctit l 575 Dortict klytrcct �§Ituth thurlington. 1€1crtnont 054111 OFFICE OF JAMES W. GODDETTE, SR. CHIEF (802) 658.7960 MEMORANDUM TO: SO. BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: CHIEF GODDETTE RE: DECEMBER 9,1986 AGENDA ITEMS DATE: DECEMBER 3,1986 1. J. Robert Audette Property 1900 WILLISTON ROAD PLANS REVIEWED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND THE FOLLOWING SHOULD BE REQUIRED A. At least one hydrant installed on property. B. Road around out side of buildings not to be less then 20` wide. 2. Davis Company 10 Farrell Road Plans Reviewed by this department and at this time I do not see a problem for emergency service. 3. LANE PRESS$ HINESBURG ROAD Plans reviewed By this department and at this time I do not see a problem for emergency equipment. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON SITE PLAN APPLICATION 1) OWNER OF RECORD (name, address, phone #) Semicon Components, Inc. 1000 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, VT 05403, (802) 658-3110 2) APPLICANT (name, address, phone #) The Lane Press, Inc. 305 St. Paul Street, Burlington, VT 05401, (802) 863-5555 3) CONTACT PERSON (name, address, phone #) Philip Drumheller, 305 St. Paul Street, Burlington, VT 05401, (802) 863-5555 4) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 1000 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, VT 05403 5) LOT NUMBER (if applicable) 6) PROPOSED USE.(S) Printing, publishing and bookbinding 7) SIZE OF PROJECT (i.e. total building square footage, # units, maximum height and # floors, square feet per floor) 91,217 square feet existing; manufacturing 68,217 sq. ft. - one story; offices 23,000 sq. ft. - two story, 26'6". An Otis elevator permits handicapped access to second floor. 40,320 sq. ft. proposed addition; manufacturing - one story 8) NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES 297 as follows: 1st shift - 165. 2nd shift - 68• 3rd shift - 56; weekends - 8 9) LOT COVERAGE: building Existing - 5.9% (78,000); Addition - 2.9% (33,600); Total - 8.8% landscaped areas 11.7 %; building, parking, outside storage 21.7 10) COSju jjjn'ATESais Addition --foundation, sitework & landscaping - $250,000g$6g,A; enovatioTr— $"0 660; Total —project - , 00T. Landscaping' Required - $17,500; Proposed - $5 000• Requested Credit - $12.500. Other Site Improvements (please list with cost) 11) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: August 1987 12) ESTIMATED AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (in and out) 900 Estimated trip ends (in and out) during the following hours: Monday through Friday 11-12 Noon 4 12-1 p.m. 0 1-2 p.m. 20 2-3 p.m. 53 3-4 p.m. 101 4-5 p.m. 11 5-6 p.m. 45 6-7 p.m. 0 13) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 7:00-8:00 a.m. and 3:00-4:00 p.m. 14 PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: Mon4ayr_hrough Frid November 20, 1986 DATE OF SUBMISSION OF APPL December 9, 1986 WVrE or HFARINt e ane ress, nc. PRINTERS SINCE 100.1 305 ST. PAUL STREET, BURLING ION, VERMO N'I M E M O R A N D U M DATE: November 20, 1986 AREA (101)H: 802 863-5555 TO: Jane Lafleur, South Burlington City Planner Richard Ward, South Burlington Zoning Administrator FROM: Philip,Drumheller RE: Site Plan Application Lane Press hereby requests zoning and planning approval to locate their printing facility within the Industrial and Agricultural District of South Burlington on the 31.26 acre premises currently known as "Semicon" at 1000 Hinesburg Road. Lane Press is engaged in the business of printing high quality, special interest magazines and conducts associated binding and distributing operations, employing approximately 300 people during three shifts of operation. 1986 payroll is estimated to be $5,800,000. To facilitate an administrative review of the project, I provide the following: General Renovation to the interior of the existing building to accommodate a printing operation to commence early 1987. Our needs require a 40,320 square foot addition, scheduled to commence in March and be completed by August 1987. The move from current location to occur between July and December 1987. Traffic Generation A) Ten average daily deliveries by truck are four paper trailers in, two mail trailers out, one scrap paper trailer and various UPS type shipments. B) Customer/visitor traffic negligible (95% of business is conducted out of state). %piling Addiess: V.0. Box 130, Budingtun, XA 05-1021-01:30 . Arll.x: 4691:34 . Nc%% 1oik(:itv:'__'12 1:11 7320 The C�ane Press, Inc. C O N T IN U E D Jane Lafleur and Richard Ward Page 2 November 20, 1986 C) Employee shifts Current Personnel 1st shift - 6:00 a.m.- 2:00 p.m. 23 7:00 a.m.- 3:00 p.m. 52 .7:00 a.m.- 3:30 p.m. 26 7:30 p.m.- 3:30 p.m. 4 7:00 a.m.- 4:00 p.m. 1 8:00 a.m.- 4:30 p.m. 9 8:00 a.m.- 5:00 p.m. 43 8:30 a.m.- 4:30 p.m. 1 9:00 a.m.- 2:00 p.m. 1 9:00 a.m.- 5:00 p.m. 1 12:00 p.m.- 8:00 p.m. 4 2nd shift - 2:00 p.m.-10:00 p.m. 20 3:00 p.m.-11:00 p.m. 29 3:30 p.m.-11:30 p.m. 19 3rd shift - 10:00 p.m.- 6:00 a.m. 11:00 p.m.- 7:00 a.m. 20 36 Weekend shift - Fri 10:00 p.m. -Sat 2:00 p.m. & Sun 7:00 a.m.-11:00 p.m. 6 Sat & Sun 6:00 .a.m.-10:00 p.m. 2 Environmental Impact and Municipal Services Lane Press will draw and dispose of a total of 12,000 gallons of water per day through existing connections to the South Burlington municipal treatment plant; 4,500 gallons will be sanitary; 5,000 gallons will be process water, and 2,500 gallons reserve for future growth. Lane Press produces approximately 15 tons of solid waste per day in the form of scrap paper for recycling. Simple trash (non -hazardous) will be approximately 10 cubic yards per day, which is handled by KELCO and will be compacted prior to being disposed of in the South Burlington landfill. Lane Press utilizes chemicals in the printing process which are subjected to silver reclamation, and the effluent is disposed of through the sewer system. Lane Press will continue to handle, store and dispose of these chemicals according to MSDS specifications. Lane Press utilizes approximately 80 gallons of fountain solution per week as a wetting agent for the offset printing process which is disposed and accounted for through the pollution abatement system. Presses are cleaned with 150 gpw of web wash which is applied with cleaning rags. Residual is also accounted for through the pollution abatement system. All of the above are covered by permit. Balance of chemicals are suitable either for direct disposal to sewer or to sewer with pre-treatment to occur within our waste water facility. The rags are stored, picked up and cleaned regularly by Foley Industrial Supplies and then returned to Lane Press. Approximately 1 �he ,�ane �ress, �nc. C O N T INUED B Jane Lafleur and Richard Ward Page 3 November 20, 1986 55 gpw of waste ink are recycled through our principal ink suppliers. Additionally, Lane Press generates approximately 275 gallons per week of reclaimed condensed ink oil via its pollution abatement system. This ink oil, comparable to No. 2 heating oil, is stored in above -ground tanks and is shipped to appropriate waste oil treatment facilities. In addition to water supply and solid waste and sewage disposal, Lane Press request the South Burlington municipality provide police and fire protection. PMD/mlc 0 N CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON SITE PLAN APPLICATION 1) OWNER OF RECORD (name, address, phone #) Semicon Components Inc 1000 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, VT 05403, (802) 658-3110 2) APPLICANT (name, address, phone #) The Lane Press, Inc. 305 St. Paul Street, Burlington, VT 05401, (802) 863-5555 3) CONTACT PERSON (name, address, phone #) Philip Drumheller, 305 St. Paul Street, Burlington, VT 05401, (802) 863-5555 4) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 1000 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, VT 05403 5) LOT NUMBER (if applicable) 6) PROPOSED USE.(S) Printing, publishing and bookbinding 7) SIZE OF PROJECT (i.e. total building square footage, # units, maximum height and # floors, square feet per floor) 91,217 square feet existing; manufacturing 68,217 sq. ft. - one story; offices 231000 sq ft two story, 26'6". An Otis elevator permits handicapped access to second floor. 40,320 sq. ft. proposed addition; manufacturing one story. 8) NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES 297 as follows: 1st shift - 165. 2nd shift - 68• 3rd shift - 56• weekends - 8 9) LOT COVERAGE: building Existing - 5.9% (78,000); Addition - 2.9% (33 600)• Total - 8.87i landscaped areas 11.7 %; building, parking, outside storage 21.7 10) s Addition--foundation, sitework & landscaping - — $250,000 660, Total project-- ,00�luffTTMg- $65g,udl8 ovatiun- Landscaping' 'Required - $17 500; Proposed - $5 000• Requested Credit_- $12.500. Other Site Improvements (please list with cost) 11) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: August 1987 12) ESTIMATED AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (in and out) 900 Estimated trip ends (in and out) during the following hours: Monday through Friday 11-12 Noon 4 12-1 p.m. 0 1-2 p.m. 20 2-3 p.m. 53 3-4 p.m. 101 4-5 p.m. 11 5-6 p.m. 45 6-7 p.m. 0 13) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 7:00-8:00 a.m. and 3:00-4:00 p.m. 14 PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: November 20, 1986__ DATE OF SUBMISSION h Frid IGNATURE OF APPI.I December 9, 1986 WE OF HEARING City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 November 17, 1986 Philip Drumheller Lane Press 305 St. Paul Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Mr. Drumheller: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 This serves to confirm that the City of South Burlington approved the connection of the Semicon (former Mitel) building to the Airport Parkway Sewage Treatment Plant. The original allocation was 14,000 gallons per day. This allocation will be continued for any new use of that building. There is adequate water to serve this property. Sincerely, f Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp cc: William J. Szymanski, City Manager H I LEPHONE L28' (347. 66 ^'\ I� S 83.09 32 W .4-- 2 Y V' C~ QO aJ E. 6 Acres W I o z E ZONE 0 I a F THE i ZO WALES 3 W > G Z W V t O Y It O t J W V > 2 4 4 Y 1 � O E a J a E — E —E G E i I61.06' (16.611 m) N 69.16' 28" W t� HELICOPTER PAD E I TRAMgMIr10 Z ( E Y � s o 0 E BUILDING S O W E w E �J A 1 w 19. yr —5------------- _ 40'E-------5T3.4T4�E----- =— _ 20• SEWER EASEMENT_ V 176 P. 510 7 • I S B7. 06' f3- E 60.00 Acres I STATE p• 5. 59'39• INTER: R •4683.75' (1427.607 m) L•490.01' d V176 P.310---,::� STOP, 0w _ \ — ---15 rw—`� io MOTE I ` OI b/ a EASEMENT ALONG GRAVEL S % 10 EASEMENT I 1 A �• DRIVE FOR ACCESS TO AND I ALONG WATER I I yI /a MAINTENANCE OF PUMP I LINE TO PUMP I STATION. I STATION. 1 1 I /? V.176 P. SIO I V. 176 P. 510 I I.Ji I I I I I > ti I I lol O 20' SE • (� 7 / • I,I EASEME 6 I ( V. 176 I 20 I I /p A 6� I I / II I I 20' WATER EASEMENT PROPOSED I I SO ' SEWER G WATER EASENEMT PROPOSED I NOTE, LOCATION OF FUTURE SEWER I I EASEMENT MAY VARY. LOCATIONS I I SHOWN HERE FOR REPRESENTATIVE I PURPOSES. II I I I I i • I I I I I I I I I I I I I II li I I I I II I it I I II r � The C ane Tess, nc. PRINTERS SINCE 1904 305 ST. PAUL STREET, BURLINGTON, VERMONT May 6, 1987 Ms. Jane LaFleur South Burlington Planning Commission 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05401 RE: VIDA Form 4 Dear Jane: AREA CODE: 802 863-5555 The Lane Press is applying to VIDA for long term financing of the Semicon building and property at 1000 Hinesburg Road in South Burlington, for renovation of the building and for a 45,000 square foot addition. We would appreciate record of your findings on VIDA Form 4, attached. If you would please call me when ready, I will arrange for pickup and delivery of the form to the VIDA office in Montpelier. Sincerely, P ili M. Drumheller Vice P esident and and Chief Financial Officer PMD/aa Enc. Mailing Address: P.O. Box 130, Burlington, VT 05402-0130 . Telex: 469134 . New York City: 212-431-7320 VIDA No. 4 (2) (3) (4) (5) VERMONT INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Findings of Planning Commission or Municipality (To be prepared by Municipal Planning Commission; if no Municipal Planning Commission exists, Munici- pal Officers or Regional Planning Commission may make findings.) Name of Planning Commission or Municipality ............................................................................................... ........... Cit.y...o.f... S.Aut.h... ...Commission......................................................... Description of Proposed Industrial Project or Park............................................................................................ ........... Lame ... �X.� .S...Addition.,...1000...Hinesburg..Road..................................................................... ............ .h...0.Q.0....guare...foot addition and„renovation.............................................................. ......... ........ Municipality in which Proposed Industrial Project or Park is to be located ......................:......................... ...........Qity.... of...South Burlington............................................................................................................. ......................... The undersigned ...,..City Planner on behalf of the Planning Commission .................................................................................................................................. WunLdpd Odk cs) (Punning Coauaniedoa) Of the City. IiM of...S.oaat.h...Baar.1.ingtran .......................... ...... Vermont, after ......................................... a study of the proposed industrial site, a review of the municipal ordinances and a general study of the effects of the proposed industrial project or park upon the municipality In which it is to be located here- with submit the following findings at the request of the Vermont Industrial Development Authority. 1. That the proposed industrial project or park (WiM (will not) violate existing zoning ordinances and regulations, and would be located in a district zoned .....Industrial -Agricultural. 2. That the proposed industrial project or park (is) (0t) in accord with a comprehensive municipal plan. 3. That the proposed industrial project or park (0 (will not) involve unusual costs to the com- munity. If affirmative --estimate costs — Water Mains;.......................................................... _ _ Street Extensions ;............................ .................. . Sewer Mains;..........................................................Other costs (itemized) ............................................................................................................................................................................. 6. That the proposed industrial project or park (is) (i ihtj in the best interests of the community for the following reasons: Impr.ov�s..mu G.i�al...tax... ba.se., Use .of a vacant industrial building. Ceae:rat_es...add.it.ional employment.. ............................................................... ... _. .... _............................................................................................ Date: Mav 6, 1987 Si MAWr,es ............�J!'A �i�?1 :... k u --.... . ...........j.a 13., J.(;�fleur on Behalf of the ......................................... ...........S.Qut)?..B.rling,ton Planning Commission. City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 TEL (802) 658-7953 June 22, 1987 Mr. Philip Drumheller 305 St. Paul Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: New Lane Press Building Hinesburg Road (#1000) South Burlington, VT Dear Phil: OFFICE OF CITY MANAGER WILLIAM 1• SZYMANSKI Your new facilities on Hinesburg Road, South Burlington are not located in a flood plain zone as outlined on maps prepared in 1980 by the Federal Government. Very truly yours, William Sz manski City Manager WJS/b Memo To: So Burlington Planning Commission From: Wafter Adams CC: None Date: D5Q4199— G Re: Minor site changes at The Lane Press Attached is a plan SP2 on which I have added some additional work (in red) we would like to perform this spring. These changes are minor in scope and will provide improvements to our site for both appearance and safety. Item #1: Curb along the diagonal parking. This will prevent cars from parking on the lawn that slopes to the building. This additional curb will not impact drainage from this lawn area. Item #2: Additional parking lot lights. Six more 20' poles, arms, and 250 watt HIPS down lights, matching newly installed fixtures, along the westerly side of the original parking areas to increase the lighting and eliminate dark spots caused by layout and fixture change. Item #3: Bollards along sidewalks. Add five 3' high 75 watt HPS bollards, same as existing along the walkways to the new parking areas. Item #4: Bollard lighting at patio. Add two bollard lights, as above, at the paver patio. We would like to do this work as part of our site cleanup and finishing and would expect that we could have this work, our final plantings, paving and grass by the end of May. Thank you, r Wafter Adams, Plant Engineer Ncl 0 Page 1 State of Vermont CASE NO. APPLICANT c/o Philip 172 Harbor Shelburne, WATER SUPPLY AND WASTEWATER DISPOSAL PERMIT LAWS/REGULATIONS INVOLVED WW-4-0604 Environmental Protection Rules Landrum Effective September 10, 1982 Drumheller Road VT 05482 This project, consisting of constructinq a 15,820 square foot addition to the existing 59,800 square foot manufacturing facility for a maximum of 300 employees approved in Certification of Compliance 4CO473 (3rd Revision) located at 1000 Hinesburg Road in the City of South Burlington, Vermont is hereby approved under the requirements of the regulations named above, subject to the following conditions. This Permit does not constitute Act 250 approval under Case Number 4CO473. GENERAL (1) This permit does not relieve the permittee from obtaining all other approvals and permits as may be required from the Act 250 District Environmental Commission, the Department of Labor and Industry (phone 828-2106), the Vermont Department of Health (phone 863-7220), and local officials PRIOR to proceeding with this project. (2) The project shall be completed as shown on the plans Job No. 9303 Sheet S 1 " Site Plan" dated March 3, 1993 last revised 4/3/93; Sheet S 2 "Utilities" dated March 10, 1993 last revised 4/6/93; and Sheet S 3 "Site Details" dated March 29, 1993 revised 5/31/93 prepared by Adams Construction, Inc. and stamped by Alan L. Nye, P.E. and which have been stamped "approved" by the Division of Protection. The project shall not deviate from the approved plans without prior written approval from the Division of Protection. (3) No alterations to the existing building other than those indicated on the approved plan or Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit, which would change or atfect the exterior water supply or wastewater disposal or the approved. use of the building shall be allo.red without prig review and approval from the Agency of Natural Resources. Water Supply and Wa 4water Disposal Permit WW-4-0604, Landrum Page 2 (4) A copy of the approved plans and this Permit shall remain on the project during all phases of construction and, upon request, shall be made available for inspection by State or local personnel. (5) In the event of a transfer of ownership (partial or whole) of this project, the transferee shall become permittee and be subject to compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit. (6) The Protection Division now reviews the sewage and water systems for public buildings under 10 V.S.A., Chapter 61 - Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit. (7) All conditions set forth in Certification of Compliance #4CO473 (3rd Revision) dated August 10, 1982 shall remain in effect except as modified or amended herein. WATER SUPPLY (8) The water main extension is approved provided the water main extension is constructed in strict accordance with the Agency of Natural Resources' "Public Water System Permit to Construct " Project # E-0220 & WSID # 5091 to Philip Drumheller dated April 30, 1993. SEWAGE DISPOSAL (9) The municipal sewer collection system herein approved shall be routinely and reliably inspected during construction by a Vermont -registered professional engineer who shall, upon completion and prior to occupancy of the subject establishment, report in writing to the Division of Protection that the installation was accomplished in accordance with the approved plans and permit conditions. Dated at Essex Jct., Vermont this llth day of ilay, 1993. Jack Long, Acting Commissioner Department of Environmental Conservation By Ernest P. Christianson Regional. Engineer CC: For The Record City of South Burlington Act 250 Coordiri for -Faith Inguisrud Water Supply Division Department of Health Denar�.ment of Labor and Industry Adams Construction, Inc. Alan L. Nye The Lane Press, Inc. PUBLIC HEARING SOUTH BURLINGTON 9961 'LZ Jeq` 4c1aS PLANNING COMMISSION uoss,w D 6wuuOld The South Burlington Planning uol6uun9 glnoS Commission will hold a public 'uoou!oyD i hearing at the South Burlington 9—l" '1 Jaled City Hall, Conference room, 575 I Dorset Street, South Burlington, poH Ap] uol6wl,n9 y1nS ayl Vermont on Tuesday, September 10 uo cf wedsw ,!lgnd Jol elgl!o�D 23, 1986 at 7:30 p.m. to consid- a,o suoy D,!lddo to s!do er the following: *pooh awnglegS C Z I In 1) Final plat application of De- pelo,ol s! puo s!ma1 .V Acylnos wey Irish for the subdivision of eq1 uo 'lle„D3 -1 Aq {se. ppuo a 1.15acre lot located south yyou eql uo pepunoq s, A1ado,d of the water tower for a sin-, -luo,nolse, Ines 091 pe clod gle-family dwelling from the a41 oI o6uoq3 ou puo laeluonbs 68.43 acre farm. Property is 000'Zq of lael e,onbs DO'8C bounded on the north by Hor- wo,l mods wglo 10 80100) vor View development, on the a,onbs 10101 ayl u! uoy IpeJ D east by J. Trevithick, H. Ben- puo 6u!ppnq 6ww es 4s!xe eglop sen, A. Smith, The Champlain -u!m q no,gl-anup yl!%.f 1-1 Water District, J. Pappas, D. yuoq D MollD al uold eL of u064 Cummings, W. Floyd, S. Hall, -D,!hpow D Jol seloposj, pooh H. Davison, and L. Calkins, on -01101 fO 101d l0uy pe!Aay (C the west by A. Racine and Allenbrook and on the south .pood by Allen Road and is located 61ngseu!H 0001 to petrol s, puo at 200 Allen Road. iy6uM .w puo 'scl!M S Pu^ -1 alu,od .m puo .V Aq 19M eyl uo 2) Preliminary Plat application of — '(y,upoocJ 'a) se,V uoojo Semicon, Inc. for the subdivi- dq liDe PuD glnos o44yo 'Aall!1 son of the 111.2 acre property 8 puD 69 alols,eµu �q q", u into a 31.2 acre parcel with 144 uo pepunoq s! A -401d IIs, the existing building and an 80 -,od —o 09 uo puo pllnq B,! acre parcel. The property is ls!xo e41 yPM IeJJOd ^ L OC D bounded on the north by Inter- ,lu! 10�, cl a„o Z l l I Vo uo!s state 89 and R. Tilley, on the !n!pgns /ol o,wl D ,o,u1 'uo, south and east by Green Acres ,weS to uoyD,!Iddo 1 lDuy (Z (R. Goodrich), and on the west by A. and R. Pointer, L. and S. Ao,v, JD a,v.eJ >f 8 CZ Wiles, and M. Wright and is D P91-01 s, puD no eq,JGA .0 located at 1000 Hinesburg ,uD '3 Aq 1,om eql 'anyouo0 Road. S Pun gl!wS '3 P {Dylueso8 s puo S ,nP a1 uD Aq 3) Revised final plat of Daniel pnos aqI uo '.(od .4 'V Aq Is.e O'Brien for 6 revision to the ,yl uo pepunoq s! JedoJd w1 layout of Parcel One of Fox - ...I e,onbs L96"9 puo esnoy Groh consisting of 28 multi- ucwxa ylun lol of e,Onbs family units on 3.32 acres. ICO'LZ o olw ed0,d a„o Property is bounded on the ,Z' I D to uo�s,w ns lol om4 north by Country park (O'Bri- ,ol Days Onul puo sepoyD en) and Briarwood, on the o u 14—ildd. d 10uy ( I west by Cardinal Woods and on the south by Hayes Avenue :6u,-.Ilo gl Jep!su0, 01 and is located north of Hayes W'd OC'L to '99 •h l JegopO Avenue and east of Hinesburg 4opsen1 uo lu0 aA 'uolBu,l,n9 Road. 11—S '1o911S in 0 9L9 wooy . oua,eluo� •110 1? uo18wP^8 Peter L. Jacob, Chairman pnos ay1 1 uuoay „I South Burlington qnd o P104 I'm 6 Planning Commissior 016uq,n {1noS ^q I September 6, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION 25 MARCH 1986 PAGE 9 regarding light manufacturing in the Industrial -Agricultural District on Hinesburg Road Mr. Rowell explained they are trying to find out what light manufacturing is as they are trying to determine whether Lane Press would be a permitted use in this zone. Mrs. Lafleur said the major concern is that other districts discriminate between light manufacturing and printing, but this may be because "printing" is meant to include the "quick copy" type of operation. Mrs. Maher said she thought of printing as heavy machinery and a lot more trucking. Mr. Drumheller said that Lane prints magazines exclusively including Vermont Life, the UVM Alumni Magazine, etc. It usually takes 3 weeks to produce a magazine. They have 281 employees and feel they have outgrown their Burlington facility. They are looking at the Semicon Building and other sites in the zone. They an- ticipate 2 or 3 trucks of paper coming in per day. Every- thing is mailed out ... but is taken out on trucks (2 per day estimate). They are not a high water user. Chemicals to clean presses are controlled by the State. They have elaborate pollution control devices, also controlled by the State. Mr. Dooley questioned whether this was a Planning or Zoning Board decision. In a poll of members, Mrs. Maher said she would be concerned with truck traffic down Hinesburg Rd. She didn`t think the ordinance was meant to include uses that would generate such truck use. Mr. Burgess said he didn't think this was light manufacturing, or manufacturing at all. He felt the Ordin- ance mean clean, non -slag producing businesses. Mr. Belter said he thought this was the kind of business they should be trying to attract to the Southeast Quadrant. Ms. Peacock sait it seemed to fit the character of the Quadrant and she didn't think 2 trailer trucks a day was so bad. But she questioned whether this would then allow the "quick copy" type of places as well. Mr. Jacob said he had no objection. It was a clean business and served a purpose. Mrs. Hurd did not feel this was what the Ordinance meant. Mr. Dooley said he thought this was close enough to be with the Ordinance but he didn't feel the Commission had the power to define this. Other Business Mrs. Lafleur distributed the Burlington Minutes of the joint meeting. As there was no further business to come before the Com- mission, the meeting adjourned at 10:45 pm. April 7, 1986 William Rowell Hickok & Boardman Realty, Inc. 346 Shelburne Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re; I-Ag Interpretation Dear Bill: Enclosed are the minutes of the Planning Commission regarding your request for an interpretation. Please call me or Dick Ward if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp cc: Gary Gyle I M� 1 not 4� PARKING: Three parking spaces are proposed on the leased land for this new hangar. LANDSCAPING: The estimated construction cost is $50,000. This seems somewhat low. If accurate, the plan depicts an adequate amount of landscaping with 15 cedars and 7 maples. OTHER: See Bill Szymanski's and Jim Goddette's comments. 7. PRATT AND WHITNEY/NORTHERN AIRWAYS, 1150 Airport Drive The applicant proposes to construct a 2800 square foot addition to the existing Northern Airways building for Pratt and Whitney. A similar proposal was approved by the Commission in August,1984 for a larger building and parking lot renovations; it was never constructed. ACCESS AND CIRCULATION: Access shall be from the existing entrance at the southern corner of the building. Circulation is around three sides of the building. PARKING: The plan proposes 94 existing parking spaces. LANDSCAPING: The $100,000 addition requires a $3000 landscaping plan and bond. The plan shows approximately $2500 worth of landscaping. Five new norway maples are shown in the front lawn. This may be on City owned property and should be checked. If there is adequate space, these could be increased in size or number to make up the deficiency in cost. A revised plan should be submitted prior to permit. OTHER: See Bill Szymanski's and Jim Goddette's comments. 8. HICKOK AND BOARDMAN, ORDINANCE INTERPRETATION Bill Rowell has asked for an interpretation of section 16.202 of the Zoning Regulations that permits light manufacturing in the Industrial -Agricultural district. The Lane Press is considering the former Mitel building on Hinesburg Road and requests that they be considered a permitted use under this section. Dick Ward and I were reluctant to agree with this interpretation since other sections of the ordinance clearly distinguish between light -manufacturing and printing. Mr. Rowell or a representative of Lane Press should be present to explain some of the features of this business that preserves the inten)L of the I-Ag zoning. 2 HICKOK& 130-ARDMAN REALTYINC. March 4, 1986 Mrs. Jane LaFleur South Burlington Planning Administrator City Hall 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05401 Dear Jane: 346 Shelburne Street, Burlington, Vermont 05401 Phone 863-1500 Thank you for your time and help in understanding some of the historical events in the development of the "Mitel", "Semicon" property. Per your suggestion, I am writing this letter to request an ex- planation of what is considered to be light manufacturing under 16.202 of the zoning regulations. More specifically, if the board would look upon the Lane Press Company, presently located on St. Paul Street in Burlington, as an allowed use of this building. I would welcome an opportunity to arrange for someone from that company to meet, and discuss with the board, the specifics of their business and their possible plans for that building. Thank you again. Sincerely, William C. Rowell WCR/sml R EALTOR EQUMET E2UITA8LE R ALTY NETWORK March 20, 1986 William C. Rowell Hickok & Boardman Realty, Inc. 346 Shelburne Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Lane Press, Industrial-Ag Zoning interpretation Dear Bill: Enclosed are the agenda and a copy of my memo to the Commission regarding your request for an interpretation of the light - manufacturing use in the I-Ag District. It would be helpful if you or someone from Lane Press could be present to explain the Lane Press business and how you feel this use meets the in- tent of the z-Ag Zone. Sincerely, Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp Encl PERRY & SCHMUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1480 WILLISTON ROAD P. O. BOX 2323 SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402 ROBERT J. PERRY RONALD C. SCHMUCKER KATHLEEN M. BRISTOL Ms. Jane LtFluer, Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05401 Dear Jane, A kvk s"III, v c October 27, 1986 TELEPHONE 863-4558 AREA CODE 802 I am enclosing a copy of the revised Semicon/South Burlington deed for the two easements. Please advise if you have any problems with them. Sincerely, Robert J. Perry, Esq. RJP:msc Enclosure cc: Steven F. Stitzel, Esq. Charles T. Shea, Esq. Vermont Warranty Deed KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS THAT It, SEMICON COMPONENTS, INC., a Massachusetts Corporation with a principal place of busines in Burlington, in the County of Middlesex and Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Grantor, in the consideration of Ten and More Dollars paid to my full satisfaction by THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, a muncipal corporation of South Burlington, County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, Grantee, by these presents, do freely GIVE, GRANT, SELL, CONVEY, AND CONFIRM, unto the said Grantee, THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, and its successors and assigns forever, a certain piece of land in South Burlington, in the County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, described as follows, viz: An easement and right of way in perpetuity, 30 feet in width for the installation, repair, maintenance and replacement of sewer and water lines on land and premises conveyed to the Grantor by Warranty Deed of Mitel, Inc. dated October 24, 1984 as recorded in Volume 209 at Pages 294-8 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Said easement extends southerly from an existing sewer line easement which extends east and west southerly adjacent to the Semicon building and is shown on a plan entitled "Site Plan for Semicon, Inc., South Burlington, Vermont" dated 7/25/86, last revised , prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers, Inc. which plan is recorded in Volume at Page of said land records. Said easement extends to the common boundary marking the southerly line of the 31.26 acre parcel and the northerly line of the 80.00 acre parcel as shown on a said plan. Also conveyed is an easement and right of way in perpetuity, 30 feet in width, for the installation, repair, maintenance and replacement of water lines which is the northerly extension of the above described northerly of the existing sewer line easement and the westerly extension thereof of a width of 20 feet, designated as "20' Water Easement Proposed" on the aforementioned plan. The exact location of said easement shall be determined by construction. Said sewer and water lines are for the benefit of said 80 acre parcel and lands southerly thereof. This deed is executed and delivered pursuant to an Offer of Irrevocable Dedication by Grantor herein to the Grantee herein subject to all rights and restrictions of record. Grantor, its sucessors and assigns, shall have the right to make use of the land which is subject to the easement in a manner not inconsistent with the use of the easement by the within Grantee but specifically shall place no structures, landscaping or other improvements within said right of way which shall prevent or interfer with Grantee's exercise of the rights granted herein. The Grantee, by the acceptance of this deed, for itself, its successors and assigns agrees that any exercise of rights granted herein shall be subject to the requirement that the premises be restored to their original condition at the Grantee's costs as soon as practicable after excavation. This deed shall act as a bill of sale and does hereby convey pipelines, gate valves and other appurtenances thereon over, under and through the right of way and easement herein conveyed. Said easement supplements prior easements granted by Mitel, Inc. as recorded in Volume 176 at Pages 516 and 518 of said land records. Reference is hereby made to the above -mentioned instruments, the record thereof, the references therein made, and their respective records and references, in further aid of this description. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD said granted premises, with all the privileges and appurtenances thereof, to the said Grantee, THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, its successors and assigns, to its own use and behoof forever; and the said Grantor, SEMICON COMPONENTS, INC., for itself and its successors, executors and administrators, do covenant with the said Grantee, THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, its successors and assigns, that until the ensealing of these presents it is the sole owner of the premises, and has good right and title to convey the same in manner aforesaid, and that it is FREE FROM EVERY ENCUMBRANCE; and it hereby engages to WARRANT AND DEFEND the same against all lawful claims whatever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this day of SEMICON COMPONENTS, INC. IN THE PRESENCE OF: Its Duly Authorized Agent. STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN At , this __ day of , 1986, personally appeared , duly authorized agent of Semicon Components, Inc. and he/she acknowledged this instrument, by him/her sealed and subscribed, to be their free act and deed. Before me: Notary Public L�18' Vermont Warranty Deed KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS THAT It, SEMICON COMPONENTS, INC., a Massachusetts Corporation with a principal place of busines in, Burlington, in the County of Middlesex and Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Grantor, in the consideration of Ten and More Dollars paid to my full satisfaction by THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, a muncipai corporation of South Burlington, County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, Grantee, by these presents, do freely GIVE, GRANT, SELL, CONVEY, AND CONFIRM, unto the said Grantee, THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, and its successors and assigns forever, a certain piece of land in South Burlington, in the County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, described as follows, viz: There is hereby conveyed in fee simple to Grantee, and its successors and assigns forever, a certain strip of land on the lands of Grantor herein in the City of South Burlington, Vermont. Said lands of Grantor herein referred to are all and the same land and premises as were conveyed to Grantor by Warranty Deed of Mite], Inc. dated Octo!aer 24, 1984 as recorded in Vo!ume 209 at Pages 294-8 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Said strip of land hereby conveyed is for the purpose and use of a City of South Burlington street, being an extension of Swift Street, so-called, in the City of South Burlington. Said strip of land commences at the easterly side of Hinesburg Road and the southern corner of the western boundary of the Grantors. said lands. The said strip is a uniform width of eighty (80) feet and the said point of commencement is also co -terminus and coincident with the point of commencement of an access road thirty (30) feet in width to the said lands of Grantor. Said strip of land hereby conveyed further then proceeds easterly and thence southeasterly from the said point of beginning and thence to the lands now or formerly owned by Green Acres Corporation. Said strip of land hereby conveyed is further more particularly depicted, denoted and described on a plan entitled "Site Plan for Semicon; Inc., South Burlington, Vermont" dated 7125/86, last revised _ prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers, Inc. whi,,h plan is recorded in Volume at Page of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Said strip of land above described is centered on the strip of land previously conveyed by Mitel, Inc. to the City of South Burlington by Warranty Deed dated as recorded in Volume 176 at Page 519 of said land records, which deed was executed and delivered pursuant to an. Offer of Irrevocable Dedication recorded in Volume 176 at Page 510 of said land records. The purpose of this deed is to extend the width of the proposed roadway to 80 feet. This conveyance is subject to all rights and restrictions of record. Reference is hereby made to the above -mentioned instruments, the record thereof, the references therein made, and their respective records and references, in further aid of this description. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD said granted premises, with all the privileges and appurtenances thereof, to the said Grantee, THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, its successors and assigns, to its own use and behoof forever; and the said Grantor, SEMICON COMPONENTS, INC., for itself and its successors, executors and administrators, do covenant with the said Grantee, THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, its successors and assigns, that until the ensealing of these presents it is the sole owner of the premises, and has good right and title to convey the same in manner aforesaid, and that it is FREE FROM EVERY ENCUMBRANCE; and it hereby engages to WARRANT AND DEFEND the same against all lawful claims whatever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this day of , 1986. SEMICON COMPONENTS, INC. IN THE PRESENCE OF: By: STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN Its Duly Authorized Agent. At , this day of personally appeared duly authorized agent of Semicon Components, Inc. and he/she acknowledged this instrument, by him/her sealed and subscribed, to be their free act and deed. Before me: Notary Public Fc;r G�i;, .. .... �`� y Draft of: Io 1 �6 / s WARRANTY DEED KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That SEMICON COMPONENTS, INC., a Massachusetts corporation with a principal place of business in Burlington, in the County of Middlesex and Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Grantor, in the consideration of Ten and More Dollars, paid to its full satisfaction by of County of and State of , Grantee(s), by these presents, does freely GIVE, GRANT, SELL, CONVEY and CONFIRM unto the said , Grantee(s), and heirs and assigns forever, a certain parcel of land, with the improvements thereon and appurtenances thereto, in South Burlington, in the County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, containing 80.00 acres, more or less, and more particularly described with reference to a certain plan entitled "Plat of Land of Semicon Components, Inc., Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated December 9, 1981, last revised and recorded in Volume at Page of the South Burlington Land Records (hereinafter the "Plan"), as follows: Commencing at a point marked by a concrete monument set in the easterly sideline of the right-of-way of Hinesburg Road at the point of intersection of the common boundary of lands now or formerly of L. & S. Wyles and the within Grantor; Thence proceeding N 83°06'48" E a distance of 423.00 feet to a concrete monument; Thence turning to the right and proceeding S 05°59'21" E a distance of 500.00 feet to a concrete monument; Thence turning to the left and proceeding N 83°01'59" E a distance of 3,073.19 feet to a concrete monument; Thence turning to the left and proceeding N 07051159" W a distance of 1,143.06 feet to a concrete monument set in the southerly sideline of the right-of-way for Interstate 89; Thence turning to the left and proceeding N 79°18'18" W a distance of 449.40 feet to a concrete monument; Thence continuing N 79°18118" W a distance of 346.39 feet to a point; Thence proceeding on a curve to the right with a central angle of 4°02'11" and a radius of 4,683.75 feet, a distance of 329.96 feet to a concrete monument; Thence turning to the left and proceeding S 08°32'07" W a distance of 815.40 feet to a concrete monument; Thence turning to the right and proceeding N 87°06'43" W a distance of 1,473.40 feet to a concrete monument; Thence turning to the right and proceeding N 04°46'35" W a distance of 170.00 feet to a concrete monument; Thence turning to the left and proceeding S 83°11'01" W a distance of 727.00 feet to a concrete monument set in the easterly sideline of Hinesburg Road; Thence turning to the left and proceeding S 05°59'21" E a distance of 633.20 feet to the point or place of beginning. The within described property is conveyed subject to the following: (a) Sewer line easement with Keith Wright dated December 9, 1976, and recorded in Volume 123, Page 480, of the South Burlington Land Records; (b) Agreement between the City of South Burlington and Bernard Roy, George DeForge, Robert E. Boardman, David M. Boardman and I. Munn Boardman, Jr., recorded in Volume 136, Page 309, of the South Burlington Land Records; (c) Easement from Keith Wright to Green Mountain Power Corporation, dated May 1, 1961, and recorded in Volume 63, Page 15, of the South Burlington Land Records; (d) Easement from City of South Burlington to Mitel, Inc. for aban- donment of part of a 20 foot sewer line, which is shown on a plan by Dick Trudell, and recorded in Volume 179, Page 400, of the South Burlington Land Records; (e) Sewer easement to Pizzagalli (for New England Telephone Building) for sewer, to be offered to the City and recorded in Volume 207, Page 176, of the South Burlington Land Records; -2- (f) Agreement between the City of South Burlington and Mitel, Inc., which is recorded in Volume 176, Page 510, of the South Burlington Land Records; (g) General easement to Green Mountain Power Corporation for under- ground/overhead electrical, dated August 13, 1981, and recorded in Volume 176, Page 138, of the South Burlington Land Records; (h) Taxes assessed for 1986 and for subsequent years which are not yet due or payable (prorated at closing) which the Grantee herein assumes and agrees to pay as part of the consideration for this transaction; (i) Title and rights of the public and others entitled thereto in and to those portions of the within described premises lying within the bounds of that adjacent street and way known as Hinesburg Road; (j) The easements, rights -of -way and rights depicted on the Plan, including: i. Pedestrian easement along southerly line. ii. Sewer easement and easement for access to sewer lines. iii. Conservation zones. iv. Green Mountain Power easement. V. Restricted runway approach area. (k) Land Use Permit #4C0473 and Land Use Permit #4C0473-1; (1) The terms of an Offer of Irrevocable Dedication between Grantor and the City of South Burlington dated October _, 1986, and recorded in Volume at Page of the South Burlington Land Records. Reference is hereby made to the aforementioned instruments, the records thereof and the references therein contained, in aid of this description. The Grantor hereby reserves, for itself and its successors and assigns, a right-of-way and easement in common with Grantee, its successors and assigns (hereinafter "Right -of -Way") thirty (30) feet in width as shown on the Plan for: (a) vehicle and pedestrian ingress and egress; and, (b) the installation, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement and removal of all types and forms of underground utilities between Hinesburg Road (Route 116) and the parcel labeled 31.26 acres on the Plan (herein- after " Retained Parcel"). The Right -of -Way is to be used in common with -3- the Grantee and and assigns. The parcel of land subject to the common Right -of -Way is designated as "30' paved drive" on the Plan. Grantee shall have the right, at sole cost and expense, to relo- cate the Right -of -Way reserved herein in order to facilitate the develop- ment of the within conveyed lands as shown on the Plan, provided, however, that Grantor shall at all times have the use of the full width of the reserved Right -of -Way for the purposes stated herein during such relo- cation. In the event Grantee elects to relocate the Right -of -Way, Grantee shall construct a roadway at least 30' in width from Hinesburg Road to a point along the southerly boundary of the Retained Parcel mutually agreed upon between Grantor and Grantee (hereinafter the "Replacement Roadway"). In the event Grantee elects to construct the Replacement Roadway, shall do so at sole cost and expense and the Replacement Roadway shall be constructed at least equivalent in width, materials, surface and workmanship to the existing thirty-foot (30') paved road located in the Right -of -Way. Grantee, at sole cost and expense, shall provide Grantor with a properly executed and acknowledged easement deed reasonably acceptable to Grantor conveying a perpetual easement for the Replacement Roadway upon the same terms and conditions stated herein (hereinafter the "Replacement Easement"). The Replacement Easement shall be the same width as the Right -of -Way reserved by Grantor herein, (including the additional easements for snow storage and electric utility easement) and shall be free and clear of all encumbrances, mortgages, liens and defects. The execution by Grantee and the acceptance and recording of the deed to the Replacement Easement by Grantor shall extinguish and terminate the Right -of -Way -4- reserved herein (provided the Replacement Roadway shall have been con- structed). In the event the Replacement Roadway is constructed by Grantee, the cost of construction of the road from Grantor's southerly boundary line to the existing private roadway traversing the Retained Parcel shall be at the expense of Grantor. In all events and at all times Grantor shall have the use and enjoy- ment of an easement and road traversing Grantee's property from Hinesburg Road to the Retained Property, for ingress and egress, snow storage and utilities, and such use and enjoyment shall not be interrupted or impaired. At such time as Grantee, or assigns, commence regular use of the Right -of -Way reserved by Grantor or any relocation thereof, Grantee, and assigns and Grantor, its successors and assigns shall be jointly responsible for the maintenance of the roadway located on the Right -of -Way or the Replacement Easement and Replacement Roadway, and shall each be equally responsible for any required maintenance, repair, snowplowing or improvement of the roadway, provided, however, that Grantor shall not be required to maintain any portion of any roadway which is not used for ingress and egress to and from the Retained Parcel and Hinesburg Road. Until such time as Grantee commences regular use of the Right -of -Way, Grantee shall not be required to perform any maintenance on the Right -of -Way including snow removal. Prior to Grantee's use of the Right -of -Way, Grantor shall have the right, at its sole cost and expense, to perform any maintenance work including snowplowing on the Right -of -Way and shall not receive any reimbursement therefor from Grantee. -5- Grantor hereby reserves the right to itself and its successors and assigns, and hereby grants to Grantee the right to create additional tenancies in the easement reserved herein and to convey one or more such additional tenancies to persons or entities acquiring portions of the property conveyed herein or the Retained Parcel, provided all such addi- tional tenants agree to the terms and conditions of this easement and agree to bear a reasonable allocation of the obligations to maintain this ease- ment. Grantor further reserves to itself and its successors and assigns additional easements as follows: (a) for the storing of snow removed from the Right -of -Way or Replacement Right -of -Way on a strip of land ten (10) feet in width located on each side of the Right -of -Way or Replacement Right -of -Way; (b) an easement ten (10) feet in width to maintain in place, repair, replace, and/or remove the existing electric utility poles and streetlights located next northerly of the Right -of -Way; and (c) an easement for the installation of utilities over, under, and through the strip of land thirty (30) feet in width located next southerly of the common boundary between the within conveyed property and lands now or formerly of K & M Wright (as described in Volume 115 at Page 342 of the South Burlington Land Records); all as shown on the Plan. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said granted premises, with all the privileges and appurtenances thereof, to the said Grantee(s), and heirs and assigns, to own use and behoof forever; and SEMICON COMPONENTS, INC., the said Grantor, for itself and its successors and assigns, does covenant with the said Grantee(s), and heirs and assigns, that until the ensealing of these presents, it is the sole owner of the premises, and has M good right and title to convey the same in manner aforesaid, that they are FREE FROM EVERY ENCUMBRANCE, except as aforementioned; and it does hereby engage to WARRANT AND DEFEND the same against all lawful claims whatever, except as aforesaid. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has caused this instrument to be executed by its duly authorized agent, who has hereunto set his hand, this day of , 1986. In Presence Of: SEMICON COMPONENTS, INC. By: STATE OF COUNTY, SS. Its Duly Authorized Agent At , in said County, this day of , 1986, personally appeared , duly authorized agent of Semicon Components, Inc., and he acknowledged the within instrument, by him signed, to be his free act and deed and the free act and deed of Semicon Components, Inc. Before me. [PK24C] Notary Public -7- *nuts -Jurliugtvu Nire Department f 575 Dory3et -*treet ti�uut4 Aurlingtnn. Vermont 05401 OFFICE OF JAMES W. GODDETTE, SR. CHIEF 863-6455 MEMORANDUM TO: SO. BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: JAMES W, GODDETTE SR. CHIEF RE: AUGUST 12,1986 AGENDA DATE: AUGUST 6,1986 1. Semicon 2-LOT SUBDIVISION At this time I do not see a problem with the subdivision. Our concern is when some one wants to build on it to make sure we have proper access and water supply. 2. L.D.B. Development Hinesburg Road At this time I do not see a problem with this development. I do not see any names on the streets at this time and we have a concern because of problems in the past. it is are feelings that street names be approved by us. PERRY & SCHMUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1480 WILLISTON ROAD P. 0. BOX 2323 SOUTH BURLINGTON. VERMONT 05402 ROBERT J. PERRY RONALD C. SCHMUCKER KATHLEEN M. BRISTOL August 15, 1986 Ms. Jane Lafleur South Burlington City Planner 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05401 Re: Semicon Dear Jane, TELEPHONE 863-4558 AREA CODE 802 The issue of the improvement coverage on the Semicon parcel came up at Tuesday night's planning commission meeting. We have calculated that of the 31.2 acres, the building coverage is 6.1 % and the overall coverage is 16.2%. I believe I indicated at the meeting that Semicon intended to reserve a sixty foot wide easement from Hinesburg Road to the developed lot. The sixty foot width is only for that portion which may become a public street serving the Goodrich property. That portion of the roadway extending northerly will have a width of 30 feet. Sincerely, Roberti. Perry, Esq. RJP:msc August 14, 1986 Robert J. Perry, Esquire P.O. Box 2323 South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Semicon Two Lot Subdivision Dear Baba Enclosed are the August 12, 1986 Planning Commission minutes. I have arranged for the City Council to review the Sketch Plan at their first September meeting. My memo and an agenda will be sent to you. you should call Betty Merrill at 658-7953 next week if you need to know the date of that meeting in advance. sincerely, Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp Encl PLANNING COMMISSION 12 AUGUST 1986 PAGE 6 the total cost. 12. The applicant shall provide a sidewalk of 240 ft. length approved by the City Engineer on the east side of Kennedy Drive between Kimball Avenue and Hinesburg Rd. 13. The building permit shall be obtained within 6 months. Mr. Burgess seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 4. Consider sketch plan application of Semicon, Inc., for subdivision of 111.2 acre property into two lots of 31.2 acres with existing building and an 80 acre lot at 1000 Hinesburg Rd. Mrs. Lafleur noted that previous approvals outlined a roadway for the extension of Swift St. The area is encumbered by the CO District, airport approach area, and sewer easements. There are sewer lines in the developed parcel. Semicon wishes to subdivide into 2 lots so that the 80-acre area will encircle the developed area. They will have a 30-foot access road. There is no current proposal for the 80 acres. Mrs. Hurd commented that when Mitel wanted to build, they were required to leave land for agricultural uses. Mr. Perry noted there was a 5-year agricultural lease which expired this year. Mr. Dooley asked what the coverage would be on the 31.2 acres after the 80 acres are taken out. Mrs. Lafleur didn't know, but Mr. Perry said they are well below requirements. Mrs. Maher asked where it is most logical a building would be put in the new lot. Mrs. Lafleur said both saides are developable. Access would have to be secured by legal right-of-way. Mr. Schuele said he remembered the Planning Commission and City Council also set aside an area for agriculture, and Mrs. Lafleur will check on this. Mr. Krassner recollected Mitel indicating they might expand their building; they did not say they would sell off the land. Mrs. Lafleur said they did at one time get a 6,000 sq. ft. extention. City Council and Planning Commission minutes will be checked on the agricultural land/open space issue, and discussion will continue on September 16. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Preliminary Plat of Mery Brown for a 119 lot subdivision, a lot for future development, 14 acres of open space, and a 28 acre industrial lot on the Vermont Structural Steel property, 1175 Hinesburg Rd. Mr. Jacob stepped down during this discussion which was then chaired by Mr. Burgess. MEMO -.I III, 8/K/K(i 4) MFHCHANTS BANK, KIMBALL, ,1VFN(,+: AND KYNNI•'M I)Itl�l: Bi1.1 Szymanski has reviewed the t.o pi•o\-ide ;t si.de w a.lk from the exit drivf, towards Williston Road. The fill will be substantial with over 30 feet, in depth required. The pipe will have to be extended under it for drainage and the City will have t.o upgrade the pipe under Kennedy Drive when this is dune. The City plans to replace the pipe whether or not the sidewalk i.s bui. l t . The f' i 1 1 would al so be requ i rred on Dan O' Br• i en' s I and i f t,hr- sidewalk is built. At. this point it seems cost .ly, pot.en- t.ial ly detrimc,rt.al and unnecessary. See Bi 11 Szyrnanski's comments on l:his. The Natural Resources Commit tee has been ashes{ to review this as well. I wi..l.l try to have a formula for the intersect.i.on improvements and a 1 i st of i mprovement s ava i labl e at. the meet i rig. The plans now show some evergreens around the pa1,h ing lot and an increase in the green area by removing some parking spaces and moving the building back from Kennedy Drive. A waiver for parking is required. CS�-'�,IIICOIN - 1000 HINESBURG ROAD Semicon, Inc. proposes to divide the property into one lot with 80 acres for future development and ont-.r lot. of 31.2 aci,es wit.h the existing building. Access is proposed through a 30 foot right-of-way to the Semicon proper-ty rather t.h.in grei-rymande- ring the two :lots to meet the frontage requirements. The owner of the Semicon building ( present. ftlI Ill.(,) shoil ].(I realize that this arrangement prohibits the existing sign next. to Hinesburg Road. After the subdivision is appi-ovod, th;rt sign will be off -premise and wi1..1 have to be removed. A slato sign similar to what Digital uses will be permitted. See Bill Szymanski's regarding the lot configuration .ind chi et' Goddette's comments. 2 M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, City Manager Re: August 12, 1986 agenda items Date: August 8, 1986 3) NORDIC CAR RENTAL, SHELBURNE ROAD 1. The 30 foot ditch along Bartletts Bay should be eliminated and existing pipe extended beyond the entrance. drive. 2. Plans are difficult to read. There are lines that are not identified such as the one behind the G.E. Supply Building and one in rear parking island. 4) MERCHANTS BANK, KENNEDY DRIVE. 1. Construction of a sidewalk along Kennedy Drive from the bank access drive to the northerly property line would require a considerable amount of filling. To do this would also require permission from the adjacent owner. The cost estimate for doing this work amounts to approximately- $45,500 assuming all required fill material is trucked in from the outside. If surplus fill from the site, such as from the building site is available then that cost can be reduced. The City has plans for jacking another pipe across Kennedy Drive and from the information available it appears this filling will extend into that area adding some extra expense to the project. Continuing the sidewalk northerly to Williston Road will be the responsibility of the City. No estimate of that cost has been made but it will be considerable (+$50,000) 2. Comments from previous memo's still apply. 5) SEMICON INC.,, HINESBURG ROAD 1. The property should be subdivided so that existing utilities mainly water and sewer could be used for future development. The access road can also be upgraded and become a public street to serve adjacent development. 1 August 8, 1986 Robert J. Perry, Esquire P.O. Box 2323 South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Semicon, 2-lot Subdivision Dear Mr. Perrys Enclosed are the agenda Also enclosed are Bill sure someone is present represent your request. JBL/mcp Encls and my memo to the Planning Commission. Szymanski's comments. Please be on Tuesday, August 12, 1986 to Sincerely, Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner CITY COUNCIL 3 SEPTEMBER 1986 The South Burlington City Council held a Regular Meeting on Wednesday, 3 September 1986, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present Paul Farrar, Chairman; George Mona, Francis X. Murray, Molly Lambert Others Present William Szymanski, City Manager; Jane Lafleur, City Planner; Albert Audette, Street Dept., Richard Spokes, City Attorney; Sid Poger, The Other Paper; Bruce O-Neill, Recreation Dept; Jim Condos, Ann Pugh, Peter Jacob, Robert Perry, Dick Mc- Kenzie, Leo Nadeau, Joan Nadeau Comments & Questions from the Public (not related to items on the Agenda) No issues were raised. Public informational meeting on the September 9, 1986 elections - Bond Issues for Park Land acquisition and sewer system improvements Mr. Farrar explained that on previous bond issues the City spent less than the bonded amount and needs approval to spend the unobligated amount for other sewer related projects. This will not result in additional cost to taxpayers. Peter Owens explained the park land acquisition issue. He stressed the city's need for recreational facilities as the population is expected to double in the next 10 years. The proposed park would include active and passive recreation with the potential for skating and swimming facilities. The site includes the Brand and Calkins parcels and portions of other adjoining parcels. It is centrally located near existing and developing population centers. The land is primarily agricultural and open space but is now owned by developers, so there is a need to proceed quickly if the city is to secure the land before it is developed. He noted that the Master Plan calls for acquisition of park land of about 250 acres. There is also a potential school site on the Economou property which could serve the developing neighbor- hoods in the southeast quadrant. Mr. Condos said he felt the issue hadn't been supported openly enough for the public to understand its importance. He was worried that the bond issue might not pass for this reason. Mr. Farrar explained that the city cannot expend public funds to promote city bond issues. An informational CITY COUNCIL 3 SEPTEMBER 1986 PAGE 2 newsletter was sent out to voters in the city. Mr. Farrar also explained that the issue will result in approximately one cent on the tax rate. The city has already collected about $300,000 from fees from developers. Mr. Audette asked if anyone had come up with projected main- tenance costs of the park. Mr. Farrar said this will be low initially as there will be no major development for several years. Mr. Nadeau said he was concerned about future costs such as widening of Dorset St. and traffic lights. Mr. Farrar said development will put more pressure for roads than the park will. Mr. O'Neill noted it is important to acquire land while it is available as the potential will be lost if the city doesn't act. He said the park could provide recreational facilities for all kinds of people with all kinds of interests. Mr. Murray added that the community will increase to 25,000 people in 10-15 years, and present facilities are just not able to handle present needs. Sketch Plan review of 2-lot subdivision of the Semicon property on Hinesburg Road Mrs. Lafleur explained that all farmland use leases have expired and that a check of the previous approvals indicate nothing to preclude this subdivision. Lot coverage on the 31 acre parcel will not exceed standards. Mr. Perry, Semicon attorney, the 31.26 acre parcel will be served by a 30 ft. paved driveway and by the powerline northwest of the driveway. Water and sewer will continue as presently provided. The 80-acre parcel has no planned use at present. Mrs. Lafleur noted the 80-acre parcel has no road frontage, but it can still be approved with a road easement. Mr. Mona said they should check to be sure the easement is wide enough to allow for snow plowing. Mr. Perry said a prospective buyer insists on a 30-foot easement. Mrs. Lafleur said the location of the easement will be at the point where the Swift St. extension is planned. Semicon will grant access to all utilities. Members felt that the Swift St. extension should be 80-feet since that is what will be required when the road is extended. Mr. Murraythen moved that the Council approve the concept with the concerns and reservations as expressed. Mr. Mona seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Sign Certificate of Opening Highway for Public Travel for reconstructed section of Shunpike Rd. Mr. Condos noted that there has been lots of erosion since CITY COUNCIL 3 SEPTEMBER 1986 PAGE 3 the heavy rains. Mr. Szymanski and Mr. Audette said the state has been notified and is checking on the situation. Mr. Murray moved that the Council sign the Certificate of Opening as presented. Mr. Mona seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Consider adopting a resolution amending the Zoning Regulations to increase the limit for a building permit from $500 to $1,000 Mr. Szymanski explained that a building permit is now re- quired for all work in excess of $500. With building costs so high, this means that virtually all work required a zoning permit. He suggested that since the figure hasn't been modified in 11 years that it be increased to $1,000. Mr. Mona moved that the Council adopt the resolution as presented 1?y the City Manager. Mrs. Lambert seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Review Zoning Board Agenda for 8 September 1986 No issues were raised on this agenda. Mr. Mona did, however, comment on the recent action of the Zoning Board concerning quarrying to be done by Ralph Goodrich. This will involve considerable truck traffic in the area. Read Minutes of 18 August 1986 Members agreed to reconsider the Minutes at the next meeting so that an item can be clarified. Sign Disbursement Orders Disbursement orders were signed. Old Business Mr. Murray presented a request from Frank Mazur to issue a Resolution of Commendation for retiring Justice of the Peace Al Reynolds. This will be prepared. Executive Session Mr. Mona moved that the Council meet in Executive Session for the purpose of discussing park land acquisition and union negotiations and to resume regular session only to adjourn. Mr. Murray seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Clerk PERRY & SCHMUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1480 WILLISTON ROAD P. O. BOX 2323 SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402 ROBERT J. PERRY RONALD C. SCHMUCKER KATHLEEN M. BRISTOL September 3, 1986 Ms. Jane Lefleur City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05401 Re: Semicon Dear Jane, TELEPHONE 863-4558 AREA CODE 802 I am enclosing the preliminary plat application for Semicon which I understand will be warned for preliminary plan approval on September 23. Trudell Consulting Engineers will complete the plan for submittal prior to the end of the week. Thank you for scheduling the matter with the city council and planning commission. Sincerely, Robert J. Perry, Esq. RJP:msc Enclosure M E M O R A N D U M To: The South Burlington Planning Commission From: Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner RE: September 16, 19$6 Agenda Date: September 12, 1986 2. LARKIN, 408 Shelburne Road On March 25, 1986, Mr. Larkin received approval for a 6,912 square foot office building on the lot with the Dairy Queen Restaurant (former Fish Banke restaurant). That site plan approval expires September 25, 1986 and the applicant requests an extension. The letter of request, the findings and minutes of the approval are enclosed. This extension should not be a problem. 3. SEMICON, 1000 Hinesburg Road As requested by the Planning Commission, I have reviewed the Planning Commission and the City Council minutes and the ACT 250 findings for the Mitel approvals to discover any stipulations, reference or intent to preserve open space that may preclude this development. The minutes and Act 250 findings are enclosed. In the Planning Commission minutes, the only pertinent reference is in the minutes of March 17, 1981 when Tyler Hart stated that the proposed site " will allow Mitel to use the rest of the land for future development". The City Council minutes of March 16, 1981 note the agreement to not subdivide for 2 to 3 years. The Act 250 findings discuss an agricultural study from the City that is needed prior to any additional development. I am not sure how the Environmental Commission will handle this since that study was rejected by the State. The City Council reviewed this sketch plan on September 3, 1986. George Mona remembered a conceptual plan and layout for future buildings on the property should Mitel's future be rosy. The City Council also made several good recommendations. First, the driveway to Semicon is 30 feet in pavement width. The ease- ment should be at least 50 feet for snow storage. Second, the right-of-way for Swift street extension should be increased from 60 to 80 feet since this is the planned width. Appropriate legal documents will be required prior to final plat. Third, the plans should show all utility easements to the 80 acre lot for future development since the configuration of the Semicon lot isolates all the utilities. The Council voted unanimously to approve the subdivision concept with these changes. 1 September 12, 1986 Robert Perry 1480 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Semicon Sketch Plan Dear Bob: Enclosed are the agenda and my memo to the commission for the continuation of your Sketch Plan discussion. I have sent all of the minutes and the Act 250 findings regarding the Agricultural Criteria to the Commission. Sincerely, Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBBL/mcp Encls PLANNING COMMISSION The South Burlington Tuesday, 16 September Conference Room, City Members Present 16 SEPTEMBER 1986 Planning Commission held a meeting on 1986, at 7:30 pm, in the Mini - Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Peter Jacob, Chairman; Judith Hurd, William Burgess, Catherine Peacock, Mary -Barbara Maher, John Dooley, John Belter Also Present Jane Lafleur, City Planner; Paul Farrar, Francis Murray, Mike Flaherty, George Mona, Molly Lambert - City Council; William Szymanski, City Manager; Sid Poger, The Other Paper; Mike Donoghue, Free Press; Department; John Larkin, Bob Blanchard, Lance Llewellyn, Mery Brown, Carl Cobb, Peter Owens, Robert Perry, Craig Heindel, Steve Crowley, Steve Smith, Bob Jolley, 1. Review Minutes of 2 September 1986 Mrs. Maher moved that the Minutes of 2 September be approved as written. Mr. Burgess seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 2. Consider request of John Larkin for an extension to the site plan approval for a 9912 sq. ft. office building with the existing restaurant at 408 Shelburne Road Mrs. Lafleur said the applicant has the right to one extension, and Mr. Blanchard said they should be able to get the building permit within 6 months. Mrs. Maher moved that the Planning Commission grant a 6 month extension to John Larkin as per all the stipulations agreed to and voted on at the Planning Commission meeting of 25 March 1986. Mr. Burgess seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 3. Continue sketch plan review of the 2-lot subdivision of the Semicon property, 1000 Hinesburg Road. Mrs. Lafleur said that all her readings of back Minutes showed no intention to keep any of the land open except for the criteria that Act 250 will take care of. There was even an indication at the City Council meeting on the original plan that there would be future buildings. Mrs. Lafleur said she would like several things changed including a 30-foot driveway and at least a 50 foot easement. The Swift Street extension should be an 80-foot right of way. All utility easements to the 80 acre lot should be shown for future development. Mr. Perry said he was concerned about a 30-foot PLANNING COMMISSION 16 SEPTEMBER 1986 PAGE 2 paved drive leading to Semicon. He would like it shown as a 30 foot drive with a 15 foot electrical easement and would like the 50 feet to include placement for snow only, not for general road purposes. No other issues were raised. 4. Continue Public Hearing: Joint meeting with the City Council for the preliminary plat application of LDB, Inc, (Mery Brown)for the 119 lot subdivision, a lot for future development, 14 acres of open space and a 28 acre industrial lot on the Vermont Structural Steel property, 1175 Hinesburg Road Mr. Jacob stepped down from the Planning Commission during the following discussion, and the hearing was chaired by Paul Farrar of the City Council. Mr. Llewellyn stated that the proposal involves only the southern 72 acres in the residential zone. The 120th lot will be developed later into 16 lots. He indicated the 3 areas of open sapce and the accesses from Hinesburg Rd. and 2 connections from Butler Farms. They have also been asked to leave a right of way to the Economou property. There will be public water and sewer, and all utilities will be underground. Mrs. Maher asked how long the land left reserved for agriculture must remain for that purpose. Mrs. Lafleur said past agreements have been for 25 years. Mrs. Lafleur explained that the maximum density is 2 units per acre which would result in-144 units. The range allowed by the ordinance is 115 to 144 units. Craig Heindel then presented his findings on the drainage question. There is a swale beginning at the Butler Farm project and flowing north . It carries much water in snow melt time. There is a very low gradience, and in some places there is not a discrete channel. Soils are wet all the time, and there is marsh -type vegetation. About 3/4 of the way north, the gradient gets very steep quite suddenly. The developer is proposing making a uniform gradient mainly so he can engineer catch basins for storm water drainage. He felt that if this is done, marsh vegetation will not revegetate, and some sort of seeding will have to be done, possibly a "conservation mix." This could be augmented by wildflower seeds. Mr. Murray asked about the possibility of long term erosion. Mr. Heindel said he couldn't tell yet but guessed there wouldn't be a great deal of erosion caused by the design as there is still a very low gradient and there aren't enormous paved areas. Mr. Farrar asked what will be the change in the peak flow of the stream. Mr. Heindel said he thought it would increase a bit and the time of City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 September 19, 1986 Robert Perry, Esquire 1480 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Preliminary Plat, Semicon, 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Bob: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the agenda and my memo to the Planning Commission. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, September 23, 1986 to represent your request. Sincerely, Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp Encls i M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission �j From: Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner Re: September 23, 1986 agenda items Date: September 19, 1986 2) S.B. Collins, 977 Shelburne Road I have received revised plans that show the building moved back 20 feet, a five foot buffer around the perimeter of the property, and the front yard coverage increased to 42% of the 50 foot setback area. The property boundary must be revised to show a 15 foot setback from each building. See Bill's comments regarding the new drainage plan. 3) IRISH, 200 ALLEN ROAD This final plat proposes to subdivide a 1.15 acre parcel from the 68.43 acre farm. The new lot is located just south of the water tower. The lot will be served by a 9,0 foot right-of-way and a private extension to Harbor Ridge Road. Bonds must be posted for the street, water and sewer extension prior to permit. The recorded mylar must show the new lot on the overall plan. 4),' SEMICON, TWO -LOT SUBDIVISION, 1000 HINESBURG ROAD This preliminary plat is for the subdivision of a 31.2 acre parcel with the existing building and an 80 acre parcel for future development. The road is shown as 30 feet in width and will be amended for final plat approval to include a 10 foot easement on both sides for snow storage. 5) O'BRIEN, FOXCROFT, HINESBURG ROAD Daniel O'Brien proposes to revise parcel one in Foxcroft from 24 multi -family and 4 single-family units to 28 multi -family units. The parcel is located on the northside (right side) of Hayes Avenue. The 28 multi -family units will be served by a private street of 24 feet in width. Adequate parking is shown. Sixty one spaces are required for the 28 units; 62 are shown including spaces within garages, in driveways and extra guest spaces. 1 PLANNING COMMISSION 23 SEPTEMBER 1986 PAGE 3 final plat of Dewey & Irene Irish for the subdivision of a 1.15 acre parcel from the 68.43 acre farm located north of Allen Road, and south of the water tower as depicted on a plan entitled "Portion of the Bernie S. Irish Estate: Site Plan for Dewey Irish" prepared 12y the Palmer Company, dated August 8, 1986 and "Property Survey of the Bernie S. Irish Estate" prepared by the Palmer Company, dated June, 1986 with the following stipulations: 1. The 20 foot easement to the new lot shall be secured by a permanent legal easement The legal documents shall be ap- proved b the City Attorney within 30 days. 2. Water and sewer details shall be approved !2y the City En- gineer prior to permit. 3. Plans shall be revised to show sewer, water and the 20 foot easement. The new lot shall also be shown on the overall pr,aperty survey. 4. It is the applicant's responsibility to record the plans with the City Clerk within 90 days. They shall be approved the Planner and signed �2y the Chairman or Clerk of the Commission prior to recording or this approval is null and void. Mr. Belter seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 3. Sketch plan application of Charles & Patricia Shea for a 2-lot subdivision of a 54,000 sq. ft. parcel with an existing house at 23 Brewer Parkway Mr. Knapp advised this was originally 2-1/2 lots. They are moving the division line 30 ft. to the east and terminating the 1/2 lot. The 2 new lots will be about 270 ft. deep. A question of setback from the "drainageway" was raised. Mrs Lafleur said there is a question of whether it is a drainageway or a swale. If it is a drainageway, they must have a 50-foot setback from it. This would leave an inadequate building envelope. The issue will be decided at permit by the Zoning Administrator. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Preliminary Plat application of Semicon, Inc. for a 2-lot subdivision of the 111.2 acre parcel into an 80 acre parcel and a 31.2 acre parcel with the existing building at 1000 Hinesburg Rd. Mr. Perry advised the plan now shows sewer easements, the existing offer for a pumping station on the site, mechanical easements, etc. There is also an offer for some floating PLANNING COMMISSION 23 SEPTEMBER 1986 PAGE 4 easements and an easement to the Green Acre parcel. The 80 ft. proposed Swift St. extension is shown as well as the snow storage area and a small easement from Semicon to the proposed lot line. Mr. Dooley moved that the Planning Commission approve the preliminary plat of Robert Perry, Esq., agent for Semicon, Inc., for the 2 lot subdivision of the 111.2 acre parcel into a 31.2 acre parcel with the existing buildings and an 80 acre parcel as depicted on plans prepared Trudell Consulting Engineers, entitled "Site Plan for Semicon, Inc., South Burlington, Vermont" dated 7/25/86, last revised 9/2 86 and "Plat of land of Semicon Components, Inc., Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, Vermont" last revised 8 29 86 with the following stipulations: 1. Appropriate legal documents for the 10 foot easements for snow storage shall be submitted to the City Attorney for approval prior to final plat. 2. Offers of dedication and deeds for the 80 foot right-of- way for Swift Street extension shall be submitted to the City Attorney for approval prior to permit 3. The final plat shall be submitted within 18 months or this approval is null and void. Mr. Burgess seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Revised Final Plat of Daniel O'Brien for a revision to parcel 1 from 24 multi -family , 4 single family units to 28 multi -family units at Foxcroft, Hinesburg Rd. Mr. Llewellyn said only Hayes Ave. will be a public street. All others will conform to city standards. There will be the same number of units but all will now be condos. Mrs. La- fleur noted an evergreen screen between this and Cardinal Woods is proposed. Mr. Dooley said there appears to be less green space' -than the previous plan and the footprints of the buildings look considerably larger. Mr. O'Brien said this is not so. Mrs. Lafleur said the applicant paid the recreation fee rather than having open space. Ms. Peacock said she is not comfortable with the 24 foot roads. Mr. Jacob said there is not on -street parking, so this shouldn't be a problem. The applicant prefers to leave the drainage pipes open and use a ditch for storage. This may be a "catch 22" between the City and State. Mrs. Lafleur noted there has been some buildup and mudslide activity on the other side. A resident of Cardinal woods said since trees were removed, there has been a drainage problem and a pond has filled up. Haybales 9/22/86 JBL MOTION OF APPROVAL That the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the preliminary plat of Robert Perry, Esquire, agent for Semicon, Inc., for the 2 lot subdivision of the 111.2 acre parcel into a 31.2 acre parcel with the existing buildings and an 80 acre parcel as depicted on plans prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers, entitled "Site Plan for Semicon, Inc., South Burlington, Vermont" dated 7/25/86, last revised 9/2/86 and "Plat �I land of Semiuuri Components, Inc., Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, Vermont" last revised 8/29/86 with the following stipulations: 1) Appropriate legal documents for the 10 foot easements for snow storage shall be submitted to the City Attorney for approval prior to final plat. 2) Offers of dedication and deeds for the 80 foot right-of-way for Swift Street extension shall be submitted to the City Attorney for approval prior to permit. 3) Thin final plat shall be submitted within 18 months or this approval is null and void. 1 PUBLIC HEARING SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION The South Burlington Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington City Hall, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on Tuesday, September 23, 1986 at 7:30 p.m. to consider the following: 1) Final plat application of Dewey Irish for the subdivision of a 1.15 acre lot located south of the water tower for a single- family dwelling from the_68.43 acre farm. Property is bounded on the north by Harbor View development, on the east by J.Trevi- thick, H.Bensen, A.Smith, The Champlain Water District, J.Pappas, D.Cummings, W.Floyd, S.Hall, H.Davison, and L.Calkins, on the west by A.Racine and Allenbrook and on the south by Allen Road and is located at 200 Allen Road. 2) Preliminary Plat application oil Semicon,vnc. for the subdivision of the 111.2 acre property into a 31.2 acre parcel with the existing building and an 80 acre parcel. The property is bounded on the north by Interstate 89 and R. Tilley, on the south and east by Green Acres (R. Goodrich), and on the west by A.and R.Painter, L.and S.Wiles, and M.Wright and is located at 1000 Hinesburg Road. 3) Revised final plat of Daniel O'Brien for a revision to the layout of Parcel One of Foxcroft consisting of 28 multi -family units on 3.32 acres. Property is bounded on the north by Country park (O'Brien) and Briarwood, on the west by Cardinal Woods and on the south by Hayes Avenue and is located north of Hayes Avenue and east of Hinesburg Road. Peter L. Jacob, Chairman South Burlington September 6, 1986 Planning Commission 1 PERRY & SCHMUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1480 WILLISTON ROAD P. O. BOX 2323 SOUTH BURLINGTON. VERMONT 05402 ROBERT J. PERRY RONALD C. SCHMUCKER KATHLEEN M. BRISTOL September 26, 1986 Charles T. Shea, Esq. Gravel & Shea P. O. Box 1049 Burlington, VT 05402 Dear Charlie,' TELEPHONE 863-4558 AREA CODE 802 I am enclosing an Offer of Irrevocable Dedication and two related deeds required by the City of South Burlington for final approval. Would you kindly advise me as soon as practicable if there are any problems with these documents from the sale point of view, since I have submitted my final plat application to the planner with the understanding that the documents will be given to her as soon as possible. In fact, they are suppose to be submitted with the final application but Jane was good enough to accept the application and schedule the third and final hearing on my representation that the documents would be in her hands in a few days. The last information necessary is the easement language for the 30 foot access road, electric lines and snow removal area. The City must review and approve the language as it will appear in a deed to any purchase of the 80 acre parcel. I understand that Jim Knapp is working on the deed at present so please forward a copy of the relevant paragraph as soon as practicable. Sincerely, Robert J. Perry, Esq. RJP:msc Enclosures cc: Mr. Rolland Robison Semicon, Inc. 15 New England Executive Park Burlington, MA 01803 October 1, 1986 Robert Perry Esquire 1480 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Ret Semicon, 1000 Hinesburg Road Dear Bob: Enclosed are the minutes of the Preliminary Plat approval. Your final Plat is scheduled for October. 14, 1986. Sincerely, Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp Encl PERRY & SCHMUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1480 WILLISTON ROAD P. O. BOX 2323 SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402 ROBERT J. PERRY RONALD C. SCHMUCKER KATHLEEN M. BRISTOL October 10, 1986 Ms. Jane LeFleur South Burlington Planner 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05401 Dear Jane, TELEPHONE 863-4558 AREA CODE 802 I am enclosing a copy of the proposed Semicon deed to any future purchases which conveys all easements which I believe are appropriate. Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Robert J. Perry, Esq. RJP:msc Enclosure cc: Steve; Stitzel, Esq. MEMORANDUM r� VP To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner Re: October 14, 1986 Agenda Items Date: October 10, 1986 2) SHEA, 23 BREWER PARKWAY This final plat shows the two lot subdivision of a 54,000 square foot parcel. The two lots will be 27,000 square feet each with the existing; house on the westerly most lot. There are no major problems with this subdivision. 3 SE�ON, 1000 HINESBURG ROAD This final plat shows the two lot subdivision of the 111.2 acre property into an 80 acre parcel and a 31.2 acre parcel with the existing building. The r.o.w. for snow storage, the 80 foot r.o.w. for Swift Street and utility easements are shown. Legal documents have been prepared for Spoke's approval. There are no outstanding issues. 4) LAKEWOOD ASSOCIATES, 1233 SHELBURNE ROAD The developer proposes several modifications to the recently approved plans. These include: 1) A reduction in office space from 48,000 square feet in 6 buildings to 35,500 square feet in four buildings. The 150 seat restaurant in a separate building remains. 2) Use of the existing "Inn" for 6,500 square feet for Vermont Federal Bank with a drive -through window, 3) Increased front yards and bermed areas to shield the view of the parking lot. A revised traffic study is being prepared by Tom Adler for review by Craig Leiner. It should be available at the meeting. A summary of the project is also enclosed. See Bill Szymanski's and Jim Goddette's comments. 1 PUBLIC III,APING SOUTII BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION The South Burlington Planniny Commission will. hold I-, public hearing at the South Burlington City Hall, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on 'Tuesday, October 14. 1986, at 7:30 P.M. to consider the following: Final Plat application of Charles and Patricia Shea for a two bdivision of a 1.24 acre property into a 27,031 square foot existing house and a 26,967 square foot lot. Property is d on the east by A. & D. Roy, on the south by C. and S. Leduc, S. and S. Rosenthal and E. Smith and S. Donahue, on the west by E. and D. Verchereau and is located at 23 Brewer Parkway. 2) Final Plat application of Semicon, Inc., for a two lot subdivision of the 111.2 acre parcel into a 30.2 acre parcel with the existing builidnq and an 80 acre parcel. by interstate 89 and R. Tille Property is bounded on the north on the south and east by Green Acres (R. Goodrich), and on the west by A. and R. Painter, L. and S. Wiles, and M. Wright and is located at 1000 Hinesburg Road. 3) Revised Final Plat of Lakewood Associates for a modification to the plan to allow a bank facility with drive -through window in _ the existing building and a reduction in the total square footage of office space from 48.000 square feet to 42,000 square feet and no change to the proposed 150 seat restaurant. Property is bounded LAB 7t on the north and by T. Farrell, on the south by A Lewis and is �A' located at 1233 Shelburne Road. Copies of the applications are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall. Peter L. Jacoh Chairman, South Burlington Planning Commission September 27, 1986 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 October 23, 1901) Robert Perry, Esquire Perry & Schmucker 1480 Williston Road P.O. Box 2323 South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Semicon, 2 lot subdivision Dear Bob: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the minutes of the October 14, 1986 i.annlng revisions revissions to Commission meeting. Please be sure to discuss th, may record the legal documents with Steve Stitzel so that yoll-s must be these as required within 30 days. Also, your my.l.�ll�l void, recorded within 90 days or this approval is null !, Sincerely, Jane B . Laf letil City Planner JBL/mcp Encl PLANNING COMMISSION 14 OCTOBER 1986 PAGE 2 Mr. Belter seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Final Plat application of Semicon, Inc., for a 2-lot subdivision of the 111.2 acre parcel into an 80- acre parcel and a 31.2 acre parcel with the existing building at 1000 Hinesburg Rd. Mr. Perry noted that all the required rights -of -way are now shown on the plan. Mrs. Lafleur said the legal documents have been sent to the City Attorney who wants some minor changes. These will be prepared for his approval within 30 days. Mrs. Hurd moved that the Planning Commission approve the final plat of Robert Perry, Esq., agent for Semicon, Inc., for a two lot subdivision of the 111.2 acre parcel at 1000 Hinesburg Rd. as depicted on two plans prepared �2y Trudell Consulting Engineers, Inc, entitled "Plat of Land of Semicon Components, Inc, Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, Vermont" last revised 8/29/86 and "Site Plan for Semicon, Inc, South Burlington, Vermontq last revised 9/2/86 with the following stipulations: 1. All legal documents for snow storage easement, utility easements and the 80 foot Swift Street r.o.w. shall be prepared for approvals by the City Attorney within 30 days. 2. It is the applicant's responsibility to record the final plat within 90 days or this approval is null and void. It shall be approved � the Planner and signed by the Chairman or Clerk of the Commission prior to recording. Mr. Burgess secondedk and the motion passed unanimously. 4. Site Plan application of Nathaniel Lash for construction of a 5065 sq. ft. addition to the existing building, 1515 Shelburne Rd. Mrs. Lafleur noted that the property line goes through a corner of the present building. The new plan shows a 7-1/2 foot easement on either side of the water line; however, on the plan it actually scales to only 7 ft. This will have to be revised to show the 7-1/2 ft and was apparently a drawing error. Mr. Lash said he had it excavated and surveyed. Ms. Peacock noted that Sue Messina at the Water Dept. is concerned about plantings on easements which may be ruined if the Water Dept. had to dig. Mrs. Lafleur said that landscaping in the right-of-way hasn't been changed on the plan. 10/14/86 JBL MOTION OF APPROVAL That the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the final plat of Robert Perry, Esquire, agent for Semicon, Inc., for a two lot subdivision of the 111.2 acre parcel at 1000 Hinesburg Road as depicted on two plans prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers, Inc., entitled "Plat of Land of Semicon Compnents, Inc., Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, Vermont" last revised 8/29/86 and "Site Plan for Semicon, Inc., South Burlington, Vermont" last revised 9/2/86 with the following stipulations: 1) All legal documents for snow storage easement, utility ease- ments an the 80 foot Swift Street r.o.w. shall be prepared for approval by the City Attorney within 30 days. 2) It is the applicants responsibility to record the final plat within 90 days or this approval is null and void. It shall be approved by the Planner and signed by the Chairman or Clerk of the Commission prior to recording. 7 4 f + CITY OF SOUTH BURLiNGTON Subdivision Application - PRELIP-;iNA.hY PLAT 1) Name of Applicant 2) Name of Subdivisio, Semicon Components, Inc. unnamed 3) Describe Subdivision (i.e. total acreage, number of lots or units, type of land use, include gross floor area if comm- ercial.) 111.2 acres to be divided into a development lot of 31.2 acres and an undeveloped lot of 80 acres for commercial or .industrial uses. 4) Indicate any changes to name, address, or phone number of owner of record,applicant, or contact person since sketch plan application: none, 5. Name, address, and phone number of: a. Enqineer Richard P. Trudell, Trudell Consulting Engineers, Inc., Blair Park, Williston, Vermont, 879-6331 b. Surveyor same as a. C. Attorney Robert J. Perry, Esq., P. O. Box 2323, South Burlington, Vermont 05402 d. Plat Designer Richard P. Trudell ) Indicate anv chant to t'he subdivision such as number of lots or units, property lines, applicant's legal interest in the property, etc., since this proposal .gas last befcre the Commission: none. 7) List names and mailing addresses of owners of record of all cont igous properties: see attached. 8) State title, drawing number, date of origin.-1 plus any revisions, and designer(s) of the preliminary man(s) accompanying this apl:li- cation: Preliminary Plan for Semicon, Inc., South Burlington, Vermont by Trudell Consulting Engineers, Inc., Williston, Vermont. °) attach a preliminary map showing the following information: 1) Pronosed subdivision name or iden`cifyinc title and the name of the city. 2} Name and address of owner of recorr, subdivider and design-r of Preliminar�T Plat. 3) Number of acres within the proposed subdivision, location of property lines, structures, viatercourses, wooden areas, and othar essential existing physical. _features. 4) The na;nes of all subdivisions ia.-aediately adjacent ant the names of owners of record of adjacent acreage. 5) The location and size of any existing sewers and v7ater mains, culverts and r�-ins on the property or serving the property to be subdivided. 6) Location, names and widths of existing, and proposes streets, private ways, sidewalks, curb cuts, paths, easements, parks -3- and other public or privately maintainer op--n spaces as well as similar facts regarCing adjacent property. 7) Contour lines at intervals of five feet, based on Unit<�r States Geological Survey datum of existing grades and also of proposed finished grades where change of existing, around elevation will be five feet or more. 8) Complete survey of subdivision tr&ct by a licensed land surveyor. 9) Numerical and graphic scale, mate and true north arrow. 10) Details of proposed connection with existing water supply or alternative means of providing water supply to the proposed subdivision. 11) Details of proposed connection with the existing sanitary sewage disposal system or adequate provision for on -site disposal of septic wastes. 12) If on -site sewage disposal system is proposedl location and results of tests to ascertain subsurface Moil, rock and ground water conditions, depth to ground water unless pits are dry at depth of five feet; location and results of ;percolation tests. 13) Provisions for collecting and discharging storm drainage in the fore of drainage plan. 14) Preliminary designs of anv bridges or culv-?rts ,which )nay be reauired . 15) The location of temporary markers adequate to erabl_ the CorclAssion to locate readily and appraise the basic lay- out in the field. Unless an existing street intersection is shown, the distance along a street from one corner of the property to the nearest existing street intersection shall be shown. 15) All parcels of land proposed to be dedicated or reserved for public use and the conditions of such dedication or reservation. 10) Developmental timetable (including number of phases, and start and compl,�tion dates) ____unknown. 11) List the waivers applicant desires from the requirements of these regulations: None other than approval of lot without public road frontage under zoning regulations. 12) Attach a vicinity map showing the '_ollo,,7ing: 1) All existing subdivisions, apl)roximate tract lines and acreage of adjacent parcels, together with the names of the record owners of all adjacent parcels of land, namely, those directly abutting or cairectly across any street ad- joining the propos•�d subdivision. 2) Locations, widths and names of existing7filed or proposed streets, curb cuts, easements, building lines and alleys pertaining to the proposed subdivision and to the adjacent properties as designated in paragraph 1 above. 3) An outline of the platted area together .,pith its street system =nd an indication of the future probable street systerl of the remaining portion of the tract, if the Preliminary Plat su`xiiittec covers only part of the sub - divider's entire holding. (signature) applicant or contact person date Names and addresses of contiguous property owners: 1. New England Telephone, 1 Burlington Square, Burlington, Vermont. 2. Mr. & Mrs. Keith M. Wright, 900 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, Vermont. 3. Richard and Anne Painter, 1060 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, Vermont. 4. Drs. Lawrence and Roberta Coffin, 1100 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, Vermont. 5. Green Acres, Inc., c/o Ralph B. Goodrich, 625 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, Vermont. 6. State of Vermont, c/o Transportation Agency/District 5, Fort Ethan Allen, Winooski, Vermont. 7. Linus and Sue Wiles, 1050 Hinesburg Road, mailing address, 14 Longmeadow Drive, Shelburne, Vermont. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Subdivision Application - SKEICH-PLAN - 1) Name, address, and phone number of: a. Owner of record Semicon Components, Inc., now known as Semicon, Inc., 15 New England Executive Parkway Burlington, MA 01803 b. Applicant Semicon Components, Inc., now known as Semicon, Inc. c. Contact person Robert J. Perry, Esq. P. 0. Box 2323 So Burlington, VT 0540/(802) 863-4558 2) Purpose, location, and nature of subdivision or development, including number of lots, units, or parcels and proposed use(s). Division of land on the easterly side of Hinesburg Road into two lots, one containing 80 acres and one containing 312 acres without public road frontage Both lots are intended for commercial and/or individual uses 3) Applicant's legal interest in the property (fee simple, option, etc) Fee simple 4) Names of owners of record of all contiguous properties New England Telephonc State of Vermont, Green Acres (Goodrich & Mikell), Wright, Wiles, Painter and Coffin. 5) Type of existing or proposed encumbrances on property such as easements, covenants, lease:_>, r fights of way, etc. Existing and proposed easements and encumbrances are shown on the accompanying plan._ 6) Proposed extension, relocation, or modification of municipal facilities such as sanitary sewer, water supply, streets, storm drainage,-etc.--- ne. 7) Describe any previous actions taken by the Zoning Board of Adjustment or by the South Burlington Planning Commission which affect the proposed sub- division, and include the dates of such actions: Planning Comission acted on the Mi t0l,-_ Application on February 24, March 3, March 24, May 5, June 9, August 11 and August 20, 1981 The Planning Commission acted on the Semicon application on February 26, 1985 8) Submit four copies of a sketch plan showing the following information: 1) Name of owners of record of contiguous properties. 2) Boundaries and area of: (a) all contiguous land belonging to owner of record and (b) proposed subdivision. 3) Existing and proposed layout of property lines; type and location of existing and proposed restrictions on land, such as easements and cove- nants. 4) 'Type of, location, and approximate sine of existing and proposed streets, utilities, and open space. 5) Date, true north arrow and scale (numerical and graphic). 6) Location map, showing relation of proposed subdivision to adjacent property and surrounding area. (Sigta ure) applicant or contact person L da to City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 Katherine Vose AEC 111 West Street Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 Re: 4CO473-2(Semicon Components QS Dear Katherine: Svm%ca4\ - oL UA November 26, 1986 6.6&�As.wN ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 This letter serves to confirm that the City of South Burlington approved the two lot subdivision of the Semicon property. There is adequate water to serve development on both parcels. Future users of the Semicon building will receive the Semicon sewer allocation. Any future development on the 80 acre parcel will require a separate sewer allocation at the time of approval. As you may know, we are expecting to receive additional capacity next fall when the sewage treatment plant is completed. Until that time, all newly approved projects served by the Airport Parkway Plant are placed on the waiting list until capacity is available either through the plant expansion or the "moving average" method. This two lot subdivision is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of South Burlington. Sincerely, Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp cc: John Ponsetto CITY OF SOUM BURLIN-TON Subdivision Application - FINAL PLAT 1) Name of Applicant Semicon Components, Inc. 2) Name of Subdivision unnamed 3) Indicate any changes to name, address, or phone number of owner of record, applicant, contact person, engineer, surveyor, attorney or plat designer since preliminary plat application: none. 4) Indicate any changes to the subdivision, such as number of lots or units, property lines, applicant's legal interest in the property, or developmental timetable, since preliminary plat application: none. S) Submit four copies of a final set of plans consisting of a final plat plus engineering drawings and containing all information required under section 202.1 of the subdivision regulations for a minor subdivision and under section 204.1(a) for a major subdivision. 6) Submit tfo draft copies of all legal documents required under section 202.1 (11) and (12) of the subdivision regulations for a minor subdivision and under section 204.1(b) for a major subdivision. (Signature) applicant or contact person 19 E 4 Date M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington City Council' From: Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner Re: Semicon Two Lot Subdivision - Sketch Plan Date: August 14, 1986 Semicon proposes to subdivide its 111 ace lot into a 31.2 acre parcel with the existing building and an 80 acre parcel. This was reviewed by the Planning Commission on August 12, 1986 and now requires City Council review under Section 16.803 of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations. Although the Planning Commission permitted the process to proceed, they are requiring two additional pieces of information. These are lot coverage information and the development history regarding any stipulations, reference or intent to preserve open space that may preclude this subdivision. The lot coverage of the new subdivided lot may not exceed 15% building coverage and 35% total coverage. The history of this site is covered below. The proposed subdivision shows the 31.2 acre parcel with the existing building as a lot with no road frontage. Under Section 19.20 the Commission may approve a lot with no road frontage provided it is secured by a permanent legal right-of-way. The feet access to this road will be secured by a 60 foot legal easement or r.o.w. The driveway to Semicon also will serve as Swift Street extension when properties to the south (Goodrich) or the new lot is developed. It will be presumably be an 80 foot r.o.w. as Swift Street extension is planned. This subdivision will not encumber the proper extension of Swift Street. Any development on the new lot requires separate site plan approval. Utilities are available to both lots although the new lot may require easements across the Semicon lot for proper connection to sewer, water and gas. Bill Szymanski's preference for layout should be discussed. We have notified the applicant of the fact that the Semicon sign at Hinesburg Road will be illegal once this subdivision is approved since it will be an off -premise sign. A state sign similar to what Digital uses will be permitted. The minutes of the Mitel approval show that the proposed location was chosen out of 3 possible sites because of excellent drainage. "It was a short distance to the pumping station and excavated rock could be used for parking lot construction. The building was the only part of the land not formerly used for farming. It will also allow Mitel to use the rest of the land for future development. Mitel wants visibility from a major highway. The 1 view from the site is spectacular and the company wants to be away from existing and proposed development". (Minutes of March 17, 1981) I will have more information on the Council's intent and Act 250 restrictions at the Council meeting. It appears as though all. lease agreements for farming this land expire this year. Sketch plan review calls for conceptual approval of this subdivision. You will have a chance to more formally review and approve the Preliminary and Final Plats at a later date. 2 k -QJYI�.�, - - - ------- veAl lsl( W�j "IX I r*fwy irvrUM Sic 0 No Text City of South Burling onlL 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 September 22, 1986 Robert Perry, Esquire 1480 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Semicon, Sketch plan review Dear Bob: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the minutes of the September 16, 1986 Planning Commission meeting. Sincerely, J04-0-.s - � Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp Encl G rayarc . P.O. Box 2944 Hartford, CT FREE: MESSAGE CALL TOLL FREE:1-800-243-5250 PERRY & SCHMUCKER Robert J. Perry Attorneys at Law Ronald C. Schmucker 1480 WILLISTON ROAD P.O. BOX 2323 Kathleen M. Bristol SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402 DATE September 26, 1986 Phone: (802) 863-4558 SUBJECT TO Mis. Jane LeFleur City Planner's Office 575 South Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05401 Dear Jane, I am enclosing a copy of a letter written to Charlie Shea together with two Warranty Deeds for the Semicon - South Burlington transaction. Sincerely, RJP:msc Enclosures cc: Richard Spokes, Esq. SIGNED Robert J. Perry, Esq. # F279 © Wheeler Group Inc. 19K FOLD AT (—) TO FIT GRAYARC 21VIEW ENVELOPE # FW9DW . IP1,17-1, i U on C%,+ K-t� St -kor ZWO te r :: , ?�o PLANNING COMMISSION 23 SEPTEMBER 1986 PAGE 3 final plat of Dewey & Irene Irish for the subdivision of a 1.15 acre parcel from the 68.43 acre farm located north of Allen Road, and south of the water tower as depicted on a plan entitled "Portion of the Bernie S. Irish Estate: Site Plan for Dewe Irish" prepared 12y.the Palmer Company, dated August 8, 1986 and "Property Survey of the Bernie S. Irish Estate" prepared �2y the Palmer Company, dated June, 1986 with the following stipulations: 1. The 20 foot easement to the new lot shall be secured by a permanent legal easement The legal documents shall be ap- proved 12y the City Attorney within 30 days. 2. Water and sewer details shall be approved 12y the City En- gineer prior to permit. 3. Plans shall be revised to show sewer, water and the 20 foot easement. The new lot shall also be shown on the overall pra'perty survey. 4. It is the applicant's responsibility to record the plans with the City Clerk within 90 days. They shall be approved the Planner and signed 12y the Chairman or Clerk of the Commission prior to recording or this approval is null and void. Mr. Belter seconded, and the motion passed unanimousl 3. Sketch plan application of('Charles & Patricia Sh a or a 2-lot subdivision of a 54,000 �-" Aa�'o`e-�---_ existing house at 23 Brewer Parkway Mr. Knapp advised this was originally 2-1/2 lots. They are moving the division line 30 ft. to the east and terminating the 1/2 lot. The 2 new lots will be about 270 ft. deep. A question of setback from the "drainageway" was raised. Mrs Lafleur said there is a question of whether it is a drainageway or a swale. If it is a drainageway, they must have a 50-foot setback from it. This would leave an inadequate building envelope. The issue will be decided at permit by the Zoning Administrator. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Preliminary Plat application of Semicon, Inc. for a 2-lot subdivision of the'111.2 acre parcel into an 80 acre parcel and a 31.2 acre ap rcel with the existing building at 1000 Hinesburg Rd. Mr. Perry advised the plan now shows sewer easements, the existing offer for a pumping station on the site, mechanical easements, etc. There is also an offer for some floating PLANNING COMMISSION 23 SEPTEMBER 1986 PAGE 4 easements and an easement to the Green Acre parcel. The 80 ft. proposed Swift St. extension is shown as well as the snow storage area and a small easement from Semicon to the proposed lot line. Mr. Dooley moved that the Planning Commission approve the preliminary plat of Robert Perry, Esq., agent for Semicon, Inc., for the 2 lot subdivision of the 111.2 acre parcel into a 31.2 acre parcel with the existing buildings and an 80 acre parcel as depicted on plans prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers, entitled "Site Plan for Semicon, Inc., South Burlington, Vermont" dated 7/25/86, last revised 9 2 86 and "Plat of land of Semicon Components, Inc., Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, Vermont" last revised 8 29 86 with the following stipulations: 1. Appropriate legal documents for the 10 foot easements for snow storage shall be submitted to the City Attorney for approval prior to final plat. 2. Offers of dedication and deeds for the 80 foot right-of- way for Swift Street extension shall be submitted to the City Attorney for approval prior to permit 3. The final plat shall be submitted within 18 months or this approval is null and void. Mr. Burgess seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Revised Final Plat of Daniel O'Brien for a revision to parcel 1 from 24 multi -family L 4 single family units to 28 multi -family units at Foxcroft, Hinesburg Rd. Mr. Llewellyn said only Hayes Ave. will be a public street. All others will conform to city standards. There will be the same number of units but all will now be condos. Mrs. La- fleur noted an evergreen screen between this and Cardinal Woods is proposed. Mr. Dooley said there appears to be less green space than the previous plan and the footprints of the buildings look considerably larger. Mr. O'Brien said this is not so. Mrs. Lafleur said the applicant paid the recreation fee rather than having open space. Ms. Peacock said she is not comfortable with the 24 foot roads. Mr. Jacob said there is not on -street parking, so this shouldn't be a problem. The applicant prefers to leave the drainage pipes open and use a ditch for storage. This may be a "catch 22" between the City and State. Mrs. Lafleur noted there has been some buildup and mudslide activity on the other side. A resident of Cardinal woods said since trees were removed, there has been a drainage problem and a pond has filled up. Haybales City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 March 12, 1985 William Duncan Semicon 1000 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Bill: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 This is to confirm that the Planning Commission has placed Semicon on the waiting list for 6000 gallons per day of sewer capacity at the Airport Parkway Treatment Plant. There is presently adequate capacity to handle this amount. Enclosed are the minutes of that meeting. The State does not approve of the City "loaning" any additional capacity to Semicon pending a recycling plan. We can, however, enter- tain a request for this capacity on a permanent basis once the Treatment Plant expands. I recommend that you file an amended Pre- treatment Permit with the State to begin this request. For your information, I have enclosed a copy of our local sewer reg- ulations. Page 11 specifically sets limits on the type of wastes that may be discharged to our sewer system. I hope this is helpful. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jane S . Bechtel, City Planner JSB/mcg 2 Encls 4. PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 26, 1985 2. Site shall be�graded so that surface runoff is toward the eas 3. There shall be a depressed concrete curb across the entrance. i 4. A $900 landscaping bond shall be posted prior to -ermit- 5. The building permit shall be obtained within 6 months. Mrs. Maher seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Consider site Dlan application for Baby Furniture Outlet for the conversion of a 3600 sq. ft. building (former Ski Shop) and storage building to a children's furniture store, located at 388 and 400 Shelburne Road Mrs. Maher left the meeting at this point.! Mr. Levy said he would be leasing the building. There are three buildings on the lot - the main one and two smaller buildings which will be used for storage. There are 20 parking spaces. 14 are required, but they want to retain the present 20. The lot presently has three curb cuts, two of which are on Shelburne Road, and the other is on Proctor Avenue. The city feels the middle cut on Shelburne Road should be closed, but this needs approval from Burlington, since it is their road. The Commission agreed this cut should be closed. Mr. Dooley moved that the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Alan Levi for Baby Furniture Outlet, 388 and 400 Shelburne Road, as depicted on a plan entitled "Site Plan: Baby Furniture Outlet" as DreDared by North Country Planning, Winooski, Vermont dated 2/19/85 with the following stipulations: 1. A $400 landscapingbond shall be posted prior to permit. 2. The easternmost Proctor Avenue road opening shall be decreased by 12' by a method approved by the City Engineer. 3. Spaces in parking lots shall be striped. 4. A permit shall be obtained from the City of Burlington for the closing of one curb cut on Shelburne Road as shown on the plan. 5. A building permit shall be obtained within 6 months. Mr. Jacob seconded the motion and all voted aye. - Consider sketch plan application of John Belter for expansion of industrial subdivision with 13 new lots, located at Ethan Allen Drive Ms. Bechtel said this item had been postponed until the next meeting. Consider request of Semicon, Inc.; for allocation of 6000 gallons per day in additional sewer capacity, for a total maximum of 20,000 gallons per day Ms. Bechtel noted that Semicon had been given Mitel's sewer capacity of 14,000 gallons per day, but they do not think it will be enough. They would like to see that allocation increased to 20,000 gallons per day. The city does not have any extra capacity - it has all been allocated to those developers who are on the waiting list. The city has made the allocation, but the State 5. PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 26. 1985 has not yet given approval. She recommended that the city put Semicon at the bottom of the waiting list and that Semicon go to the State for approval for the additional gallonage. If the ,State approves-, she would contact each of the developers on the waitin� list and ask if they would give up their capacity to Semicon as long as they were not ready to go ahead with their projects. Mr. Poger noted that capacity would be available in 2 years, now that the bond issue has passed. Mr. Duncan said he had a list of the equipment Semicon would be using, and it would require 44,000 gpd., He said they would like' to have enough time to pursue the possibility of recycling some of .the water. He said that if the capacity existed now, but had been used on paper, Semicon would like to use it now, and when the developers to whom it had been allocated indicated that they would be needing it, Semicon would back off, and',the original developers could have their capacity. This would allow Semicon time to do some studies of how to put recycling facilities: in place at the plant. They would also have more time to buy and put in place recycling equipment: He hoped the entire thing could be done in 6 months. time. Mrs. Hurd wanted to see a more concrete proposals'and a time schedule. Mr. Dooley noted that they were requesting all the existing capacity, so everyone on the list ahead of them would have to agree. Mr. Poger said there was no question that the others would have to agree to this plan. Mr. Dooley noted that even after the recycling is put in place, they want more capacity than they now have. Mr. Duncan said they wanted to have that as an option in case the recycling does not work as well as they hope. They want to go at the bottom of the waiting list for an additional 6,000 gpd. Mr. Poger said all the city could do would be to put Semicon at the bottom of the list and see if the State would let them have the capacity temporarily. Mr. Burgess noted that some of the water which would be put into the sewer system was industrial waste, not sanitary. He felt the City Engineer should look into what might be going into the treatment plant. Mr. Dooley moved to put Semicon at the bottom of the waiting list for an additional allocation of 6,000 gpd. Mr. Jacob seconded the motion and all voted aye. The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 pm. Clerk STATE OF VERMONT AGENCY OF HUMAN SERVICES January 16, 1985 Mr. William Szymanski City Manager City of S. Burlington 575 Dorset Street S. Burlington, VT 05401 Dear Mr. Szymanski: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 60 MAIN STREET P.O. BOX 70 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402 RECEIVED JAN 21 1985 MANAGER'S OFFICE CITY 7 In the past month an incident has been brought to my attention regarding alleged ground water contamination by Semicon, Inc. in Burlington, Massachusetts. During the course of investigating the charges, I contacted Harold Publicover, Superintendent of the Burlington, Mas- sachusetts Department of Public Works. Mr. Publicover informed me that Semicon and Burlington have recently negotiated a legal settlement of the case which, according to the terms of the agreement, is not public information. Mr. Publicover gave me the following information. The cause of the problem was a leak in the sewer system due to illegal discharge of acids. The leak allowed ground water in the area to become contaminated with tetrachloroethylene, trichloroethylene and other chemicals. Apparently other industry, as well as Semicon, was involved. ..Burlington now has access to proper surveillance and inspection to avoid future problems. Since Semicon will be utilizing a facility in S. Burlington in the near future, it is suggested that the city adopt a method to assure the safe disposal and monitoring of chemicals wFiicfi' ave e otential of contaminating the environment. I mig t ur er suggest that Harold Garabe ian of t e Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering be contacted to assist you in designing a method and coordinating your efforts. If I can be of assistance,to you, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Terence D. Macaig Chief of Operations cc: Roberta R. Coffin, M.D., Commissioner Kenneth Stone, Director Harold Garabedian 'r- John Dooley STATE OF VERMONT AGENCY OF HUMAN SERVICES January 16, 1985 Mr. William Szymanski City Manager City of S. Burlington 575 Dorset Street S. Burlington, VT 05401 Dear Mr. Szymanski: DEPARTMENTIOT-MALT11 60 MAIN STREET P.O. BOX70 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402 RECEIVED ,BAN 21 1985 rR'S' OFFI:_ In the past month an incident has been brought to my attention regarding alleged ground water contamination by Semicon, Inc. in Burlington, Massachusetts. During the course of investigating the charges, I contacted Harold Publicover, Superintendent of the Burlington, Mas- sachusetts Department of Public Works. Mr. Publicover informed me that Semicon and Burlington have recently negotiated a legal settlement of the case which, according to the terms of the agreement,, is not public information. Mr. Publicover gave me the following information. The cause of the problem was a leak in the sewer system due to illegal discharge of acids. The leak allowed ground water in the area to become contaminated with tetrachloroethylene, trich loroethylene and other chemicals. Apparently other industry, as well as Semicon, was involved. Burlington now has access to proper surveillance and inspection to avoid future problems. Since Semicon will be utilizing a facility in S. Burlington in the near future, it is suggested that the city adopt a method to assure the safe disposal and monitoring of chemicals which have the potenti,il of contaminating the environment. I might further suggest that Harold Gar'atx'dian of the Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering be contacted to assist you in designing a method and coordinating your, efforts. If I can be of assistance to you, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Terence D. Macaig Chief of Operations cc: Roberta R. Coffin, M.D., Cornmissioner Kenneth Stone, Director, Harold Garabedian John Dooley PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 December 18, 1984 Mr. Robert House Executive Vice President Semicon 15 New England Executive Park Burlington, Massachusetts 01803 Dear Mr. House: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Bill Szymanski referred your letter of December 14, 1984 to me regarding the request for 6000 g.p.d. additional sewage discharge. As you may know, the Planning Commission established a sewer wait- ing list with specific allocations for approved projects. Although Semicon is already on-line and has an allocation for 14,000 g.p.d., any increase will require an allocation by the Planning Commission and a subsequent amendment to your discharge permit at the State level. The Planning Commission allocation will then place you on the waiting list. At that point we are prepared to contact those above you on the list to request that they defer their allocation to you, but maintain their position on the list. In most cases, this should not be a problem since those projects are not ready to go. There is no guarantee, however, that there will be capacity when these projects are ready since the flows could change from month to month. However, once the treatment plant is expanded, there should be no problem. I have arranged for Semicon's request to be placed on the Planning Commission agenda of February 26, 1985. William Duncan has agreed to be available for questions at that meeting. It should be a fairly routine, but necessary approval by the Commission. Sincerely, i Jane S. Bechtel, City Planner JSB/mcg cc: William Szymanski William Duncan Richard Trudell GO N D(. O N Z Semicon °FV I C <1 ComponentslNC. A SUBSIDIARY OF SEMICON, INC. Feb.26, 1985 City of South Burlington Planning Commission 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vt. 05401 Gentlemen: Semicon Components, Inc. located at 1000 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, Vt. respectfully requests consideration of allowing an increase in the maximum daily discharge to the minicipal sewer line. At present the discharge permit for this facility allows a maximum of 14,000 gal./day. We are requesting that this maximum be increased to at least 20,000 gal./day or an increase of 6,000 gal./day over the present limit. By the indications of water usage listed on the attached equipment list, it is obvious that the increase requested is not nearly enough to satisfy the total requirements. We do rec- ognise that the sewer plant at Airport Parkway is essentially at maximum capacity, but also believe there may be a little more it can handle. Granting an increase, however small at this time, will give SEMICON additional time to pursue engineering studies on how to re -cycle the majority of this water which will be used to cool down process equipment. Without an increase in the dis- charge limit, SEMICON will be severely limited in the types of equipment, ie: the diffusion furnaces, which it plans to put in service. Consequently, the numbers of new employees will also be governed by the ability to get this equipment "on line". SEMICON has every intention of pursuing the possibility of re -cycling the water used in this facility. The time frame for accomplishing this however is going to be an ongoing activity for some time, and much longer than the immediate requirements for getting this facility into operation. Any consideration in this regard will be most helpful and appreciated. Respectfully subp4tted, William S. uncan, Manager Facilities Engineering 1000 HINESBURG ROAD- SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 • (802) 658-3110 4 9 p M / 4 4k Apm/ 4 s4k 13 � err a 9P>y-� i used I0 4) o 3 C�Jv.rrY(JS / Anse D� /0 c4u.mp s 4-a 4 1or, S -- ,;Zo dL,.,ps /dam W 0. e-r Sc, r L b b 2r atzk, O ;1 c. r , F 4-c-• m "ley c Lk ; y'e yn e- vt- 4- DI wital I 'Sj : { -; try S � o n �:.�. � rl •�. C (?.: S �. �•' y- 2 S f., ! D r / e, rs --ro I a- � \GO N DSO F A N � semicon ComponentsINC. A SUBSIDIARY OF SEMICON, INC. l/ s 2. 0 go, 11dAr /ISz0 l/5ZO 8 '-4- o 2 40 500 4 iP Memorandum February 26, 1985 Agenda Items 2/21/85 Page 4 8) SEMICON Semicon has received the same sewer allocation that Mitel was allowed, 14,000 gallons per day. We have received a request (attached) tincrease this to 20,000 gallons per day. There is a waiting list for the Airport Parkway Plant. It is possible to ask people already on the list todefer their allocation to Semicon, if they do not plan to use it prior to the Treatment Plant expansion. Waiting list projects include University Mall, Benson's 16 unit multi -family project, RDR's 3-lot subdivision, Cardinal Woods extension, Burlington Indoor Tennis and Dubois. I know that many of these will be ready to go as soon as capacity is freed up, so it seems unlikely all would agree to the jump, but it could be tried. February 22, 1985 William Duncan Sem icon 1000 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Bill: Enclosed is the agenda for the Planning Commission meeting on Tuesday, February 26, 1985. As you requested, Semi-con's request for an increase in sewer capacity will be heard by the Commission after 9 P.M. Please be sure someone is present to represent your request. Sincerely, Jane S. Bechtel, City Planner JSB/mcg Encls cc: Robert House STATE OF VERMONT ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION # 4 111 West Street Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 Telephone: 879-6563 January 4, 1935 Robert E. House, Executive Vice President Semicon 15 New England Executive Park Burlington, Massachusetts 01803 Re: Land Use Permit #4CO473 Dear Mr. House: Thank you for your letter of December 26, 1984, with attachment, regarding the requested increase in sewer caoacity allocation for Semicon in South Burlington. Such an increase will require a Land Use Permit Amendment (Act 250) and a revised Certification of Compliance from the Division of Protection, Agency of Environmental Conservation. I have enclosed a permit amendment application form which should be completed and returned along with a letter from the City of South Burlington allocating the additional capacity and plans detailing any plumbing changes or a statement that there will be no such changes. Please feel free to call me should you have any questions. Sincerely, Katherine M. Vose Environmental Board Coordinator Enclosure cc: Ernest Christianson, Regional Engineer Jane Bechtel, South Burlington City Planner ee Semico INC. 15 N E W ENGLAND EXECUTIVE PARK - BURLINGTON MASS December 14, 1984 Mr. William Szymanski City Manager City of South Burlington 575 Dorset St. South Burlington, VT 05401 Re: Semicon Sewer Allocation Dear Mr. Szymanski: RECEIVED DEC 17 1984 MANAGE-,Z. ciry PFric O 1 8 0 3�0 (�4�ikLrApN z 9 O As you know, Semicon has purchased the Mitel building on Hinesburg Rd. We are now in the process of formulating plans for the products to be manufactured as well as the equipment and utilities required. It is my understanding that South Burlington has allowed us a total discharge of 14,000 GPD effluent. In view of the fact that additional sewer capacity may not be available until late in 1986, as an interim measure, I would like to respectfully request your consideration to increase our discharge to a maximum of 20,000 GPD. Very truly yours, Robert E. House Executive Vice President REH:pml cc: Richard P. Trudell Norman E. DeVolder William Duncan --d" -OL - DINSE, ERDMANN & CLAPP JOHN M. DINSE ATTORNEYS AT LAW ROBERT H. ERDMANN 209 BATTERY STREET MICHAEL B. CLAPP ROBERT C. ROESLER P 0. BOX 988 SPENCER R. KNAPP BURLINGTON, VERMONT OS402-0988 BARBARA E, CORY ROBERT R. MCKEARIN JAMES W. SPINK JOHN D. MONAHAN, JR. RITCHIE E. BERGER JOYCE H. ERRECART AUSTIN D. HART JAMES W. VOLZ LUANN VAN ZEELAND November 12, 1984 Jane S. Bechtel City Planner City of South Burlington Vermont 05401 Re: Semicon Dear Jane: TELEPHONE AREA 802-864-5751 Thank you very much for sending me a coPy of your letter to Dick Trudell dated November 7, 1984, concerning Semicon. Your letter raises a question as to whether the Mitel Land Use Permits are transferrable to Semicon. By the terms of the Permits themselves, and by applicable law, they are trans- ferrable. Each of the Act 250 Permits issued to Mitel (Permits 4CO473 and 4C0473-1) contains acondition which states as follows: By acceptance of the conditions of this Permit without appeal, the permitee confirms and agrees for itself and all assigns and successors in interest that the conditions of this permit shall run with the land and the land uses herein permitted, and will be binding upon and enforceable against the permitee and all assigns and successors in interest. This provision is consistent with Rule 32(D) of the Rules of the Environmental Board promulgated under Act 250, which states "Permits issued after February 1, 1978 shall run with the land". Similarly, the final plat approvals granted by the South Burlington Planning Commission are held to run with the land, and do not require transfer upon a change of ownership. LAW OFFICES OF DINSE, ERDMANN & CLAPP Jane S. Bechtel November 12, 1984 Page 2 I would be happy to discuss these matters further with you if you have any questions. Very truly yours, DINSE, ERDMANN & CLAPP S ncer R. Knapp SRK/sjw cc: Richard Trudell Robert House Katherine Vose November 7, 1984 Richard Trudell P.O. Box 308, Route 2A Williston, Vermont 05495 Dear Dick: I have reviewed your letter of October 19, 1984 regarding the Mitel sewage allocations. I have also discussed this with Virginia Little at the Permits and Compliance Section of AEC in Montpelier. Without trying to explain any of the passible discrepancies in the correspondence between 1981 and 1982, our understanding is as follows: 1) In June,r1981, the State approved an initial allocation of 6000 gpd for domestic flows; 2) In September, 1981, the State approved an additional 2000 gpd for a total of 8000 gpd in domestic flows; 3) In December 1981, the State issued a pre-treatment permit for 6000 gpd (monthly average) for industrial wastes. Therefore, the State has approved a total of 14,000 gpd for the Mitel Plant. It is my understanding that the Mitel land use permits may in- deed be transferable to Semicon. If they are transferable we would expect Semicon to operate within this limit of 8000 gpd in domestic flows and 6000 gpd in industrial flows. If they are not transferable, Semicon will have to reapply as a new applicant. This should be cleared up within a few days. If Semicon wishes to request core than this amount, they must amend the State permits and request additional capacity from the City. As long as they plan to operate within this amount for a year or two, it may behoove them to wait until we have additional capacity. Richard Trudell November 7, 1984 Page 2 I hope this is helpful. Please feel free to call if you have any questions or if you have additional information. Sincerely, Jane S. Bechtel, City Planner JSB/mcg cc: William J. Szymanski Robert House Spencer Knapp Katherine Vose TRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, Inc. [November 13, 1984 Mr. William Szymanski City Manager City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Semicon Dear Bill: RECE�N E�) '00v 15 1y�4 FICS 1d►ANAGER' t4GTON CITY `SO' As a follow up to my letter of October 15, 1984, (copy attached) we now understand that Semicon will have an allocation of 8,000 GPD domestic flow and 6,000 GPD industrial flow. Semicon still desires to discuss increasing their industrial contribution to approximately 70,000 GPD and would like to discuss timing and methods for reaching this goal. Please contact me at your convenience, so that we can discuss this matter. Very truly yours, TRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. C�u Richard P. Trudell RPT/bmm enclosure cc: Robert House BOX 308, WILLISTON, VERMONT 05495 (802) 879-6331 - _ e �4 Uer x_. STATE OF VERMONT ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION # IV 255 North Main Street Barre, Vermont 05641 802-828-2455 MEMORANDUM'J � � I� TO: All Parties FROMr }Edward Staniict Coordinator. DATE: January 25, 1982 RE: Land Use Permit #4C0473-1 Mitel Semiconductor, South Burlington REVISED Certification of Compliance #4C0473-1 Enclosed is a copy of Certification of Compliance #4C0473-1 (REVISED) issued on January 19, 1982 by the Assistant. -Chief _Engineer, Division of Protection, Agency of Environmental Conservation. This Certification specifically approves the following aspects of the 30,400 square foot addition to the existing 59,800 square foot manufacturing facility: an increase of 100 employees (increasing maximum occupancy to 400), revisions to the previously approved sewer line extension and revisions to the previously approved domestic water supply service entrance. Additionally, this Certification approves the water distributicn piping for the facility addition. While all conditions in this REVISED Certification of Compliance have been in- corporated in Land Use Permit #4C0473-1 through Condition #3 therein, the District Commission emphasizes Condition #5 in this most recent Certification and reading as follows: 5) The project is approved for a maxis -um of 8,000 gallons per day of sewage to be disposed of in the South Burlington municipal sewer system and a maxinx n of 400 employees. The sewage flow from the addition will so include an additional 4,000 gallons per day of industrial processing wastes which require pre-treatment. The discharge of industrial wastes to the municipal sewer system will be approved under the Pre -Treatment Permit to be issued by the Permits Section of the Agency of Environ- mental Conservation. Please contact the coordinator should you have any questions in this matter. ES: jh enclosure TRU®ELL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, Inc. October 19, 1984 Ms. Jane Bechtel City Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset St. South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Wastewater Flows - Mitel Land Use Permit 4C0473-1 Dear Jane: As you are aware Semicon, Inc. intends to purchase the Mitel property on Hinesburg Road in South Burlington. They are concerned about the present wastewater allocation/approval, as there appears to be some misunderstanding as to the amount of wastewater that the Mitel project was approved for. This letter is an attempt to clarify the chronological sequence of approvals and arrive at an agreed upon quantity of wastewater for the project. 1. The original design brief (3/9/81) had this projection 300 employees present 300 employees future 4,500 gpd 4,500 gpd 9,000 gpd total This was submitted to Mr. William Szymanski for review. 2. Mr. Szymanski noted that South Burlington could accept this flow (9,000 gpd) in his April 13, 1981 letter. 3. The Planning Commission minutes of May 5, 1981 speak to 9,000 gpd flow. 4. Mitel received Land Use Permit 4C0473 on June 19, 1981. Neither the permit nor the Certificate of Compliance list the wastewater flows. The Findings of Fact do address the question. On page 4 a wastewater quantity of 6,000 gpd is addressed and on page 5 a water demand of 9,000 gpd is noted. Since the 6,000 gpd figure was based on Exhibits 3 & 7 which were Mitels submission of 9,000 gpd flows and Mr. Szymanski's letter concerning the same, it is felt the 6,000 gpd figure was a typographical error that should have read 9,000 gpd. I C) O � (1 BOX 308, WILLISTON, VERMONT 05495 (802) 879-6331 11 5. After starting construction, Mitel decided to expand the building and started the review process over again. 6. The projected flows increased from 9,000 gpd to 16,000 gpd. 7. Mr. Szymanski's letter of August 14, 1981 noted that the increased flow of 7,000 gpd was acceptable. This brought the total flow to 16,000 gpd. 8. A letter was addressed to Mr. Bryer on September 3, 1981 noting the increase to 16,000 gpd and including notes on the increase. 9. A September 10, 1981 letter from Mr. Gormsen of the Agency of Environmental Conservation, Division of Environmental Engineering noted an approval of 16,000 gpd. 10. The Land Use Permit #4C0473-1, dated September .21, 1981 for the expansion of the building references a site and foundation approval which in turn references a letter from the Water Resources Department. That letter addressed only the 4,000 gpd industrial process water of the 7,000 gpd sought after increase. 11. The Findings of Fact for the amended permit refer to the additional 7,000 gpd. (for a total of 16 OOO.gpd) G. LS:g6 1 1 COD CLQ 12. The Certificate of Compliance #4C0473-1 revised dated January 3 e",)6;� 19, 1982 indicates that the approval is for 8,000 gpd domestic flow and 4,000 gpd industrial processing waste. (for a total flow of 12,000 gpd) ... The following can be concluded from the above. a. The City of South Burlington has accepted the value of 16,000 gpd. b. The Division of Environmental Engineering has accepted the value of 16,000 gpd. c. The District Commission accepted the value of 16,000 gpd in September 1982 via their Findings of Fact. d. The revised Certificate of Compliance approved 12,000 gpd although it referenced the approval letter of 16,000 gpd. Possibly a "double" subtraction'of the 4,000 gpd process water was made in the drafting of the Certificate inadvertently. The only discrepancy in the "paper trail" appears to be the Certificate of Compliance approving only 12,000 gpd instead of 16,000 gpd. Based on the above documentation, it appears that Mitel was approved for 16,000 gpd and we would like to establish this quantity as an agreed upon figure. Please review the attached documents and reply by letter to me concerning this matter. A duplicate letter has been sent to the District Environmental Commission. Very truly yours, TRUDEU NSU,,G EN ` NEER INC. Rilard P. Trudell RPT/bmm cc: Robert House, Semicon Bill Duncan, Mitel 1 DESIGN BRIEF on a SEWAGE PUMPING STATION for the MITEL CORPORATION MOUNTAIN VIEW INDUSTRIAL PARK located in South Burlington, Vermont March 9, 1981 A701JA,)7141A) UIC--W A /t)e ro� j4b IC4 -33 ,j is'pll> hA,,1A2-'r44rAr1 57;47'70" nJ "ILZ,14,7-Zany Ogg 3510 t7r` 4911. C, 4 is Z?cc) "ZeV. 1110kv ^IALP& 7— 4:ems�e Vlote4llik 11 NOL IRErA�u7l, R- WEI '7716 Or-740"; Of 4- % yya 4p City of South Burlington 'J'yS*MMMD 575 Dorset Street SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 TEL. 863-2891 April 13, 1981 District Environmental. Commission District #4 111 West Street Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 Re: Mitel - GBIC Hinesburg Road South Burlington, Vermont The above referenced project will be connected to the municipal water and sewer collection system in conformance with city standards. The sewer treatment plant has sufficient reserve capacity to accept this fticil.ity. Very -truly yours, William J. z m anski City Manager WETS /b :I LANNTNa rnmm7q5T0m MEETING Ak ),Opwl. 6Y 51 1981 Add 5ttpulAtion, # 17 as follows "Any changes to the location of the water -line, e City Wa as required by the Department and t;'Q City Planner, shall be recorded on the final plat.,, Mr. Wooleryta motion which was seconded by Mr- Jacob reads In full as follow,, to I move that the So 141 T E L 1eml conductor as d M-1 C t ed on a 28 dated April 1 981 nt I nul �qti ons:#6 4t BurlinAton -for —A-14-2-nEs a "I set of ,_,_prepared ared by 7, lAnn !PISO—MmiRsion rant fin JLase foot industrial ist buildin Is entitled "MITEL Mountain !911i Consulting M MAL-all —Dr 0. IPA I of n Hinesburg RoaFj ew Industrial Park t h e f a I 1Z. —4. -- I. The applicant .hall comply with the requirements of the City Manager's memo, dated 5/1/81, regarding road gravel, sever arA water main, and sewage Pumping station improvements. 2. The following lega: documents shall be submitted to and a Attorney prior to Issuance of a building permit: ppro Vad by the City a) Easement deed and offer of dedication for a Pedestrian trail alon southern boundary of the property. g the b) Right -Of -way deed and offer of dedication for A Possible extensI041 of Sidif t Street. C) Easement deeds and Offers of dedication for than pumping station, access to and maintenance of d) Easement deeds And offers of dedication for Potential sewer c0An(-ction3 to abutting propertieq. 3. The 15 foot pedestrian tram easement along the southern boundary of the Property and 20 foot sewer casements to adjacent properties to the east, soith, all Le indicated on the final plat. d west shall 4. Road Improvements at the Intersection of the now Park road and Hinesburg Road 4/29/81. shall be As indicated or, P,1,1,ge SP239 entitled "Eniranr.e Road Tntersection-, revised 5. "No Through Traffic" signs shall ba erccted at both entrances of Old Farm Road. Mitel Semiconductor will he asked to use Its good Offices as an employer to discourage employee through traffic on Old Farm Road. 6. Road improvements for the intersection of Hinesburg Road and Kennedy Drive shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission prior to Issuance of a building permit. 7. Information on building elevations, roof screening, an,,' A color chart Indicatin the exterior color of the building - all as presented to t' during Public hearings - shall be submitted as Part of the Planning Commission g of a building permit. record prior to Issuance 8* A landscaping bond to cover the following Issuance of a building permit; Items 5"11 be Provided prior to a) $56,000 for new plantings. b) An amount to cover replaceme�at of existing trees In front of the Brirson Property If damaged during road widening. 9. A bond to cover all proposed Public newer, wester, and road improvements shall be provided prior to the issuance of a building permi,,, 10. In the event that Swift Street is extended across this property, the area of land southwest of the Proposed road shall remain as part of the overall not constitute & separate building lot without Planning COmmision aProperty and a pproval. N, • 47 12. The location of the fire hydrant or hydrants on Hinesburg Road near the intersection with the existing CWD water main shall be as approved by the Fire Chief. 13. If volumes of chemicals to be disposed in the City Landfill exceed those listed in the March 20, 1981 letter from David Martell, MTEL Production Manager, the applicant shall obtain approval from the City Manager before disposing of the additional chemicals, 14- A revised final Plat package, contairing required changes from stipulations 1, 3, 4, 6. 7 and 12, shall be subMitted prior to issuance of a building pe-z'Mit. IS. This approval expires in 18 months. 16- The final plat - to Include Pages SO and Sp19 - shall be recorded within 90 days. 17- Any changes to the location of the water lint, as required by the City Water Department and the City Planner, shall be recorded on the final plat. Wa er E_ha_Lr_ma1 f22er called for & vote on the motion, sod it passed unanimousiv. Chairman Poger asked the Commission members for their views on the subject. Mr. Woolery complimented engineer Richard Tr,�dlejl On a fine presentation. He felt the facility was well I)lanned Out and would 'be A welcome addition to our coorpunIty. He went on to say that traffic problems and road conditions would continue to be a big hassle with future applicants. Mr. Ewing said he still has reservstions as to the location of the building, but other than that felt the applicants had done a superior job of the presentation and welcomed MITEL to the area. Mr. Poger said that generally this Is & good plan. fie 21ild titat the 50 acre minimum lot requirement keeps the area open and visually green. M'a sa" he was well Pleased with the submissions from both MITE1. and GBIC and with the direezi,3n the city has taken. ,. , �f.__ _._�'•_`�.>- z".mil rc' f. l r':1 'St t::t i O,y r. !1-1d rot ,:ai led .fir : pre in.'ur!rnc; H.'1•;1 that cove. ir. r�r i,;id that ccuiri btu di:.c:.^.:ud. ::ea said the Council wanted al.;; to revise t..":e dental plr_n, but tr!=,.de-offs could be discussed. rd requested some res nonce to each individual reo_uest. ::r. Spitz stated that he strongly supported the 1 hour lunch break, which he felt this Croup of esployees needed. :r. iarrar said the Council would respond next week. v,eet with City Attorr.,ey to discuss Police Arbitration matter At 7:00 pm !fr. Flnherty roved to Lo i r.to executive session to d i snuss a err in,. 1e-1 situation with the City Attorney Mr. Paulsen seconded the i t1G;� f,.nd all. Voted for it. At 7:30 pm the regular session was reconvened. i'ut;lic hc•;rir.7 on z;ni-_J ch-:_:--•e -'_ro^: k,rriculturnl to industrial for a 145 sIcre c�!rcel loc ated south of 1.n.ter:3trate 89 and east of Hinesburg rtoad Mr. ;;rrar rebid the notice which appeared in the Free Press. Planner David _pitz e~ho+ed the area in question on the proposed Ljnd use c:n;p a.,o, ted in November. e pointed out other chancres to the map as well as an area of about 600 acres which was changed from agricultural to insuetri,al. All there chsn,-es were approved as part of trle land use plan. It was noted that what was being considered here was a zone chr,.nge, not a site plan. GBIC has a client which wishes to build or. this land and .-:r. Farrar asked if the proposed use and the zone change were consistent. he w.aIs told they were. pie thc,n asked if the zoning change was consistent with the Xaster °lan as arnroved and was told it was. 'Vr. Schmucker represented about 28 affected pro,.erty owners. lie did not reel the proposal was in total conformity with the Master ?Ian. He noted that area residents were served by wells and were concerned about the chemicals which the operation will use leaching into those wells. They nre also concerned about air r,oliution and residents feel that they do nct the protection from industrial uses which they were promised and which they r.<rrd. Xr. Schmucker felt cone zoning ret>ulations tailored for t r;^ pr(;Joct h•:r...i i..:t :. t of tti� ick, _,p discussed tonight. i'e felt the nosal did violence to the Plan. ,:voting that high quality, large -lot uses were callc.d for in the Pla_^., he pointed to tY,e srall p,:rcel of land which will be left when this company buys the 110 acres it proposes to and he suggested the coW;;any purchase the entire area in question tonight. :?r. Sch^.,. c'.�er also re,:d frcm the :'lan that the city should insure water quality and drainaJ e and he said t.`at wi:ile the company had said it would handle some toxic chemicals, there w,,is no indication that these were the only toxic chemicals it would use. H.e reiterated that specific regulations should have been set up tailored to the particular applicant. :,;r. _"chnucker questioned the rlanning Commission's procedures of 'nearing the a;.ulicnnt before the existence of any zoning ordinance which would permit the use. re said the use would affect the level of service figures and that people were concerned that traffic would worsen. 1:r. Farrar s~,id Mr. ::c",sucker was asking that the zone change for:_at be ch'!n;red to restrict the use or the size of the land and that he was as::ing tr:,t :.rt of t'rie bard be deleted from the change. i-:r. Schmucker responded that his clients were against the zone chani,e but at the very least they 4 '. . S. T r, 0 1 1 t t, " h,l t S! eci q 1 rr .-'.A .bons I d h,tve L—en p- rt of t!,.O ro I to :'t r tn,i t n r(: a in br. Lu,,inbuni :CA t t:li:_; 10,_`ked like srl;ot zonir.,.- rt 'nd th ,t trl(:! CrirL Wna )roct.edin,_3. fie was n.*'rp.id th,t ),,t!-celo in tho Would be nnd �lave 11 Uses Which were not coE.oatiblle with tc.e re:,:4.,Q1' %1,ial us'ej out of said the comt)any in q",Icstion wn:. .,A tel and Ile tl-.,ivG- infor=-ation on Lnem. Mr. Farrar noted ti,iat all that was being Mere Was the 'Zont, not the soccif-ic applicrrit. w n rioted t h 1 t thle city had a new ?lan under w'^ic- all t,is land industr'_:,<! --ind he 3t,,ted that the zoning was merely a by-law W"';Cri the ,lqn o,.-erat-d. Tic., Xoninf� ROKI)1-1tionn will be am'endel to bring i,,to rfnrmity with the clan. rie stated that objection_- to trie change bi fit t.:e nearings on the Plan. Mr. Flaherty noted that tllp ilan was conce-,tual. h,-;,r :such of the currently zoned industrial 1„nd w-as occu: it,d. Ssitz srtid ;it wa3 -.bout 31-/:>, but the great r:fOority of t h un i tv (-� 1:,t c.d land wa, s owned by two landowners, one of wl,ich is i)i,: i tal Taking tnilt 11,:.,,i oat, the rent i.,; a little less than 50," developed. -'everal residents ex7re..Fed surT,-,rise that Dipital should have been allowed to tAke up Lucn of the industrial land in the city so no one else could use it. arrar said t`.at w*,Ien the Plan was discussed the Council st,.ent hours tr%,ir. to rVO4d whet is hap_;enin.rr tonight - a charge in use after a numter of ruGple are living in a-n area. They tried to estimate how Much industrial land be needed in the future to maintain the same relative tax 1--se b!_,1&nce betwe?n residential ant non-residential uses and set aside t-st much land now so everyone would know what was planned for the future Coffin said no one on Hinesburg cad knew the discussions were un.ie:rw;i,;;,t t!ic ti:--e the in uf;e was contemplated. with the stFitempnt that once the :'Irtn w-,n -,do; tc,t tl-;rrc- w,is a ::hind ite to implement it with by-laws. tie 81!d t'!1,t COUI'i I'(-, d,0.-t? but it wii.,i not L,.%ndhted. D. snid rc,�.e industrial uses would not be with rr`11.idt-:.tir:l uzes in t1n-e are%i and he asfed for some ret7ulziti,)".S WiIich. would be sure the permitted uses were compatible. :.rL.,:,ner noted that a :najor problem in the city was traffic and that congestion s',Iould be reduced. thou,;,',11t this locption, with only Hinesburg Road to serve it, was -,Gor Lor an industrial u_e. o'udy Hurd Braid s?e h,:d two children, and with 9001 more tris :(--r airy did not see n,,,w a -none with children could live on _;nesbur c.- :a . e I - 0 noted that tijis was prime agricultural land which the city does not (�3 ,4 t in abundrince. N: felt this use would create traffic problems which the road bindle. P_r-,.r. felt the c-ncerns b(--.,' nf), voiced tonJ--i:t ,.fre .ir :- t'.t zone cr.,,. ,- c,-,n^idered here; w.,._ild r,-et the city in trouble in V.-j future ,.in,,!, ri.-; ".,%,r rt,i Vie -,,rocedure, he w,�I.nted to consult with the Ci.ty Attorney to see if the proposnl could be modified by taking out, for example, the twD �.-,arcels of land added by the Commission above what the applicant w,,, n t s - `e ur(,,.'_n; the Commission to hurry on its pr,,)rosed zonin,rl fc-r th(-_' entire area. lie was not sure different rules cool: be ri, I .: d to t-`is new zone t'r.nn '.:ere applied in existing zoning. industrial At the next meeting the Council will try to reach a decision on the issue. 4. 'Y '\"Ii } .._rrar wanted to find out the Council's ability to modify the procosal. . Flaherty asked wKy the Co-Rmission was holding her,rinrs on the while zone ne;.rinE7a were -oirgZ on and was told it W':2 bec.:-.'a;e of the vast amount of irfo.rwation which is needed from the ar^licant. —nted to E,et started tr.kln�; testimony but they will rot vet tic Lion. V Burgess moved to continue the public hearing until the next re-.Ularly moeti^:., at 7:30 pm at City Hall. Mr. Flaherty seconded the :notion an all, were in ft vor. Cc,r;ti.nue work on the City Bullet r. :.*zymt,nski said some items had been deleted from the budget but that tr,ere still a t31,0'J0 s::ortfall. it was notr-w ti at t>ie C'-'T,% expense had gone from $27,0in ..')79-E30 to :. .0 two years later. id ir.:>urr,r:ce costs had risen Its,, , lie went t,-irouj,,1h tile rcl.iustrnents to the fire department budget. It was decided to use a fivure of 41.7; per gallon for gasoline in this budget. Mr.. "-zy:nP.nski then wc::t tt:rcut.,h the puliee decarti nt adjust!%ents, Zr. Farrar asked how n any miles ;_.slice vehicles had put on them and how much it cost to maintain them. it was decided to think over the bud6;et and discuss it more next week. 1�.r. ;.owell Krassner showed pictures of flooding on Beacon Street and asked for :Honey to fix it. he had a letter signed by area residents supporting t:e rep r:ir--. i:r. Ynrr•ar said the governer had decided that apportionment ar:d school al'i were :,eTRrate i.:,sues and st:ould be trer-.ted as such. He has also said t::•:t t::e state-ment that property assessments should be 1CC L' should either DO removed or enforced. :r. Farrar wondered if appraisal levels could be ad„u:.t�d yearly to keep them at 10CYjC'). 'r:eview _Manning and Zoning a,~er.das ,�3 on the Zoning, Board, Yr. Paulsen was not aware of an dA on Last Terrace and er. Szymanski said he would check into it. Old n,,;! en asked about appliances in the kitchen in the npw City Hall conference room. Mr. Szymanski said he would try to get them in by the ei-i of' tte month. Farr;�r than. Bill Szymanski and Bill Burgess for the work they did keeping track of the City Hall construction' progress and stated that they had done a good job. D::=cuss_Cld `);nici;-!.,l Building Demolition Contract r. ::zymanski felt this should be in executive session and Mr. r'1%herty moved to tz-, into eyilcative. :,,.action to disc' a de-,, Iiticn contract with the i`tV ?.';_ r'r n.;;d tti.(-i re?conyc_; f, t,.e refrul.,-ir� e lei' with thn only nct.ion witi re--,r'd to the contr�ict. '`ihe motion was seconded by Mr. -kurgess and all were in At 10:00 tir. Paulsen moved to reconven<, ir repulgr session. Mr. burgess seconded the motion and all were in favor. The Council decided to take no action on the contract. The meeting was adjourned at 10:05 pm. Clerk CITY COUNCIL h,AR C H 16, 1981 I The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, March 16, 1981 at 7:30 pm in the Conference Room, Uity Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present Paul Farrar, Chairman; Michael Flaherty, Martin Paulsen, John Towne, William Burgess (tiers Present William Szymanski, City Manager; Albert Audette, Street Dept.; James Goddette, Fire Chief; Bruce O'Neill, Recreation Director; Jodie Peck, Free Press; Ruth Poger, The Other Paper; Dick Trudell, Walt Bruska, Chuck Thweatt, Elaine & Normand Lavoie, David & Debbi Martell, Donald & Bernice Brisson, Donald Kerwin, Viola Luginbuhl, Ann Emery, Roberta & L.H. Coffin, Thomas Chittenden, Judy Hurd, Leo Nadeau, Richard Painter, Theodore Goodrich, M.K. Wright, Carl Cobb, Gary Farrell, Thomas O'Connor, Maria & Luke Albee, Alan Levy, Dan, Jane & Edith Hendley, Richard Lang, William Schuele, John McKenzie Agenda addition Mr. Farrar noted that the City Attorney had sent a memo answering some questions asked of him. A number of the topics come under Old Business, so he thought those would be discussed at the end of the meeting, if time permitted. Minutes of March 2 and 9, 1981 The March 2 and 9, 1981 minutes were approved on a motion by Mr. Paulsen a second by Mr. Flaherty and a unanimous vote. Disbursement orders Disbursement orders were signed. Continue public hearing on zoning change from agricultural to industrial for a 145 acre parcel located south of I-89 and east of Hinesburg, Road Mr. Farrar said a question had arisen at the last meeting regarding appraisal of the land. He said the land would be appraised as industrial, not farm land. Regarding procedure, he said that if the Council wanted to change the boundary of the area in question to delete land, they could approve the zone change with the change in the boundary.. The change would go to the Planning Commission for comment and the Council would have another meeting to ratify the action. To write different regulations for the land in question would require starting again at the Planning Commission level. Mr. Farrar said the present change requested by the applicant could be approved and the Commission then directed to come up with permanent zoning for the entire area. Mr. Schmucker was concerned that the Council could direct the Commission to start the process but the Council could not tell them what to do. Mr. Farrar felt the Commission would proceed in a reasonable manner and added that they could be requested to respond within some reasonable time limit. Mr. Szymanski pointed out on the map the area requested by the applicant for a zone change plus the area added by the Commission. Three residential 2. CITY COUNCIL MARCH 16, 1981 lots originally included in the change had been deleted by the Commission. The Council did not want those 3 lots included in the change either. Mr. Towne arrived at this time. Mr. Gary Farrell felt the city should encourage a business like the one proposed and her hoped there would not be a long delay. Mr. Nadeau felt the company should locate near Digital, but was told that land was not for sale. :�ir. Farrar said one concern which had been raised was that the applicant (GBIC) and the proposed tenant (Mitel) might change their plans and subdivide the land. lie said assurances had been received from both that they would put it in writing that this was not their intent and that they would forego any legal rights they have in this area for 2 or 3 years. This assufance applies to only the 111 acres GBIC is interested in now. Mr. Chuck Thweat, a Mitel representative, spoke about the company and about what kind of employees they would have. Mr. Flaherty asked what improvements to the Kennedy Drive -Hinesburg Road intersection, as described at Planning Commission meetings, might cost and was told it would be about $5-10,000. Mr. Nadeau asked how the city could control the growth of this facility and was told control was in the 'Zoning Ordinance and site plan reviews at both the local and Act 250 levels. Mr. Farrar said one argument which had been presented was that because of the location of this area in the Quadrant, it might be desirable to have permitted uses in this industrial area be different from permitted uses in the existing industrial zone. Because the existing zone was being extended under this zone change proposal from the Commission, area residents were concerned about the uses to which the two small parcels might be put if the change was passed in this form. Mr. Burgess moved to close the public hearing. Mr. Towne seconded the motion and all voted for it. It was noted that with deletion of the two small parcels, the area in question would be 111 acres. The two parcels can be rezoned industrial at a later date. Mr. Burgess did not see any advantage or disadvantaf,e to excluding the two parcels. Mr. Paulsen preferred to include all the areas which came to the Council, to avoid zoning for a particular applicant. Mr. Flaherty was concerned over the rezoning. He was afraid rezoning would accelerate development of that area of a type the city might not want, and he was afraid that this change might change the character of Hinesburg Road and the south part of the city. IIe also did not want to see small lots used for small industrial uses. He was against any industrial zoning south of the Interstate. Mr. Towne felt the proposed tenant would be compatible and should be welcomed. Mr. Farrar felt the Council was dealing with a situation where a zone change had been requested for a particular applicant and that was what should be granted. He also felt the Commission should be directed to look at the entire question of rezoning that area with reasonable speed and in a way which is compatible with what has been put forth in the Plan. Mr. Burgess moved that the City Council delete the 10 and 25 acre parcels of Tilley and Wright from the present application and that the Council then approve the zone char e on the remainder of the land. The motion was seconded by Mr. Towne and passed 4-1, with Mr. Flaherty dissenting. Mr. Paulsen then moved to schedule a meeting to consider final action on this item for Monday, April 6, 1981 at 7t30 pm at City Hall, Mr. Burgess seconded the motion and all voted for it. CITY COUNCIL APRIL 6, 1981 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, April 6, 1981 at 7:30 pm in the Conference Room,City Hall, 1175 Williston Road Members Present Paul Farrar, Chairman; Michael Flaherty, John Towne, Martin Paulsen, William Burgess Others Present William Szymanski, City Manager; Donald & Bernice Brisson, Madlyn Morrissey, William Schuele, Jim & Pete Crevier, Debbi & David Martell, Charles Thweatt, Walter Bruska, Jim Atkins, Carl Cobb, Pat Burgmeier, The Other Paper. Agenda addition Mr. Flaherty said he had a personnel matter he would like to discuss in executive session. Minutes of March 12, 16, 17, 18, and 27, 1981 Mr. Paulsen moved to approve the March 12, 16, 17, 18, and 27, 1981 minutes. Mr. Flaherty seconded the motion and all voted aye. Sign Disbursement Orders Disbursement orders were signed. Public hearing- on amendment to City 'Zoning Ordinance. Amendment to include a zone chan e of a parcel of land of approximately 110 acres located south of Interstate 89 and east of Hinesburg Road formerly a part of the Wright Farm Mr. Farrar noted that at the previous meeting on thin item, it tied been referred back to the Planning Commission for consideration of the modifications made by the Council. The Commission voted 6-1 to concur with the Council changes. Mr. t'aulsen moved to ap;:rove the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance for the City of South Burlington for the 110 acre parcel located immediately south of Interstate 89 and east of Hinesburg Road, consisting of the parcel owned by Boardman, as preliminarily approved at the meeting of March 16, 1981. Mr. Towne seconded the motion. A member of the audience asked whether the. Planning Commission had allowed enough room for on -off ramps at the Hinesburg Road intersection with the Interstate and was told that any such considerations would be taken up at site plan review. The motion carried with Mr. Flaherty voting no. Appoint Town Service Officer Mr. Flaherty moved that, in recognition of the fine job William Szymanski has done during the past year, he be reappointed Town Service Officer for the next year. The motion was seconded by Mr. Burgess and all voted aye. _'LANNING COMMISSION JUNE 9. 1961 that by the time he was done with the building, no one could afford to buy it to sell junk. Across the street from the property is a wooded area. Mr. Ilona asked about lighting. He was told there was a light on a telephone pole and that there would be a dome light every 20' along the fence. On the rear of the building will be amber lights which will shine down. They will be placed under the.eaves. Mr. Mayo said lights would not shine into traffic on the road or at the buildings on the other side of the road. Mr. Woolery moved that the "outh Burlington Planni r Commission approve the .ste_plpnprl ��aton of Rodney Mayo for a car dealership as depicted on a. -plan entitled "370 Dorset Street, Rod Mayo" re cared by Krebs & Lansing Consulting Engineers, last revised 6 3 81, subject to the following stipulations: 1. The site shall be raded so that storm water drains toward San Remo Drive. 2. A landeca inpbond_of 3600 shall be provided. 3. This api:roval expires in 6 months. 4. The lighting shall be constructed so as not to be objectionable to the1)otential neighbors across the street and not to _shine directly onto Dorset Street. Mr. Ewing seconded the motion. Mr. Poger asked about snow storage and was told that Mr. Mayo intended to have it taken away when it became excessive. Mr. Mayo said he would pave the entire lot and Mr. Poger said that should be shown on the plan of record. The motion was passed by a vote of 5-0. Review of required Mitel roa. rovements at the intersection of Kenn Drive and Hinesburg Roa ation 6 from May 5 1981 aaproval Mr. Poger read a letter from the District Environmental Commission. One portion of the letter stated that the sewer, pedestrian trail, and Swift Street Extension easements could not be activated until a study was done of the Southeast Quadrant and the Winooski River area. Mr. Ewing said that meant no expansion in that area could take place until the study was done. Mr. Spitz said it would be a city study. He felt the Winooski River area wording only referred to that area within the city, but Mr. Woolery noted that the letter should say "within the city" if that were the case. The city is a party to the letter. Mr. Levesque felt the people making the decisions were not in tune with the 21st century. He said the prime agricultural land was not in Chittenden County - the jobs were here. He proposed that some of the land which had formerly been fields be cleared for farming and that land for industry be left in Chittenden County so people had places to work. He noted that 90% of the state had been cleared and farmed at one time, and he said this was still prime agricultural land. Mr. Spitz said the letter was before the Commission for its information. He said that the city would map out the prime soils in the Quadrant, look at existing uses on every piece of land out there, and then decide what to do 4. PLANNING C(XiXISSION JUKE 9. 1981 with it. Mr.Poger noted that with the large lots the Commission had designated for the Quadrant,'he felt agricultural uses could be compatible, but he felt that to say that simply because the land was of a particular type made it prime agricultural land was shortsighted. He felt there was a difference between Chittenden County, which is an industrial area, and the other areas of the state, which are more agricultural. He said the city's interest in large lots was not agricultural - it was for the visual vista. He said this got his back up because he felt the Commission had discussed and considered carefully the uses of the land in that area. He felt this was not a rural area - it was urban or suburban. Mr. Ewing felt the land Mr. Pillsbury was farming would be better used to provide jobs for people. He noted that 200 acres of industrial land could employ a lot of people and that there was a lot of land in the state not being used for agriculture which could be. After a short break, the road improvements were considered. Mr. :spitz said most of the time had been spent working on the traffic study between the ar,,,licant's consultant and the city's. They have now come to final conclusions about conditions in 5 years with this intersection, in terms of normal traffic growth plus the impact of the fully developed 60,000 sq. ft. facility. As to the cost, Mr. Spitz thought the City Council would have Mitel pay for part of the cost and the rest would be paid out of taxes. That has not yet been formalized. He felt the improvements should be required to be done by a certain date. The intersection design should be for the future with only the Hinesburg Road portions being done now. State help will be needed on the design. Mitel hopes to open April 1 next year, but Mr. Spitz felt it could oven before the improvements were completed. He felt a completion date of the end of the next building season should be set. Mr. Trudell said Hinesburg Road approaches to the intersection should be widened, each on the right side. In addition, they want to plan for large trucks, so the lanes will be widened out and islands put in. Mr. Spitz said some right of way for these improvements might have to be acquired. Mr. Trudell said the Kennedy Drive island going west would be shaved off to allow a 'WB-50 turning radius and the same would be done on the other side. The curve for the right turn from Kennedy Drive to Hinesburg Road going east will also be widened. Mr. Trudell said the curbs would also be widened at the intersection and then meet the existing pavement, so that when Kennedy Drive is widened in the future, the curbs for the widening will already be there. All these items will be done by the end of the next building season. They will cover improvements needed for the next 5 years. Mr. Spitz said this was just for information. The final design will have to be worked out with the state and city. It will probably be for 20 years. Mr. Woolery moved that the following; stipulations be added to comply with and to supplement stipulation o e a'�._� 1981 South Burlington Planninr Commission final Elat approval of MITEL Semiconductor fora 59,800 U. ft, industrial building on Hinesburg Road 1. The following road improve Road and Kennedy; Drive shall be com is for the intersection of Hinesl ted prior to September 1, 1982: a. Widening of both the southbound and northbound Hinesburg Road approaches to accomodate two 12-foot traffic lanes. b. Improvement of all approaches to and from the southerly Hinesburg 5. PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 9. 1981 Road leA as necessary to accomodate turning movements for design WB-50 vehicles 2. The applicant shall cooperate with the Vermont Agency of Transportation and with the City in_the design of longterm improvements for the Kennedy^ - ------- Drive%Hines- -- burg Road intersection and shall insure that all improvements - - re2uired in stipulation 1 nhall be designed to be consistent with any _ --- lonCer-term improvements. F''inal �lcin3 shial-1 be submitted to and approved r;nee=r for inclusion with the record c_oIYi_. 3. A bond for the estimated cost of improvements required in stipulation Shall be provided prior to issuance of a building permit. Mr. Levesque seconded the motion. Mr. Thweatt questioned stipulation 2. He asked whether Mitel was being required to design the intersection. Mr. Spitz did not see how they could be. Mr. Poger said Mitel just had to cooperate, not to design the inter- section. He felt the city and state would submit whatever they planned to do to Mitel, so Mitel could have some input into the design. It is the Commission's intent that Mitel look at the plans, but not design the inter- section. Mr. Poger noted that if the road improvements were*not made by the date in the motion, the bond would be activated and they would be done. It was noted that if the state or anyone else did not move fast enough to meet the date in the motion, Mitel should not lose its bond. Mr. Spitz said that they could come back in later for a rewording of the stipulation. The motion carried unanimously. Continue work on -zoning revisions: Discussion of "Summary of Industrial Commercial Zoning -Materials" Mr. Spitz proposed that the wording in the memo in regard to each of the five zones appear in the ordinance. Mr. Mona asked that in the zones which were industrial and something else, the word "industrial" come first. Mr. Spitz said that the office use included all types of offices, including medical. The members felt that perhaps car rentals should be included with other types of rentals. The general philosophy in the memo was all right with the members. The Commission looked at the traffic overlay zones. These zones will cover Williston Road, Shelburne Road, Dorset Street, Kennedy Drive, Hinesburg Rd., and various intersections, regardless of the zoning. In specific zones, uses will be prohibited or allowed only with size restrictions. There are three sections on the traffic zoning provisions page. The Commission will evaluate access points, level Qf service and nearby inter- sections. Mr. Spitz said these were only for developments which were not PCDs. Other business There will be no meeting June 30. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 pm. Clerk PANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY S. 1981 .. The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, May 5, 1981 at 7:30 P.M. in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present Chairman Sidney Poger, Ernest Levesque, George Mona, James Ewing, Peter Jacob and Kirk Woolery Members Absent Robert Walsh Others Present David Spitz, Planner; Richard Trudell, Debbi and David Martell, William Schuele, Walter Bruska of GBIC, Chuck Thweatt, Roberta Coffin, Judy Hurd, Ralph Goodrich Chairman Poger called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. Minutes of April 28, 1981 Mr. Ewing made a motion to accept the minutes as presented. The motion was seconded by Mr. Levesque. Mr. Mona abstained from voting as he was not present at that meeting, and the motion passed. WARNED PUBLIC HEARING App lication 6�V_MITEL_$emihonductor for final plat approval of a 59,800 square foot industrial but ng on a 110 acre parcel on Hinesburg Road south of I-89 Chairman Poger pointed out that this warned public hearing called to review the application of the Mitel Semiconductor people for final plat pproval, saying that the intersection of Hinesburg Road and Kennedy Drive has to be improved and he wondered who was going to pay for it. Planner David Spits said the Planning Commission would decide what improvements are needed and then the City Council would work on who would pay for it. Mr. Thweatt from Mitel said he understood from City 'Council Chairman Farrar that it would be a joint effort, if the city wanted more work done than would be necessary to bring the intersection to the point proporere it would natestake off a ofcost- traffic projections upto 1986 Mitel would pay Mr. Mona felt that the minutes don't totally reflect all the Council's recommendations, that the traffic item should be discussed again with the Council. Mr. Spitz said the details of the original application and changes have been presented to the heads of the water and fire departments and the city manager. The main issue now is the traffic report which requires further study. Mr. Trudell then presented plans detailing all aspects of the application. He said the facility would contain 59,800 square feet on ill acres of land on the south side of the intersection located on the east side of Hinesburg Road. He noted that the employees' work hours were flexible, i.e., "flex time", which should help to eliminate a lot of traffic at so-called peak hours. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY S, 1981 Mr. Trudell pointed out the size of the water mains and their locations on the •. map, as well as the location of the on -site storm collection systems. He reported that the fire flow is adequate and has been approved by the Fire Chief and the Supervisor of the City Water Department. The Champlain Water District can push more water through when it is needed. Speaking of the sewer system he said it was designed to serve a larger area, that the pumping station can process 9,000 gals., which would adequately service Mitel and any expansion. This item also was reviewed by City Manager Szymanski and o-kayed. Mr. Trudell said he has already received temporary pollution permits from the state. The subject matter again centered on traffic problems. Mr. Mona pointed out that the right turn radius off Kennedy Drive on to Hinesburg Road should be enlarged. He also wondered if problems would be caused because all straight and left turn traffic would be in one lane. Mr. Trudell explained that the planned improvements, widening of the road on legs A and B, and repainting the lines, would take care of the problem. He mentioned an anticipated change in the timing of the signal lights which would also alleviate a lot of the problem. He then pointed out that the new 1980 traffic count from the state on the intersection is showing a 77. decrease at this point and he had figured on a 4% increase. Chairman Poger wondered if the city has done anything about requesting a decrease In the speed limit signs. Mr. Spitz said yes, the council is acting on it. Mr. Mona spoke about the difficulty of passing the stacked -up cars. Mr. Spitz and Chairman Poger felt there was plenty of room for passage and Mr. Trudell again explained the planned improvements which would help that situation. On another drawing Mr. Trudell showed the location of the road to the acess road and the entrance to the proposed building. Mr. Jacob said that if there were any problems with traffic at this point Mitel could consider what IBM does, make changes to their entrances. Mrs. Hurd wanted to know where the road widenings were situated and Mr. Trudell told her the changes would not haveeffect on her driveway. In regard to the use of our landfill area b�MITEL, Mr. Spitz read a letter from the Environmental Board which stated that he materia lSto be deposited at the site is not hazardous but does produce dust so it will have to be containorized. As to other municipal services, both the Chief of Police and Chief of the Fire Department were satisfied with the sections of the application that concerns their departments. Mr. Trudell pointed out the location of the fire hydrants. This brought up a discussion of the location of some water and sewer lines. Commissioner Jacob was to check out these locations. Mr. Trudell said he had met with the Department of Agriculture personnel on the location of the building on the site. The department was adamant about keeping the location of the building where it is presently proposed. There will be some row planting (corn), but otherwise most of the agriculture section will be seeded with different grasses. There were no changes in the appearance of the building. Mr. Trudell pointed out the north and south elevations, roof screening, and east and west elevations. He showed a drawing of the side of the building which would face Hinesburg Road. Mr. Mona said the building was going to be very visible, it would be bound to be compared with the Digital plant. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 5, 1981 The next drawing showed in detail the landscaping that was planned. The screening *' on Hinesburg Road would have American Beech, white pine and Austrian pine trees. Mr. Trudell pointed out the location of all the plantings, showing how the elevations in the property were being utilized to help with the screening effect. Mr. Jacob wondered if he would consider some plantings along the long access road where none were planned. He thought that it would be a help in sheilding the residents from headlights along the road. Ms. Coffin asked for an explanation of -how residents would not be affected by the lights from the cars, and Mr. Trudell explained how the plantings were placed at different elevations and were designed to take care of the problem. He felt there would be no trouble. Mr. Poger said this should be checked out in a year. Mr. Trudell said that the company was spending $65,000 for the landscaping, that there would be white pines, red oaks, 3 weeping willows, Austrian pines, sugar maples and flowering crabs around the building site. There was a long discussion about the amount of lighting and number of light poles planned for the access road. Chairman Poger said he felt Mr. Ewing's suggestion to install the poles as planned and then engineer them so some could be turned off was a good solution. Mr. Trudell showed a drawing of the MITEL sign. It has a brick base, 14' X 8', the sign is 10' X 3', and it is 6' 6" high. It is lit at a low level from the inside. Mr. Mona was concerned that there be a street light at the extrance to the access road and was told that that was up to the city. Mr. Mona asked that the commission again consider the subject of the Kennedy Drive - Hinesburg Road intersection. Mr. Spitz said that we were still analyzing all the new data received on the matter. Mr. Mona wondered how the commission could consider approving anything when the traffic item is not resolved. Mr. Spitz said it could be approved with the stipulation that this item (traffic) has to come before the Planning Commission for consideration. Mr. Poger wondered what MITEL should be responsible for regarding traffic improvements. Mr. Spitz repeated that he still has to study the new report. Mr. Schuele asked if there is a Trail Easement proposed. Mr` Trudell said yes, details f the proposed easement have already been shown to a member of the �ramKi 'nt+�5 R.@4 Committee. Mr. Poger said if the city should need a Swift Street exit, it would need a right-of-way. Mr. Spitz said we could get an easement in fee -simple which would be a flexible right of way. He felt locations could be worked out and the city attorney would draw up the documents. There was discussion on the use of Old Farm Road. Mr. Mona thought it was in terrible condition, saying it had a bump in it which makes it a miserable road. Mr. Poger thought "No Through Traffic" signs would be a good idea. Chairman Poger asked the Commissioners and those present if anyone had any questions. There were no more questions and Planner David Spitz distributed papers listing 16 stipulations to any approval. Commissioner Woolery made a motion for approval which incorporated the following additions to the stipulations which were unanimously approved and are as follows: Stipulation #5 was amended to read "No Through Traffic" signs shall be erected at both entrances of Old Farm Road. Mitel Semiconductor will be asked to use its good offices as an employer to discourage employee through traffic on Old Farm Road". Stipulation #10 was amended to read "In the event that Swift Street is extended across.this property, the area of land southwest of the proposed road shall remain as part of the overall property and shall not constitute a separate building lot without Planning Commission approval:' 4 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 5, 1981 Add Stipulation #17 as follows, "Any changes to the location of the water line, •, as required by the City Water Department and the City Planner, shall be recorded on the final plat." Mr. Woolery's motion which was seconded by Mr. Jacob reads in full as follows: "I move that the South Burlington Planning Commission grant final plat approval of MITEL Semiconductor for a 59,800 square foot industrial building on Hinesburg Road as depicted on a 28 page set of_plans entitled "MITEL, Mountain View Industrial Park," dated April 1, 1981, prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers with the following stipulations:" 1. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City Manager's memo, dated 5/l/81, regarding road gravel, sewer and water main, and sewage pumping station improvements. 2. The following legal documents shall be submitted to and approved by the City Attorney prior to issuance of a building permit: a) Easement deed and offer of dedication for a pedestrian trail along the southern boundary of the property. b) Right-of-way deed and offer of dedication for a possible extension of Swift Street. c) Easement deeds and offers of dedication for access to and maintenance of the sewage pumping station. d) Easement deeds and offers of dedication for potential sewer connections to abutting properties. 3. The 15 foot pedestrian trail easement along the southern"*boundary of the property and 20 foot sewer easements to adjacent properties to the east, south, and west shall be indicated on the final plat. 4. Road improvements at the intersection of the new park road and Hinesburg Road shall be as indicated on page SP23, entitled "Entrance Road Intersection", revised 4/29/81. 5. "No Through Traffic" signs shall be erected at both entrances of Old Farm Road. Mitel Semiconductor will be asked to use its good offices as an employer to discourage employee through traffic on Old Farm Road. 6. Road improvements for the intersection of Hinesburg Road and Kennedy Drive shall be reviewed and approved oy the Planning Commission prior to issuance of a building permi t. 7. Information on building elevations, roof screening, and a color chart indicating the exterior color of the building - all as presented to the Planning Commission during public hearings - shall be submitted as part of the record prior to issuance of a building permit. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 5. 1981 8. A landscaping bond to cover the following items shall be provided prior to •. issuance of a building permit: a) $56,000 for new plantings. b) An amount to cover replacement of existing trees in front of the Brisson property if damaged during road widening. 9. A bond to cover all proposed public sewer, water, and road improvements shall be provided prior to the issuance of a building permit. 10. In the event that Swift Street is extended across this property, the area of land southwest of the proposed road shall remain as part of the overall property and shall not constitute a separate building lot without Planning Commision approval. 11. Sewer allocation for this project is 9,000 gallons per day. 12. The location of the fire hydrant or hydrants on Hinesburg Road near the intersection with the existing CWD water main shall be as approved by the Fire Chief. 13. If volumes of chemicals to be disposed in the City Landfill exceed those listed in the March 20, 1981 letter from David Martell, MITEL Production Manager, the applicant shall obtain approval from the City Manager before disposing of the additional chemicals. 14. A revised final plat package, containing required changes from stipulations 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 12, shall be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. 15. This approval expires in 18 months. 16. The final plat - to include pages Spa and Sp19 - shall be recorded within 90 days. \ 17. Any changes to the location of the water line, as required by the City Water Department and the City Planner, shall be recorded on the final plat. Chairman Poger called for a vote on the motion and it passed unanimously. Chairman Poger asked the Commission members for their views on the subject. Mr. Woolery complimented engineer Richard Trudell on a fine presentation. He felt the facility was well planned out and would be a welcome addition to our community. He went on to say that traffic problems and road conditions would continue to be a big hassle with future applicants. Mr. Ewing said he still has reservations as to the.location of the building, but other than that felt the applicants had done a superior job of the presentation and welcomed MITEL to the area. Mr. Poger said that generally this is a good plan. He said that the 50 acre minimum lot requirement keeps the area open and visually green. He said he was well pleased with the submissions from both MITEL and GBIC and with the direction the city has taken. U PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 5, 1981 +. Mr. Mona said the City Council and Planning Commission were in agreement with what we have tried to do with the comprehensive plan. He felt the development was not as nice as farms or open land but we do have to have industry and jobs and must work to keep the tax base in balance. He wanted the applicant and GBIC to be aware that the approval obtained tonight did not guarantee approval of Phase 2. Mr. Levesque was very pleased with the application and the resulting approval. He said our young people want to stay in Vermont, that we need production jobs for them. He felt we have to look at Chittenden County and its growth, he sees no problem with the industrial building in that location. Mr. Jacob said he thought Mitel and GBIC made excellent presentations and he wanted to compliment the people from Hinesburg Road who acted with restraint. He hoped no one was hurt and wanted to thank them for their understanding. He could not forsee any problems and felt MITEL would be a good addition to South Burlington. He hoped MITEL would be civic minded, saying GE and IBM were part of the community, were parti- cipants in the heart fund, cancer fund and other community affairs and hoped MITEL would follow their example. Mr. Thweatt of MITEL said he wanted to compliment the Commission on its businesslike operation and method of conducting the meetings. He said the company plans to be active in the community and grow with it. Mr. Bruska of GBIC said his outfit would be circulating a report on the needs of Chittenden County. He felt this approval was beneficial, especially to the young people of the area, many of whom do not continue their education beyond high school and want to live and work here. He said GBIC would be sharing its report with all Interested parties. Other Business ` The Commissioners agreed to meet at 5 P.M. on Monday, May 11, 11981 to look over the Ryan property. Mr. Schuele remarked on the appearance of a retention pond on Kennedy Drive. Mr. Jacob told him that it was up to the state to take care of, but he personally felt that cedars could be planted which would enhance the appearance. City Planner Spitz gave a short rundown on the items to be taken up at the next regular meeting. Mr. Jacob made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:25 P.M. The motion was seconded by Mr. Levesque and passed unanimously. Approver Clerk 2. PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 7, 1981 Architect, subject to the following stipulations: 1. Fill slope shall be graded and seeded and an appropriate bond. in an amount to be determined by the City Planner shall_be,_-provided. 2. Building roof drains must outlet at a location which does not erode - the fill area. --------- --- --- — _.-------- - 3. A_landscaping bond of U8,000 shall be provided. The administration may allow some 'credit for the existing trees. 4. This site plan approval expires in 6 months. 5. The_present curb cut to the west on Kennedy Drive _must be closed_ before a building permit is issued. ��tr. t;ona seconded the motion. Mr. Poger stated that he felt bad about the filling and would abstain from voting on the motion. Mr. Ewing also felt bad about it, but noted that the application met all the requirements and he saw no reason not to vote for it now. The motion carried with Mr. Poger abstaining. Continuntion of warned public hearing on application b GBIC for preliminn plat a::proval of a 55,700 sq. ft. building for a light manu acturing opera on Hinesburg Road south of Interstate 89 Mr. Spitz reported that the City Council had passed the zone change on a 4-1 vote last night. He added that the actual size of the building would be 59,800 sq. ft. The zoning will become effective in 21 days and the City Attorney has suggested that the final plat application not be approved until 7 days after the zoning goes into effect. The administration feels it is proper to take action now on preliminary plat. Mr. 'Aoolery moved that the South Burlington Planning Commission apErove_the___pr.1iminary plat application of Greater B_u_rlington_Industr141 Corporntion for a_59.a00 sq _ ft. industriallbbuilding on Hinesburg Road south of I-89 as depicted on a plan entitled. -MITEL Mountain View Industrial Park", last revised 2727T1, prepared by Trudell Consultin& Engineers, --subject to the following stipulations: 1. All traffic information shall be reviewed during the course of final plat review. Items for discussion shall include: a. Improvements for the intersection of Kennedy Drive and Hinesburg. Road to handle present and projected traffic. Also required would be a phased schedule and responsibility for the improvements keyed to the issuance of this and future building_permits., b. Potential signing or other modifications -for Old Farm Road, to discourage through traffic. C. hength3 of bypRss_lane_and_deceleration _lane _at_the._lnteraeQtiQn. of Hinesburg Road and the industrial park entrance. Z. The sewage pumping station shall be served by an unobstruc.te access road with at least a gravel surface A parking and turnaround._gre4_ PLA!� ING CONKISSION 3• shall be APB- • ?q81 provided at the um in9 station. 3. Water service shall be rovided to the um in station._ 4• sewer- easements shall be to the southwest corner of the ��Iriehtvidedroas the applicant's property -- - -- - - - _ _ _ -- o the k'i len props rt property and the northwest corner pro erties y to allow posnible future sewer connections to abutting -F_on the east :side of Hinesburg Road. 5. A 15 foot pedestrian trail easement leading towards the Crean Ac _er s ro art - — boundar - -- -p y • r y_9hal_l e provided alon g - ds the suarry on_ _y of the applicant's - _.most of t_he southerly bT the ails TrCommproperty_ The exact l ittee, ocation shall be_ reviewed be--" e "b e�al documents for required easements and e9re _final plat- apDr%-- --_public utilities shall 7. Detailed landscaping information and building_ be submitted fo_r final flat review includin the to_the south of the main entrance. _- appearance shall ------- -_�-__potential for screening 8. Submissions of chemical data, as the relate t and other municipal services shall be reviewed durin the course o o use of the landfill plat review. - -- �.--- ----- - - g- - f-final 9. All aspects of this comment and Plannin Commission consideration duringthe course proposed development shall be open to ublic plat review. --- €- --- -- ---- - p- 1'ir. Levesque seconded the motion. — -- of final Mr. Poger asked for public comment Syr. Poger felt that on the motion, but there was none. discussion and he su- in la, long range improvements might merit discussed. Mr. Levesquetsu that estedwho thatwould thePay Citfor each improvement be percentage of the costs, since the Y Counc=l undertake a Poger felt that before final y zoned this area for development, good and who would Plat, the city and developer discuss improvements PlanningPay for them. Mr. Spitz hoped to have a Commission meeting to discuss traffic before finaltplatyonothial application. The motion originally contained a stipulation which would have the words "possible location, Swift Street extension" from the :wing felt an east -west road in that location might be useful in the removed. for connection to Williston. plat future menti small lots on Hinesburg Road, so they would onot needned atotcome off Road. The Commission felt the words should be left on the e off Hinesburg that would leave the city the maximum flexibilitPlat from the motion. Y. and the stipulationswasedeleted future, It was felt that if the city did not need the land in the they could give up the easement. An audience member asked for a co py of the Planner to provide at least 10 copies when ea'large•review and rispexpe directed Mr. Pof;er reported that he had looked at the proposed did not feel that it would be 8 expected. GBIC would move it back and would the easa problem. 8 P Plant site and stakes could be driven to show where the ool ry f wished would b and nice �"r• Woolery felt it would be nice if The motion carried with I�iz�. W floor level would be. Walsh voting no. 4. PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 7. 1981 Mr. Woolery then moved that the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that the city pay for the differential cost of installing a 6 inch force main instead of a 4 inch force main to provide for future sewer service to the area south of I-89, east of Hinesburg Road, and north of Van Sicklen Road. This cost may be recovered from future users of the sewer main according to an appropriate formula to be determined. Mr. Mona seconded the motion. Mr. Spitz told the Commission what area this would cover. The motion carried unanimously. Other business Mr. 'spitz noted that the final traffic report from Traffic Engineering Associates was in. It deals mainly with the ability of through traffic to get through the area based on intersection capacities. Mr. Mona asked whether a traffic consultant had been hired and was told that Dr. Joseph Oppenlander was now working on a review of traffic for the Yitel development. Dr. Oppenlander does not seem to have any potential conflicts of interest. Ms. Coffin felt that the traffic situation would be improved if the traffic lights worked. Mr. Spitz felt work needed to be done both on keeping them in working order and on using them to their full potential. Mr. Spitz was also directed to work on getting the Jughandle area lights synchronized. Mr. Spitz noted that the report figures for 1990 indicated some real problems. It takes a normal growth of 2.5y4 per year and then adds in development in the city. Mr. Spitz felt this produced very high estimates. Mr. Woolery felt it might be good to take some estimates based on square footage and then do some actual counts in the city to see how close the numbers were. Mr. Spitz said he would summerize the report for the Council for the joint meeting. The Commission agreed that the city had some responsibility to spend some money to improve deteriorating intersections. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 pm. Clerk 5. PLANNING COM,MIS"TON MARCH 24, 1981 Continuation of warned public hearing, on ap1ication CBIC or pre plat aT;proval of a 55 7c;u -q ft buildirf: for a light cturiri� operation on Hinesburg Road south of Interstate 89 Mr. Trudell said the building color had been changed to brown. The back of the building will be the same color. Mr. Trudell went over the proposed landscaping. Berms along the road (one of which may have to be cut into when the Swift St. Extension is built) will be created and trees planted on them. lie told the Commission where the various trees would be planted and said they planned to put in Austrian and white pine, ash, linden, red oak, red maple, willow, sugar maple, flowering crab, and cherry trees. The berms will be varioun heights above road level - one will be 4' and another will be 6', Mr. Trudell said. There will be a 30 sq. ft. sign at the entrance with a brick base and a white background. Mr. Trudell showed the Commission and the audience the light fixtures which are proposed. These will direct the light down so there will not be glare from the sides. Mr. Brisson, a Hinesburg Road resident, felt the.people in that area should look at the front, not the back of the building. Mr. Ewing asked about the nitrogen tank and was told it would be 15' high, 5' in diameter, and placed on the parking lot side of the building. It will be the same color as the building. Mr. Walsh felt the location of the building on top of the knoll needed to be addressed. He opposed the location. Mr. Poger felt traffic should be discussed first. Mr. Poger noted that a letter from traffic engineer Bruce Houghton had been sent to the residents' attorney, Mr. Schmucker. Mr. Trudell showed a proposal for a turning lane, bypass lane, and a deceleration lane in front of the entrance to the project. lie felt an acceleration lane would cause as many problems as it would solve, and the Aj;ency of Transportation agrees. Mr. Trudell said the figures used in the traffic study came from the Agency of Transportation and that if fib, -ores were available from an updated source, they would update their traffic report to include them. Mr. Spitz noted that Bruce Boughton had been hired to do a traffic study of the triangle area bounded by Williston Road, Kennedy Drive, and Dorset Street during interim zoning. A preliminary report was given to the city in June of 1979 but the final report is not in. Because of the time which has elapsed since the preliminary report, the firm has done spot checks in two areas, and these checks show a traffic growth greater than the 2`p the Agency of Transportation uses. Mr. Spitz expected the final report shortly. Mr. Levesque said he had voted no for the traffic study of the triangle area based on the reliability of the firm in question, and he questioned the reliability of any report from that firm,.based on the delay the city has experienced in getting final figures. Mr. Trudell repe^ted that when the figures were available, they would be incorporated. fie said that rivht now it seems that what is needed is widening on the north leg both sides of llineuburg Road plus an additional lane on the south leg of Hinesburg Road. Who would pay for the improvements was discussed. Mr. Poger felt they should be done at the time the project gets started. Ir. Trudell noted that the project would generate 3200,000 a year in taxes for the city and he felt the improvements would cost 46,000. He suggested that the city take some of those taxes to improve the intersection. Mr. Poger noted that history showed that if the city were to do it, it would not be done. He wanted to be sure the improvements were made, regardless of who paid for them. 6. PLANNING commi5SI0N MAItCTI P4,__D,8l i ". Lu�;inbuhl itz,Ved who would decide wh-ther the proposed improvenents were adequate and was told the Commission would decide, with expert advice. Mr. Spitz said the improvements would depend on projected traffic volumes, but he suspected that they would cost more than Si6,000. Mr. Ewing felt the City Council would have to be consulted as to who would pay for the road. Mr. Levesque reminded the Commission of a project on Dorset Street which had not been built until the road was upgraded. Mr. Krassner mentioned "No Through Traffic" signs for Old Farm Road as a possibility. Mr. Schner did not feel developers should have to maintain existing city streets. Mr. Poger agreed it was the city's responsibility to fix many of these intersections, but he said he did not make that determination. 1�r. Schner suggested that the Commission make a recommendation to the Council on this point, perhaps in a joint session. `ir. Mona added that the Commission had done what Mr. Schner suggested in its proposals for entry into the Capital Budget of the city, but its recommendations have in the past been ignored. Mr. Schner felt that tax generators like this should not be asked to upgrade intersections which are already disintegrating. He felt this was a city problem. Mr. roger said the Commission agreed in theory and that he did not object to a joint meeting to discuss it. Mr. Brisson suggested a second access, for fire protection, but it was noted that the land has no access to another road. In response to a question raised at the last meeting, it was noted that Digital's elevation is 346' and this will be 376'. Mr. Trudell said they estimated 5-6 van -type trucks per day and 1 semi per month. Mr. Kransner felt that was an optimistically low fif-ure. Mr. roper nitid that at final plat the applicant could be asked to submit some kind of schedule of shipments in and out. The building location was discussed. Mr. Mona was not as concerned about the location as the appearance. Mr. Woolery agreed that this color blended in better and the location did not bother him. Mr. Walsh did not like the location. Mr. Ewing said the building could be moved southeast Off the knoll and still maintain the view. Uther than that, he felt it was a good plan. Messrs. Poger, Mona, Jacob and Levesque had no problem with the location. Mr. Walsh asked the Commission to consider the location from the Interstate. The building will be high and the most prominent feature in the entire area. He felt that was not good for the area. Regarding access, the Commission spoke about the entrance road for the project. Mr. Trudell said the proposed location had been chosen because there was more space between the houses on the road at that point, and therefore, less interference with those driveways. He added that the proposed site had better sight -distance, it was a good location for the Swift Street Extension, and it gave the company a better chance to do something with the entrance road other than make it straight in. As far as safety in the event of an accident, it was noted that the road is 30' wide and there will be no parking on it. Regarding the design of the entrance, Mr. Mona expressed concerns about the shortness of the passing and deceleration lanes. Mr. Trudell said 5-6 cars could stack in the lane and the standards indicated room was needed for 3. Extending the lane would bring it closer to the Brisson driveway. The deceleration lane is 50' of full pavement and 180' of taper. Mr. Poger felt that was adequate. Mr. Mona was not sure and he thouvht 5 stacked cars was a small amount. Mr. Trudell said copies of the design standards would be submitted. Lowering the speed limit on the road was mentioned by Ms. Hurd and Mr. Poger aaid perhaps it could be set at 7. PLANNING C0M11!IjSI0N . MARCH 24, 1981 35 until one was past the plant. Mr. Jacob asked that the City Council be requested to recommend that to the State. Mr. Krassner asked about a double lane on the exit so right turning cars could get out while left turning ones waited. It was noted that the road would be wide enough for that. Air. Spitz felt major off -site improvements could be resolved at the end of preliminary plat and he felt that should be stipulated. He felt the Interstate interchange with Hinesburg Road should be given renewed interest and that the city should pursue it with the :;taste. As far as sewers, Mr. Spitz felt the oversized force main but not the oversized pump station should be installed. If oversized improvements are put in the Commission must recommend that to the Council and the Council will take action on it. There are three possible easements to be considered here. One is for the Swift Street Extension. Mr. Spitz felt the need for this on the east Of Hinesburg Road was questionable. The second is for sewer easements to abuttors on Hinesburg Road and the applicant will give those. There should also be a pedestrian trail easement. Mr. Poger said the Natural Resources Committee would be asked to fix a location for that. Mr. Trudell said power lines on the land would be buried. Mr. Poger noted that since the Commission had decided to make no decision on the application until the new zoning in that area becomes effective, the public hearing should be continued until such time, which will be April 7. The proposed motion on the application will be sent to the members so they can look it over. Mr. Woolery moved to continue the preliminary plat application of GBIC until two weeks from tonight, April 7, at Citv Hall at 7 30 pm Mr. Mona seconded the motion and all voted for it. Mr. Spitz stated that the City Council, in its deliberations on the zone change for the property, had reduced the acreage involved from 145 to 111 acres. They also want action to take place as soon as possible on the new industrial provisions and they suggested that input be sought from residents on Hinesburg Road. Mr. Woolery moved that we concur with the City Council recommendation to modify the zone change request from 145 acres to 111 acres as Proposed at the City Council meeting of March 16 Mr. Mona seconded the motion. Mr. Woolery felt the entire 500 acres should have been done in the first place. Mr. Poger felt very sensitive about spot zoning in this case and he demurred. The vote was 6 yes and 1 no, with Mr. Poger dissenting. Discussion of traffic review procedures for develo went a lications Mr. Spitz said this item related to the traffic review of the project just discussed and others. It also relates to past performance of contractors and potential future contractors and he felt this sort of business should be conducted in executive session. Mr. foolery moved to go into executive session to discuss specific ersenalities and contracts on traffic and at the conclusion of the executive session, to adjourn. Mr. Jacob seconded the motion and it passed 7-0. At 11:10 pm, Mr. Woolery moved to come out of executive session and adjourn Mr. Ewing seconded the motion and all voted for it. The meeting was adjourned at 11:10 pm. Clerk PLANNING COMMISSIOf MARCH 17, 1981 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, March 17, 1981 at 7:30 pm in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present George Mona, Vice Chairman; Ernest Levesque, James Ewing, Kirk Woolery, Hobert Walsh ;Members Absent Sidney Poger, Chairman; Peter Jacob Others Present David Spitz, Planner; Richard Trudell, Lowell Krassner, Carl Cobb, Ethel & William Schuele, Viola Luginbuhl, Roberta Coffin, Robert Furlong, Ann Painter, Walter Bruska, Chuck Thweatt, George Baron, Debbi & David Martell, Gerald DiVincenzo, Vermont Agency of Environmental Conservation; James Johnson, Peter Dakin, Tony Petermann, Michael Hogg, Thomas O'Connor, J.C. Rowley, Thomas Chittenden, Vernon & Judy Hurd, Sue & Linus Wiles, David Furlong Minutes of March 10, 1981 The minutes were deferred until next week. Continue warned public hearing on application by GBIC) for preliminary plat approval of a 55,700 sq. ft. building for a light manufacturing operation on Hinesburg Road south of Interstate 89 Mr. Woolery arrived at this time. Mr. Chuck Thweatt gave an overview of the company. He said they had received an enthusiastic welcome in the foreign trade zone and that they had operations in Canada, Hong Kong, New York, Florida, etc. They hope to start construction by June 1 and he expected to have an operation which would meet area standards and enhance the area. The people in the present operation in the Burlington area are, with one exception, all Vermonters, and Mitel hopes to grow in this area. They have a clean, high technology operation. Dave Martell, production manager of the operation presently in the area, explained the present use, storage and r eclamation of chemicals (copy of letter on this on file with Planner, dated March 13, 1981). The major chemical is 92.5% Chloroethane plus 7.5X Butyl Alcohol. The company uses 4 55 gallon drums per month in its degreasing operation. The chemical is reclaimed and its shipments are followed with a manifest system controlled by the Hazardous Waste Department in Montpelier. Another chemical used is Isopropyl Alcohol, used for cleaning silkscreens. They will store 5 gallons of this per month. Kimwipes absorb this chemical and the wipes are sent out so the precious metals used in the process can be reclaimed. This is a closed loop system and both OSHA and the National Fire Prevention Association have inspected the plans. The above chemicals are presently used in the Foreign Trade Zone. They, plus others, will be used in the proposed building. An additional chemical to be used will be 40% denatured Ethanol, 40% Isopropanol, and 20% Naptha. They will store 1 55 gallon drum per month and use it to clean screen printers. 2. PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 1981 Kimwipes will also be used here and they will be recycled to reclaim the precious metals. Plastic for packaging will also be used. :;torag,e of this will be 1500 lbs. per month stored in an 8' x 8' walk-in freezer. Most of this will be used in the process. It is Morton Polyset 410A - Epoxy Novolac/silicn filled. :fir. Pete Dakin said the Burlington plant would start out with silicon wafers, saw them into chips and put these chips in plastic packages. The leads will be cleaned. He explained the steps which would be taken at the new plant. Wax is used for mold release. This is inert. To clean the mold another type of plastic is used. This is also inert. 24 lbs. of that is used per month and it will be disposed of at the landfill. The leads are cleaned in an acid dip. 20 gallons of this are used per month, but the acid is neutralized with a chemical of which they use 55 gallons per month. As the usefulness of the acid diminishes with each time it is neutralized, it is eventually sent out to a company to dispose of it. Mr. Dakin explained that the company wanted a non -aqueous system so they would not have to dispose of water. They do, however, use de -ionized water to cool the saw which cuts the silicon. Regarding chemical evaporation, Mr. Dakin said a consulting firm had come to the Quebec plant and taken air samples. Of all the chemicals used, there were only 3 that the firm used as examples - the others were present only in trace amounts. The 3 which showed up were in quantities of 16 parts per million, 4 parts per million, and .04 parts per million, and none of them will be used at the South Burlington plant. Mr. DiVincenzo noted that he would be concerned with hazardous waste management - he would inspect the industry on -site and would deal with the hazardous waste manifests. Mr. Mona asked whether emissions into the air would be only in trace amounts and was told that was correct. Mr. Walsh asked whether the 3 chemicals found at the Bromont, Quebec plant would be introduced at this plant at a later date. He was told that those chemicals were used in the front end of the process and the back end of the process would be going on in this area. At this time they do not plan any front end work here and it was noted that if those processes were added in South Burlington, they would have to start the entire procedure again. Mr. Levesque asked about filters to remove trace amounts and was told that if they reached threshhold values, they would be filtered. Members of the audience asked specific questions about the chemicals to be used. Mr. Schuele noted that the recent laws regarding hazardous waste made a company responsible for its waste even after it was given to a reclaimer, and Mr. Thweatt said they would get information on the procedures of the reclaimer. Mr. Mona asked that when the Act 250 hearings came up, the area residents' attorney be informed so people could attend. Mr. Thweatt said he would see that it be done. The question of spills came up. Mr. Thweatt said that in the normal operation groundwater would not be affected. Mr. Krassner mentioned a safety net in case of accidents. Mr. Mona said he would like to know the degree to which there is control over a spill, and if there is a spill, he wanted some comment on what the effect might be. He 1' �fi:o� g gave the example of an rum falling off a truck and being totally absorbed into the ground. He also wanted to know the possibility of unpolymerized materials being sent to the landfill. It was noted that the plant would receive that material already mixed and the heat of the process 3. PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 1981 would polymerize it. Mr. Krassner wanted to know how it would be handled if it were not polymerized. After a short break, the Commission discussed site appearance. Mr. Hogg said the building would be about 60,000 sq. ft. in size with 10,000 sq. ft. on a second floor. He went through a plan of the areas within the building set aside for the various operations. The office area will be 25' high and the production area 15' high. The outside will be prepainted off white flush metal panels. What windows there are will be bronze. Roof equipment will be screened (there will be 11 units), as will the garbage compactor. There will be 2 8' x 8' loading doors. Mr. Linus Wiles broached the subject of color - he felt the white would stand out and he suggested an earth tone, which would blend in better. At this point, slides of other Mitel buildings were shown. Some were brick and some were the white metal proposed here. Mr. Ewing agreed that white would make the building stick out. He asked the elevation of this plant compared to the Digital plant. The question of the roof screens was discussed. Mr. Hogg said the screens would be 4' high and most of the roof equipment was 4-5' tall. The plant elevation is 3761, or 396' to the top of the screen. At the road entrance to the property, the elevation is 415'. Mr. Hurd felt he would be looking down onto the roof of the plant. Mr. Mona pointed out that it would be 2000' away. Mr. Hogg said that the stacks would be at most 2' above the screen. Ms. Luginbuhl suggested putting the plant on the other side of the knoll where it would not be visible from Hinesburg Road. Mr. Wiles requested an alternate color for the siding and the roof. He was told the screen would block about 75% of the roof, but the gravel on the roof would probably be gray. Mr. Mona said the Commission could not decide the color. Slides of the area for the proposed building were shown. Mr. Trudell showed all the restraints on the site from zoning restrictions, easements, setbacks, etc. All together, they leave 3 areas open, of 14, 15► and 24 acres. This is a permitted use and zoning requirements will be met. The chosen site allows for excellent bearing capacities and drainage. It is a short distance to the pumping station and excavated rock can be used for parking lot construction. They can screen the parking area, and Mr. Trudell noted that the building site was the only part of the land not formerly used for farming. It will also allow Mitel to use the rest of the land for future development. Mitel wants visibility from a major highway, the view from the site is spectacular, and the company wants to be away from existing and proposed development. He said that the building would be visible anywhere on the land, since it is all open. Mr. Walsh recognized all these considerations, but felt that this was a beautiful view and that the plant was in the wrong spot. He felt the light color would disrupt the beauty of the area. Mr. Mona agreed the color should be addressed. Mr. Noolery said he would prefer a toned -down color. Mr. Woolery moved to continue the public hearing on the preliminary plat application of Mitel until next Tuesday, March 24 at City Hall at 7:00 pm. Mr. Ewing seconded the motion. Mr. Spitz said there were two sketch plans and two site plans for review next week and it was noted that these applicants would have to be reviewed before the Mitel review continued. The motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 3, 1961 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, March 3, 1981 at 7:30 pm in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present Sidney Poger, Chairman; Robert Walsh, Kirk Woolery, James Ewing, George Mona, Ernest Levesque, Peter Jacob Members Absent none Others Present David Spitz, Planner; Edward & Ann Emery, Roberta & L.H. Coffin, Nancy & John Boyd, Thomas Chittenden, Joan Nadeau, Elizabeth Horton, Vi Luginbuhl, Lois & Donald Kerwin, Sam & Ruth Bogorad, Judy Hurd, Madlyn Morrissey, Charles & Marilyn Dunn, Donald & Bernice Brisson, Gwendolen Rye, Sachi Rowley, Rendol Barlow, Elaine & Normand Lavoie, Robert Furlong, Thomas O'Connor, Mikyung Kwon, Bruce Horton, David Bogue, Linus Wiles, Ronald Schmucker, Bruce Ladeau, Richard Painter, William Schuele, Lowell Krassner, Fran Reiman, Ruth Poger, The Other Paper; Walter Bruska, Carl Cobb, Richard Trudell Minutes of February 24, 1981 The February 24, 1981 minutes were approved on a motion by Mr. Ewing, a second by Mr. Mona and a positive vote, with one abstention by Mr. Poger. Continuation of warned public hearing on applicatio =bGBIC fo reliminar plat approval of a 00 square foot building_for a-anufacturin operation on Hinesburg Road south of Interstate 89 ,The Commission had received letters from GBIC and from the City Attorney. Mr. Bruska read the letter from GBIC and told the audience that the company's name would be announced at a press conference at 1:30 pm tomorrow at the Ramada Inn. Mr. Poger then read the City Attorney's letter. (Both letters dated .March 3; 1981 and attached to these -minutes). Mr. Poger said that after he had read the letter he would like the Commission to discuss how it wanted to proceed on the application. Mr. Schmucker asked if he could address the Commission before it ruled on its procedure. Mr. Poger asked him to wait until the Commission discussed the City Attorney's advice. Messrs. Walsh, Ewing and Jacob favored letting Mr. Schmucker speak, Messrs. Mona and Levesque and Woolery favored discussing the letter first, and Mr. Poger cast the deciding vote that on this legal issue he would ask Mr. Schmucker not to speak. Mr. Poger stated that the City Attorney had said that what the Commission has done is legal even if the zoning law does not apply yet. He was not sure whether the final public hearing referred to by the Attorney meant the final hearing on the preliminary plat or the final plat. He recommended that since the parties were here, the Commission listen to the presentation and ask questions on factual matters. Then the hearing can be continued until after the Council has acted on the zoning amendment. Mr. Mona noted that the application was complex and that it would take some time before the Commission would be ready to take action on it. Mr. Walsh agreed with the 2. PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 3, 1981 Attorney's position and added that with the GBIC statement that they were willing to postpone the hearing, he felt it was logical to wait until the zoning change was resolved. Mr. Poger said the Commission had always put everything out on the table and he felt it was not productive to have a lot of people come out for a hearing and send them all home again, since that drags out the process. He preferred to take testimony tonight. Xr. Walsh pointed out that the people who had come for the hearing might not want it to proceed tonight. Mr. Woolery said that the Commission was on record as favoring the change to industrial zoning, so the discussion here should not be an argument of the merits of that zone, but of the merits of the specific application. Mr. Ewing felt the Commission should take information but not make a decision until the final zoning is approved. Mr. Spitz noted that the day after the zoning became effective was 4 weeks from tonight. The Commission voted 6-1, Mr. Walsh dissenting, to proceed. Mr. Schmucker, responding to the City Attorney's letter, said he wished the Commission to decide that today this application is not in conformance with the zoning ordinance. He added that he was not asking the Commission to dismiss, but only to stay the hearing. He did not think the Commission was administering a bylaw here, since it is not in existence and he said he was asking the Commission to determine early on whether the application was in conformance with the zoning ordinance. Mr. Bogorad questioned the warning of this meeting and he was informed of the warning procedure followed. Mr. Trudell said they had received information on the airport approach cone, which now shows the building falling outside it. He showed the site plan and some views. Ins. Trudell then addressed traffic. He said the impact on Old Farm Road had been evaluated. Morning peak counts had been taken at the entrance to the park, at both ends of Old Farm Road, and at both entrances to Digital. Digital's first shift is 770 employees. During the am. peak there are 439 trips in and out to handle those employees, or about 2 people per trip. The peak 15 minute period had 136 vehicles. Using a peak shift change for the proposed plant of 260 people, they expect 130-150 trips in the a.m. peak and 30-40 at the peak 15 minute period. They projected that 10.4% would use Old Farm Road, for an extra 15 cars during the peak hour. Information on how that would affect the two intersections is not finalized yet. Mr. Trudell said the Agency of Transportation had also suggested a turning lane for traffic coming from the north, and the design is being finalized. The west side of the road will be widened for southbound cars to pass left - turning cars. The 24" CWD water main will be tapped and a 12" mai4 brought on the frontage of the property. 3 hydrants will be put in. Water will feed both sides of the building and the building is fully 9prinklere.d. 3,000 gallons per minute is needed for fire flows and they can only get 2500 gpm, but CWD has said that in the event of an emergency some valves can be closed to direct water flow and the required gallonage can be obtained. This can be done over phone lines, with a call to CWD's office. Mr. Poger read the fire chief's letter on this application (copy attached). Mr. Trudell then read a letter from CWD. Mr. Trudell said the pump station had been approached from 3 directions. It can be built to handle this facility only, to handle this facility only, but with a force main adequate to handle future development, or the size can be increased, for future development, of both the station and the force main. The Council has been asked which Kay they would like it built, but until that question is answered, they are assuming they will put in a pump station sized only for this facility and a force main„for future development. Mr. Trudell said S8zecL 3. PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 3, 1981 the force main could serve 600 acres of land in the Quadrant. The main will go under the Interstate through a sleeve and eventually connect to Kimball Ave. The control panels for the station will be mounted on a piece of ledge. Mr. Trudell showed the road and building and pointed out where burms and landscaping would go. The ledge will be cut 3-8' for a level site for the building. There will be catch -basins in the parking lot which will drain to the retention pond. This pond will catch and treat the first 112" of water. It is sized for a 25 year storm. The surface will be grass except during storms. Mr. Trudell said erosion controls would include hay bales, slope stabilization, and sediment barriers. He did not have specifics yet of the landscaping, but said there would be plantings on the burms and plantings in other areas would be clustered. The building will be brick, glass and metal. Ventilating equipment on the roof will be screened. Roads will be paved 30' ride. Mr. Trudell read a letter which had been submitted. which dealt with chemicals to be used (copy attached). A low level entrance sign is proposed and there will be a logo on the front of the building. The lights will be on 25' poles directed downward. In response to questions from Mr. Walsh, Mr. Trudell said the fire chief would be informed about the phone call to CWD to obtain the 3,000 gpm, and that the metal part of the building would be broken up with plantings. Mr. Mona was told that the 600 acre figure was if the city wanted the station and force main up -sized, they would be able to handle 600 acres. He was also told there were 200 parking spaces plus about 18 for the handicapped. Mr. Mona noted that a question yet to be answered is the improvement to the Kennedy Drive/116 intersection. What will be done, by whom, and when? He did not want Old Farm Road to bear a traffic burden if it could be avoided, and said he would like to be sure traffic could flow freely by the site of the plant's entrance. He asked about discharges into the air and was told that the plant would assemble components, so some of those discharges would not be present here. Mr. Poger was told the left turn lane would be 10' wide and the passing lane would be 12' wide. He felt that traffic on that road would get heavier and that it might be good to have a right turn lane for slower traffic. The present speed limit is 50 mph. He felt the percentage of cars which would use Old Farm Road according to the projection (10.4%) sounded small and he suggested looking into ways to discourage traffic from using that road. He asked if using a 25 year storm was normal and Mr. Spitz said he would check. Mr. Ewing liked the project, but he felt it would be very visible set up on the knoll. Mr. Trudell said that was what the company wanted. Mr. Woolery was told the actual length of new paving at the entrance would be 130'. The radii are 50'. Mr. Poger felt the Commission would favor a proposal with a deceleration lane to get in and an acceleration lane to get out. Mr. Krassner asked for a guarantee that organic solvents would not get into the sewer system and thence to the lake. Mr. Trudell said a company chemist could attend the next meeting to discuss such concerns. Mr. Poger said the question was what would happen in the event of a breakdown in normal procedures for handling these chemicals. Mr. Schmucker said his clients were participating in the hearing under protest because since so little was known about the company to go on the site, intelligent questions could not even be formulated. He asked whether a traffic expert would be hired to review the traffic information presented 4. PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 3, 1981 and was told that had not been decided. Kr. Trudell was asked about high structures and said there would be a 4' x 10' storage tank for hydrogen. He was asked to screen roof units so they would be hidden from people looking down on them. Mr. Emery asked about trucks and was told there would be 3-4 panel trucks per day and a semi once a month. It was noted that 300 people was the most the building could handle. Mr. Ewing asked whether the Commission had the power to move the building for esthetic reasons and was told they could, with a liberal interpretation of the regulations. Mr. Schuele felt the estimate of trucks was low and he suggested that be looked into. Mr. Boyd asked about sewer plant capacity and was told there were about 115,000 gallons per day left and this use would take 9,000 gallons per day. Mr. Linus Wiles stated he had written a letter to the Commission regarding the access road and he requested that they read it as soon as possible. Mr. Mona wanted to address the question of keeping chemicals out of the ground water. It was suggested that a representative from.the sewage treat- ment plant attend the next meeting. Mr. Schmucker asked whether the company could be asked to submit to a review process every time it changed its chemical process and .sir. Bogorad asked whether the Health Officer or someone else knowledgeable could assess the health hazards involved here. Mr. Spitz said that if the zoning passed March 9, it would become effective March 30. Mr. Mona moved to continue the public hearing on this application until March 10 at 7:30 pm at City Hall for the sole purpose of gaining more information on the project and not for taking any action Mr. Levesque seconded the motion. Mr. Woolery questioned whether GBIC would have more information ready by next week. The motion failed with Messrs. Mona, Levesque and Ewing voting yes. Mr. Walsh then moved to continue the public hearing on this application until March 17 at 7.30 pm at City Hall for the sole purpose of gaining more information on the project and not for taking any action Mr. Jacob seconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Poger dissenting. He stated that he felt it would be better to wait until March 31. Other business The Planner was directed to have the conference room warm at 7:30 for the next meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 pm. Clerk 4. VG COS. ;IJ SIU; r T'B?iUA.?iY 24, 1981 At the nearest tr;,ffic livht and how many cars would be turning left into the lot from the south. He mentioned a sidewalk and some sort of wide area to Pull out in on the side. Mr. Xona said tr.e concern was not counts, but what happened in terms of left and right turns, he warred the applicants that the Commission might want them to renrrnn;;e the road in front of the property and suggested again that they talk to the State highway Department. Mr. Ewinv moved to continue the public hearing on thin fkpplicntion until two weeks from tonii_ht nt City Hall at 7:3U pm. Mr. Walsh seconded the motion and all voted for it. /-i'-- A plicntion cif CHIC for preliminaryplat approval of a 55.700 sq ft building for a light menu ncturing operrition on Hinesburg --Pond south of Interstate by Mr. Ronald Schmucker sr+id he represented 23 property owners and understood that there was presently no zoning ordinance under which this proposal could be considered. Fie stated that he felt this was an illegal and unwarranted meeting,. Mr. Mona replied that there was a warned public hearing set for March 9 before the City Council at which time the zoning change to industrial in this area will be reviewi;d and acted upon. He said the Commission w,ts proceeding simultaneously with the review of the application. Yr. :;chmucker felt it was almost ns tl.irh the Commission was shonsering this project and he felt this was the first time anything like this had occurred. Yr. Spitz said that when the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in November it identified this area as industrial, which it is felt gives the Commission the basis to start the process simultnneous with the zoning change. Final approval cannot be given until the zoninv chanre is in effect, but preliminary work can be done. He added that he had discussed the situation with the City Attorney, but would now ask for a written opinion from him, but he did not feel that should interfere with tonight's hearing. Mr. Mona said the Commission would proceed to review the application, Mr. Schmucker said he and his clients would participate under prejudice, and Mr. Walsh noted his exception to the Chairman's ruling,. He felt Mr. ';chmucker had raised a problem based on the lnw and that it would be proper to have a written opinion from the City Attorney before the Commission proceeded. Mr. Woolery felt the board should take no action but that it could proceed and take testimony. Messrs. Ewing and Levesque favored proceeding, and Nr. Jacob felt it did not, matter one way or the other to him. Ar. Mona sr{id the Commission would proceed. Mr. Trudell represented GHIC in this matter. He showed the area in question. The size of the airport np;)roach cone on the drawing was questioned and Mr. ;Iona ranked that it be accurately drawn for the next meeting. The building size is now being finalized, but it will be 57,000 to 60,000 sq. ft. in size and will be located on top of a rocky knoll. The entrance will be located on thf� en-st -Side of the Hinesburg Road frontni-e, where the ni;-ht-diatanco is best - 1:'10' north and over 3000' south. Water will be brou,7ht across the full frontage of the property and fire hydrants will be added on the property. A Pump station will be constructed and an easement given to serve trie are,i:s south of the project with sewers. The entrance road will be burmed and lr,ndscaped and the parking area screened. Mr. Trudell said that the building would not block the visibility of either the top or bottom of Mount M,anrifield from Hinesburg Road. Traffic was discussed. Census data from 1970 and 1980 was taken and projected forward to 1966 and based on population studies, &;f of the cars would come from or go to the north on Hinesburg Road, while the other 12% 5. PLANNING CUMMISSION FEBRUARY 24, 1981 would be from the south. For the report, the figures 90% and 10% were used. based on 300 employees, the average daily traffic to be generated here would be 900 vehicles. Mr. Trudell looked at the Kennedy Drive/route 116 intersection and he showed present traffic counts, projected counts in 1986 without the project and projections in 1986 with the project traffic. He had submitted a traffic report which is available in the Planner's office. Once turning movements were determined, the intersection capacities were analyzed. Based on today's figures, the intersection is not adequate in two areas and should be widened on Hinesburg Road approaching the intersection going southeast and approaching it going northwest. This improvement is needed today, in 1986 without the project, and in 1986 with the project to maintain level of service C at the intersection. The road should be widened and an additional turning lane put in. In addition the road should be striped and the cycle time changed slightly. Ms. Fran Reiman said many people took a shortcut over Old Farm Road and she predicted a conflict with Digital traffic on Kimball Avenue and Mr. Mona suKgested they look at this intersection. An audience member asked about those figures when another building on the site was erected. He was told that approval would have to be given for another building and traffic would again be studied at that time. They would have to come back even for an expansion of the present building, and unless it is a minor expansion, they will be subject to the same review criteria that they are subject to now. Mr. Schmucker said area residents wanted to know what company was planning to locate here. Mr. Bruska said the company wished to remain anonymous and that the applicant here was GBIC. He told a little of what the firm would be involved with and said it would be compatible with the area. He felt that perhaps the name might be announced after the zone change, if approved, was formalized and he believed the name would be known before final plat approval. He added, however, that he would have to discuss this with the firm. Mr. Mona urged him to tell the firm of the public's concern and to move the date the name will be revealed to as close to March 9 as possible. It was 10:18 and Mr. Mona polled the Commission as to how long they wished to discuss this. Mr. Trudell said he could finish on traffic, but would not be able to cover specifics of grading, storm drainage, water, sewer, erosion con landscaping, and the nature of materials to be used on the site. Mr. Trudell said that present traffic on Hinesburg in front of the site was level of service A and it would be that also in 1986 without the project. With the project in 1986 it would be close to B, so they are calling it level of service B at that time. Going north, a vehicle will come along an average of 1 every 12 seconds, and going south it will be 1 every 10 seconds, which is enough time to turn without a stacking lane. Mr. Trudell felt the city's traffic consultant should look at the report submitted. The question of who will pay for the Kennedy/116 intersection improvements has not been decided. Mr. Woolery warned that the Commission might ask for some road improvements in front of the site as well as at the Kennedy/116 intersection. Mr. Mona agreed a turning lane might be required. Mr. Woolery moved to continue the application of GBIC for preliminary plat approval until next Tuesday, March 3. 1981 at City Hall at 7:30 pm. Mr. Jacob seconded the motion. Mr. Walsh, however, wanted the date of the next hearing to be after the Council's March 9 meeting and he moved to amend the-natiall--"ake_the date March_ 10. The motion, however, died for lack of a second and the original motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 pm. Clerk 4. R i.n steed. N.r. 'Vdalsh wss riot sure, sr,yirig he did rot strcrr1y cbject to a :;ear :Street access and Mr. Jacob avreed. idr. Levesque fr.:vorL-d a:,.ther :::;ear :street entrance. the Comrcissiori was thus 4-3 in. favor of r.".ea:;ant ''lay. It k-^s noted also thRt if access were given to Pheasant Wny, that would provide a second access for 1eadowood. 1r. doolery asked fir. -spitz to find out what he could about where the court action regarding ihea.:sant Way stood. Regarding the recreation fee/land, Mr. Spitz said about 2 acre:s would be involved in this case. It was noted that lots 22-24 comprised about 2 acres of land. Regarding density, Mr. Mona felt the real issue here was esthetics, not density. Mr. Poger felt that having 7 lots on Pheasant Jay Would provide a better transition.. He asked the member3 whetrer they preferred lorkr narrow lots on Spear Street, or these wider lots with more room between the houses. t•:r. :wing f,,vored more room between houses but Mr. Jacob felt there s!:ould be large backyards for family activities. 'Whether having a second row of houses behind the first row would block the views was discussed. It was decided to discuss this application more next week, since the hour was late. A0»1 cP,tion bf G31C or sketch plan review of a 50,000 sai rr� foot bu-ldirp for li!,nt rnanufacturing located easterly of Hinesburg Road and southerly of z-fi<i Mr. Peter Judge represented GBIC. He said the proposal was to construct ,cturing facility building on the land formerly the Wright farm. This is the first choice location of the client. Application has been Lade to rezone the land. The firm is a semi -conductor manufacturing company also involved in telecommunications. It is a high technology firm. The present plan is for a 30,000 'to 60,0:;0 sq. ft. building with an initial employment of up to 300 people. It might later expand to 100,000 sq. ft. Ar. Trudell said tae site was 141 acres on the ea3t side of Hinesburg Road. A Champlain Water District water main runs near the site and t'-0,are is sewer on kimball Avenue. The site is zartially under the hirport ap)reach core. 'Water will come from the CWD main and sewage will go to a pump 3ration and force main, under the Interstate and to Kimball Avenue. Tnerr. is an easer.ent Ficross the Digital land for the sewer, i,..r. r'o, er noted that the proposal would involve extending sewers into the Routiiehst QasarE.r.t, and if that wc,,e done, the pipes would have to be large en:,ugh to serrice nn 14.raa larger than just this plant. YX- Trsac:ll said that would be considered. Cr. the conceptual plans, any building expansion would be to the south. 25J parking spaces are shown, which is'over•the rtquire::.ent. Storm water will go to a retention pond and then into a swale. There will be burms along the entrance road, which will h,.ve Eocd sight distance in both directions on Hinesburg Road. It will be about 1500' lonE. The building will be one story, about 15-20' tall, with office scnce in a second story over part of the building. The firm intends to retain all the acreage now and Yr. Woolery warned that if they decided to subdivide the li;nd, it might be difficult to get approval. Common own(:rohip of the land with two buildings on it would be no problem. It was also noted that swales and drainas-ewFvs on the property could not be disturbed. Mr. Mona noted that when the Commission had considered this area for industrial uses, it had thought about shared access for all the land. He 5- told the applicants they might be asked to provide access for the 10 acre Piece, via the bend in the entrance road nearest that land. A right of way for such a future road could be provided. The firm might be asked to bring that road bend closer to the 10 acre parcel. Tne Siwift ,treet Extension road was mentioneu. It was s.: ;er<rted that that may extend no further titan Hinesburg Road. It was noted tint the Goodrich parcel behind this site could supi;ly its own access. "'r. mowing mentioned a city street with a cul-de-sac, which would then give access to all the pieces of land in this area, or perhals just an easement of some sort. It was noted that perhaps the start of the entrance road as proposed now could be public and the company road could code off it. The Cc:zmission did not want the entire entrance road to be public. An acceleration/deceleration lane in the entrance road area was mentioned. Projected traffic figures were given to the Commission. This proposal will not lower the level of service C now at iennedy Drive. i;r. ;voolery mentioned addition of a right turn lane at the Kennedy Drive-116 intersection. The facility may add 4-10 van -type trucks per day to the traffic. A sidewalk or bikepath along 116 to this location was mentioned. I•:r. Krassner hoped any toxic waste generated would be handled carefully to keep it out of the septic system. The meeting was adjourned at 11:20 pm. Clerk pd�jntr�y,1; f :\ V,��,re Stnte of Vermont LAND USE PERMIT CASE No. 4CO473 APPLICANT Mitel Semiconductor Division ADDRESS of Mitel. of Delaware, Inc. Air Guard Road Building 880 South Burlington, VT 05401 and BDR 346 Shelburne Street Burlington, VT 05401 LAWS/REGULATIONS INVOLVED 10 V.S.A., Chapter 151 (Act 250) and Vermont State Board of Health Regulations Chapter 5, Sanitary Engi- neering, Subchapter 1, Public Buildings, and Sub- chapter 10, Part III, Waste- water Treatment, Disposal by Land Application - EXTERIOR WATER AND SEWER ONLY District Environmental Commission #4 hereby issues a Land Use Permit pursuant to the authority vested in it in 10 V.S.A., Chapter 151. This permit applies to the lands to be identified in the Land Records of South Burlington, Vermont, as the subject of a deed to Mitel Semi- conductor, the "permittee" as grantee. This permit specifically authorizes the permittee to construct a 59,800 square foot electronics manufacturing facility with parking facilities, access road, stormwater treatment system and other related improvements. The project will utilize municipal water and sewer facilities and is located off Vermont Route 116 in South Burlington, Vermont. The permittee, its assigns and successors in interest are obligated by this permit to complete and maintain the project only as approved by the District Commission in accordance with the following conditions: 1. The project shall be completed as set forth in Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law #4C0473, in accordance with the plans and exhibits stamped "Approved" and on file with the District Environ- mental Commission, and in accordance with the conditions of this permit. No changes shall be made in the project without the written approval of the District Environmental Commission. 2. By acceptance of the conditions of this permit without appeal, the permittee confirms and agrees for itself and all assigns and successors in interest that the conditions of this permit shall run with the land and the land uses herein permitted, and will be binding upon and enforceable against the permittee and all assigns and successors in interest. 3. This permit hereby incorporates all of the conditions of the Certification of Compliance #4C0473, issued on June 19, 1981, by the Assistant Chief Engineer, Division of Protection, Agency of Environmental Conservation in compliance with Vermont State Board of Health Regulations, Chapter 5, Sanitary Engineering, Per�tit ;hapter 1, Public Buildings, and Subchapter 10, wastewater Treatment, Disposal by Land Application WATER AND SEWER ONLY., This permit incorporates all contained in said Certification of Compliance. Part III, - EXTERIOR condi tiony 4. The District Environmental Commission maintains continuing juris- diction during the lifetime of the permit and may periodically require that the permit holder file an affidavit certifying that the project is being completed in accordance with the terms of the permit. 5. The permittee and all assigns and successors in interest, shall. install and maintain water -conserving plumbing fixtures, including but not limited to low -flush toilets, and aerator. -type or flow - restricted faucets. 6. The permittee and all assigns and successors in interest shall. continually maintain the landscaping substantially as approved in Exhibits #65 and 85 by replacing any dead or diseased plantings as soon as seasonably possible. 7. Permittee Mitel shall apply to the District Commission for approval for any change in the manufacturing processes which would cause noxious or unhealthy emissions into the air or injection of toxic wastes into the soils. 8. All outdoor lighting shall be installed or shielded 'in such a manner a- to conceal light sources and reflector surfaces from view substantially beyond the perimeter of the area to be illuminated. 1). The permittee shall comply with Exhibits #48, 50, 64, 24 and 86 for erosion control and shall incorporate them in any contract documents for site work. The plans shall be maintained on site during construction. 10. All disturbed areas shall be seeded and mulched as soon as possible following disturbance but not later than October lst of any construction season. If fall construction is necessary, all disturbed areas of the site shall be seeded with permanent seed as recommended by the Soil Conservation Service no later than October lst, 1981, or with dormant seed between November 1st, 1981, and December lst, 1981. All disturbed areas must be seeded by either method no later than December 1st, 1981. Immediately after fall seeding, mulch shall be applied and tied down with either twine or netting and shall be maintained until vegetation is established. All erosion control devices shall be periodically cleaned, replaced, and maintained until vegetation is permanently established on all slopes and disturbed areas. ? 3 Jse Permit I 777 OiN ,I -ior to the disposal of any Polyset 4108 Epoxy Nova lac pellets k at the City of South Burlington landfill, permittee Mitel shall submit a specific proposal to this Commission detailing a method of containerization and instructions to the landfill operators guaranteeing said wastes shall either be buried separately from municipal wastes or at the toe of the landfill lift so said wastes will be covered with greater quantities of municipal refuse. 12. Permittee Mitel shall maintain the stormwater collection system and retention pond as described in the accompanying Findings of Fact and as depicted on those relev�_int plans stamped "Approved". 13. Permittee Mitel shall provide this Commission with a copy of its access permit upon issuance by the Agency of Transportation. 14. This Commission shall refrain from ruling on any future expansion proposals for this project site until such time as the so-called agricultural -open space study of the Southeast Quadrant and Winooski River area is developed and submitted for its review and use. 15. Any future expansions of this project shall be reviewed under subcriterion 9(B), in addition to all. other applicable criteria. Any such proposals shall include a review of the expansion, the presently approved project, and the -1-1.1.2 acre parcel in their totality. 16. All construction on this project must be completed by August 1, 1982. 17. This permit shall expire on June 191 2001, unless extended by the District Commission. paled at Essex Juncti.on, Vermont, this 19th day of June, 1981. I)IST,R;OT,�T,,N';,I'TZONP417INTA14,eO?qM.]".!53ION #4 11 clen B. Lawrence Liticoln Brownell i STATE OF VERMONT DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION #4 Re: Mitel Semiconductor Division Application #4C0473 of Mitel of Delaware, Inc. Findings of Fact and Air Guard Road Conclusions of I,aw Building 880 1.0 V . S . A. , ('hapter 151 South Burlington, VT 05401 (Act 250) and BDR 346 Shelburne Street Burlington, VT 05401 on April 21, 1.981, an application for an Act 250 permit was. filed by Mitel Semiconductor Division of Mitel of Delaware, Inc. Air Guard Road, Building 880, South Burlington, Vermont, and BDR, 346 Shelburne Street, Burlington, Vermont, for a project generally described as the construction of a 59,800 square foot electronics manufacturing facility with parking facilities, access road, stormwater treatment system and other related improvements. The project will utilize municipal water and sewer facilities and is located off Vermont Route 116 in South Burlington. The tract of land consists of 111.2 acres with 111.2 acres involved in the project area. Co -applicant BDR's legal interest is ownership in fee simple with an option to the parcel held by Co -applicant Mitel. Under Act 250, projects are reviewed based on the 10 criteria of 10 V.S.A., §6086(a) 1-10. Before granting a permit, the Board or District Commission must find that the project complies with these criteria and is not detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. Decisions must be stated in the form of findings of fact and I conclusions of law. The facts we have relied upon are contained' in the exhibits on file identified as follows: Mitel/BDR #1-93;; Agency of Environmental Conservation #1-7; City of South Burlington #1; Pillsbury Farms 41-4; Greater Burlington Industrial Corporation #1-3; Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission #1-3; Green Acres, Inc. #1; Adjoining Property Owners #1. The District Commission received evidence at hearings held on May 13, 1981, May 21, 1981, May 27, 1981, June 2, 1981, and June 3, 1981. In addition, the District i Commission convened a pre -hearing conference in this matter on May 6, 1981 which was conducted by Commissioner Charles Tetzlaff, Esq., acting as the authorized delegate of the ` District Commission. I Parties to this application are. A. The Applicants by Charles Thweatt, Richard Trudell, P.E., Richard Lang', Esq., Carl Cobb, Peter Collins, Esq., -And F. A. Senftleber. ' #4C04i3 Findings )Fact and ) conclusions of Law Page 2 ,j B. The Municipal planning Commission by David Spitz, Paul i Farrar and Sidney Poger. C. The Regional Planning Commission by Arthur Hogan, Executive ! Director. D. Agency of Environmental Conservation by Dana Cole -Levesque, ;! Esq., Stephen Kerr (Department of Agriculture) and Gerald DiVincenzo (Hazardous Waste Specialist). Ii ' E. Adjoining property owners and the criteria they were allowed to participate on: i, Green Acres,;Inc. by Ralph Goodrich on Criteria 5 and 9(B); Ann and Richard Painter on Criteria 5 and 8; Judith and Vernon Hurd on Criteria 5 and 8; Roberta Coffin, M.D. on Criteria 5 and 8; Bernice and Donald Brisson on Criteria 5 and 8; Linus Wiles on Criteria 5 and 8. The locations of the adjoiners in relation to the project are indicated on Exhibit #40 - Mitel/BDR. �I F. Persons admitted under Rule 12(C) and the criteria they were allowed to participate on: Pillsbury Farms by Daniel Pillsbury and Robert McKearin, Esc., on Subcriterion 9(B). Pillsbury Farms demonstrated that it could materially assist the District Commission in its deliberations in that it has been a lessee of the parcel for agricultural purposes and that the project could result in a possible adverse impact on the overall farming interests of Pillsbury Farms. The Hinesburg Road Association by Judith Hurd was admitted on Criteria 5 and 8. The Association demonstrated it could assist the District Commission by providing information regarding unsafe highway conditions on the road (Vermont Route #116) particularly to children boarding and departing school buses and by providing information .regarding possible impact on the existing scenic quality of the area. The Greater Burlington Industrial Corporation by Walter Bruska was admitted on Criteria 9(A) and 10 in that it would assist the District Commission by providing information regarding employment needs of the area and background on planning for economic growth in the area. In making the following findings, wo have summarized the statu- tory language of the 10 criteria of 10 V.S.A., §6086(a): 1. There will be no undue water_ or air pollution: ! W Of #4C0473 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Page 3 AIR POLLUTION: i. The proposed structure gas -fired boiler, which pollution (Exhibit #89 will be heated with a natural. will. not cause undue air.: - Mitel/BDR) . The applicant supplied the District Commission with a study of comparable gaseous emissions at its plant in Bromont, Canada which discusses impacts through the use of phenol, xylene and phosphine (Exhibit #9 - Mitel/ BDR). The Air and Solid Waste Program of the Agency of Environmental Conservation has reviewed the expected emissions from the proposed project and concluded that no permit will be required under the State Air Pollution Control Regulations for the volatile organic compounds to be utilized in the manufacturing process (Exhibit #89 - Mitel/BDR). In addition, the disposal of several chemical by-products was examined by Program Director Richard V'alentinetti. Mr. Valentinetti stated that such wastes would be disposed of at the South Burli.ngtonl sanitary landfill and expressed concern regarding the proper handling of Polyset 410B Epoxy Novalac pellets at the municipal site. We will condition any land use permit to include the Program's recommendations in this regard: that the aforementioned pellets be kept containerized and be buried either separately from the municipal refuse or at the toe of the landfill lift so it will be covered with greater quantities of municipal. refuse (Exhibit #74 - Mitel/BDR). Mitel shall provide this Commission with a proposal to meet these requirements and shall expressly discuss the manner of containerization, its instructions to the City landfill in this regard, and the procedure whereby these wastes will be buried either separately or at the toe of the .landfill. lift. Additionally, this project will include on -site parking for 218 vehicles (Ixh.ibi.t #1 - Mi.tel/BDR) and will generate 960 trips per day. We find that, based upon the evidence described above, no significant reduction in air duality will result from this project as proposed. WATER POLLUTION: Subcriteria A (See Exhibits #2 and 39 - Mitel/BDR) and F are not applicable to. this project. #4C0473 } Findings c k act and / Conclusions of Law Page 4 (B) w�lste Disposal: i. Sanitary waste will be disposed of through connection to the municipal treatment plant. The City Manager has stated the treatment plant has sufficient reserve The City of soutn burlingtin Airport Road Water Pollution Control Facility, a primary treatment facility, will receive the wastes which will not include any industrial by-products (Exhibit #11 - Mitel/BDR). A Certification of Compliance for EXTERIOR WATER AND SEWER ONLY has been issued by the Division of Protection, which the Commission accepts as evidence that the disposal of wastes into the municipal system meet applicable State Health Regulations and will not cause undue water pollution (Exhibit #7 - Agency of Environmental Conservation). The project entails an extension of the municipal sewer line from the vicinity of Kimball Avenue, under Inter- state 89 through a pre-existing sleeve and into the proposed facility (Exhibit #41 - Mi.tel/BDR) . A pump station will be constructed by the applicants.and maintained by the City (Exhibit #3 - Mitel/BDR). Several sewer easements are indicated on revised Exhibit #42 - Mitel/BDR but the actual execution of said easements are discussed below under Subcriterion 9(B). The nature of this project will require extensive use of several chemical agents (Exhibits #8 and 10 - Mitel/ BDR). The applicant presented its method for handling accidental spillage and stated that its method conforms with Section 6-609(a) of the hazardous Waste Management regulations and that it will comply with notification requirements should any spills occur in transport to or from the site (Exhibit #13 - Mitel/BDR). The applicant has established a system of proper recycling of its chemical wastes involving the utilization of Folino, Inc. of Essex, Vermont -- a registered trans- porter of hazardous wastes (Exhibit #12 - Mitel/BDR). Finally, those wastes categorized as non -hazardous will be disposed of at the City landfill which currently is under a consent agreement prior to actual site approval by the Air and Solid Waste Programs (Exhibit #74 - Mitel/BDR). Stormwater runoff will be collected in a series of catch basins (Exhibits #54 and 49 - Mitel/BDR) and channeled to a retention pond designed to hold the AC0473 l indings ollact and Conclusions of Law ?age 5 entire stormwater discharge from the project for a 25 year storm and then release it via a subsurface drainage network. To prevent erosion, the pond will be lined with a filter fabric and then covered with a minimum of 6 inches of approved soils with a permeabil- ity rate of 5 feet per day (Exhibit #16 - Mitel/BDR). A Temporary Pollution Permit has been issued, which the Commission accepts as evidence that the project complies with applicable Water Resources Department regulations (Exhibits #17 and 18 - Mitel/BDR). (C) Water Conservation: i. Water -conserving fixtures will be installed and main- tained throughout the building. No manufacturing process requires a constant flow of water and distilled water in a closed system will be utilized in certain processes (Exhibit #2 - Mitel/BDR). (D & E) Floodways and Streams: i. A series of drainage swales course through the project parcel (Exhibit #42 - Mitel/BDR). Conservation zones have been established along the swales and no structures, will be placed so as to interfere with flows or natural conditions (Exhibit #2 - Mitel/BDR). Regional Engineer Ernest Christianson has evaluated the proposed crossing of one swale with a force main and stated that a stream alteration permit would not be required (Exhibit #14 - Mitel/BDR). Based upon the above evidence, we find that this project will not result in undue water pollution. 2-3. There is sufficient water available and no existing water supply will be unreasonably burdened: a. ct (Exhibit #20 - Mitel/BDR). b. The project will be served by municipal water from the Champlain Water District. The Commission accepts the letter (Exhibits #22 and 23 - Mitel/BDR) from the General Manager that there is sufficient water available; and Lho project will not restrict nor encumber present consumers. In his letter, the General Manager states that the applicants' expected demand for fire flows can be met, if necessary, by the Water District's #4CO473 Findings c,- Fact and Conclusions of Law Page 6 partial closing of certain valves in its system. The applicants propose to service the parcel with the municipal water by extending the existing water main down Hinesburg Road, into the site itself and will also extend the new main to the easternmost boundary of the project parcel (Exhibits #42-44 - Mitel/BDR). 4. Where will be no unreasonable soil erosion or effects on the capacity of the land to hold water: a. The soils are given as Vergennes, Farmington, Covington, and Stockbridge soil. Testing is indicated on Exhibits #5 and 47 - Mitel/BDR. b. Temporary soil erosion controls are depicted on Exhibits #48, 50 and 64 - Mitel/BDR. They consist of hay bale barriers, check dams, temporary water bars, and sediment barriers among others. The utiliza- tion of these devices is set forth in Exhibit #24 - Mitel/BDR and a construction sequence is set forth in Exhibit #86 - Mitel/BDR. We note that although the dates in Exhibit #86 are no longer applicable, the substance of the project's phasing is still relevant to our. findings. The construction phase for this project calls for some blasting in the ledge area where the building will be located and the use of the r(�moved ledge as part of the extensive fill required for the access road, parking area and building site (Exhibits #51-53 - Mitel/BDR). We will require that all erosion controls be carefully employed particularly during this phase of the project. All disturbed areas shall be seeded and mulched as j soon as possible following disturbance, but not later than October lst of any construction season. If fall 'i construction is necessary', all disturbed areas of the site shall be seeded with permanent seed as recommended by the Soil Conservation Service no later than October lst or with dormant seed between November lst and De- cember lst. All disturbed areas must be seeded by either method no later than December 1st. Immediately after fall seeding, mulch shall be applied and tied down with either twine or netting and shall be main- tained until vegetation is established. All erosion j control devices shall be periodically cleaned, f replaced, and maintained until vegetation is permanently' �i established on all slopes and disturbed areas. ' I I) I� F� #4C0473 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Page 7 Permanent erosion controls consist of final grading and seeding and the installation of an adequate drainage system (See Criterion 1 - Stormwater). We note that approximately 15 acres of the overall 111.2 acres will be disturbed by s itewo rk at this project -- the remainder of the soils being subject to specific non -developmental uses described below under Criterion 9 (B) . The Commission finds that if the above --mentioned methods are implemented as planned, that undue erosion should not result. The applicant shall comply with Exhibits #48, 50, 64, 24 and 86 - Mitel/BDR for erosion control and shall incorporate them .in any contract documents for site work. The plans shall be maintained on site during construction. 5. This project will not cause unreasonable safety or conges- tion conditions with respect to highways or other means of transportation: a. Access to the project will be from Vermont Route 116, known as the Hinesburg Road. The applicant presented extensive evidence under this criterion indicating that the project would generate some 960 trips per day, that these additional trips will not alter the current "Class C" level of Route 116, and that the "tee" intersection and bypass lanes are sufficiently designed so as to not warrant signalization at the project's entrance (Exhibits #24, 42, 62, and 70 - Mitel/BDR). The sight distances at the access point are 1,210 feet north and over 1/4 mile south. At the hearings, adjoiners Hurd, Brisson, Painter and Wiles put forth testimony that the proposed access cut would create several unacceptable conditions: difficulty exiting driveways due to the proposed "stacking" lane, adverse impacts .on properties which would be taken for road renovations, safety problems for stopping school buses in that most of Mitel's employees would approach the plant entrance from the north and concerns over increased traffic flows on a high speed road (Exhibit #1 - Adjbiners). The adjoiners proposed that many of these problems would be eliminated if the applicants would relocate the access road to its northern boundary abutting the Wriglit property. The City stated that the safety problem may be reduced by a lowering of the #4C0473 r Findings of. Fact and Conclusions of Law Page 8 speed limit which it proposes to enact. The Regional i Planning Commission introduced evidence that the road relocation would still allow adequate sight distances -- particularly with a lower speed limit (Exhibit #3 - Regional Commission). The applicants responded to these issues by stating that the flex -time schedule allowed by Mitel will lessen any backed -up traffic in the vicinity of the adjoiners'homes. In addition, the bypass lanes were required prior to attaining City approval although the design guidelines of the Agency of Transportation clearly indicate no need for such road alterations. The applicants stated further that the northerly access road proposal was an original consideration but was eliminated as an actuality due to sight distance problems and a grade of 10% into the plant area -- the Regional Commission having calculated a 6.2% slope in the same location. Finally, the proposed access road has a grade close to 5% whereas extensive fill in the northern location would only result in a 7% grade -- the maximum which should be considered for truck traffic (Exhibits #90-92 - Mitel/BDR). Based on the record before us, the District Commission finds no reason to alter the access road to this project as proposed. The applicant has presented a dotailed analysis of its position on these issues and those parties opposing this aspect of the project have failed to meet that burden of proof set forth in 10 V.S.A., 96088(b). We will require that the applicant provide this Commission with a copy of its access permit upon issuance by the Agency of Transportation. Another component of this project will seek to prevent undue congestion at the intersection of Route 116 and Kennedy Drive. Based upon traffic study projections and the applicants' own analysis, the intersection will be substantially improved to lessen any negative impacts from traffic heading towards the project site (Exhibits #25, 68, 71 and 63 - Mitel/BDR) . The project plans to provide on -site parking for 218 vehicles which are adequate for the demands of the project. The parking areas are depicted on Exhibit #42 - Mitel/BDR. The applicant has begun efforts to secure mass transit service to the project and the project wJ.1.1 not cause an adverse impact on air traffic approaching the nearby airport via a flight path over the site proper (Exhibits #26 and 27 - Mitel/BDR) . #4C O4`73 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Page 9 i6-7. There will be no unreasonable burdens on educational or other municipal services: EDUCATION fI ' i. The Superintendent of Schools of South Burlington has i� indicated that any additional students as a result of this project will not unduly burden the school system ! (Exhibit #28 - Mitel/BDR) . MUNICIPAL SERVICES i. Municipal services to be provided to the project are fire and police protection and water and sewer service. ii. The Police and Fire Departments have indicated the project will not unreasonably burden the municipal services which will be provided to the project (Exhibits #33 and 34 - Mitel/BDR) . The City Manager has stated that city facilities have the reserve capacity to accommodate the added sewage flows (Exhibit #7 - Mitel/BDR) as has the Champlain Water District (Exhibit #22 - Mitel/BDR). iv. The Commission accepts the above as evidence that undue burdens on the municipality will not result. 8. There will be no undue adverse effects on aesthetics, scenic beauty, historic sites or natural areas: a. Historic sites, necessary wildlife habitat and rare and irreplaceable natural areas will not be affected by this project (Exhibit 435 - Mitel/BDR). The present site is essentially open fields used for agricultural purposes. In locating its development on this parcel, the applicants were limited by several considerations -- varied conservation zones, wet areas, several sewer and road easements, an effort not to impair existing scenic views for nearby homeowners and other considerations discussed below under Criterion 9(B). As a result, the majority of site improvements were located in the northernmost section of the overall parcel (Exhibit #42 - Mitel/BDR) . Extensive landscaping is planned for the project and is depicted on Exhibits #65 and 85 - Mitel/BDR. Plantings along the curving drive were designed to #4C0473 Findings Fact and Conc'Lu3ions of Law Page 10 highlight existing contours and preserve the present hilly effect. Other aspects of the overall landscaping plan were geared to screen the parking area and building from the nearby Interstate. The applicants have agreed to continually maintain all plantings as approved. ' Exteriorilighting will consist of shielded fixtures as indicated on Exhibit #67 - Mitel/BDR. They will_ be located as depicted on Exhibit #85 -- Mi.tc'l/BDR wi "vh some 150 .feet between lamp locations. The building exterior will be a brown tone with a two storied glassed component on the northern portion facing the Interstate. The applicant will also provide adequate screening for the trash dumpster as it will for a planned nitrogen tank. The project proposal calls for two signs to be located at this site. The larger sign is depicted on Exhibit #67 - Mitel/BDR, measures 14'8" x 1616", will be constructed of a brick base with a white plastic sign i and will be lighted. The sign will be positioned in the vicinity of the access road intersection with Route 116. We find this sign appropriate for the needs of this project. A second sign in the form of a 6' diameter Mit.el Corporation logo would be positioned over the main entrance to the plant. The plant's main entrance is located at the northeast cornea of the structure and faces Interstate 89. The Agency of Environmental Conservation offered testimony relevant to the long held policy of this State as to the scenic corridor value of the Interstate system. This roadway carries many tourists through the State and affords high scenic beauty and aesthetic quality (Soo Exhibit #5 - Agency of Environmental Conservation).! Fused upon the design of the logo and the evidence set I forth by the Agency, we find that the logo as proposed I will have an undue adverse effect under this criterion. As a result, we must deny the applicants' request to ! position this sign in the aforementioned location. The Commission recommends that the'applicants redesign this aspect of the project so that this identifying symbol at its front entrance is not visible from any point within the scenic corridor. This resubmission will be considered as an amendment to any land use permit granted in the present application. #4C0473 ' Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Il�tba' Page 11 9. The project is in conformance with the Capability and Development Plan: Subcri.teria (C) ► (n) , (F) and (h) are not applicable to this project. (A) Impact of Growth: i. The municipality and region will be able to accommodate the total growth and rate of growth that will result from this project. This project will result in some $200,000 per year in real estate taxes to the City and has a projected payroll of $4,000,000. (Exhibit #30 - Mitel/BDR). The City recently re -zoned this area as a solution to a perceived lack of adequate areas else- where in its limits to accommodate commercial and industrial growth. In other words, the growth anti- cipated by this development coincides with the needs of the City as evidenced at the hearings. Finally, the Greater Burlington Industrial Corporation intro- duced evidence demonstrating that its studies of employment and population trends in the Chittenden County area support a finding that this project will not, result in an adverse impact under this criterion. (B) Primary Agricultural Soils: i. This project, as proposed, will not significantly reduce the agricultural potential of the primary agricultural soils present on this site. Those particular soils which meet the threshold test of 10 V.S.A. 96001(15) are Vergennes B and Stockbridge B although for the purposes of consideration by the j District Commission the applicant stated that 103 I acres of this site were in agricultural production during the 1980 growing season -- including pockets I of Covington soils both at the no corner and in the vicinity of a 200' conservation zone at I the eastern portion of the parcel. In essence, there- fore, 93% of the site has been involved in agricultural i production (see Exhibit #76 - Mitel/BDR) with a 1980 yield some four times greater than a comparable agri- I cultural acre in this state (Testimony - Pillsbury Farms, May 21, 1931). The applicants have designed their proposal so as to maximize the use of non-farmable� y lacat i n�( the facil.�ty on a knoll composed of. ional development Farmington soils and ledge. Addit�. of the site entails a parking area, stormwater reten- tion pond and access road located of necessity on prime agricultural soils. In summary, then, the #4C047. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Page 12 proposed project will consume approximately 15 acres of the overall parcel with only 3 of those acres, more or less, constituting prime agricultural soils. Recognizing that the District Commission must review a project in relation to the overall tract of involved land, the applicants devised a method whereby the majority of the overall parcel will remain in agricul- tural production or retain its agricultural potential. This plan was described by Commissioner of Agriculture, George M.' Dunsmore, as being an innovative approach to ensuring compatible industrial and agricultural uses of farmable land and "may be the best, if not only, hope for conserving the area's farmland" (Exhibit #4 - Agency of Environmental Conservation). The applicants' plan divides the unused portions of the site into four areas (Exhibit #76 - Mitel/BDR). The scope and uses for eachof the areas are as follows: 5.8 acres; maintained by Mitel and only subject to the lease agreement for 1981. "B" - 6.3 acres; maintained in grasses such as timothy or brome, or row crops such as corn. "C" - 34.0 acres; maintained in grasses such as timothy or brome, or row crops such as corn. "D 43.6 acres; maintained in grasses such as timothy or brome, or row crops such as corn. (Exhibit #75 - Mitel/BDR). This plan will be executed through a lease between co applicant Mitel and a selected farmer and involves "C", "D" and, for 1931, parcel "A". The parcels "B", lease, in summary, runs for five years and allows the lessor to withdraw any part of the premises from the lease at any time during the five year period (Exhibit #78 - Mitel/BDR). A group of parties admitted under this subcriterion have acquiesced in the applicants' proposal. The St -.ate of Vermont, acting through its "Agricultural Lands Review Board" established by Executive Order #52 dated September 25, 1980, ruled it favorably on this proposal and its conclusions were presented in our proceedings by the Agency of Environ- mental Conservation (Exhibits #1, 2, 3 and 6 - Agency of Environmental Conservation). Parties Pillsbury Farms, the City of South Burlington, and the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission entered into a stipulation dated June 8, 1981, regarding this sub- #4C0473 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Page 13 (F) criterion and discussing possible project expansions, the aforementioned lease and the abeyance of certain easements granted to the City until such time as an agricultural -open space study of the so-called South- east Quadrant and Winooski River area is developed (Exhibit,#88 - Mitel/BDR, and see Exhibit #1 - City of South Burlington). The District Commission will refrain from ruling on any future proposals for this project site and any development or subdivision planning to utilize these easements until such time as the aforementioned study is made available for its review and use. In light of the record established over the course of I five District Commission hearings, we find that this project will not cause a significant reduction of the agricultural potential of the primary agricultural soils on this site. Conservative estimates lead us to conclude that 87% of the farmable surface on this parcel will remain unimpaired by the planned development. Some reference was made during the hearings relevant to a 40,000 square foot expansion immediately south of the proposed 59,800 square foot structure. In addition, Exhibit #76 - Mitel/BDR reflects a "9.5 acre area of future expansion" within agricultural area "C". However, witnesses for the applicant testified that i there is no expansion presently planned at this site and the District Commission so finds. Any future j expansion of this project must be reviewed through an amendment(s) to any land use permit in the instant matter and we will be required to review any such growth under this subcriterion for its impact on these soils, viewing the present project, any proposed I expansion and- the parcel in their totality (see LaBrecque #6G0217-EB at 9(B)). Ile see no reason to make further findings under (i)- (iv) of 9 (B) in the application before this Commission. i Energy Conservation: i. The proposed building will have exterior walls with an R-value of not less than R-15. The roof envelope will contain an R-value of not less than R-22. Glazing of building windows will be limited to the office areas on the north and east elevations due to the high amount of internal heat gain from equipment and processing. ;j All hot water tanks will be insulated to ASHRAE 90-80 standards and will incorporate night set -back timers. #4C0473 Finding f Fact and ) Conclusions of Law Page 14 Pipework'will be insulated. The building will be heated by a natural gas -fired boiler system. More extensive energy saving devices are described in the varied submissions and demonstrate attempts to incorporate principles of energy conservation in the overall project design (Exhibits #72 and 87 - Mitel/BDR). (G) Private Utility Services: i. The private utilities proposed for the project are its roadway and stormwater drainage system. The applicant has stated it accepts sole responsibility for the maintenance of both. (H) Costs of Scattered Development: i. The project site is a newly created extension of industrial lands in the City of South Burlington. The applicants will bear the costs of varied extensions of public facilities (Exhibit #37 - Mitel/BDR). The City presented testimony stating that the project site is 3.7 miles from the core of Chittenden County (Main and Pine Streets, Burlington) and that this distance is less than that found for any other development areas in surrounding suburban communities. The City also stated that another major industry is located within one mile of the site as is a high -density residential area with potential for accommodating over 2,000 dwelling units (Exhibit #1 - City of South Burlington). Additionally, 75% of the City's expenditures .for its school system and 50% of its income is dependent upon revenues from business development within its confines. We find that, although not physically contiguous to an existing settlement, the potential benefits of this development to the City outweigh any negative impacts under this subcriterion. (J) Public Utility Services: i• The Commission accepts the letter from the Green i Mountain Power Company as evidence that it can provide utility service to the project (Exhibit #31 - Mitel/BDR)l We refer to our findings above regarding other govern- mental services to be provided to this project. (L) Rural Growth Areas: I i. The project has been designed to meet its burden under this subcriterion by demonstrating compliance with j 9 (A) , 9 (G) , 9 (11) , and 9 (J) it #4C0473 i Findings )of Fact and Conclusions of Law Pare 15 10. The project is in conformance with the local or regional plan: a. The City of South Burlington Planning Commission has indicated that the project conforms to the local plan (Exhibits #38 and 93 - City of South Burlington) . CONCLUSION OF LAW Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, 'it is the conclusion of this District Environmental Commission that the project described in the application referred to above, if completed and maintained in conformance with all of the terms and condi- tions of that application, and of Land Use Permit #4C0473 will not cause or result in a detriment to public health, safety or general welfare under the criteria described in 10 V.S.A., §6086(a) and that, pursuant to such section, a permit is therefore .issued., Dated at Essex Junction, Vermont, this 19th day of June, 1981. DISTRICT #4 ENVIRONMPMTnr. `-�-�__ U J 1..a-aJ4c• r tit Helen B. Lawrence Lincoln Brownell City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 October 31, 1984 Colonel G.C. Crooks 74 Spear St. So. Burlington, VT. 05401 Dear Dr. Crooks: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the Land Use Permits from the State for the original Mitel building and the expansion. These address air pollution, water pollution and waste disposal. I called the Air and Solid Waste Division in Montpelier to see what type of review, if any, they must give to Semi -con. Brian Fitzgerald will be reviewing for Liquid Waste streams. He said there will be no treatment on -site and like Mitel, chemicals will be stored on -site for less than 90 days before being shipped out to the proper facilities out of state. Larry Miller will be reviewing for air pollution and it is believed he has no concerns. The Water Resources Department will require Semi -con to apply for a NPDES discharge permit for the discharge of liquid waste into our system. Each of these people will send me any of their findings or concerns in writing. Please feel free to come in and call any of these people to confirm your findings or to ask any questions. Thanks again for your assistance. JB/df Sincerely,. c CVO )ane Bechtel City Planner GEORGE C. CROOKS 74 SPEAR STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON. VERMONT 05401 October 30,1984. Ms.Jane Bechtel, Planning Administrator, City of South Burlington, South Burlington, Vermont 054.01. Dear Ms Bechtel: I still have a few qustions relative to the information which we have seen from Semicon. 1.Is the list that you sent to me complete and chemically accurate? I find it difficult to believe that the nitric acid, hydrochloric acid,etc will not be contaminated with metal or metallic ions when they leave the plant. 2.The materials listed at RCRA supposedly weill be recovered and reused. Recovery will undoubtedly produce some unusable waste "crud". What do they plan to do with that waste? What is the composition of that waste? 3.Can they guarantee an effluent between pH 5.5 and 9.5? Is this acceptable to the sewage plant operation at this time? 4.When they speak of wastes such as nitric acid, hydrochloric acid, etc. in "vol/time" what are the concentrations of these chemicals in percent or mass/volume? Without this we can not really tell how much real contamination is leaving the plant. Six gal/day of concentrated solution of a material would be quite different from one of lesser concentration in the same volume and time. 5•Has there been any question of steps to prevent any air polution? Sincerely, George C.Crooks State of Vermont Department of Fish and Game Department of Forests, Parks, and Recreation Department of Water Resources & Environmental Engineering Natural Resources Conservation Council November 1, 1984 Jane Bechtel City Planner - South Burlington 575 Dorset St. S. Burlington, VT 05401 Dear Ms. Bechtel: AGENCY OF ENVIRONMENTAL. CONSERVATION Montpelier, Vermont 05602 Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering Enclosed is a copy of my preliminary review of the opera- tions being proposed by Semicon at the 1000 Hinesburg Road facility regarding the generation and management of hazardous waste. As indicated, it is my preliminary conclusion that the management of their waste streams will not require a certifica- tion permit, but will be subjected to the full scope of the State of Vermont Hazardous Waste Regulations regarding proper manage- ment and disposal of their hazardous waste. Please feel free to contact me for any additional informa- tion or clarification Sincerely, j Brian Fitzgerald Hazardous Waste Engineer Hazardous Materials Management Program enc. State of v E'. I' I"17 O 11 t. Depar tment of Fish and Game Department of Forests, Pal ks, and Recreation Department of Water Resources & En,iior, mental Fri ginr_rer nq Natural Resources Conservation Council October 22, 1984 Robert House, Executive Vice President Semicon, Inc. 15 New England Executive Park Burlington, MA 01803 Dear Mr. House: 1Ionlpelier, N"ermonl 05602 Def)arinlenf of' W1 Ifer Nesuurces '111(i irtlnmen till I�,nriueerin� The Agency of Environmental Conservation, Hazardous Material Management Program has conducted a preliminary review of the manufacturing operations being proposed by Semicon, Inc. subse- quent to their purchase of the Mitel facility at Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, VT. Based on the initial information supplied by Semicon regarding types and amounts of waste generation, the Hazardous Program's determination is that Semicon will be subject to the State of Vermont Hazardous Waste Regulations. However, through conversations with yourself and the initial data sub- mitted, the preliminary determination is that under the short- term (less than 90 days) storage exemption, Semicon will be clas- sified as a hazardous waste generator, not a storage facility which would require a permit. the Hazardous Waste Program does not anticipate ariy failure by Semicon to comply with the Regula- tions governing hazardous waste generators. This preliminary determination is based on Semicon's current compliance with the State of Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Regulations and past com- pliance with Vermont Hazardous Waste Regulations by the Mitel Corp., which was located at the Hinesburg Road facility. Robert House -2- October 22,1984 If any further questions arise or clarification on any opf these matter is needed, please do not hesitate to call me at (802) 828-3395. Sincerely, Brian Fitzgerald Hazardous Waste Engineer Hazardous Materials Management Program BF/kp cc: Spencer Knapp, Atty Uinse Allen & Erdmann skztt l C Ac �- k� Ca L — ti -C AYE a LA L)o C-) 'Z L42L - No Text Vj October 23, 1984 Colonel G.C. Crooks 74 Spear Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Dr. Crooks: Enclosed is the most recent information from Semicon regarding the treatment and disposal of chemicals. T hope that this material is somewhat more informative than what you have already reviewed. Please feel free to call Robert E. House, Executive Vice President, if you need further information. Your review and analysis of this material is greatly appreciated. Thank you again. Sincerely, Jane S. Bechtel, City Planner JSB/mcg 1 Encl 1 A LAW a Arro, �► C:L, ,9emia on NEW October 8, 1984 Mr. Richard Ward zoning Administrator city of South Burlington 575 Dorset St. South Burlington, VT 05401 Dear Mr. Ward: Semicon, Inc. intends to purchase the Mitel property in South Burlington and to use the facility for the manufacture of semiconductors. Mitel also planned to use the site to produce hybrid circuits and semiconductors. We are scheduled to pass papers on October 24, 1984. One of the items on the agenda includes copies of all zoning and environmental licenses, permits and approvals. Per your memo to Richard Spokes, dated June 6, 1983, Semicon feels that our occupancy of the building will not constitute a "new use" and offers the following information for your consideration. 1. Tj aff jc Generation We expect to build up _to a maximum of 400 employees in a three year period. There will be two shifts and the hours will be scheduled to minimize traffic impact. The number of van type truck deliveries will increase from 4 per day for Mitel -to an estimated 9 per day for Semicon. Most of the chemicals used by Mitel will also be used by Semicon with a few additions or omissions. A copy of the chemicals used by Mitel and those planned by Semicon is enclosed. We plan no exterior work at this time. Some interior work will be done next year with the proper permits. Semicon will operate the plant at reduced capacity because of the 12,000 gallon per day limit on discharge into the sewer. We may increase this to 30,000 or 40,000 gallons per day when your new sewage treatment system is operation. The following state agencies have been contacted and supplied in detail as to proposed chemical and gas usage. They will review the impact on the existing air discharge, solid waste disposal and industrial water pretreatment permits. Ms. Katherine Vose Environmental Coordinator Mr. Richard Valentinetti Director of Air and Solid Waste Programs Mr. Brian Kooiker Chief of Permits and Compliance. Semicon will pick up Mitel's bonding for various improvements and their maintenance for the remainder of the maintenance period. .Any effort to expedite the review by your department would be appreciated. Very truly yours, i Robert E. House Executive Vice President REH:pml Enclosure cc: Ms. Jane Bechtel Mr'. Richard Trudell Mr. Spencer Knapp Sec, 9. The connection of the building sewer into the public sewer shall conform to the requirements of the building and plumbing code or other applicable rules and regulations of the town, and shall also conform to the rues and require- ments of the Town Manager, or the pro- cedures set forth in appropriate specifi- cations of the A.S.T.M. and the W.P.C.E Manual of Practice No. 9. All such connections shall be made gastight and water tight. Any deviation from the prescribed procedures and materials must be approved by the Town Manager before installation. Sec. 10. No sewer connection shall be opened, ono pipe laid, and no joints made, except under the inspection of the Town Manager or his duly authorized representative. Sec. 11. Any work not conforming to the provisions of Sec. 10 shall be removed. Sec. 12. All excavations for building sewer installation shall be adequately guard- ed with barricades and lights so as to protect the public from hazard. Streets, sidewalks, parkways, and ocher public property disturbed in the course of the work shall be restored in a manner satisfactory to the town. Sec. 1. to ARTICLE V Use of the Public Sewers No person shall discharge or be discharged any stormwater, water, groundwater, roof runoff, cause surface sub- surface drainage, uncontaminated cooling water, or unpolluted industrial process waters to any sanitary sewer. Sec. 2. Stormwater and all other unpolluted drainage shall be discharged to such sewers as are specifically designated as combined sewers or storm sewer, or to a natural outlet approved by the Town Manager. Industrial cooling water or unpolluted process waters may be discharged, on approval of the Town Manager, to a storm sewer, combined sewer - or natural outlet. Sec. 3.• No erson shall discharge or cause to be discharged any of the following described waters or wastes to any public sewers: (a) Any gasoline, benzene, naphtha, fuel oil, or other flammable or expolsive liquid, solid, or gas. (b) Any waters or wastes containing toxic or poisonous solids, liquids, or gases in sufficient quantity, either singly or by interaction with other wastes, to injure or interfere with any sewage treatment process, con- stitute a hazard to humans or animals, create a public nuisance, or create any hazard in the receiving waters of the sewage treatment plant, including but not limited to cyanides in excess of two (2) me/1 a.377N in the wastes as discharged to the public sewer. (c) Any waters or wastes having a pH lower than 5.5, or having any other corrosive proper y capable of causing damage or hazard to structureseguip- ment, and personnel of the sewage works. 10 11 excess of 9.5. (a) Reject the wastes, (i) Materials which exert or cause: (b) Require pretreatment to an acceptable (1) Unusual concentrations of inert condition for discharge to the public suspended solids (such as, but not a sewers limited to, Fullers earth, lime (c) Require control over the quantities slurries, and lime residues) or of and rates of discharge, and/or dissolved solids (such as, but not (d) Require payment to cover the added limited to sodium chloride and cost of handling and treating the wastes sodium s0ate). not covered by existing taxes or sewer (2) Excessive discoloration (such charges under the provisions of Section as, but not limited to, dye wastes 10 of this article. and vegetable tanning solutions). (3) Unusual BOD, chemical oxygen If the Town Manager permits the pretreat - demand, or chlorine requirements ment or equalization of waste flows, the in such quantities as to constitute design and installation of the plants a significant load on the sewage and equipment shall be subject to the 1 treatment works. review and approval of the Town Manager, I (4) Unusual volume of flow or con- and subject to the requirements of all centration of wastes constituting applicable codes, ordinances, and laws. "slugs" as defined herein. (j) Waters or wastes containing substances Sec. 6. Grease, oil, and sand interceptors which are not amenable to treatment or shall be provided when, in the opinion reduction by the sewage treatment process- of the Town Manager, they are necessary es employed, or are amenable to treat- for the proper handling of liquid wastes ment only to such degree that the sewage containing grease in excessive amounts, treatment plant effluent cannot meet or any flammable wastes, sand, or other the requirements of other agencies having harmful ingredients; except that such jurisdiction over discharge to the interceptors shall not be required for receiving waters. private living quarters or dwelling units. All interceptors shall be of a type and Sec. 5. If any waters or wastes are discharg- capacity approved by the Town Manager, ed, or are proposed to be discharged to and shall be located as to be readily the public sewers, which waters contain and easily accessible for cleaning and the substances or possess the character- inspection. istics enumerated in Section 4 of this Article, and which in the judgement of Sec. 7. Where preliminary treatment or flow - the Town Manager, may have a deleterious equalizing facilities are provided for effect upon the sewage works, processes, any waters or wastes, they shall be main - equipment, or receiving waters, or which tained continuously in satisfactory and otherwise create a hazard to life or effective operation by the owner at his constitute a public nuisance, the Town expense. Manager -may: 14 ` i5 Sec. 8. When required by the Town Manager, always, BOD and suspended solids analyses !the owner of any property serviced by are obtained from 24-hr composites of ,a building sewer carrying industrial all outfalls whereas pH's are determined wastes shall install a suitable control from periodic grab samples. manhole together with such necessary meters and other appurtenances in the Sec. 10. No statement contained in this article building sever to facilitate observation, shall be construed as preventing any sampling, and measurement of the wastes. special agreement or arrangement between Such manhole, when required, shall be the town and any industrial concern accessibly and safely located, and shall whereby an industrial waste of unusual be constructed in accordance with plans strength or character may be accepted approved by the Town Manager. The man- by the town for treatment, subject to hole shall be installed by the owner at payment therefore, by the industrial his expense, and shall be maintained by concern. him so as to be safe and accessible at all times. ARTICLE VI Sec. 9. All measurements, tests, and analyses of the characteristics of waters and Protection from Damage wastes to which reference is made in this ordinance shall be determined in accord- Sec. 1. No unauthorized person shall ma- ance with the latest edition oC "Standard liciously, willfully, or negligently Methods for the Examination of Water and break, damage, destroy, uncover, deface, Wastewater " published by the American or tamper with any structure, appurte- Public Health Association, and shall be nance, or equipment which is a part of determined at the control manhole provid- the sewage works. Any person violating ed or upon suitable samples taken at this article on conviction thereof shall said control manhole. In the event that be fined in the amount not exceeding no special manhole has been required, $100 for each violation. the control manhole shall be considered to be the nearest downstream manhole in the public sewer to the point at which ARTICLE VII the building sewer is connected. Sampling shall be carried out by customarily Powers and Authority of Inspectors accepted methods to reflect the effect of constituents upon the sewage works Sec. 1. The Town Manager and other duly and to determine the existence of hazards authorized employees of the town bearing to life} limb and property. (The particu- proper credentials and identification lar analyses involved will determine shall be permitted to enter all properties whether a twenty-four (24) hour composite for the purposes of inspection, obser- of all outfalls of a premise is appropri- vation, measurement, sampling, and test- ate or whether a grab sample or samples ing in accordance with the provisions should be taken. Normally, but not of this ordinance. The Town Manager or 16 17 Semicon VT Estimated Chemical Usage MATERIAL EST. VOLUME 1:1:1 Trichloroethane 1/2 gal/wk isopropyl Alcohol 20 gal/day Methylene Chloride 5 gal/day Acetone 1 gal/day Xylene 1 gal/wk Chlorinated Aliphatic 3 gal/wk Niplate solution 10 gal/day Nitric Acid 6 gal/day Hydrofluoric Acid 4 gal/day Acetic Acid 2 gal/day Sulfuric Acid 2 gal/day Hydrochloric Acid 40 gal/wk Ammonium Fluoride 1/2 gal/day Calcium Hydroxide 38 gal/wk Ammonium Hydroxide 2 gal/day Hydrogen Peroxide 2 gal/day Fluoboric Acid 1 gal/wk Ammonium Phosphate 1.2 lb/wk consumed Boron Anhydride 1.2 lb/wk consumed BA 84 Epoxy Resin 4 gal/day consumed BA 62 Epoxy CAtalyst 1 gal/day consumed RTV Silastic 1 gal/wk consumed Nitrogen 150,000 SCF/mo Oxygen 1,000 SCF/mo Argon Helium 1,000 SCF/mo Hydrogen 500 SCF/mo 20,000 SCF/mo METHOD OF DISPOSAL RCRA RCRA RCRA RCRA RCRA RCRA RCRA treatment treatment treatment treatment treatment treatment treatment treatment treatment treatment n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a exhaust exhaust exhaust exhaust exhaust 4 acl-l's /YL-ly, IL-i .r' � ��� `// �. • __ _ �FlN t o � �� _. _ _ _ _ PC-__ 1291 __ _-- IAA- _ __ L � � __ __ _ P�- _ _ 1�— __ _ _ �,�� ht) c,-) is r scan t ve vvtk r k � � � fy"*) o � bCot C��c 4w4-� koL e "(Wry ,-r . 14-s a- c "ok, It OA-P-Au-a-4ivL� C� 6" � vn Brim ���j 31s a No Text A -A paA L& a-rAJ if vv ij r r R�� c 11 , op - an M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment From: Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RE: Semicon, Inc. Date: May 1, 1986 Printing, binding and publishing is a permitted land use under Section 16.405. This section allows for those uses on pre-existing small lots of 3 acres or less. Light manufacturing is a permitted use under Section 16.202 within a planned industrial development. Minimum lot size for a P.I.D. is 10 acres with a minimum area of 80 acres. This building and land in question is Semicon and land area is 100 acres. The original approval for Mitel was from the subdivision of the Wright Farm. The 100 acres were never subdivided. The applicant had requested an interpretation from the Planning Commission "that the Lane Press operation located on St. Paul Street, Burlington be classified as light man- ufacturing thereby being a permitted use." •After discussion with Attorney Steve Stitzel (City Attorney ) he believes that Lane Press is a printer/publisher and that because the zoning regulations specify printing, binding and publishing as a use allowed within the Industrial and Agricultural District that Lane Press can not and should not be considered as a permitted use under Section 16.202. He believes that Section 16.405 does create somewhat of a problem and feels that the Planning Commission should address that issue. It is however, an issue that should result in an amendment to the permitted use section. My decision was that the land use of Lane Press is not classi- fied as light manufacturing an therefore is prohibited within the I -A District. City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 April 28, 1986 Mr. William Rowell Hickok & Boardman Realty 346 Shelburne Road Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Zoning hearing Dear Mr. Rowell: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Be advised that the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the City Offices, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on Monday, May 12, 1986 at 5:00 P.M. to consider your zoning application. Please plan to attend this meeting. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mcp t 'h J/,P d �3o�°n donc �,o pro i' AO" 70? Lv �B� �'�Aso/° MB/� h" e�e%So, 0 9" �S of S °/ B 9 V no ons�, �P 9B��OPJ '^CdB f� 6j �na °JnJ O @@J f@ PgJ°nC °wo S.�,yO Soo r@ /Q p�OMc of 9: P nor J+S se as �o ho@J rh M °r r ° Res@s 0 o o.'hos Jo 0e4hOse saio,gn,{, SOS C°'per @rho 9 OirJ ho o O t CC 9/ / 47 °J79gei' fo n0, o°Jo 9�0 opy 1 fo n Ae �O1d9 e o @°Ct 'I Of O�O@ @J° o°@/ASP BV C/v� n / ° RO6 °CO' /0, co @+nS� ca o °nf O e/ Of on SOOn / SOC @@� O/O' 'YO aJkOY co°9to B@q� 8 0 ono, °J nIs p Onc @ *,9 4Q) a �'@n fQ• pe Q@g Of n�0' p�°% o/of�7� `onJ/7s/F os 4Mi fnp d o �o e y° a@J f of CCO/Jy'p'" on O @f S .ee_O�O onJ fo' ,P Of h0 4e ge s o,S9q��n +p@ /oho e / aop� w °ge fl/S rhn as'o of so S '9nry' s q °ot p o s o° a go,o oc. ,r pA /° f@ n p 6@ g@ eO/ COJ@d 'OncOni(, c n of of n GJJ�g 0 9 to s°fry�en , n G °o/Jonn g ie/fs g J o0 hJ°,hn• s,V°o(, cc/e y gFno!.�°oJo �ryh0 S�no r'@0n r 9 n JO O B°fig C.0fJ/ @+ /9/ a 90@ }a n6@ JeO. 1 nJ6.°7 i Ono. '9 0° OJ� 7n Co Con 0'. p @ g p , a°°n �ngg0/°fin C1' ��J@p� }?'Y 4e4h5 rec dp°poR0 /q ear o C o/ J J1 �O°44' 4Niin 13n0'. �O ne O• a/� 1 F9Jon �C4p aOb of n@fc4 f fo+ j9 +s'in sr/ory yi@.r 9 S O/@•t 6V d Q• .o g ° to, , to, CO o SJ� j nt 1�. Jo +> f J/° c o 6,. on o+ on n S o,O.�RO/Jo o nq - / /o'yi 60/0 ' o''y @O/ N.e �'Se n . 000, °role cOn eg JJin!r%•f"onr oge con °'oJ + 'QOo° Co'@y /o '� ° dn' r /nc � qo OJnd (,Se I lo�4 Wr Q o Oy o/n f'o of "b of o °90 e 4 Ofo'gJoO o'ers@B D 1 o ld g / hSc'Oe. of0 n P o; o y4. reds °/ %* J ° a J Of a °n eJ OI�•'°O�/e�. COn'P@q'oll � p d2d /Oc0 /O 'mac f i,(o'f�o9�e/p o/of o'fs ?ffoho�9 Do., cgr o� r"e a o J ory f ppAy S '0' 'P. of J d /d!y j p t e/y lo o, Q nf. so° t,/. TOOa p� j @.d`RJ No O @ i qp� lol' o `j'ryi o ; ?6 &.1 r1.Cr�`+� bjr /flBa n'e��2cf� 'Jon 1Oti e^o•w hr 'rp� pro o, ce' Q4 J ��I April 18, 1986 Mr. William Rowell Hickok & Boardman 346 Shelburne Road Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Lane Press Dear Bill: After review of the City's zoning regulations and discussion with the City Attorney, along with Peter Jacob and Fred Blais, it is my determination that the use classification for a operation such as Lane Press would be printing and binding and not light manufacturing. Therefore, your proposal to locate Lane Press in the Semicon building would not be permitted. It is suggested that you approach the Planning Commission, requesting that they amend the ordinance to allow for a printing operation as a permitted use. It appears that, that type of use is the type that the Planning Commission wants in the Southeast Quadrant. I did find some problems with certain sections of the ordinance dealing with use that should be cleared up. Finally, you may wish to appeal my decision, should you decide to do so, you must appeal *before April 23, 1986 in order to be scheduled for the next meeting of the Board of Adjustment. If you have any questions regarding this matter please don't hesitate to call me. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mcp NOTICE OF APPEAL SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Name, address and telephone # of applicant S�`WbtCOir( jt--Gc- Name, address of property owner 1 Off: C7 Property location and description — 5 .-a wti.0 - I hereby appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for the following: conditional use, variance or decision of the administrative officer. I understand the meetings are held twice a month (second and fourth Mondays). The legal advertisement must appear a minimum of fifteen (15) days before the hearing. I agree to pay the earing fee of $30.00 which is to off -set the cost of the hearing. „ c t _ Hearing Date Signature of Appellant, L J �� `lam / ___-_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 at (day of week) (month and date) time to consider the following: ,. Appeal of ,d..�,r .. , ! r `.•,�,» seeking so ��,.,,`,, from Eee44*T1 � G?..�,-rr ✓v� Co(/1� - W,Qi o ..t..,..,E!"...,..'{" d✓2..,Io,C/.,r wt. '+'� �il.-,.e ..G.t.�.�Q„�,, .I. .,... of the Sout h Bu°r1-.i.ng.ton-•Re.gu.lations. Request is for permission to- �---e.�,t �ts� Q� /00 0 ,, fir...: `��+ �,.�• /'�..b-.,., HICKOK& BOARDMAN REALTYINC. April 22, 1986 Mr. Richard Ward City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05401 Dear Dick, 346 Shelburne Street, Burlington, Vermont 05401 Phone 863-1500 I am writing this letter at the request of Lane Press to appeal your decision as regards the use of the Semicon Building. It is my understanding, this appeal will be heard on Monday, May 12, 1986. Regards, William C. Rowell y MLS REALTOR" EQ -NET '2VITABLETY REAL NETWORK . .e r.