Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBATCH - Supplemental - 1061 1075 Hinesburg RoadRye Associates Request for Waivers Page 1 of 3 January 14, 2014 Rye Associates Preliminary Plan Submittal January 14, 2014 Request for Waivers The following waivers are requested in support of the development of a neighborhood friendly roadway system and layout of a traditional village style environment. General Development Standards Section Title Description & Reason 3.06 Setbacks and Buffers C. Yards Abutting a Planned Street. Yards abutting a right-of-way designated for a planned public street shall (Swift Street Extension) have a minimum setback equal to the front setback requirement for the district in which the lot exists, unless the yards abut any of those streets listed in above, in Section 3.06.B in which case the minimum setback shall be fifty (50) feet from the edge of the planned right-of-way. With the assumption that the reference to "Swift Street" also means Swift Street Extension, the applicant seeks a waiver for Cottage buildings 7-1 and 7-7 (to 30 ) and residential lots #22 and #23 (to 20) and Commercial Lot #1 (to 30 ) to achieve the goals set forth in the SEQ district guidelines. Southeast Quadrant District Section Title Description & Reason 9.07 Dimensional Standards - In the Southeast quadrant District, all requirements of Article XXV governing lot size, density, frontage, and setbacks shall apply. The request is to waive the following requirements: A. Minimum radius of curves for Local streets from 200' to 50' Appendix Table C-2 Dimensional Standards - The following waivers are requested to allow greater interaction between the proposed buildings in support of enhancing the fabric of the neighborhood. A. Single Family Minimum Lot Size from 12,000 SF to 9,937 SF. - B. Single Family Max. Building Coverage from 15% to 20% for all lots. C. Single Family Max. Lot Coverage from 30% to 42% for Lot 7. 'W', Michael Lawrence Associates Landscape Architects / Site Planning Consultants January 27, 2014 Re; Landscape Cost Estimate for Planting — Rye Meadow Planned Unit Development Hinesburg Road —South Burlington, Vermont STREET TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 8 Acer X freemani `Armstrong' 2-2.5 in. $580 $4,640 8 Acer X freemani `Celzam' 2-2.5 in. $580 $4,640 8 Aesculus hippocastanum `Baumanii' 2-2.5 in. $610 $4,880 4 Betula nigra `Heritage' 2-2.5 in. $580 $2,320 8 Ginko biloba `Autumn Gold' 2-2.5 in. $737 $5,896 6 Ginko biloba `Magyar' 2-2.5 in. $737 $4,422 4 Ginko biloba `Princeton Sentry' 2-2.5 in. $737 $2,948 8 Gleditsia triacanthos `Shademaster 2-2.5 in. $580 $4,640 8 Gleditsia triacanthos `Sunburst 2-2.5 in. $580 $4,640 1 Nyssa sylvatica 2-2.5 in. $580 $ 580 10 Platanus x acerifolia `Columbia' 2-2.5 in. $580 $5,800 11 Quercus bicolor 2-2.5 in. $580 $6,380 7 Quercus imbricaria 2-2.5 in. $580 $4,060 7 Quercus macrocarpa 2-2.5 in. $580 $4,060 7 Quercus muehlenbergii 2-2.5 in. $580 $4,060 4 Quercus rubra 2-2.5 in. $580 $2,320 6 Sophorajaponica 2-2.5in. $580 $3,480 5 Tilia cordata `Glenleven' 2-2.5 in. $688 $3,440 1 Tilia cordata `Greenspire' 2-2.5 in. $688 $ 688 4 Tilia euchlora 2-2.5 in. $688 $2,752 6 Tilia tomentosa `Green Mountain' 2-2.5 in. $688 $4,128 5 Ulmus Americana `Valley Forge' 2-2.5 in. $658 $3,290 4 Ulmus davidiana `Jacan' 2-2.5 in. $658 $2,632 6 Ulmus morton `Accolade' 2-2.5 in. $658 $3,948 6 Ulmus morton `Glossy' 2-2.5 in. $658 $3,948 TOTAL STREET TREES $94,592 MEMBER Eight Linden Lane Essex Junction, Vermont, 05452 American Society PH/FAX 802-878-2778 C 802-578-9591 of Landscape Architects mike@mclasla.com CENTRAL OPEN SPACE PLANTING Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 3 Cornus alba `Siberica 3 gal. $ 45 $ 135 6 Cornus mas 5 gal. $200 $1,200 3 Cornus sericea `Baileyi' 3 gal. $ 50 $ 150 6 Cornus racemosa 2 gal. $ 45 $ 270 5 Ilex verticillata `Berry Nice' 3 gala $ 58 $ 290 1 Ilex verticillata `Jim Dandy' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 58 1 Ilex verticillata `Southern Gentleman' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 58 5 Ilex verticillata `Winter Red' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 290 15 Picea glauca 5-6 ft. $337 $5,055 2 Quercus bicolor 2-2.5 in. $580 $1,160 1 Quercus muehlenbergii 2-2.5 in. $580 $ 580 4 Quercus rubra 2-2.5 in. $580 $2,320 3 Sambucus nigra `Black Lace' 3 gal. $ 58 -$ 174 8 Sambucus nigra `Madonna' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 464 3 Sambucus nigra `Pulverentula' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 174 1 Sambucus racemosa `Sutherland Gold' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 58 TOTAL CENTRAL OPEN SPACE PLANTING $12,436 K 7 COTTAGE UNITS WITH GARAGES PLANTING 7 COTTAGES WITH GARAGES PLANTING BUDGET BASED ON CONSTRUCTION BUDGET Construction Budizet $300,000 x 7 = $2,100,000 FIRST 250,000 x 3% = $ 7,500 SECOND 250,000 x 2% = $ 5,000 REMAINDER 1,600,000 x 1% = $16,000 Landscape Budget $28,500 1' : 1W17.y 1111 W.13eItM',IC EVERGREEN TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 3 Abies concolor 6-7 ft. $420 $1,260 3 Picea omorika 5-6 ft. $338 $1,014 1 Thuja occidentalis `Nigra' 5-6 ft. $263 $ 263 DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN SHRUBS Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 2 Buxus microphylla `Chicagolnd Grn' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 146 2 Buxus microphylla `Green Mountain' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 146 2 Buxus microphylla `Winter Gem' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 100 3 Cornus alba `Prairie Fire' 2 gal. $ 45 $ 135 6 Cornus pumila 2 gal. $ 45 $ 270 2 Cornus sericea `Baileyi' 3 gal. $ 50 $ 100 10 Euonymus fortunei `Green Lane' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 500 4 Hydrangea macrophylla `Blue Billows' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 292 5 Hydrangea macrophylla `E-less Sumr' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 365 3 Hydrangea macrophylla `Twist&Sht' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 219 7 Rhododendron catawbiense `Album' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 511 7 Rhododendron PJM 5 gal. $123 $ 861 10 Rhododendron `Pohjola's Daughter' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 500 7 Rhododendron `English Roseum' 5 gal. $125 $ 875 1 Thuja occidentalis `Little Giant' 30-36 in. $ 75 $ 75 7 Thuja occidentalis `Woodwardii' 30-36 in. $ 75 $ 525 FLOWERING TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 3 Acer campestre 2-2.5 in. $580 $4,740 11 Cornus alternifolia 5-6 ft $275 $3,025 7 Cornus mas 1.5-2 in $382 $2,674 2 Magnolia x loebneri `Leonard Messel' 5-6 ft. $310 $ 620 1 Magnolia x loebneri `Dr. Merrill' 5-6 ft. $310 $ 310 6 Magnolia stellata `Royal Star' - 5-6 ft. $310 $1,860 3 Malus x `Donald Wyman' 2-2.5 in. $490 $1,470 4 Malus x `Prairie Fire' 2-2.5 in. $490 $1,960 8 Pyrus calleryana `Autumn Blaze' 2-2.5 in. $580 $4,640 3 Quercus bicolor 2-2.5 in. $580 $1,740 1 Quercus rubra 2-2.5 in. $580 $ 580 TOTAL 7 COTTAGE UNITS WITH GARAGES PLANTING $28,776 3 7 COTTAGES WITHOUT GARAGES PLANTING 7 COTTAGES W/O GARAGES PLANTING BUDGET BASED ON CONSTRUCTION BUDGET Construction Budget $250,000 x 7;;='$1,750,000 FIRST 250,000 x 3% = $ 7,500 SECOND 250,000 x 2% = $ 5,000 REMAINDER 1,250,000 x 1% = $12,500 Landscape Budget $25,000 PROPOSED PLANTING EVERGREEN TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 5 Abies concolor 5-6 ft, $338 $1,690 3 Picea glauca 6-7 ft. $420 $1,260 3 Thuja occidentalis `Nigra' 6-7 ft. $265 $ 795 DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN SHRUBS Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 2 Aronia melanocarpa'Autumn Magic' 3 gal. $ 50 $ 100 3 Aronia melanocarpa 'Viking Purple' 3 gal. $ 50 $ 150 7 Buxus microphylla `Winter Gem' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 350 11 Cornus alba `Prairie Fire' 2 gal. $ 45 $ 495 15 Cornus stolonifera `Arctic Fire' 5 gal. $ 88 $1,320 17 Euonymus fortunei `Green Lane' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 850 4 Hydrangea arborescens `Bella Anna' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 200 5 Hydrangea macrophylla `Blue Billows' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 365 6 Hydrangea macrophylla `E-less Sumr' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 438 5 Hydrangea macrophylla `Twist&Sht' 3 gal. $ 80 $ 400 3 Hydrangea paniculata `Little Lime' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 219 1 Hydrangea paniculata `Pinky Winky' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 73 1 Hydrangea paniculata `Vnla Strwbry' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 73 6 Rhododendron catawbiense `Album' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 438 2 Rhododendron `Boursault' 5 gal. $123 $ 246 11 Rhododendron `English Roseum' 5 gal. $125 $1,375 4 Rhododendron `PJM' 3 gal. $ 87 $ 348 2 Rhododendron `Pohjola's Daughter' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 100 SHADE & FLOWERING TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 4 Acer campestre 2-2.5 in. $580 $2,320 2 Cornus alternifolia 5-6 ft. $275 $ 550 5 Cornus mas 1.5-2 in. $383 $1,915 2 Magnolia x loebneri `Dr. Merrill' 5-6 ft. $310 $ 620 2 Malus x `Adams' 2-2.5 in. $490 $ 980 1 Malus x `Donald Wyman' 2-2.5 in. $490 $ 490 1 Malus x `Prairie Fire' 2-2.5 in. $490 $ 490 2 Malus x `Sargentii' 2-2.5 in. $490 $ 980 2 Nyssa sylvatica 2-2.5 in. $580 $1,160 9 Pyrus calleryana `Autumn Blaze' 2-2.5 in. $505 $4,545 ' TOTAL 7 COTTAGE UNITS W/OUT GARAGES PLANTING $25,335 FOUR PLEX UNITS PLANTING FOURPLEX PLANTING BUDGET BASED ON CONSTRUCTION BUDGET Construction Budget $280,000 x 16 = $4,480,000 FIRST 250,000 x 3% = $ 7,500 SECOND 250,000 x 2% = $ 5,000 REMAINDER 3,980,000 x 1% = $39,800 Landscape Budget $52,300 PROPOSED PLANTING EVERGREEN TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 3 Abies concolor 6-7 ft, $420 $1,260 10 Picea omorika 6-7 ft, $420 $4,200 3 Picea pungens `Fat Albert' 5-6 ft. $615 $1,845 DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN SHRUBS Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 11 Aronia arbutifolia'Brilliantissima' 5 gal. $ 65 $ 715 8 Aronia melanocarpa 'Autumn Magic' 5 gal. $ 65 $ 520 8 Aronia melanocarpa 'Autumn Magic' 5 gal. $ 65 $ 520 14 Buxus microphylla `Chicagolnd Grn' 3 gala $ 73 $1,022 3 Buxus microphylla `Green Mountain' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 219 3 Buxus microphylla `Green Velvet' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 219 14 Buxus microphylla `Winter Gem' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 700 7 Cornus alba `Siberica 3 gal. $ 45 $ 315 4 Cornus pumila 2 gal. $ 45 $ 180 6 Cornus racemosa 2 gal. $ 45 $ 270 14 Cornus sericea `Baileyi' 3 gal. $ 50 $ 700 7 Cornus stolonifera `Arctic Fire' 5 gal. $ 88 $ 616 9 Euonymus fortunei `Canadale Gold' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 450 9 Euonymus fortunei `Emerald Gaiety' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 450 16 Euonymus fortunei `Emerald `n Gold' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 800 45 Euonymus fortunei `Green Lane' 2 gal. $ 50 $2,250 4 Hydrangea arborescens `Incrediball' 3 gal. $ 65 $ 260 6 Hydrangea macrophylla `Blue Billows' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 438 5 Hydrangea macrophylla `E-less Sumr' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 365 4 Hydrangea macrophylla `Twist&Sht' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 292 3 Hydrangea macrophylla `Forever Red' 2 gal. $ 73 $ 219 4 Hydrangea paniculata `Little Lime' 3 gal. $ 50 $ 200 30 Microbiota decussata 3 gal. $ 50 $1,500 2 Picea glauca `North Star' 6 gal. $215 $ 430 3 Picea pungens `Montgomery' 5 gal. $188 $ 564 6 Pinus strobus `Nana' 6 gal. $188 $1,128 4 Rhododendron catawbiense `Album' 3 gal.' $ 73 $ 292 2 Rhododendron `English Roseum' 5 gal. $123 $ 246 1 Rhododendron `PJM' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 73 6 Rhododendron `Roseum Elegans' 5 gal. $123 $ 738 5 2 Rhododendron `Pohjola's Daughter' 2 gala - $ 50 $ too 2 Rhododendron `Olga Mezitt' 5 gal. $123 $ 246 4 Salix discolor 2 gal $ 45 $ 180 3 Salix integra `Flamingo' 3 gal. $ 50 $ 150 2 Salix purpurea `Gracilis' 3 gal $ 45 $ 90 6 Sambucus nigra `Black Lace' 3 gal $ 65 $ 390 7 Sambucus nigra `Madonna' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 406 3 Sambucus nigra `Pulverentula' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 174 3 Sambucus racemosa `Sutherland Gold' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 174 4 Thuja occidentalis `Holmstrup' 7 gal. $143 $ 572 6 Thuja occidentalis `Little Giant' 30-36 in. $ 73 $ 438 8 Thuja occidentalis `Smaragd' 6-7 ft. $265 $2,120 8 Thuj a occidentalis `Techny' 6-7 ft. $265 $2,120 8 Thuja occidentalis `Woodwardii' 30-36 in. $ 73 $ 584 FLOWERING TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 4 Acer campestre 5;gal. $ 305 $1,220 3 Cornus alternifolia 5-6 ft. $ 275 $ 825 2 Cornus mas 1.5-2 in. $ 382 $ 764 2 Magnolia x loebneri `Dr. Merrill' 5-6 ft. $ 310 $ 620 1 Magnolia stellata `Royal Star' 5-6 ft. $ 310 $ 310 1 Malus x' `Adams' 2-2.5 in. $ 490 $ 490 4 Malus x `Candymint' ` 2-2.5 in. $ 490 $1,960 2 Malus x `Coralburst' 2-2.5 in. $ 490 $ 980 2 Malus x `Donald Wyman' 2-2.5 in. $ 490 $ 980 1 Malus x `Prairie Fire' 2-2.5 in. $ 490 $ 490 3 Malus x `Sargent' 2-2.5 in. $ 490 $1,470 2 Malus x `Zumi Calocarpa' 2.2.5 in. $ 490 $ 980 12 Pyrus calleryana `Autumn Blaze' 2-2.5 in. $ 490 $5,880 SHADE TREES Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total _Qu 5 Quercus bicolor 2.5-3 in. $762 $3,810 TOTAL FOUR PLEX UNITS PLANTING $52,519 6 PROFESSIONAL BUILDING PLANTING PROFESSIONAL BLDG. PLANTING BUDGET BASED ON CONSTRUCTION BUDGET Construction Budget $850,000 FIRST 250,000 x 3% _ $ 7,500 SECOND 250,000 x 2% _ $ 5,000 REMAINDER 350,000 x 1% _ $ 3,500 Landscape Budget $16,000 PROPOSED PLANTING EVERGREEN TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 1 Picea glauca 5-6 ft, $338 $ 338 3 Picea omorika 5-6 ft. $338 $1,014 2 Thuja occidentalis `Nigra' 6-7 ft. $265 $ 530 DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN SHRUBS Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 2 Buxus microphylla `Green Mountain' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 146 4 Buxus microphylla `Green Velvet' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 292 2 Buxus microphylla `Winter Gem' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 100 3 Cornus alba `Prairie Fire' 2 gal. $ 45 $ 135 1 Cornus alba `Siberica 3 gal. $ 45 $ 45 4 Cornus pumila 2 gal. $ 45 $ 180 6 Cornus stolonifera `Arctic Fire' S gal. $ 88 $ 528 2 Hydrangea arborescens `Incrediball' 3 gal. $ 65 $ 130 1 Hydrangea arborescens `Invncble Sprt' 1.5 gal. $ 50 $ 50 2 Hydrangea macrophylla `E-less Sumr' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 146 3 Hydrangea macrophylla `Blshg Bride' 3 gal. $ 80 $ 240 2 Hydrangea macrophylla `Twist&Sht' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 146 2 Hydrangea macrophylla `Forever Blue' 2 gal. $ 73 $ 146 5 Hydrangea macrophylla `Forever Pink' 1.5 gal. $ 50 $ 250 1 Hydrangea macrophylla `Forever Red' 2 gal. $ 73 $ 73 2 Hydrangea paniculata `Bombshell' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 116 2 Hydrangea paniculata `Fire & Ice' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 116 1 Hydrangea paniculata `Grndfl Cmpct' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 58 3 Hydrangea paniculata `Little Lime' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 219 1 Ilex verticillata `Berry Nice' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 58 6 Ilex verticillata `Red Sprite' 3 gal $ 58 $ 48 1 Ilex verticillata `Southern Gentleman' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 58 52 Microbiota decussata 3 gal. $ 50 $ 2,600 2 Picea abies `Clanbrassilliana Stricta' 6 gal. $143 $ 286 2 Picea glauca `North Star' 6 gal. $215 $ 430 2 Rhododendron catawbiense `Album' 3 gal.' $ 73 $ 146 2 Rhododendron `Boursault' 5 gal. $125 $ 250 7 Rhododendron `English Roseum' S gal. $123 $ 861 5 Rhododendron `PJM' 3 gal $ 73 $ 365 2 Rhododendron `Roseum Elegans' S gal. $123 $ 246 4 Rhododendron `Pohjola's Daughter' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 200 1 Rhododendron `Olga Mezitt' S gal. $123 $ 123 4 Thuja occidentalis `Little Giant' 30-36 in. $ 73 $ 292 2 Thuja occidentalis `Techny' 6-7 ft. $265 $ 530 6 Thuja occidentalis `Woodwardii' _30-36 in. $ 73 $ 438 FLOWERING TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 3 Acer campestre 2-2.5 in. $ 575 $1 ,725 2 Cornus altemifolia 5-6 ft. $ 275 $ 550 2 Magnolia stellata `Royal Star' 5-6 ft. $ 310 $ 620 2 Malus x `Prairie Fire' 2-2.5 in $ 490 $ 980 2 Pyrus calleryana `Autumn Blaze' 2-2.5 in $ 490 $ 980 TOTAL PROFESSIONAL BUILDING PLANTING $16,784 STREET TREES $94,592 CENTRAL OPEN SPACE $12,436 7 COTTAGE UNITS WITH GARAGES $28,776 7 COTTAGE UNITS WITHOUT GARAGES $25,335 FOUR PLEX UNITS PLANTING $52,519 PROFESSIONAL BUILDING $16,784 TOTAL LANDSCAPE $230,442 8 Pagel of 3 Justin Rabidoux From: Justin Rabidoux Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 8:03 AM To: ray Subject: FW: Comments on Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road Ray, My comments are below and Tom's follow mine. Justin 1...; Remove all "Winter Parking Ban" signs from the plan. "2. All pavement markings shall be Type I Durable Tape. Applicant to submit a specific product to Public Works for approval prior to installation. �3. Pedestrian level street lighting is needed at all crosswalks. 4. All foundation/perimeter drains shall be shown on plans. No Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued for any of the single family homes without approved As-Builts showing the drain lines. 5. A foundation drain detail is needed that shows the backflow prevention method. 6. No roadway striping is needed other than for crosswalks and stop bars. Each parking space does not need to be striped, nor is crosshatching necessary to highlight no parking areas. 7. Remove the crosswalks through the driveways, carry the sidewalk through. $.i The east radius of the proposed Edgewood Lane and Fox Run Lane shall be tightened. Does Edgewood as a name comply with 911 naming standards? Is it too similar to other existing city streets? 10.' Illustrate via crosshatch the limits of disturbance/excavation on existing city streets necessary for utility connections, matching curb radii, etc. From: Tom Dipietro Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 3:15 PM To: Justin Rabidoux Subject: Comments on Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road Justin, I reviewed the plans for the Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road. The plans reviewed were developed by Civil Engineering Associates and dated 12/6/13. 1 would like to offer the following review comments: 1. This project is located in the Potash Brook watershed, which is listed as stormwater impaired by the State of Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (ANR). Also, the project proposes to create greater than 1 acre of impervious area. It will therefore require a stormwater permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Stormwater Division. Obtaining this permit should be a condition of approval for the project. 2. The plans indicate that the project will disturb greater than 1 acre of land. Therefore, this project will need to obtain and comply with a construction stormwater permit (3-9020 or individual permit) from the Vermont DEC Stormwater Division. Obtaining this permit should be a condition of approval for the project. 3. Provide hydrologic modeling for the project so that potential impacts on downstream structures can be 1 /6/2014 Page 2 of 3 evaluated. Providing the actual HydroCAD files would facilitate review by DPW staff. 4. Does the proposed drainage network convey the 25 year, 24 hour storm event without surcharging? 5. Plans have been revised so that water leaving the proposed detention pond on lot #31 no longer enters the existing drainage system north of Fox Run Lane. Water leaving the proposed pond now flows to Potash Brook via a new —900' Swale. Flow to Potash Brook via the new swale is preferable to allowing this water to flow into the existing drainage system on Fox Run Lane. 6. The proposed detention basin on lot #5 discharges water into the existing closed drainage system under Oak Creek Drive. Adjacent to the proposed detention basin, the plans show an existing 18" culvert beneath Fox Run Lane that leads to an open channel along Vt Route 116. Rather than send water to the closed drainage system (and eventually through an existing detention pond located downstream), could this water instead be discharged to the ditch along Vt Route 116 via the existing 18" culvert? Discharge in this manner would be the City's preference. 7. Confirm that the swale to the rear of lots 9-14 will be sufficiently graded to prevent water from flowing onto adjacent properties to the south. 8. Backflow preventers must be installed on all foundation drains. 9. The pump station and detention basin on lot #31 must have an appropriate maintenance access drive identified on the plans. 10. In a future submission, include landscaping plans for the detention basin on lot #31. 11. Provide a map showing the drainage area to each proposed stormwater treatment practice. 12. Please confirm that the proposed stormwater treatment pond located on lot #31 and the dry detention basin in the park will accept runoff from only residential properties. Past resolutions by the South Burlington City Council indicate that the "The City shall accept conveyance of and assume responsibility for the following types of Regulated Private Systems that serve exclusively residential development in the City:" (emphasis added). It appears that the proposed detention pond on lot #31 and the proposed dry detention basin in the park would be eligible for City take over, but the proposed detention pond on lot #5 would not. 13. The proposed development shows wetlands on the project site. Is the applicant seeking wetland permit coverage from the State of Vermont or ACOE? Section 12.02 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations (LDRs) contains provisions to protect wetlands. The applicant should provide more information on the wetlands contained on the site so that any potential impacts can be evaluated pursuant to the regulations in the LDRs. 14. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance structures on -site. 15. Per section 12.03.F(1) of the City's Land Development Regulations, the final decision should require the submission of record drawings showing pipe invert elevations, drainage structure rim elevation, pipe material, final grading, etc. 16. The final decision should require that final hydrologic modeling be submitted to the Department of Public Works so that this information can be incorporated into the City's watershed model for Potash Brook. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. -Tom Thomas J. DiPietro Jr. Deputy Director Department of Public Works 104 Landfill Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Phone: (802) 658-7961 x108 Email: TdipietroCcDsburl.com Web Site: www.sburl.com 1 /6/2014 Civil Engineering Associates, Inc. 10 Mansfield View Lane Phone: 802-864-2323 South Burlington, VT 05403 Fax: 802-864-2271 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Date: To:Rcul Ne laIK From.. (j Project(s): I Description: � f � Message:4� Copies To: '�1 Pa� �i dQo 0 qA REEIV DEC 3 0 "^" city of So, ELI r , ray From: Art Klugo Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 1:58 PM To: ray Cc: Tim Barritt Ray, Thank you for sending along the package for the upcoming DRB meeting. Since I will not be able to attend tonight's meeting, I provided some thoughts below for consideration. Design Review Application SP-13-66 - Malone Properties: > How does the location of the old transformer affect the proposed parking lot connection to the "Blue Mall"? > Since it is being replaced, should it also be relocated? > I would support continuing this application at this time. Prelim & Final Application SD-13-41- Malone Dorset Street Properties: > Under COMMENTS, the last sentence of paragraph 4 be revised to read ... "...three (3) lots will be considered one lot ..."; word "remains" was deleted to reflect the "physical/legal" condition versus the "planning" condition. > Parking Waiver - Accept Staff's recommendation Building 2 Trash > Dumpster Location - Accept location Building 2 Proposed Elevations - > 1) Does the vision glass meet the LDR's; appears to be too much spandrel glass; 2nd Floor windows are too sparse and not consistent with Building 1. Suggest pairs of windows above 1st Floor curtainwall. The "pairs" could be vision, spandrel, or brick recesses. The brick recesses could be designed such that they could be removed and replaced with windows for a future tenant. 2) Additional vision glass should be provided on Level 2. Consider transom windows at Level 1 Break Area. 3) Suggest relocating Stair 106 egress door from the south to the east elevation. 4) Generally, Building 2 elevations feel "unresolved" against Building 1 elevations. > I would support continuing this application at this time. MP Application MP-13-01- Rye Associates > No comments provided; Landscape Plan L-1 does not match the balance of the plans submitted. > Comments provided at last meeting appear to have only been incorporated into the landscape drawings. > Since the drawings are not coordinated, I would suggest the application be continued to the next meeting. Prelim Plat Application SD-13-22 (or SD-13-33; as noted in Staff Comments) - Rye Associates > Item A: No comments provided; will review with the updated drawings. > Item B: I would support the requested Professional Office Building parking waiver. > Item C: I would support the requested Cottage Home parking waiver. > Item D: No comments provided; will review with the updated drawings. > Item E: No comments provided; will review when information is provided. > Item F: No comments provided; will review with the updated drawings. > I would support continuing this application at this time. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best, Art ray From: Craig Lambert Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 10:43 AM To: ray Subject: RE: Rye Landscape Cost Estimate, L-1, L-2 Ray, My previous comments have been addressed. I spoke with Mike Lawrence prior to these plans being submitted and I believe he plans to make some minor species adjustments per our conversation but other than that things look good. Craig Lambert South Burlington City Arborist 104 Landfill Rd South Burlington, VT 05403 Ph: 802-658-7961 Fax: 802-658-7976 email: clam bert(a�sburl. com Notice - Under Vermont's Public Records Act, all e-mail, e-mail attachments as well as paper copies of documents received or prepared for use in matters concerning City business, concerning a City official or staff, or containing information relating to City business are likely to be regarded as public records which may be inspected by any person upon request, unless otherwise made confidential by law. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return email. Thank you for your cooperation. From: ray Sent: Monday, January 13, 2014 2:17 PM To: Craig Lambert Subject: FW: Rye Landscape Cost Estimate, L-1, L-2 Here are the other plans. Ray Belair Administrative Officer City of So. Burlington 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 802-846-4106 www.sburl.com www.sbpathtosustainabilitV.com Notice - Under Vermont's Public Reeords Act, all e-mail, e-mail attachments as well as paper copies gf documents received or prepared for use in matters concerning City business, concerning a City gfficial 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: Greg Rabideau [mailto:greg@rabideau-architects.com] Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 4:22 PM To: ray Cc: 'Brad Dousevicz' Subject: FW: Rye Landscape Cost Estimate, L-1, L-2 Ray, ra From: David Marshall <dmarshall@cea-vt.com> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 11:00 AM To: ray Cc: 'Greg Rabideau' Subject: Rye Associates Waiver Request Updates Attachments: Rye Waiver Reques last rev 1-16-14.doc; Rye Waiver Reques last rev 1-16-14.pdf, Rye Master Plan Waiver Reques last rev 1-16-14.pdf; Rye Master Plan Waiver Reques last rev 1-16-14.doc Thanks for meeting with us yesterday. Please find attached the proposed waiver request for the Preliminary Plat and Master Plan applications. The Master Plan waivers do not include the lot ratio waiver, nor the parking waivers as both of those are specific to the design standards in the preliminary plat application. The remaining waiver requests cover both the current and future applications associated with the commercial buildings. Best David S. Marshall, P.E Civil Engineering Associates, Inc. 10 Mansfield View Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 P 802-864-2323 x310 F 864-2271 1 r Rye Associates Master Plan Request for Waivers Page 1 of 4 January 16, 2014 Rye Associates - Master Plan January 16, 2014 Request for Waivers The following waivers are requested in support of the development of a neighborhood friendly roadway system and layout of a traditional village style environment. General Development Standards Section Title Description & Reason 3.06 Setbacks and Buffers C. Yards Abutting a Planned Street. Yards abutting a right-of-way designated for a planned public street shall (Swift Street Extension) have a minimum setback equal to the front setback requirement for the district in which the lot exists, unless the yards abut any of those streets listed in above, in Section 3.06.B in which case the minimum setback shall be fifty (50) feet from the edge of the planned right-of-way. With the assumption that the reference to "Swift Street" also means Swift Street Extension, the applicant seeks a waiver for Cottage buildings 7-1 and 7-7 (to 30') and residential lots #22 and #23 (to 20') and Commercial Lot #1 (to 30') to achieve the goals set forth in the SEQ district guidelines. Section 3.06 (1) I. Buffer Strip for Non -Residential Uses Adjacent to Residential District Boundaries. of the LDR's requires that (with comments italicized): (1) Where a new non-residential use is adjacent to or within fifty (50) feet of the boundary of a residential district (The proposed commercial parking lots and buildings are proposed to be located within 50' of the VR zoning district line), or where an existing non-residential use, structure or parking area that is adjacent to or within fifty (50) feet of the boundary of a residential district is proposed to be expanded, altered or enlarged, the required side or rear setback shall be increased to sixty-five (65) feet (This would make use of the VC district for commercial use extremely limited) . A strip not less than fifteen (15) feet wide within the sixty- five (65) foot setback shall be landscaped with dense evergreens, fencing, and/or other plantings as a screen (Acknowledged). New external light fixtures shall not ordinarily be permitted within the fifteen (15) foot wide buffer area (Acknowledged).. Rye Associates Master Plan Request for Waivers Page 2 of 4 January 16, 2014 (2) The Development Review Board may permit new or expanded nonresidential uses, structures and/or parking areas, and new external light fixtures, within the setback and/or buffer as set forth in (1) above (the applicant is seeking to have the ability to place parking 5 feet from the District Line), and may approve a modification of the width of the required setback and/or landscaped buffer as set forth in (1) above. In doing so the DRB shall find that the proposed lighting, landscaping and/or fencing to be provided adjacent to the boundary of the residential district will provide equivalent screening of the noise, light and visual impacts of the new non-residential use to that which would be provided by the standard setback and buffer requirements in (1) above (The proposed layout creates multi family structures which are 105 feet from the proposed edge of the parking with street trees and a 50' right-of-way and an additional 15 feet of green space eligible for landscaping placement). However in no case may the required side or rear setback be reduced below the standard requirement for the zoning district in which the non-residential use is located (The applicant is not seeking a waiver of the 20'side or rear yards nor the new front yard requirement of 20' with the creation of Rye Circle, however it should be noted that the commercial structures will be located as little as 6 feet from the district line.). In summary, the applicant seeks: • A modification of the requirement that the required side or rear setback shall be increased to sixty-five (65) feet. In this case the applicant seeks a waiver indicating that the front yard setback shall be reduced to 20 feet when a street with a Rights -of -way width of at least 50' is proposed between the residential use and the proposed commercial use. The side and rear lot setbacks shall otherwise be consistent with the SEQ-VC District requirements. Southeast Quadrant District Section Title Description & Reason 9.07 Dimensional Standards - In the Southeast quadrant District, all requirements of Article XXV governing lot size, density, frontage, and setbacks shall apply. The request is to waive the following requirements: A. Minimum radius of curves for Local streets from 200' to 50' Appendix Table C-2 Dimensional Standards - The following waivers are requested to allow greater interaction between the proposed buildings in support of enhancing the fabric of the neighborhood. A. Single Family Minimum Lot Size from 12,000 SF to 9,937 SF. - B. Single Family Max. Building Coverage from 15% to 20% for all lots. C. Single Family Max. Lot Coverage from 30% to 42% for Lot 7. D. Single Family Front Yard Setback from 20' to 10' (Cottage Units 6-1 & 6-2 off of Edgewood Drive). Rye Associates Master Plan Request for Waivers Page 3 of 4 January 16, 2014 E. Single Family Rear Yard Setback from 30' to 20' (Cottage Units 7-2 thru 7-6). F. Multi -Family Max. Building Coverage from 15% to 28% for Lot 6. G. Multi -Family Max. Lot Coverage from 30% to 55% for Lot 6. H. Commercial Lot Coverage from 30% to 54% for all lots except for Lot 3 which shall be 63% I. Commercial Building Coverage from 15% to 21% for all lots except for Lot 3 which shall be 26% J. PUD Lot Coverage to Exclude City Recreation Paths. 9.09 SEQ-VR Sub -District; Specific Standards & Dimensional Standards (A)(2) Interconnection of Streets (a) Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 400 feet. Applicant seeks waiver to reflect minimization of street intersections on future collector road (Swift Street Extension). 9.10 SEQ-VC Sub -District; Specific Regulations (1) Development blocks. Development block lengths should range between 200 and 300 linear feet; see Figure 9-2 for example. Blocks 300 feet or longer must include mid -block public sidewalk or recreation path connections. The applicant seeks a waiver from the absolute values to reflect the commercial use on the east side where the curb cuts to Hinesburg Road are to be minimized, to the south where the pre-existing development pattern precludes the inclusion of addition intersections, and to the north where again, curb cuts on to future collector streets are to be minimized. The west side proposes the inclusion of a "mid" block pedestrian connector. (2) Interconnection of Streets (a) Average intersection spacing shall be 200 to 300 feet. The applicant is not proposing any new streets within the Village Commercial district. D. Design Standards for Non -Residential Land Uses in the SEQ-VC Sub - District (3) Building Setbacks. New buildings with commercial uses must be built to a 'build -to line' established no less than fifteen feet (15') and no more than twenty feet (20') from the edge of the curb. The area between the building and the curb shall provide for convenient pedestrian access via sidewalk or recreation path; see Section 9.10(C)(1) above. Parking is prohibited between Rye Associates Master Plan Request for Waivers Page 4 of 4 January 16, 2014 the building and the sidewalk. As the Development Review Board expressed its' desire to orient the commercial buildings with the interior of the PUD and not Hinesburg Road, the applicant seeks a waiver for all of the commercial lots as this will conflict with the requirements of section 9.11(B)(2). 9.11 Supplemental Standards for Arterial and Collector Streets A. Setbacks. The minimum front setbacks from Dorset Street, Old Cross Road, Nowland Farm Road, Hinesburg Road, Swift Street, Swift Street Extension, and Old Cross Road Extension, shall be as set forth in Section 3.06(B) (1) and (2) of these Regulations (see below). B. Building Orientation along Arterial and Collector Streets. (1) New developments with frontage on Dorset Street, Old Cross Road/Nowland Farm Road, or Swift Street, or which have the potential to include frontage along Swift Street Extension or Old Cross Road Extension, shall maintain a setback of twenty feet (20') from the edge of the planned right-of-way. No issue, this is acceptable. (2) New developments with frontage on Hinesburg Road shall maintain a setback of forty feet (40') from the edge of the planned right-of-way. The applicant seeks a waiver from 40 feet to 23 feet to enable the comprehensive planning and interconnection of the parking infrastructure serving the commercial buildings in the narrow VC district area. i Rye Associates Request for Waivers Page 1 of 5 January 16, 2014 Rye Associates Preliminary Plan Submittal January 16, 2014 Request for Waivers The following waivers are requested in support of the development of a neighborhood friendly roadway system and layout of a traditional village style environment. General Development Standards Section Title Description & Reason 3.06 Setbacks and Buffers C. Yards Abutting a Planned Street. Yards abutting a right-of-way designated for a planned public street shall (Swift Street Extension) have a minimum setback equal to the front setback requirement for the district in which the lot exists, unless the yards abut any of those streets listed in above, in Section 3.06.B in which case the minimum setback shall be fifty (50) feet from the edge of the planned right-of-way. With the assumption that the reference to "Swift Street" also means Swift Street Extension, the applicant seeks a waiver for Cottage buildings 7-1 and 7-7 (to 30') and residential lots #22 and #23 (to 20') and Commercial Lot #1 (to 30') to achieve the goals set forth in the SEQ district guidelines. Section 3.06 (1) I. Buffer Strip for Non -Residential Uses Adjacent to Residential District Boundaries. of the LDR's requires that (with comments italicized): (1) Where a new non-residential use is adjacent to or within fifty (50) feet of the boundary of a residential district (The proposed commercial parking lots and buildings are proposed to be located within 50' of the VR zoning district line), or where an existing non-residential use, structure or parking area that is adjacent to or within fifty (50) feet of the boundary of a residential district is proposed to be expanded, altered or enlarged, the required side or rear setback shall be increased to sixty-five (65) feet (This would make use of the VC district for commercial use extremely limited) . A strip not less than fifteen (15) feet wide within the sixty- five (65) foot setback shall be landscaped with dense evergreens, fencing, and/or other Rye Associates Request for Waivers Page 2 of 5 January 16, 2014 plantings as a screen (Acknowledged). New external light fixtures shall not ordinarily be permitted within the fifteen (15) foot wide buffer area (Acknowledged).. (2) The Development Review Board may permit new or expanded nonresidential uses, structures and/or parking areas, and new external light fixtures, within the setback and/or buffer as set forth in (1) above (the applicant is seeking to have the ability to place parking 5 feet from the District Line), and may approve a modification of the width of the required setback and/or landscaped buffer as set forth in (1) above. In doing so the DRB shall find that the proposed lighting, landscaping and/or fencing to be provided adjacent to the boundary of the residential district will provide equivalent screening of the noise, light and visual impacts of the new non-residential use to that which would be provided by the standard setback and buffer requirements in (1) above (The proposed layout creates multi family structures which are 105 feet from the proposed edge of the parking with street trees and a 50' right-of-way and an additional 15 feet of green space eligible for landscaping placement). However in no case may the required side or rear setback be reduced below the standard requirement for the zoning district in which the non-residential use is located (The applicant is not seeking a waiver of the 20'side or rear yards nor the new front yard requirement of 20' with the creation of Rye Circle, however it should be noted that the commercial structures will be located as little as 6 feet from the district line.). In summary, the applicant seeks: • A modification of the requirement that the required side or rear setback shall be increased to sixty-five (65) feet. In this case the applicant seeks a waiver indicating that the front yard setback shall be reduced to 20 feet when a street with a Rights -of -way width of at least 50' is proposed between the residential use and the proposed commercial use. The side and rear lot setbacks shall otherwise be consistent with the SEQ-VC District requirements. Southeast Quadrant District Section Title Description & Reason 9.07 Dimensional Standards - In the Southeast quadrant District, all requirements of Article XXV governing lot size, density, frontage, and setbacks shall apply. The request is to waive the following requirements: A. Minimum radius of curves for Local streets from 200' to 50' Appendix Table C-2 Dimensional Standards - The following waivers are requested to allow greater interaction between the proposed buildings in support of enhancing the fabric of the neighborhood. A. Single Family Minimum Lot Size from 12,000 SF to 9,937 SF. - B. Single Family Max. Building Coverage from 15% to 20% for all lots. i Rye Associates Request for Waivers Page 3 of 5 January 16, 2014 C. Single Family Max. Lot Coverage from 30% to 42% for Lot 7. D. Single Family Front Yard Setback from 20' to 10' (Cottage Units 6-1 & 6-2 off of Edgewood Drive). E. Single Family Rear Yard Setback from 30' to 20' (Cottage Units 7-2 thru 7-6). F. Multi -Family Max. Building Coverage from 15% to 28% for Lot 6. G. Multi -Family Max. Lot Coverage from 30% to 55% for Lot 6. H. Commercial Lot Coverage from 30% to 54% for all lots except for Lot 3 which shall be 63% I. Commercial Building Coverage from 15% to 21% for all lots except for Lot 3 which shall be 26% J. PUD Lot Coverage to Exclude City Recreation Paths. 9.07 Regulating Plans B. General Provisions (2) All residential lots created on or after the effective date of this bylaw in any SEQ subdistrict Shall conform to a standard minimum lot width to depth ratio of one to two (1:2), with ratios Of 1:2.5 to 1:5 recommended. The applicant seeks a waiver to reflect the fact that certain lots do not conform the recommended values. Specifically waivers are requested for Lots, 6,7,8,15,16,17 and 30. The calculated ratios are outlined below. Lot depth to Width Ratios Lot # Depth Width Ratio 6 250.3 571.0 0.44 7 163.9 310.0 0.53 8 216.7 165.7 1.31 15 132.5 75.0 1.77 16 132.5 75.0 1.77 17 87.5 211.6 0.41 30 167.1 40.5 4.13 9.09 SEQ-VR Sub -District; Specific Standards & Dimensional Standards (A)(2) Interconnection of Streets (a) Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 400 feet. Applicant seeks waiver to reflect minimization of street intersections on future collector road (Swift Street Extension). 9.10 SEQ-VC Sub -District; Specific Regulations (1) Development blocks. Development block lengths should range between 200 and 300 linear feet; see Figure 9-2 for example. Blocks 300 feet or longer Rye Associates Request for Waivers Page 4 of 5 January 16, 2014 must include mid -block public sidewalk or recreation path connections. The applicant seeks a waiver from the absolute values to reflect the commercial use on the east side where the curb cuts to Hinesburg Road are to be minimized, to the south where the pre-existing development pattern precludes the inclusion of addition intersections, and to the north where again, curb cuts on to future collector streets are to be minimized. The west side proposes the inclusion of a "mid" block pedestrian connector. (2) Interconnection of Streets (a) Average intersection spacing shall be 200 to 300 feet. The applicant is not proposing any new streets within the Village Commercial district. D. Design Standards for Non -Residential Land Uses in the SEQ-VC Sub - District (3) Building Setbacks. New buildings with commercial uses must be built to a 'build -to line' established no less than fifteen feet (15') and no more than twenty feet (20') from the edge of the curb. The area between the building and the curb shall provide for convenient pedestrian access via sidewalk or recreation path; see Section 9.10(C)(1) above. Parking is prohibited between the building and the sidewalk. As the Development Review Board expressed its' desire to orient the commercial buildings with the interior of the PUD and not Hinesburg Road, the applicant seeks a waiver for all of the commercial lots as this will conflict with the requirements of section 9.11(B)(2). 9.11 Supplemental Standards for Arterial and Collector Streets A. Setbacks. The minimum front setbacks from Dorset Street, Old Cross Road, Nowland Farm Road, Hinesburg Road, Swift Street, Swift Street Extension, and Old Cross Road Extension, shall be as set forth in Section 3.06(B) (1) and (2) of these Regulations (see below). B. Building Orientation along Arterial and Collector Streets. (1) New developments with frontage on Dorset Street, Old Cross Road/Nowland Farm Road, or Swift Street, or which have the potential to include frontage along Swift Street Extension or Old Cross Road Extension, shall maintain a setback of twenty feet (20') from the edge of the planned right-of-way. No issue, this is acceptable. (2) New developments with frontage on Hinesburg Road shall maintain a setback of forty feet (40') from the edge of the planned right-of-way. ) Rye Associates Request for Waivers Page 5 of 5 January 16, 2014 The applicant seeks a waiver from 40 feet to 23 feet to enable the comprehensive planning and interconnection of the parking infrastructure serving the commercial buildings in the narrow VC district area. D. Design Standards for Non -Residential Land Uses in the SEQ-VC Sub -District (4) Parking (a) Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 13 of these Regulations, each non- residential use shall provide three (3) off-street parking spaces per 1,000 gross square feet. The DRB may grant a parking waiver in conformance with Section 13.1(N)(3). Lot 1 has a GSF of 5,000 thereby requiring 15 parking spaces. The applicant is proposing 14 spaces on the Lot with the understanding that the parking lot as proposed will be extended and shared with other commercial buildings. The applicant seeks a waiver for 1 parking space with the recognition that there is ample nearby on -street parking for day time use of this commercial property. 13.01 Off Street Parking and Loading N. Exemptions, Waivers, and Modifications of Requirements. (2) Waivers. Where the Development Review Board determines that a proposed land use or structure is adequately served by existing or proposed parking facilities, the Development Review Board may waive the off-street parking space requirements stipulated in Tables 13-1 through 13-6, by no more than twenty-five percent (25%). The7 cottages shown on Lot 8 depict 13 parking spaces. As residential uses require 2 paces per unit for a total of 14, • the applicant seeks a waiver of 1 parking space for this Lot in recognition that the small size of the unit will yield a smaller demand than the typical single family home. ray From: David Marshall <dmarshall@cea-vt.com> Sent: Friday, January 17, 2014 12:22 PM To: ray Subject: RE: Comments on Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road Ray - We have inserted our responses to both Justin's and Tom's comments within their original text below. Best David S. Marshall, P.E Civil Engineering Associates, Inc. 10 Mansfield View Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 P 802-864-2323 x310 F 864-2271 From: ray [mailto:ray@sburl.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2014 4:26 PM To: dmarshall@cea-vt.com Subject: FW: Comments on Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road Dave, See comments below. Ray Belair Administrative Officer City of So. Burlington 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 802-846-4106 www.sburl.com www.sbpathtosustainabilitV.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: Tom Dipietro Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2014 4:16 PM To: ray Cc: Justin Rabidoux Subject: FW: Comments on Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road Ray, Justin's comments are below and I have the following comments on the latest version of the Rye Associates plans: 1. This project is located in the Potash Brook watershed, which is listed as stormwater impaired by the State of Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (ANR). Also, the project proposes to create greater than 1 acre of f impervious area. It will therefore require a stormwater permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Stormwater Division. Obtaining this permit should be a condition of approval for the project. [David Marshall] This is acceptable as a condition of approval that these be submitted prior to the commencement of construction. 2. The plans indicate that the project will disturb greater than 1 acre of land. Therefore, this project will need to obtain and comply with a construction stormwater permit (3-9020 or individual permit) from the Vermont DEC Stormwater Division. Obtaining this permit should be a condition of approval for the project. [David Marshall] This is acceptable as a condition of approval that these be submitted prior to the commencement of construction. 3. Confirm that the proposed drainage network can convey the 25-year, 24-hour storm event without surcharging?[David Marshall] We are currently undertaking this review and will update pipe diameters or inlet sizes if the analysis shows any conflicts with conformance with the 25-year design standard. 4. Confirm that the drainage areas shown on the proposed conditions hydrology plan that was provided via email are accurate for the project as now proposed. The building configuration in this plan appears out of date.[David Marshall] This is being updated to reflect the latest management of the multiple watersheds, residential and commercial. 5. Original Comment: The proposed detention basin on lot #5 discharges water into the existing closed drainage system under Oak Creek Drive. Adjacent to the proposed detention basin, the plans show an existing 18" culvert beneath Fox Run Lane that leads to an open channel along Vt Route 116. Rather than send water to the closed drainage system (and eventually through an existing detention pond located downstream), could this water instead be discharged to the ditch along Vt Route 116 via the existing 18" culvert? Discharge in this manner would be the City's preference. a. Response from the engineer (1/6/14): This would be redirecting existing stormwater from the City collection system to the State of Vermont's infrastructure on Route 116. It is our recent experience that VTrans will not allow nor will accept any increases in peak flows (for the 50-year design storm or smaller) to their stormwater infrastructure. Therefore this is not a likely outcome.[David Marshall] The normal peak flow managed flows will continue to flow into the existing system but we have revised the plan to show that the emergency overflows will not be directed into the Route 116 roadside ditch. We will provide contacts and supporting plans to Tom DiPietro in spearheading this stormwater management approach with VTrans. b. Updated Comment: I am not proposing that water from the City collection system be redirected to the VTrans drainage system on Vt Rt 116. 1 am proposing that water from the Rye property discharge directly to the VTrans ditchline on Vt Rt 116 rather than first flowing through the City owned drainage system under Oak Creek Drive, which ultimately discharges to the VTrans drainage system on Vt Rt. 116. Additionally, it appears that the proposed emergency spillway for this pond discharges towards Fox Run Lane and would ultimately flow to the existing closed drainage system under Oak Creek Drive. The Oak Creek Drive drainage system consists of 12" pipe. My concern is that additional flows to this this system would contribute to it surcharging during storms up to and including the 25-year, 24-hour storm. Discharging instead to the ditchline along VT Rt 116 would reserve capacity in the existing drainage pipe for existing flows. Otherwise, it may be necessary to replace existing pipe under Oak Creek Drive so that it can accommodate additional flow volumes and rates. 6. The pump station and detention basin on lot #31 must have maintenance access drives a minimum of 12' wide in a minimum 20' wide easement.[David Marshall] These have been added to the plans to be submitted for future review. 7. Double check the invert out shown for DMH #3 on sheet C3.0.[David Marshall] acknowledged 8. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance structures on-site.[David Marshall] acceptable 9. Per section 12.03.F(1) of the City's Land Development Regulations, the final decision should require the submission of record drawings showing pipe invert elevations, drainage structure rim elevation, pipe material, final grading, etc.[David Marshall] Acknowledged z 10. The final decision should requirethatfinal hydrologic modeling be submitted to the Department of Public Works so that this information can be incorporated into the City's watershed model for Potash Brook.[David Marshall] Acceptable Thomas J. DiPietro Jr. Deputy Director Department of Public Works City of South Burlington 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: Justin Rabidoux Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 1:58 PM To: Tom Dipietro Subject: FW: Comments on Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road After you add your comments please forward to Ray. Ray, Of my 10 items, 1, 2 and 10 remain incomplete. Four is one we'll need to track and add to the Conditions of Approval Tom will share his thoughts below.[David Marshall] These are all acceptable and will be introduced into the next updated plan set submission. Justin From: Justin Rabidoux Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 8:03 AM To: ray Subject: FW: Comments on Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road Ray, My comments are below and Tom's follow mine. Justin 1. Remove all "Winter Parking Ban" signs from the plan.[David Marshall] Acceptable 2. All pavement markings shall be Type I Durable Tape. Applicant to submit a specific product to Public Works for approval prior to installation (David Marshall] Acceptable 3. Pedestrian level street lighting is needed at all crosswalks. 4. All foundation/perimeter drains shall be shown on plans. No Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued for any of the single family homes without approved As-Builts showing the drain lines. 5. A foundation drain detail is needed that shows the backflow prevention method. 6. No roadway striping is needed other than for crosswalks and stop bars. Each parking space does not need to be striped, nor is crosshatching necessary to highlight no parking areas. 7. Remove the crosswalks through the driveways, carry the sidewalk through. 8. The east radius of the proposed Edgewood Lane and Fox Run Lane shall be tightened. 9. Does Edgewood as a name comply with 911 naming standards? Is it too similar to other existing city streets? 10. Illustrate via crosshatch the limits of disturbance/excavation on existing city streets necessary for utility connections, matching curb radii, etc.[David Marshall] Acceptable From: Tom Dipietro Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 3:15 PM To: Justin Rabidoux Subject: Comments on Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road Justin, I reviewed the plans for the Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road. The plans reviewed were developed by Civil Engineering Associates and dated 12/6/13. 1 would like to offer the following review comments: 1. This project is located in the Potash Brook watershed, which is listed as stormwater impaired by the State of Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (ANR). Also, the project proposes to create greater than 1 acre of impervious area. It will therefore require a stormwater permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Stormwater Division. Obtaining this permit should be a condition of approval for the project. 2. The plans indicate that the project will disturb greater than 1 acre of land. Therefore, this project will need to obtain and comply with a construction stormwater permit (3-9020 or individual permit) from the Vermont DEC Stormwater Division. Obtaining this permit should be a condition of approval for the project. 3. Provide hydrologic modeling for the project so that potential impacts on downstream structures can be evaluated. Providing the actual HydroCAD files would facilitate review by DPW staff. 4. Does the proposed drainage network convey the 25 year, 24 hour storm event without surcharging? 5. Plans have been revised so that water leaving the proposed detention pond on lot #31 no longer enters the existing drainage system north of Fox Run Lane. Water leaving the proposed pond now flows to Potash Brook via a new —900' Swale. Flow to Potash Brook via the new swale is preferable to allowing this water to flow into the existing drainage system on Fox Run Lane. 6. The proposed detention basin on lot #5 discharges water into the existing closed drainage system under Oak Creek Drive. Adjacent to the proposed detention basin, the plans show an existing 18" culvert beneath Fox Run Lane that leads to an open channel along Vt Route 116. Rather than send water to the closed drainage system (and eventually through an existing detention pond located downstream), could this water instead be discharged to the ditch along Vt Route 116 via the existing 18" culvert? Discharge in this manner would be the City's preference. 7. Confirm that the Swale to the rear of lots 9-14 will be sufficiently graded to prevent water from flowing onto adjacent properties to the south. 8. Backflow preventers must be installed on all foundation drains. 9. The pump station and detention basin on lot #31 must have an appropriate maintenance access drive identified on the plans. 10. In a future submission, include landscaping plans for the detention basin on lot #31. 11. Provide a map showing the drainage area to each proposed stormwater treatment practice. 12. Please confirm that the proposed stormwater treatment pond located on lot #31 and the dry detention basin in the park will accept runoff from only residential properties. Past resolutions by the South Burlington City Council indicate that the "The City shall accept conveyance of and assume responsibility for the following types of Regulated Private Systems that serve exclusively residential development in the City:" (emphasis added). It appears that the proposed detention pond on lot #31 and the proposed dry detention basin in the park would be eligible for City take over, but the proposed detention pond on lot #5 would not. 13. The proposed development shows wetlands on the project site. Is the applicant seeking wetland permit coverage from the State of Vermont or ACOE? Section 12.02 of the South Burlington Land Development 4 Regulations (LDRs) contains provisions to protect wetlands. The applicant should provide more information on the wetlands contained on the site so that any potential impacts can be evaluated pursuant to the regulations in the LDRs. 14. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance structures on -site. 15. Per section 12.03.F(1) of the City's Land Development Regulations, the final decision should require the submission of record drawings showing pipe invert elevations, drainage structure rim elevation, pipe material, final grading, etc. 16. The final decision should require that final hydrologic modeling be submitted to the Department of Public Works so that this information can be incorporated into the City's watershed model for Potash Brook. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. -Tom Thomas J. DiPietro Jr. Deputy Director Department of Public Works 104 Landfill Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Phone: (802) 658-7961 x108 Email: Tdipietro(a-)sburl.com Web Site: www.sburl.com Twitter: @SBPubWorks 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. ray From: David Marshall <dmarshall@cea-vt.com> Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 3:54 PM To: ray Cc: Tom Dipietro Subject: RE: Rye Associates Stormwater Comments & Responses Attachments: Rye Associates Proposed Conditions.hcp; USGS Locaton Map 8.5xll.pdf; SW1Rye Associates Prop Cond Hyd.pdf; SW2 Rye Associates Ex Cond Hyd.pdf; RYE Assoc. ECB memo.docx Ray & Tom - Please find attached our written responses to Tom's comments based on the 12/6/13 submittal. 1. This project is located in the Potash Brook watershed, which is listed as stormwater impaired by the State of Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (ANR). Also, the project proposes to create greater than 1 acre of impervious area. It will therefore require a stormwater permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Stormwater Division. Obtaining this permit should be a condition of approval for the project. Acknowledged and Acceptable provided that the condition reads that this permit be acquired prior to the commencement of construction. 2. The plans indicate that the project will disturb greater than 1 acre of land. Therefore, this project will need to obtain and comply with a construction stormwater permit (3-9020 or individual permit) from the Vermont DEC Stormwater Division. Obtaining this permit should be a condition of approval for the project. Acknowledged and Acceptable provided that the condition reads that this permit be acquired prior to the commencement of construction. 3. Provide hydrologic modeling for the project so that potential impacts on downstream structures can be evaluated. Providing the actual HydroCAD files would facilitate review by DPW staff. Please find attached the HydroCad modeling of the watershed characteristics. 4. Does the proposed drainage network convey the 25 year, 24 hour storm event without surcharging? The proposed stormwater management pond and the facilities downstream of the pond are design to pass the 100-year design storm. Detailed information on the infrastructure upstream will be forwarded shortly. 5. Plans have been revised so that water leaving the proposed detention pond on lot #31 no longer enters the existing drainage system north of Fox Run Lane. Water leaving the proposed pond now flows to Potash Brook via a new —900' Swale. Flow to Potash Brook via the new swale is preferable to allowing this water to flow into the existing drainage system on Fox Run Lane. Acknowledged. 6. The proposed detention basin on lot #5 discharges water into the existing closed drainage system under Oak Creek Drive. Adjacent to the proposed detention basin, the plans show an existing 18" culvert beneath Fox Run Lane that leads to an open channel along VT Route 116. Rather than send water to the closed drainage system (and eventually through an existing detention pond located downstream), could this water instead be discharged to the ditch along VT Route 116 via the existing 18" culvert? Discharge in this manner would be the City's preference. This would be redirecting existing stormwater from the City collection system to the State of Vermont's infrastructure on Route 116. It is our recent experience that VTrans will not allow nor will accept any increases in peak flows (for the 50-year design storm or smaller) to their stormwater infrastructure. Therefore this is not a likely outcome. 7. Confirm that the swale to the rear of lots 9-14 will be sufficiently graded to prevent water from flowing onto adjacent properties to the south. Similar to the pond and discharge swale from the pond, this swale has also been designed to accommodate the 100-year storm event. 8. Backflow preventers must be installed on all foundation drains. Yes, the new plans show this requirement. 9. The pump station and detention basin on lot #31 must have an appropriate maintenance access drive identified on the plans. Yes, these facilities will have the necessary means of access. Please advise on the width requirements. 10. In a future submission, include landscaping plans for the detention basin on lot #31. Acknowledged. 11. Provide a map showing the drainage area to each proposed stormwater treatment practice. This pre and post development plans of the site are attached. 12. Please confirm that the proposed stormwater treatment pond located on lot #31 and the dry detention basin in the park will accept runoff from only residential properties. Past resolutions by the South Burlington City Council indicate that the "The City shall accept conveyance of and assume responsibility for the following types of Regulated Private Systems that serve exclusively residential development in the City:" (emphasis added). It appears that the proposed detention pond on lot #31 and the proposed dry detention basin in the park would be eligible for City take over, but the proposed detention pond on lot #5 would not. Stormwater runoff from the commercial lots on the east side of the project site have been graded to that all runoff from these properties will be directed to their own dedicated stormwater management facility. No commercial runoff is directed into the proposed stormwater treatment pond located on lot #31 and the dry detention basin in the park. 13. The proposed development shows wetlands on the project site. Is the applicant seeking wetland permit coverage from the State of Vermont or ACOE? Section 12.02 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations (LDRs) contains provisions to protect wetlands. The applicant should provide more information on the wetlands contained on the site so that any potential impacts can be evaluated pursuant to the regulations in the LDRs. Attached is the description of the wetlands and the impacts to their functions and values. 14. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance structures on -site. Acknowledged and Acceptable. 15. Per section 12.03.F(1) of the City's Land Development Regulations, the final decision should require the submission of record drawings showing pipe invert elevations, drainage structure rim elevation, pipe material, final grading, etc. Acknowledged and Acceptable. 16. The final decision should require that final hydrologic modeling be submitted to the Department of Public Works so that this information can be incorporated into the City's watershed model for Potash Brook. Acknowledged and Acceptable. David S. Marshall, P.E Civil Engineering Associates, Inc. 10 Mansfield View Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 P 802-864-2323 x310 F 864-2271 From: ray [mailto:ray@sburl.com] Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 2:58 PM To: dmarshall@cea-vt.com Subject: FW: Rye Dave, See Tom's question below and if you could provide him with your responses, if any. Thanks. Ray Belair Administrative Officer City of So. Burlington 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 802-846-4106 www.sburl.com www.sbpathtosustainability.com Notice - Under Vermont's Public Records Act, all e-mail, e-mail attachments as well as paper copies of documents received or prepared for use in matters concerning City business, concerning a City official or staff, or containing information relating to City business are likely to be regarded as public records which may be inspected by any person upon request, unless otherwise made confidential by law. Ifyou have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return email. Thank you foryour cooperation. From: Tom Dipietro Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 2:15 PM To: ray Subject: Rye Ray, Did Dave Marshal provide written responses to my previous round of comments on Rye Associates? If so, can you forward this information as soon as you have a chance? Justin asked me to review this plan set prior to the other two that I have on my desk. Thanks. -Tom Thomas J. DiPietro Jr. Deputy Director Department of Public Works 104 Landfill Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Phone: (802) 658-7961 x108 Email: Tdipietro(a)sburl.com Web Site: www.sburl.com Twitter: @SBPubWorks 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. RECOVEL) JAN 10 2014 City of So. Burlington Michael Lawrence Associates Landscape Architects / Site Planning Consultants January 6, 2014 Re; Landscape Cost Estimate for Planting — Rye Meadow Planned Unit Development Hinesburg Road —South Burlington, Vermont STREET TREES LARGE STREET TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 5 Acer X freemani `Armstrong' 2-2.5 in. $580 $2,900 8 Acer X freemani `Celzam' 2-2.5 in. $580 $4,840 8 Aesculus hippocastanum `Baumanii' 2-2.5 in. $610 $4,880 4 Betula nigra `Heritage' 2-2.5 in. $580 $2,320 6 Ginko biloba `Autumn Gold' 2-2.5 in. $737 $4,422 6 Ginko biloba `Magyar' 2-2.5 in. $737 $4,422 4 Ginko biloba `Princeton Sentry' 2-2.5 in. $737 $2,948 6 Gleditsia triacanthos `Shademaster 2-2.5 in. $580 $3,480 8 Gleditsia triacanthos `Sunburst 2-2.5 in. $580 $4,640 1 Nyssa sylvatica 2-2.5 in. $580 $ 580 1 Platanus x acerifolia `Columbia' 2-2.5 in. $580 $ 580 11 Quercus bicolor 2-2.5 in. $580 $6,380 1 Quercus imbricaria 2-2.5 in. $580 $ 580 1 Quercus macrocarpa 2-2.5 in. $580 $ 580 1 Quercus muehlenbergii 2-2.5 in. $580 $ 580 4 Quercus rubra 2-2.5 in. $580 $2,320 6 Sophora japonica 2-2.5 in. $580 $3,480 4 Tilia cordata `Glenleven' 2-2.5 in. $688 $2,752 1 Tilia cordata `Greenspire' 2-2.5 in. $688 $ 688 4 Tilia euchlora 2-2.5 in. $688 $2,752 6 Tilia tomentosa `Green Mountain' 2-2.5 in. $688 $4,128 5 Ulmus Americana `Princeton 2-2.5 in. $658 $3,290 5 Ulmus Americana `Valley Forge' 2-2.5 in. $658 $3,290 4 Ulmus davidiana `Jacan' 2-2.5 in. $658 $2,632 6 Ulmus morton `Accolade' 2-2.5 in. $658 $3,948 4 Ulmus morton `Glossy' 2-2.5 in. $658 $2,632 TOTAL LARGE STREET TREES $76,044 MEMBER I Eight Linden Lane Essex Junction, Vermont, 05452 American Society PH/FAX 802-878-2778 C 802-578-9591 of Landscape Architects mike@mclasla.com SMALL STREET TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 2 Acer campestre 2-2.5 in. $580 $1,160 7 Acer miyabei `Morton' 2-2.5 in. $580 $4,060 7 Amelanchier x grandiflora `ABr.' 2-2.5 in. $580 $4,060 1 Carpinus betulus `Fastigata' 2-2.5 in. $610 $ 610 6 Maackia amurensis 2-2.5 in. $610 $3,660 1 Sorbus alnifolia 2-2.5 in. $610 $ 610 TOTAL SMALL STREET TREES $14,160 TOTAL LARGE AND SMALL STREET TREES $90,204 CENTRAL OPEN SPACE PLANTING Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 3 Cornus alba `Siberica 3 gal. $ 45 $ 135 6 Cornus mas 5 gal. $200 $1,200 3 Cornus sericea `Baileyi' 3 gal. $ 50 $ 150 6 Cornus racemosa 2 gal. $ 45 $ 270 5 Ilex verticillata `Berry Nice' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 290 1 Ilex verticillata `Jim Dandy' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 58 1 Ilex verticillata `Southern Gentleman' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 58 5 Ilex verticillata `Winter Red' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 290 15 Picea glauca 5-6 ft. $337 $5,055 2 Quercus bicolor 2-2.5 in. $580 $1,160 1 Quercus muehlenbergii 2-2.5 in. $580 $ 580 4 Quercus rubra 2-2.5 in. $580 $2,320 3 Sambucus nigra `Black Lace' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 174 8 Sambucus nigra `Madonna' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 464 3 Sambucus nigra `Pulverentula' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 174 1 Sambucus racemosa `Sutherland Gold' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 58 TOTAL CENTRAL OPEN SPACE PLANTING $12,436 7 COTTAGE UNITS WITH GARAGES PLANTING 7 COTTAGES WITH GARAGES PLANTING BUDGET BASED ON CONSTRUCTION BUDGET Construction Budget $300,000 x 7 = $2,100,000 FIRST 250,000 x 3% = $ 7,500 SECOND 250,000 x 2% = $ 5,000 REMAINDER 1,600,000 x 1 % = $16,000 Landscape Budget $28,500 PROPOSED PLANTING EVERGREEN TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 3 Abies concolor 6-7 ft. $420 $1,260 3 Picea omorika 5-6 ft. $338 $1,014 1 Thuja occidentalis `Nigra' 5-6 ft. $263 $ 263 DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN SHRUBS Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 2 Buxus microphylla `Chicagolnd Grn' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 146 2 Buxus microphylla `Green Mountain' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 146 2 Buxus microphylla `Winter Gem' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 100 3 Cornus alba `Prairie Fire' 2 gal. $ 45 $ 135 6 Cornus pumila 2 gala $ 45 $ 270 2 Cornus sericea `Baileyi' 3 gal. $ 50 $ 100 10 Euonymus fortunei `Green Lane' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 500 4 Hydrangea macrophylla `Blue Billows' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 292 5 Hydrangea macrophylla `E-less Sumr' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 365 3 Hydrangea macrophylla `Twist&Sht' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 219 7 Rhododendron catawbiense `Album' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 511 7 Rhododendron PJM 5 gal. $123 $ 861 10 Rhododendron `Pohjola's Daughter' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 500 7 Rhododendron `English Roseum' 5 gal. $125 $ 875 1 Thuja occidentalis `Little Giant' 30-36 in. $ 75 $ 75 7 Thuja occidentalis `Woodwardii' 30-36 in. $ 75 $ 525 FLOWERING TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 3 Acer campestre 2-2.5 in. $580 $1,740 11 Cornus alternifolia 5-6 ft $275 $3,025 7 Cornus mas 1.5-2 in $382 $2,674 2 Magnolia x loebneri `Leonard Messel' 5-6 ft. $310 $ 620 1 Magnolia x loebneri `Dr. Merrill' 5-6 ft. $310 $ 310 6 Magnolia stellata `Royal Star' 5-6 ft. $310 $1,860 3 Malus x `Donald Wyman' 2-2.5 in. $490 $1,470 4 Malus x `Prairie Fire' 2-2.5 in. $490 $1,960 8 Pyrus calleryana `Autumn Blaze' 2-2.5 in. $580 $4,640 3 Quercus bicolor 2-2.5 in. $580 $1,740 1 Quercus rubra 2-2.5 in. $580 $ 580 TOTAL 7 COTTAGE UNITS WITH GARAGES PLANTING $28,776 7 COTTAGES WITHOUT GARAGES PLANTING 7 COTTAGES W/O GARAGES PLANTING BUDGET BASED ON CONSTRUCTION BUDGET Construction Budget $250,000 x 7 = $1,750,000 FIRST 250,000 x 3% _ $ 7,500 SECOND 250,000 x 2% _ $ 5,000 REMAINDER 1,250,000 x 1% _ $12 500 Landscape Budget $25,000 PROPOSED PLANTING EVERGREEN TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 5 Abies concolor 5-6 ft, $338 $1,690 3 Picea glauca 6-7 ft. $420 $1,260 3 Thuja occidentalis `Nigra' 6-7 ft. $265 $ 795 DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN SHRUBS Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 2 Aronia melanocarpa'Autumn Magic' 3 gal. $ 50 $ 100 3 Aronia melanocarpa'Viking Purple' 3 gal. $ 50 $ 150 7 Buxus microphylla `Winter Gem' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 350 11 Cornus alba `Prairie Fire' 2 gal. $ 45 $ 495 15 Cornus stolonifera `Arctic Fire' S gal. $ 88 $1,320 17 Euonymus fortunei `Green Lane' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 850 4 Hydrangea arborescens `Bella Anna' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 200 5 Hydrangea macrophylla `Blue Billows' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 365 6 Hydrangea macrophylla `E-less Sumr' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 438 5 Hydrangea macrophylla `Twist&Sht' 3 gal. $ 80 $ 400 3 Hydrangea paniculata `Little Lime' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 219 1 Hydrangea paniculata `Pinky Winky' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 73 1 Hydrangea paniculata `Vnla Strwbry' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 73 6 Rhododendron catawbiense `Album' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 438 2 Rhododendron `Boursault' S gal. $123 $ 246 11 Rhododendron `English Roseum' S gal. $125 $1,375 4 Rhododendron `PJM' 3 gal. $ 87 $ 348 2 Rhododendron `Pohjola's Daughter' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 100 SHADE & FLOWERING TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 4 Acer campestre 2-2.5 in. $580 $2,320 2 Cornus alternifolia 5-6 ft. $275 $ 550 5 Cornus mas 1.5-2 in. $383 $1,915 2 Magnolia x loebneri `Dr. Merrill' 5-6 ft. $310 $ 620 2 Malus x `Adams' 2-2.5 in. $490 $ 980 1 Malus x `Donald Wyman' 2-2.5 in. $490 $ 490 1 Malus x `Prairie Fire' 2-2.5 in. $490 $ 490 2 Malus x `Sargentii' 2-2.5 in. $490 $ 980 2 Nyssa sylvatica 2-2.5 in. $580 $1,160 9 Pyrus calleryana `Autumn Blaze' 2-2.5 in. $505 $4,545 TOTAL 7 COTTAGE UNITS W/OUT GARAGES PLANTING $25,335 FOUR PLEX UNITS PLANTING FOURPLEX PLANTING BUDGET BASED ON CONSTRUCTION BUDGET Construction Budi;et $280,000 x 16 = $4,480,000 FIRST 250,000 x 3% = $ 7,500 SECOND 250,000 x 2% = $ 5,000 REMAINDER 3,980,000 x 1% = $39,800 Landscape Budget $52,300 PROPOSED PLANTING EVERGREEN TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 3 Abies concolor 6-7 ft, $420 $1,260 10 Picea omorika 6-7 ft, $420 $4,200 3 Picea pungens `Fat Albert' 5-6 ft. $615 $1,845 DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN SHRUBS Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 11 Aronia arbutifolia'Brilliantissima' 5 gal. $ 65 $ 715 8 Aronia melanocarpa 'Autumn Magic' 5 gal. $ 65 $ 520 8 Aronia melanocarpa 'Autumn Magic' 5 gal. $ 65 $ 520 14 Buxus microphylla `Chicagolnd Grn' 3 gal. $ 73 $1,022 3 Buxus microphylla `Green Mountain' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 219 3 Buxus microphylla `Green Velvet' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 219 14 Buxus microphylla `Winter Gem' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 700 7 Cornus alba `Siberica 3 gal. $ 45 $ 315 4 Cornus pumila 2 gal. $ 45 $ 180 6 Cornus racemosa 2 gal. $ 45 $ 270 14 Cornus sericea `Baileyi' 3 gal. $ 50 $ 700 7 Cornus stolonifera `Arctic Fire' 5 gal. $ 88 $ 616 9 Euonymus fortunei `Canadale Gold' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 450 9 Euonymus fortunei `Emerald Gaiety' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 450 16 Euonymus fortunei `Emerald `n Gold' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 800 45 Euonymus fortunei `Green Lane' 2 gal. $ 50 $2,250 4 Hydrangea arborescens `Incrediball' 3 gal. $ 65 $ 260 6 Hydrangea macrophylla `Blue Billows' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 438 5 Hydrangea macrophylla `E-less Sumr' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 365 4 Hydrangea macrophylla `Twist&Sht' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 292 3 Hydrangea macrophylla `Forever Red' 2 gal. $ 73 $ 219 4 Hydrangea paniculata `Little Lime' 3 gal. $ 50 $ 200 30 Microbiota decussata 3 gal. $ 50 $1,500 2 Picea glauca `North Star' 6 gal. $215 $ 430 3 Picea pungens `Montgomery' 5 gal. $188 $ 564 6 Pinus strobus `Nana' 6 gal. $188 $1,128 4 Rhododendron catawbiense `Album' 3 gal.' $ 73 $ 292 2 Rhododendron `English Roseum' 5 gal. $123 $ 246 1 Rhododendron `PJM' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 73 6 Rhododendron `Roseum Elegans' 5 gal. $123 $ 738 Rhododendron `Pohjola's Daughter' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 100 Rhododendron `Olga Mezitt' S gal. $123 $ 246 Salix discolor 2 gal. $ 45 $ 180 Salix integra `Flamingo' 3 gal. $ 50 $ 150 Salix purpurea `Gracilis' 3 gal. $ 45 $ 90 Sambucus nigra `Black Lace' 3 gal. $ 65 $ 390 Sambucus nigra `Madonna' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 406 Sambucus nigra `Pulverentula' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 174 Sambucus racemosa `Sutherland Gold' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 174 Thuja occidentalis `Hoimstrup' 7 gal. $143 $ 572 Thuja occidentalis `Little Giant' 30-36 in. $ 73 $ 438 Thuja occidentalis `Smaragd' 6-7 ft. $265 $2,120 Thuja occidentalis `Techny' 6-7 ft. $265 $2,120 Thuja occidentalis `Woodwardii' 30-36 in. $ 73 $ 584 FLOWERING TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 4 Acer campestre 5 gal. $ 305 $1,220 3 Cornus alternifolia 5-6 ft. $ 275 $ 825 2 Cornus mas 1.5-2 in. $ 382 $ 764 2 Magnolia x loebneri `Dr. Merrill' 5-6 ft. $ 310 $ 620 1 Magnolia stellata `Royal Star' 5-6 ft. $ 310 $ 310 1 Malus x `Adams' 2-2.5 in. $ 490 $ 490 4 Malus x `Candymint' 2-2.5 in. $ 490 $1,960 2 Malus x `Coralburst' 2-2.5 in. $ 490 $ 980 2 Malus x `Donald Wyman' 2-2.5 in. $ 490 $ 980 1 Malus x `Prairie Fire' 2-2.5 in. $ 490 $ 490 3 Malus x `Sargent' 2-2.5 in. $ 490 $1,470 2 Malus x `Zumi Calocarpa' 2-2.5 in. $ 490 $ 980 12 Pyrus calleryana `Autumn Blaze' 2-2.5 in. $ 490 $5,880 SHADE TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 5 Quercus bicolor 2.5-3 in. $762 $3,810 TOTAL FOUR PLEX UNITS PLANTING $52,519 PROFESSIONAL BUILDING PLANTING PROFESSIONAL BLDG. PLANTING BUDGET BASED ON CONSTRUCTION BUDGET Construction Budget $850,000 FIRST 250,000 x 3% = $ 7,500 SECOND 250,000 x 2% = $ 5,000 REMAINDER 350,000 x 1% _ $ 3,500 Landscape Budget $16,000 PROPOSED PLANTING EVERGREEN TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 1 Picea glauca 5-6 ft, $338 $ 338 3 Picea omorika 5-6 ft. $338 $1,014 2 Thuja occidentalis `Nigra' 6-7 ft. $265 $ 530 DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN SHRUBS Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 2 Buxus microphylla `Green Mountain' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 146 4 Buxus microphylla `Green Velvet' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 292 2 Buxus microphylla `Winter Gem' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 100 3 Cornus alba `Prairie Fire' 2 gal. $ 45 $ 135 1 Cornus alba `Siberica 3 gal. $ 45 $ 45 4 Cornus pumila 2 gal. $ 45 $ 180 6 Cornus stolonifera `Arctic Fire' 5 gal. $ 88 $ 528 2 Hydrangea arborescens `Incrediball' 3 gal. $ 65 $ 130 1 Hydrangea arborescens `Invncble Sprt' 1.5 gal. $ 50 $ 50 2 Hydrangea macrophylla `E-less Sumr' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 146 3 Hydrangea macrophylla `Blshg Bride' 3 gal. $ 80 $ 240 2 Hydrangea macrophylla `Twist&Sht' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 146 2 Hydrangea macrophylla `Forever Blue' 2 gal. $ 73 $ 146 5 Hydrangea macrophylla `Forever Pink' 1.5 gal. $ 50 $ 250 1 Hydrangea macrophylla `Forever Red' 2 gal. $ 73 $ 73 2 Hydrangea paniculata `Bombshell' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 116 2 Hydrangea paniculata `Fire & Ice' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 116 1 Hydrangea paniculata `Grndfl Cmpct' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 58 3 Hydrangea paniculata `Little Lime' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 219 1 Ilex verticillata `Berry Nice' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 58 6 Ilex verticillata `Red Sprite' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 48 1 Ilex verticillata `Southern Gentleman' 3 gal. $ 58 $ 58 52 Microbiota decussata 3 gal. $ 50 $ 2,600 2 Picea abies `Clanbrassilliana Stricta' 6 gal. $143 $ 286 2 Picea glauca `North Star' 6 gal. $215 $ 430 2 Rhododendron catawbiense `Album' 3 gala $ 73 $ 146 2 Rhododendron `Boursault' S gal. $125 $ 250 7 Rhododendron `English Roseum' S gal. $123 $ 861 5 Rhododendron `PJM' 3 gal. $ 73 $ 365 2 Rhododendron `Roseum Elegans' S gal. $123 $ 246 4 Rhododendron `Pohjola's Daughter' 2 gal. $ 50 $ 200 1 Rhododendron `Olga Mezitt' S gal. $123 $ 123 4 Thuja occidentalis `Little Giant' 30-36 in. $ 73 $ 292 2 Thuja occidentalis `Techny' 6-7 ft. $265 $ 530 6 Thuja occidentalis `Woodwardii' 30-36 in. $ 73 $ 438 FLOWERING TREES Qu Scientific Name Size Unit Price Sub -total 3 Acer campestre 2-2.5 in. $ 575 $1 ,725 2 Cornus alternifolia 5-6 ft. $ 275 $ 550 2 Magnolia stellata `Royal Star' 5-6 ft. $ 310 $ 620 2 Malus x `Prairie Fire' 2-2.5 in $ 490 $ 980 2 Pyrus calleryana `Autumn Blaze' 2-2.5 in $ 490 $ 980 TOTAL PROFESSIONAL BUILDING PLANTING $16,784 LARGE AND SMALL STREET TREES $90,204 CENTRAL OPEN SPACE $12,436 7 COTTAGE UNITS WITH GARAGES $28,776 7 COTTAGE UNITS WITHOUT GARAGES $25,335 FOUR PLEX UNITS PLANTING $52,519 PROFESSIONAL BUILDING $16,784 TOTAL LANDSCAPE $226,054 8 RE: Rye Associates - Lee Krohn https: //outl ook. offi ce" 4 i.com/owa/#viewmodel—ReadMessageltem&It... RE: Rye Associates Roger Dickinson <roger@Idengineering.com> Thu 12/5/2013 3:43 PM Toiee Krohn <lkrohn@ccrpcvt.org>; cc:David Marshall <dmarshall@cea-vt.com>; Lee, I've reviewed your comments, and offer our responses in red below. I would be happy to meet with you next Tuesday to discuss any remaining concerns that you might have. Thanks, Roger Roger Dickinson, P.E., PTOE Lamoureux & Dickinson Consulting Engineers, Inc. 14 Morse Drive Essex, VT 05452 Tel:802-878-4450 Fax:802-878-3135 roger Idengineering.com From: Lee Krohn Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2013 1:37 PM To: roger@ldengineering.com Subject: Rye Associates Hi, Roger: You'll remember me from Manchester... after 24+ years there, I have made a major life transition, and I am now a Senior Planner with the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission. Part of my job is helping South Burlington with development review. So I am reviewing prior and current aspects of the proposed Rye Associates project on Hinesburg Road. I've reviewed your traffic study for the project, and wonder: 1. Did you review/take into account prior approvals and conditions related to traffic for Meadowland Drive development(s)? Apparently, there may be relevant issues and information from that which may affect matters here relative to cumulative impacts of new/additional traffic. Yes; the original traffic study for the Meadowland Drive development was reviewed in 1996 by VTrans. Their traffic study review letter, dated September 6, 1996, included the following conditions (in italics): 1 of 12/10/2013 11:07 AM RE: Rye Associates - Lee Krohn https://outlook.office'll- corn/owa/#viewmodel=ReadMessageltem&It... "If the access intersection with VT 116 is determined to warrant a separate left turn lane sometime in the future, then the proposed design of the left turn lane will need to be brought up to today's standards (i.e., not to have a bypass lane, but a separate left turn lane, especially ifsignalization is contemplated). This issue should be addressed as soon as additional development within the complex is contemplated." The bypass left -turn lane in the southbound direction on VT 116 was subsequently upgraded to the separate left -turn lane that now exists. I don't have the exact date that occurred. "In conclusion, you should provide us with an updated traffic study whenever you intend to develop an individual lot within the project complex. The information we need should include the following; -For signal warrant analysis. You need to provide at least a 12-hour turning movement (to include the 0600-1800 hours at a minimum) showing distribution of all moves within the intersection. Volumes should be factored to reflect the average weekday condition. -For LOS analyses and geometric improvements. You need a minimum AM (0700-0900) and PM (1500-1800) peak periods surveyed. The analysis should use DHV's " We have performed the above requested signal warrant and LOS analyses for various projects within Meadowland Business Park since 2002. Most recently in July 2013 for Lot 5 at 66 Bowdoin St. That analysis also included "other development" traffic from the Rye Associates development and a new building on Lot 6 proposed by Super -Temp. 2. Can you please help me understand the difference/distinction between the two LOS tables toward the end of your report (pages 3 & 4). They are quite similar, but slightly different; and each must have unique meaning. Table 3 includes two intersections, but got split between pages 3 and 4. At the bottom of pg. 3 are the results for the northerly VT 116/Meadowland Drive/Rye Associates Street D intersection. At the top of pg. 4 are the results for the southerly VT 116/Fox Run Lane/Mansfield View Lane intersection. Fox Run Lane being located immediately south of the Rye Development. Street B connects with Fox Run Lane. 3. Finally, and not unique to this report or project, I will appreciate learning how adding this much new commercial and residential development will create virtually no change in LOS at this intersection, and at most only one additional second of delay for one turning movement, when comparing the 'build' and 'no build' conditions. If you look closely as the WB LT/TH lanes exiting Meadowland Drive at the northerly VT 116/Meadowland Drive/Rye Associates Street D intersection, the delays for that lane increases by 6 seconds (19 to 25). Also, while Street D's LOS D rating meets VTrans' LOS Policy for an unsignalized intersection, its delay of 29 seconds is not insignificant. That being said, this development benefits from having two access points onto VT Route 116; Street D to the north and Fox Run Lane to the south. Turning movements entering and exiting the Rye Associates development will gravitate towards the access in the direction that they are traveling to/from. This helps minimize the impact on future delays and LOS. As you may be aware, we are set to review this application on December 17. Whether by email or phone (my cell is 80.733.7788), I'll appreciate clarification by early next week. I am typically in S Burl city hall on Tues and Wed; tomorrow morning is good, or next Tuesday sometime would be great. 2 of 3 12/10/2013 11:07 AM 'RE: Rye Associates - Lee Krohn https:Houtlook.office2).com/owa/#viewmodel=ReadMessageltem&It... s Many thanks. Hope you are well. Lee Lee A Krohn, AICP 3 of 12/10/2013 11:07 AM ray From: Tom Dipietro Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2014 4:16 PM To: ray Cc: Justin Rabidoux Subject: FW: Comments on Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road Ray, Justin's comments are below and I have the following comments on the latest version of the Rye Associates plans: 1. This project is located in the Potash Brook watershed, which is listed as stormwater impaired by the State of Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (ANR). Also, the project proposes to create greater than 1 acre of impervious area. It will therefore require a stormwater permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Stormwater Division. Obtaining this permit should be a condition of approval for the project. 2. The plans indicate that the project will disturb greater than 1 acre of land. Therefore, this project will need to obtain and comply with a construction stormwater permit (3-9020 or individual permit) from the Vermont DEC Stormwater Division. Obtaining this permit should be a condition of approval for the project. 3. Confirm that the proposed drainage network can convey the 25-year, 24-hour storm event without surcharging? 4. Confirm that the drainage areas shown on the proposed conditions hydrology plan that was provided via email are accurate for the project as now proposed. The building configuration in this plan appears out of date. 5. Original Comment: The proposed detention basin on lot #5 discharges water into the existing closed drainage system under Oak Creek Drive. Adjacent to the proposed detention basin, the plans show an existing 18" culvert beneath Fox Run Lane that leads to an open channel along Vt Route 116. Rather than send water to the closed drainage system (and eventually through an existing detention pond located downstream), could this water instead be discharged to the ditch along Vt Route 116 via the existing 18" culvert? Discharge in this manner would be the City's preference. a. Response from the engineer (1/6/14): This would be redirecting existing stormwater from the City collection system to the State of Vermont's infrastructure on Route 116. It is our recent experience that VTrans will not allow nor will accept any increases in peak flows (for the 50-year design storm or smaller) to their stormwater infrastructure. Therefore this is not a likely outcome. b. Updated Comment: I am not proposing that water from the City collection system be redirected to the VTrans drainage system on Vt Rt 116. 1 am proposing that water from the Rye property discharge directly to the VTrans ditchline on Vt Rt 116 rather than first flowing through the City owned drainage system under Oak Creek Drive, which ultimately discharges to the VTrans drainage system on Vt Rt. 116. Additionally, it appears that the proposed emergency spillway for this pond discharges towards Fox Run Lane and would ultimately flow to the existing closed drainage system under Oak Creek Drive. The Oak Creek Drive drainage system consists of 12" pipe. My concern is that additional flows to this this system would contribute to it surcharging during storms up to and including the 25-year, 24-hour storm. Discharging instead to the ditchline along VT Rt 116 would reserve capacity in the existing drainage pipe for existing flows. Otherwise, it may be necessary to replace existing pipe under Oak Creek Drive so that it can accommodate additional flow volumes and rates. 6. The pump station and detention basin on lot #31 must have maintenance access drives a minimum of 12' wide in a minimum 20' wide easement. 7. Double check the invert out shown for DMH #3 on sheet C3.0. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance structures on -site. 9. Per section 12.03.F(1) of the City's Land Development Regulations, the final aecision should require the submission of record drawings showing pipe invert elevations, drainage structure rim elevation, pipe material, final grading, etc. 10. The final decision should require that final hydrologic modeling be submitted to the Department of Public Works so that this information can be incorporated into the City's watershed model for Potash Brook. Thomas J. DiPietro Jr. Deputy Director Department of Public Works City of South Burlington 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: Justin Rabidoux Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 1:58 PM To: Tom Dipietro Subject: FW: Comments on Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road After you add your comments please forward to Ray. Ray, Of my 10 items, 1, 2 and 10 remain incomplete. Four is one we'll need to track and add to the Conditions of Approval. Tom will share his thoughts below. Justin From: Justin Rabidoux Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 8:03 AM To: ray Subject: FW: Comments on Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road Ray, My comments are below and Tom's follow mine. Justin 1. Remove all "Winter Parking Ban" signs from the plan. 2. All pavement markings shall be Type I Durable Tape. Applicant to submit a specific product to Public Works for approval prior to installation. 3. Pedestrian level street lighting is needed at all crosswalks. 4. All foundation/perimeter drains shall be shown on plans. No Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued for any of the single family homes without approved As-Builts showing the drain lines. 5. A foundation drain detail is needed that shows the backflow prevention method. 6. No roadway striping is neede- her than for crosswalks and stop bars. Ems. � parking space does not need to be striped, nor is crosshatching necessary to highlight no parking areas. 7. Remove the crosswalks through the driveways, carry the sidewalk through. 8. The east radius of the proposed Edgewood Lane and Fox Run Lane shall be tightened. 9. Does Edgewood as a name comply with 911 naming standards? Is it too similar to other existing city streets? 10. Illustrate via crosshatch the limits of disturbance/excavation on existing city streets necessary for utility connections, matching curb radii, etc. From: Tom Dipietro �,�w..,.,..��..�..._.��._�,_�..._.... Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 3:15 PM To: Justin Rabidoux Subject: Comments on Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road Justin, I reviewed the plans for the Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road. The plans reviewed were developed by Civil Engineering Associates and dated 12/6/13. 1 would like to offer the following review comments: 1. This project is located in the Potash Brook watershed, which is listed as stormwater impaired by the State of Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (ANR). Also, the project proposes to create greater than 1 acre of impervious area. It will therefore require a stormwater permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Stormwater Division. Obtaining this permit should be a condition of approval for the project. 2. The plans indicate that the project will disturb greater than 1 acre of land. Therefore, this project will need to obtain and comply with a construction stormwater permit (3-9020 or individual permit) from the Vermont DEC Stormwater Division. Obtaining this permit should be a condition of approval for the project. 3. Provide hydrologic modeling for the project so that potential impacts on downstream structures can be evaluated. Providing the actual HydroCAD files would facilitate review by DPW staff. 4. Does the proposed drainage network convey the 25 year, 24 hour storm event without surcharging? 5. Plans have been revised so that water leaving the proposed detention pond on lot #31 no longer enters the existing drainage system north of Fox Run Lane. Water leaving the proposed pond now flows to Potash Brook via a new -900' Swale. Flow to Potash Brook via the new swale is preferable to allowing this water to flow into the existing drainage system on Fox Run Lane. 6. The proposed detention basin on lot #5 discharges water into the existing closed drainage system under Oak Creek Drive. Adjacent to the proposed detention basin, the plans show an existing 18" culvert beneath Fox Run Lane that leads to an open channel along Vt Route 116. Rather than send water to the closed drainage system (and eventually through an existing detention pond located downstream), could this water instead be discharged to the ditch along Vt Route 116 via the existing 18" culvert? Discharge in this manner would be the City's preference. 7. Confirm that the swale to the rear of lots 9-14 will be sufficiently graded to prevent water from flowing onto adjacent properties to the south. 8. Backflow preventers must be installed on all foundation drains. 9. The pump station and detention basin on lot #31 must have an appropriate maintenance access drive identified on the plans. 10. In a future submission, include landscaping plans for the detention basin on lot #31. 11. Provide a map showing the drainage area to each proposed stormwater treatment practice. 12. Please confirm that the proposed stormwater treatment pond located on lot #31 and the dry detention basin in the park will accept runoff from only residential properties. Past resolutions by the South Burlington City Council indicate that the "The City shall accept conveyance of and assume responsibility for the following types of Regulated Private Systems that serve exclusively residential development in the City:" (emphasis added). It appears that the proposed detention pond on lot #31 and the proposed dry detention basin in the park would be eligible for City take over, but the proposed detention pond on lot #5 would not. 13. The proposed development shows wetlands on the project site. Is the applicant seeking wetland permit coverage from the State of Vermont or ACOE? Section 12.02 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations (LDRs) contains provisions to protect wetlands. The applicant should provide more information on the wetlands contained on the site so that any potential impacts can be evaluated pursuant to the regulations in the LDRs. 14. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance structures on -site. 15. Per section 12.03.F(1) of the City's Land Development Regulations, the final decision should require the submission of record drawings showing pipe invert elevations, drainage structure rim elevation, pipe material, final grading, etc. 16. The final decision should require that final hydrologic modeling be submitted to the Department of Public Works so that this information can be incorporated into the City's watershed model for Potash Brook. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. -Tom Thomas J. DiPietro Jr. Deputy Director Department of Public Works 104 Landfill Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Phone: (802) 658-7961 x108 Email: Tdipietro(@-sburl.com Web Site: www.sburl.com Twitter: @SBPubWorks 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. ray From: Justin Rabidoux Sent: Friday, December 13, 2013 9:26 AM To: ray; Paul Conner Cc: dmarshall@cea-vt.com Subject: Rye Development Ray, This Wednesday Tom DiPietro and I met with Dave Marshall to review the latest updates to the Rye Development plans. While we have a number of technical related questions and changes, they do not represent and red flags or reasons the DRB should not continue its review. We will be sending Dave an email early next week with the specifics. In general, Dave agreed with our comments and will incorporate them into the next plan set. Justin Rabidoux 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT O5403 (802) 658-7961 jrabidoux@sburl•com www-ctiurl•rnm Twitter: twitter•com/sbpubworks 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. 1 CIN/lL t' H Gi11EERI N G A\��Jr,i reSO, ll IC#6 10 Mansfield View Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 May 23, 2013 Mr. Ray Belair, Zoning Administrator City of South Burlington Planning & Zoning 550 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Phone: 802-864-2323 Fax: 802-864-2271 E-Mail: mail@cea-vt.com aECEIVED MAY242013 City of So. Buffington Re: Rye Associates - 1075 Hinesburg Road PUD Preliminary Plan Application, Master Plan Application update Dear Mr. Belair: Rye Associates, LLC is seeking approval for a mixed use planned unit development located on an undeveloped 18.01 acre parcel located in the northwest quadrant of the Fox Run Lane - Hinesburg Road intersection and an abutting 1.9 acre property to the north subject to an offer of dedication to the City for a future street. The main property currently sits within both the SEQ-NR (15.15 acres) and the SEQ-VC (2.86 acres) districts. We offer the following information in support of the City's review for compliance with the standards set forth in the Southeast Quadrant District. Zoning - The south lot is broken up into two separate SEQ subdistricts. The Village Commercial (VC) district occupies the eastern eighth of the site while the remaining portion lies in the Neighborhood Residential (NR) district. The NR District allows up to 4 units per acre with the use of TDR's. The total property in the NR District is 15.15 acres yielding a maximum density of 60.6 units. This application seeks approval for 52 units. The VC District allows up to 8 units per acre with the use of TDR's. The total property in the VC District is 2.86 acres yielding a maximum density of 22.8 units. The application at this time does not include any residential units in this district, only commercial structures. Encumbrances - A drainage way carries stormwater runoff from properties to the north southwesterly across the property towards the residential properties located off the end of Fox Run Lane. Along this route is a series of unconnected wetland pods. There are three other small wetland pockets on the property of which the small wetland located in the southeast corner of the site appears to have been created by the original construction of Fox Run Lane. We have attached a letter report from Gilman & Briggs Mr. Ray Belair Page 2 of 5 May 23, 2013 Environmental which responds to each of the items outlined in Section 12.02 (E) of the Land Development Regulations. The City Official Map shows the proposed extension of Oak Creek Drive to the north to intersect with the future east -west extension of Swift Street. The same map shows the proposed extension of Swift Street along the northern edge of this property within an existing offer of dedication to the City. Village Commercial District Requirements The VC district boundary line is located 200 feet from the centerline of Hinesburg Road. The existing right-of-way width for Hinesburg Road is 66 feet leaving (200'-33') 167 feet for the VC District. The front yard setback is 50 feet on Hinesburg Road from the planned future right-of- way width of 80 feet. The current right-of-way width is 66 feet resulting in a front yard setback of (one-half of 80'-66') 57 feet from the existing right-of-way. With the requirement of the LDR's that the parking be placed behind (or on the side of) the buildings, the resulting usable space from the front of the building in VC District to the west edge of the VC district is approximately (167' - 57') 110 feet. Section 3.06 (1) of the LDR's requires that (with comments italicized: I. Buffer Strip for Non -Residential Uses Adjacent to Residential District Boundaries. (1) Where a new non-residential use is adjacent to or within fifty (50) feet of the boundary of a residential district (The proposed commercial parking lots are proposed to be located within ,50' of the VR zoning district line), or where an existing non-residential use, structure or parking area that is adjacent to or within fifty (50) feet of the boundary of a residential district is proposed to be expanded, altered or enlarged, the required side or rear setback shall be increased to sixty-five (65) feet (This would make use of the VCdistrictfor commercial use extremely limited) . A strip not less than fifteen (15) feet wide within the sixty-five (65) foot setback shall be landscaped with dense evergreens, fencing, and/or other plantings as a screen (Acknowledged). New external light fixtures shall not ordinarily be permitted within the fifteen (15) foot wide buffer area (Acknowledged).. (2) The Development Review Board may permit new or expanded nonresidential uses, structures and/or parking areas, and new external light fixtures, within the setback and/or buffer as set forth in (1) above (the applicant is seeking to have the ability to place parking within 6 to 12 feet of the District Line), and may approve a modification of the width of the required setback and/or landscaped buffer as set forth in (1) above. In doing so the DRB shall find that the proposed lighting, Mr. Ray Belair Page 3 of 5 May 17, 2013 landscaping and/or fencing to be provided adjacent to the boundary of the residential district will provide equivalent screening of the noise, light and visual impacts of the new non-residential use to that which would be provided by the standard setback and buffer requirements in (1) above (The proposed layout creates multi family structures which are 105 feet from the proposed edge of the parking with street trees and a 50' right-of-way and an additional 15 feet of green space eligible for landscaping placement). However in no case may the required side or rear setback be reduced below the standard requirement for the zoning district in which the non-residential use is located (The applicant is not seeking a waiver of the 20'side or rear yards nor the new front yard requirement of 20' with the creation of B Street). Specific layout standards for the NRNC Districts 0.27 Ac Minimum Lot Size for SFH (12,000 SF) 0.54 Ac Minimum Lot Size for Duplex (24,000 SF) 0.92 Ac Minimum Lot Size for Other Uses (40,000 SF) 45' Maximum Building Height (SEQ-NR District) 50' Maximum Building Height (SEQ-VC District) 15% Maximum Building Coverage 30% Maximum Lot Coverage 20' Front Yard Setback (50' + 7' along Hinesburg Road) 10' Side Yard Setback (20' for "other" uses) 30' Rear Yard Setback 5' for stand alone parking garages 30% max lot coverage in the VC front yard. These minimum lot sizes may be waived by the DRB provided that SEQ planning guidelines are being met. Design Approach The existing frontage on Hinesburg Road has a number of mature trees that are proposed to be retained to maintain the character and buffering of the proposed buildings. Those trees within the required 57' foot front yard setback will be retained. The more westerly trees are primarily made up of Cottonwood and are not proposed to be retained since they fall within the limited space available for the proposed VC development area. In support of the development of village scale buildings and to provide additional flexibility in the phased development of the project, four buildings were chosen to be placed in the VC district. The assumption for this layout is that adequate screening through the use of landscaping and fencing can be developed to properly separate the commercial uses from the residential uses in the adjoining NR district to the west. VC District Pro forma The development potential on the South Lot as laid out on the Conceptual Development Mr. Ray Belair Page 4 of 5 May 23, 2013 Plan includes: 20,000 GSF commercial space in four buildings. 70 parking spaces required. 70 Parking spaces are proposed. The building and parking layouts depicted on this plan are conceptual only and are shown for means of discussion with regard to their proximity to the residential uses, interrelationship with Hinesburg Road and estimated lot coverages for conformance with the PUD SEQ standards. NR District Design Approach The goal of the residential layout was to create a layered transition from the VC and 10 districts into the heart of the NR district. The Plan depicts the use of Cottage style homes and 4-unit multi -family structures to provide this transitional approach. One design challenge with the extension of Swift Street to the west is that the City LDR's call for the minimization of private curbs cuts on collector roadways. To mitigate this, two new public roads running in the north -south direction are proposed to enable alternate frontage opportunities for the north end of the parcel. The 10 units of Cottage style housing is served by only two curb cuts. NR District Pro forma The development potential on the South Lot NR District as laid out on the Conceptual Development Plan includes: • 30 residential units in the form of 4 quad-plex units and 14 Cottage units • 22 Single Family Home lots • 2,550 LF of public roads • Stormwater Infrastructure for the entire project located within a 0.8 acre parcel. • 2.93 acre Open space parcel with neighborhood park Infrastructure Sewer - The project is proposed to be served by gravity sewer mains flowing to the existing collection system located on Oak Creek Drive. Water - A looped water distribution system is proposed to service the project. Water mains will be installed along all of the proposed streets. The two connection points to the existing municipal distribution system is off of Fox run lane to the south and at the Meadowland Drive intersection with Hinesburg Road to the north. Streets - All of the streets are proposed to be publically owned. The westerly extension of Meadowland Drive on the west side of Hinesburg Road (To be named Swift Street Extension?) will follow the offer of dedication encumbering the property to the north. A series of interconnected local streets will serve the project. These streets will connect at three locations to the north with Swift Street Extension and at one location to the south on Fox Run lane at its intersection with Oak Creek Drive. Mr. Ray Belair Page 5 of 5 May 23, 2013 The existing turning lane markings will be modified to enable a dedicated left turn lane into D Street. No other improvements are recommended in the traffic study. Storm Drainage - Will be collected in an enclosed drainage system located within the local streets and will be directed to a stormwater management facility located at the low point in the southwest corner of the property. A mid property detention facility is located in the southwest corner of the open space parcel and is designed to double as both a filter and volleyball court. These flows are then directed to the main facility on Lt #30. The discharge from the main facility will be through a level spreader to mimic the existing drainage pattern in this portion of the property. Master Plan application The Master Plan application previously submitted in December 2011 has been updated with the attached plans and amended application form. We ask that the plans submitted with the Preliminary Plan application be referenced in the efforts to reduce the use of redundant paper. This completes our summary of the proposed features of the project. If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 864-2323 x310 or Brad Dousevicz at 879-4477 ext 103. spectfully, avid arsha , -P. Project Engineer Enclosures: Preliminary Plan Application Application Base Fee of $5,213.00 $513 Base Fee plus $3,900 Residential [(52 Units x $50) x 150%] + $800 Commercial ((First 10, 000 SF x $0.05)+(Second 10, 000 SF x $0.03). Five (5) Full Size Plan Sets One 11" x 17" Reduced Size Plan Set Section 12.02 Wetland Letter Preliminary Plan List of Submittal Requirements Infrastructure Estimate Lot Coverage Calculations Outdoor Lighting Cut Sheets Earthwork Computation Sheet Stormwater Calculations (only as PDF on CD) Master Plan Application Form (amended pages to reflect reduced density) Traffic Study List of Waivers Abutters List CD of plans and documents CC: A. Seneca] (w/ enclosures) B. Dousevicz (3 sets of enclosures) G. Rabideau (w/enclosures) CEA File 11202.00 (w/ enclosures) P \AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\3-Permitting\1-Local Applications\2-Preliminary\Belair Prelim Cover Letter.doc., No Text Rye Associates Building & Lot Coverage Computation ................................................Total Y-.1..3.................... .............. . ................. _............. ......................................... 1..........Indiv............ Total (Each r Total Building Building 1 Driveway House) (Each House) Decks/ Total Lot # Units ' Size Area Pavement Decks Walkways i Walks Coveraaa .......................................................:.............................................:........................... ' Lot22............. .......................................................y. ..._..__ age.. nit...�N)............ ................ ........................€........................� age._U_nit...(N)...................................................3............................ ageUnit..CS.)....................................................4............................ Port 1 i 1 Street Inc. Above ................................. Inc. Above 0! 1 ................................................... i..............................�.$A9 Oi 1 Rec Path s........................._.................i. 8 893 i _ 8 893 ...............................................................I.......................................................................d....................................................n....................................................................................................................................A..............n....................................w....................................1.............I SF SF Rye Associates, LLC Abutters List January 14, 2013 Subject Parcel 0860-01075 Rye Associates, LLC 21 Carmichael St Suite 201 Essex Junction, VT 05452 PARCEL ID OWNER OF RECORD 0860-01035 Mansfield View Properties, LLC 1035 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01045 Mansfield View Properties, LLC 1035 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01061 Rye, Arther H & Brisson, Bernice R Trust 63 Sam Web Road Fairfax, VT 05454 1225-00001 Beasimer, Linda M 1 Oak Creek Road South Burlington, VT 05403 1225-00002 Frigo, Vincent M & Jovina 2 Oak Creek Road South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00006 Savage, Tyler D & Heidi A 6 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00010 Cerreta Scott & Jill 10 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00014 Lyman Tod H & Kelly M 14 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 1 s out f� 2 i o -J. 1. J,. j1 'R I11I v PLANNING R ZONING APPLICATION FOR MASTER PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the plans will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. For amendments, please provide pertinent information only. i) OWNER(S) OF RECORD (Name(s) as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #} Rye Associates LLC, c/o Dousevicz Construction, Suite 201 21 Carmichael Street, Essex, Vt 0,5452, Ph 87g-4477 ext 1o., Fax 872448o Offer of Dedication -Rye, Arther H & Brisson, Bernice R Trust, 63 Sam Web Road, Fairfax, VT 05454 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED(S) (Boole and page#) Vol 7 4 Pg _S92-5 6 Map slide 4Q1 pager 3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) Rye Associates, LLC, c/o Dousevicz_ Construction, Suite 201 21 Carmichael Street Essex, Vt 054,2, Ph 879-4477 ext 1o3, Fax 879-4480 4) APPLICANT'S LEGAL INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY (fee simple, option, etc.) Fee Simple 5) CONTACT PERSON (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) Brad Dousevicz, Dousevicz Construction Suite lox 21 Carmichael Street Essex, Vt oE4 ,2 Ph 879-4477 ext 103, Fax 879-4480 5a) CONTACT EMAIL ADDRESS: douseviez(@gmail.com g_mail,com 6) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 1075 Hinesburg Road 7) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) 0860-01075 8) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) General project description (explain what you want approval for): • Creation of a planned unit development which includes 20,000 SF of commercial use in four buildings within the 2.86 acres of the property located in the SEQ-VC district and 16 units in four (4) multi -family buildings and 22 single family lots and 14 Cottage units within the 15.15 acres located within the SEQ-NR district, Master Plan Application Page 2 of4 • Creation of 2,55o LF of proposed public roadways on the property and 910 of public roadway in the offer of dedication to the City located on the adjacent property to the north (I/O district). b) Existing Uses on Proper (including description and size of each separate use) The existing 18.01 acre lot is undeveloped. c) Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain 20,000 SF of commercial use in four buildings within the 2.86 acres of the property located in the SEQ-VC district and 16 units in four (4) multi -family buildings and 22 single family lots and 14 Cottage units within the 15.15 acres located within the SEQ-NR district. d) Total building square footage on proper (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) Commercial Structures 20,000 SF (Footprint) 20,000 SF (Total) Residential Buildings 60,645 SF e) Proposed height of building (if applicable) Commercial Structures 28' Multifamily Buildings 28' Single Family Homes 28' f) Total parcel size(s) - Please see attached listing of lot sizes. f) Proposed phasing (please describe the number of total phases and if a licable at this time the number of units or square feet of uses to be proposed in the first phase): Phase I - Road Sta 0+00 to 2+50 and 16+00 to 28+00 16 Res Units in 4 quadplex bldgs, 9 SFH's, 4 Cottage Units and 20,000 SF commercial in 4 bldgs. Phase II - Road Sta 2+50 to 9+45 10 Cottage Residential Units Phase III - Road Sta 10+00 to 16+00 13 SFH's. q) MASTER PLAN UMBRELLA CRITERIA a) Total acreage of involved proper Ges) i8.oi b) Total acreage of first phase for development (if known at this time) 8.2 acres c) Total number of residential units and/or sq ft of all uses requested Commercial Structures 20,000 SF (Footprint) 20,000 SF (Total) Multifamily Buildings 4 x 4 units/bldg = 16 units 22 Single Family Homes, 14 Cottage Homes d) Existing impervious coverage, entire site (sq ft and %) o% e) Maximum proposed impervious coverage, entire site (sq ft and %) 235,354 SF or 30% f) Maximum existing building coverage, entire site (sq ft and %) o SF or o% g) Maximum proposed building coverage, entire site (sq ft and %) 117,677 SF or 15% Master Plan Application Page 3 ofq h) Estimated number of existing PMDeak hour vehicle trip ends ck 0 i) Maximum proposed number of PM peak house vehicle trip ends Isg107 j) Existing or prop,osied encumbrances on properV (easements,cov leases rights of way, etc. Easements in favor of Green Mountain power for power distribution outside of the pubic rights -of -way. k) Proposed extension relocation or modification of municipal facilities(sanitary, sewer, water supply, streets, stormwater, etc.) — please describe briefly Sewer - The project is proposed to be served by gravity sewer mains flowing to the existing collection system located on Oak Creek Drive. Water - A looped water distribution system is proposed to service the project. Water mains will be installed along all of the proposed streets. The two connection points to the existing municipal distribution system is off of Fox run lane tot he south and at the Meadowland Drive intersection with Hinesburg Road. Streets - All of the streets are proposed to be publically owned, The westerly extension of Meadowland Drive on the west side of hnesburg Road (Swift Street extension?) will follow the offer of dedication encumbering the property to the north. A series of interconnected local streets will serve the project. These streets will connect at two locations to the north with Swift Street extension and at one location tot he south on fox Run lane at its intersection with Oak Creek Drive. Storm Drainage - Will be collected in an enclosed drainage system located within the local streets and will be directed to a stormwater management facility located at the low point in the southwest corner of the property. The discharge from the facility will be through a level spreader to mimic the existing drainage pattern in this portion of the property. xo) OWNERS OF RECORD OF ALL CONTIGUOUS PROPERTIES & MAILING ADDRESSES (this may be provided on a separate attached sheet: and on pre -stamped and preaddressed envelopes. The city will add the return address). Please see attached listing. Envelopes are attached. i.i) ESTIMATED FINAL PROJECT COMPLETION DATE Phase III - Completion - 2oi8 12) PLANS AND FEE Please submit plans showing the information listed in Section 15.07(C)(3) of the Land Development Regulations. Five full-sized and one reduced size copy (11x17) of the plans must be submitted. Application fee must be included with the. application. A'VQ � �, 0^4� � GI1b-4 1 hereby certify that all the information request as part of this application has been submitted and is a urate tot ledge. V � t Signature of Applicant Signature of Property Owner I Master Plan Application Page 4 04 Do not write below this line ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF SUBMISSION: `" � M�/� I have reviewed this sketch plan applicati n and And it to be: Complete 0 Incomplete � 0 4 tive Officer Date The applicant or permittee retains the obligation to identify, apply for, and obtain relevant state permits for this project. Call (8o2) 879-5676 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist. 1 Civil Engineering Associates, Inc. 10 Mansfield View Lane Phone: 802-864-2323 South Burlington, VT 05403 Fax: 802-864-2271 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Date:(ol(4 To: From: 1 1 '�il v Pro j ect(s): 11 P'—e��% l GL"T C -S Description: 4 i S I M (I G+ ( -) Ro (Oyyj chi Sr-k. (0 lo) ( (Y) pa-) �^V<<✓�c� bra i rag s►ie � Ico � m Pz3 � Message: ktq, FV-V'r-1r' kqcu C',-��(* Us w-, Av Copies To: Rye Associates Request for Waivers Page 1 of 3 May 23, 2013 Rye Associates Preliminary Plan Submittal May 23, 2013 Request for Waivers The following waivers are requested in support of the development of a neighborhood friendly roadway system and layout of a traditional village style environment. General Development Standards Section Title Description & Reason 3.06 Setbacks and Buffers C. Yards Abutting a Planned Street. Yards abutting a right-of-way designated for a planned public street shall (D Street as Swift Street Extension) have a minimum setback equal to the front setback requirement for the district in which the lot exists, unless the yards abut any of those streets listed in above, in Section 3.06.B in which case the minimum setback shall be fifty (50) feet from the edge of the planned right-of-way. With the assumption that the reference to "Swift Street" also means Sift Street Extension, the applicant seeks a waiver for Cottage buildings 7-1 thru 7-5 (to S ) and residential lots #21 and #22 (to 10 ) and Commercial Lot #1 (to 20 ) to achieve the goals set forth in the SEQ district guidelines. Southeast Quadrant District Section Title Description & Reason 9.07 Dimensional Standards - In the Southeast quadrant District, all requirements of Article XXV governing lot size, density, frontage, and setbacks shall apply. The request is to waive the following requirements: A. Minimum radius of curves for Local streets from 200' to 40' Appendix Table C-2 Dimensional Standards - The fbllowing waivers are requested to allow greater interaction between the proposed buildings in support of enhancing the fabric of the neighborhood. A. Single Family Minimum Lot Size from 12,000 SF to 11,000 SF. - B. Single Family Max. Building Coverage from 15% to 42%. C. Single Family Max. Lot Coverage from 30% to 60%. D. Single Family Front Yard Setback from 20' to 10' (Lots 21 & 22). Rye Associates Request for Waivers Page 2 of 3 May 23, 2013 E. Single Family Front Yard Setback from 20' to 5' (Cottage Units 7-1 thru 7-5). F. Single Family Rear Yard Setback from 30' to 20' (Cottage Units 7-6 thru 7-10). G. Multi -Family Max. Building Coverage from 15% to 50%. H. Multi -Family Max. Lot Coverage from 30% to 65%. I. Multi -Family Front Yard Setback from 20' to 10'. J. Multi -Family Rear Yard Setback from 30' to 5'. K. PUD Lot Coverage to Exclude City Recreation Paths 9.09 SEQ-VR Sub -District; Specific StandardsDimensional Standards (A)(2) Interconnection of Streets (a) Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 400 feet. Applicant seeks waiver to reflect minimization of street intersections on future collector road (D Street). 9.10 SEQ-VC Sub -District; Specific Regulations (1) Development blocks. Development block lengths should range between 200 and 300 linear feet; see Figure 9-2 for example. Blocks 300 feet or longer must include mid -block public sidewalk or recreation path connections. The applicant seeks a waiver from the absolute values to reflect eh commercial use of multiple existing or new streets for access and the inclusion of a "mid" block pedestrian connector. (2) Interconnection of Streets (a) Average intersection spacing shall be 200 to 300 feet. The applicant is not proposing any new streets within the district. D. Design Standards for Non -Residential Land Uses in the SEQ-VC Sub - District (3) Building Setbacks. New buildings with commercial uses must be built to a `build -to line' established no less than fifteen feet (15') and no more than twenty feet (20') from the edge of the curb. The area between the building and the curb shall provide for convenient pedestrian access via sidewalk or recreation path; see Section 9.10(C)(1) above. Parking is prohibited between the building and the sidewalk. Applicant seeks a waiver for all of the commercial lots as this will conflict with the requirements of section 9.11(B)(2). Applicant proposes that the Build -to line" be referenced to the edge of the proposed sidewalk and not the curbing or edge of pavement of Hinesburg Road. The applicant also seeks a waiver of this standard for Commercial Lot#3 as it would require the likely removal of existing trees to accommodate this requirement. Rye Associates Request for Waivers Page 3 of 3 May 23, 2013 The applicant also seeks guidance as to whether the DRB wants the buildings oriented to Hinesburg Road or to C Street. 9.11 Supplemental Standards for Arterial and Collector Streets A. Setbacks. The minimum front setbacks from Dorset Street, Old Cross Road, Nowland Farm Road, Hinesburg Road, Swift Street, Swift Street Extension, and Old Cross Road Extension, shall be as set forth in Section 3.06(B) (1) and (2) of these Regulations. B. Building Orientation along Arterial and Collector Streets. (1) New developments with frontage on Dorset Street, Old Cross Road/Nowland Farm Road, or Swift Street, or which have the potential to include frontage along Swift Street Extension or Old Cross Road Extension, shall maintain a setback of twenty feet (20') from the edge of the planned right-of-way. The applicant seeks a waiver for the placement of the cottages 7-1 thru 7-5from D Street (part of Swift Street Extension). The rights -of -way for this street is 80 feet which exceeds the 60 foot design standard for collector roads in Table 1 S-1 Street Design Standards(1). (2) New developments with frontage on Hinesburg Road shall maintain a setback of forty feet (40') from the edge of the planned right-of-way. The applicant seeks clarification and a possible waiver from this requirement as it runs counter to the requirements set forth in 9.10(D)(3) where the building needs to be set within 20 feet of the edge of the curbing. Although there is no specific figure for commercial uses setback from Hinesburg Road, Figure 9-13 provides guidance on how the residential buildings are to be setback from the future rights -of -way of Hinesburg Road. The conceptual commercial design complies with this layout. Planned Residential Developments Section Title Description & Reason 15.12 General Standard - Planned Residential Developments shall meet the requirements of the South Burlington Subdivision Regulations. Request to waive the following requirements of Table 15-1 of the Land Development Regulations : (D)(4) — Applicant seeks waiver for the completion of D Street to the west end of the strip of land in which an offer of dedication was previously offered to the City by a different property owner and extending the roadway would require the construction of a cul-de-sac that would provide little if any use as A Street provides a ready circulation pattern for users of D Street. Rye Associates, LLC Infrastructure Improvements Estimate of Probable Construction Costs 23-May-13 Item Description General unit Qty Unit Price- $2,140,767 ! $2, 140,767 $3,000 Total Us LS Acres 6.0 % 1.0 % 5.21 $128,446 _ $21,408 $149,854 1 Mobilzation & DemoblllzBtlon 2 Sediment 3 4 5 Performance & Payment Bonds & Erosion Control Strip & Stockpile Topsoil I Laydown Areas Construction Entrances $15,611 LS 1 $12,500 $12,500 LS 1 $7.000 $7,000 6 Drainage Inlet Protection FA 27 $150 $4,060 7 4" Sad. Basin Floating Skimmer EA 1 $1,500 $1,500 8 InspectIon/Reporting Requirements LS 1 $4,000 ,0 00 9 All Remaining EPSC Measures LS 1 76,514 $76,614 121.176 Water 10 Water Connection (TS&V) - North LS 1 $5,600 $5,500 11 Water Connection (TS&V) - South LS 1 ,500 $4,500 12 Jack & Bore - North LS 1 20,000 $20,000 13 8" Water Main LF 3,002 5 $135,090 14 8" Gets Valve FA_ 9 1,300 11,700 15 B" Water Service __ LF 170 35 5,950 16 17 18 19 20 21 I e- 22�68S.wer 23 24ewer 24' 6" Gate Valve EA EA LF EA SY _ 9 5 1,660 - 42 300 _._ 1 Qty - 2,0T0 300 1,3D0 11,700 Fire Hydrants 3/4" Copper Water Service 3/4" Water Service Corp & Curb Stop Type I Insulation (2" Thick) All Remaining Water Installations Description r Service - Service - Sanitary Manholes - 3,400 77,000 25 $41,500 350 $8 14,700 $2,400 _ LS - Unit LF LF 10,500 10,500 $260__. ,540 Unit Price Total 5 93,150 $45 $13,500 LF EA _ 1,020 9 0 0,800 3,500 _ _ ___ 31,500 25.All Remaining -Sewei o _ $193,950 Road _ 26'FilterFabric _27 BY 9,612 $1 $9,612 27 Borrow 12" Road Base CY CY 3,000 3,204 20 $28 60,000 $89,710 28 6" Road Subbase CY 1,6021 $48,059 28 2.5" Base Course Paving Tons 1,322 95 125,554 29 29 30 30 31 31 32 32 Dainage 33l24" 34.18" 35'15" 36.12" 37'Foundation 1.5" Finish Course Paving 5" Concrete Sidewalk 10" Concrete Sidewalk Recreation Path Grading Rec Path Construction - Complete Site Lighting Pole, Base, Luminaire Concrete Curbing - _ All Remaining Road Work HDPE Storm Line HDPE Storm Line HDPE Storm Line HDPE Foundation Line - -- Dram Cleanouts Tons 1,612 1,604 $95 $153,140 SY 45 1,159 BY _ - 90 54 4,870 LS -- LF _ 1 1,218 _ _ 5 - 6,002 1 -- 752 1,450 1,410 -170 _ $3.600 $3,500- - $30 $36,548 ._. $3,750 $18,750 _ $20 $120,040 - $30,000 $30,000 $780,940 _- - $49 $36,472 $34 $49,300 29 $40,890 $35 5,950 FA - LF _ LS LF LF LF LF EA - 13 $200 _ _ 2,800 38 39 404'Manhole 415'Manhole 42 43 44 _ Eloctncal/Communications 46IETCCom 47�Transformer&Pad-K30.2 48 49 50 51 52 Gas - 53 4' Diameter Catch Basin 5' Diameter Catch Basin _ _ Flared End Sections Detention Basin (SW) Detention Basin (NE) - Remaining Drainage or 9 9 Duct Bank __ ---. __ ILF Transformer & Pad - K30.3 Elec Pedestal _ T, & C Pedestal Installation Concrete Encasement -- All Remaining Electrical Work Piping items _-- -- Coordination Work Control EA EA _ 26 1 2,100 $2,550 _ 54,600 $2,550 FA LF FA LS LS _ EA ._. 4 1 - $2,300 $2,800 _-...-_ $9,200 -_ $2,800 $300 $110,000 $35,600 $30000 $3T9,662 $198 000 $88,000 $11,000 S400 $6,800 $201.000 _ - 5,000 $329,200 - - $3,000 $3,000 - - 1 _ $300- 1 $110,000 1_- $35,000 1 3300, $30.000 $60 11'I $8,000 1'. $11,000 - 1 $400 17 $400- 400 $50_... 1 - $5,000 EA FA _ FA _ LF � _ Ls - -- LS 1 - $3,000 Traffic Hr 400 25 $10,000' 54 Flaggers---__._.__.. __...._- 55 Portable Message Signs FA/Mo 2 $1,400 _ $2,800 56 Permanent Signs and Posts LS 1 ,000 _ -$8,000 57 Temporary Construction Signage_ LS 1 3,500 _ $3,500 58 __ Temporary Pavement Markings LS 1 $1,000 _ $1,000 59 Permanent Pavement Markings LS 1 $32,000 $32,0130 BO Remaining Traffic Control Work LS 1 $5,000 $5.000 _ _ $62,300 _ Subtotal 2,267,621 Contingency 15.0% ,000 Total1 $2,630,600 Rye Associates PUD Preliminary Plat Submittal Requirements (1) Name and address of the owner of record and applicant. On Sheet C-1 (2) Name of owners of record of contiguous properties. On Sheet C-1 (3) Date, true north arrow and scale (numerical and graphic). The preferred scale shall be not mnre than nne huncirPri (inn) feet to the inrh nr not mnre than civty (AM feet to the inch where lots have less than one hundred (100) feet of frontage. On Sheet C-1 (4) Location map, showing relation of proposed subdivision to adjacent property and surrounding area. On Sheet C-1 (5) Boundaries and area of: (a) All contiguous land belonging to owner of record, On Sheet C-1 (b) The proposed subdivision, and On Sheet C-1 (c) Existing zoning districts (boundaries only). On Sheet C-1 (6) Existing and proposed layout of property lines; type and location of existing and proposed restrictions on land, such as easements and covenants. On Sheet P-1 (7) Type of, location, and size of existing and proposed streets, structures, utilities, and open space. On Sheet C-1 (8) Existing water courses, wetlands, floodplains, wooded areas, ledge outcrops, and other natural features. On Sheet C-1 (9) Location of existing septic systems and wells. None — Not Applicable (1) Items (1) through (9) in Section 15.05(A) above (2) For applications including commercial or industrial uses or multifamily dwellings, or applications made as a PUD, all information required for site plan review in Section 14.05 (D) of these Regulations. (1) Legal data: (a) A list of the owners of record of abutting properties, which may be generated by the Department of Planning and Zoning or by the applicant. Attached. (b) Boundaries of existing zoning and special districts on the subject property and adjacent zoning and special district boundaries. On Sheet C-1 (c) Area and boundaries of the property, building or setback lines as required in this chapter, and lines of existing streets and adjoining lots, as shown on a survey. On Sheet P-1 (d) Streams, drainage ways, and associated stream buffer areas as set forth in Article 12. On Sheet C-1 (e) Reservations, easements and areas dedicated to public use, if known, shall be shown. On Sheet C-1 (f) Lot dimensions and survey data, and section and lot numbers of the subject property. On Sheet P-1 (2) General project description: (a) The title of the development, date, North arrow, scale, name and address of the owner of record and of the applicant, if other than the owner, and of the engineer, architect, landscape architect or surveyor preparing the plan shall be shown on a preliminary site plan map. On Sheet C-1 Where the applicant or owner is a corporation, the Development Review Board may require the names and addresses of all officers, directors and principal stockholders of said corporation. The preferred scale shall be not less than one (1) inch equals thirty (30) feet. (b) Such map shall show the applicant's entire property, adjacent properties, streets within two hundred (200) feet of the site, approximate location and dimensions of all existing structures, and location of all existing structures on adjacent properties and within one hundred (100) feet of the site boundary. At the discretion of the Administrative Officer or Development Review Board, the required area of the site plan may be increased. On Sheet C-1 (c) Such map shall show proposed structures, access points, and general internal circulation. On Sheet C-1 (d) Existing and proposed contours at a maximum vertical interval of two (2) feet. On Sheets C-2.0 & C-3.0 (3) Existing conditions: (a) Location of existing structures on the site, and showing all site conditions to remain. On Sheet C-2.0 (b) Location of watercourses, waterbodies, wetlands, floodplains, and floodplain boundaries as determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency or as mapped by the City of South Burlington, watercourses, wetlands, rock outcrops, wooded areas, existing vegetation, and other significant natural features on the site. On Sheet C-2.0 (c) Topographic contours and profiles as needed. On Sheet C-3.0 & C5.0 (d) Existing structures and access points on adjacent properties, including those directly across a public street. On Sheet C-1 (4) Development data: (a) All means of vehicular access and egress to and from the site onto public streets, and all provisions for pedestrian access and circulation. On Sheet C-1 (b) One set of preliminary plans, elevations, floor plans, and sections of proposed structures showing the proposed location, use, design and height of all structures, roads, parking areas, access points, sidewalks and other walkways, loading docks, outdoor storage areas, sewage disposal areas, landscaping, screening, site grading, and recreation areas if required. Plans shall also show any proposed division of buildings into units of separate occupancy and location of drives and access thereto. The commercial buildings depicted on Lots 1 — 4 are shown for concept only and do not represent a proposed structure or approval for the subdivision. (c) The location and layout of any off-street parking or loading areas, traffic circulation areas, pedestrian walkways, and fire lanes. On Sheet C-1 (d) Analysis of traffic impacts, if required by the traffic overlay district and/or the DRB. See Attached Traffic study. (e) Lot area in square feet and acres, and lot coverage calculations including building, overall, and front yard coverage. Outlined on Application Form and detailed further in attached spreadsheet. (f) The location of all proposed waterlines, valves and hydrants and sewer lines or of alternative means of water supply and sewage disposal and treatment. On Sheet C-3.0 (g) Cut sheets for all proposed outdoor lighting within the site. (h) Preliminary grading, drainage, landscaping and 'buffering plan in accordance with Article 13, Supplemental Regulations. A proposed landscaping plan is included in the plan set. (i) The extent and amount of cut and fill for all disturbed areas (see attached earth volume computation sheet), including before -and -after profiles (See Sheet C-5.0 for before and after profiles) and cross sections of typical development areas, parking lots and roads On Sheet C-7.0, and including an erosion and sedimentation control plan On Sheet C-6.0, and proposed locations of sediment sink/setting pond and interceptor swales. (j) Proposed stormwater management system On Sheet C-3, including (as applicable) location, supporting design data and copies of computations used as a basis for the design capacities and performance of stormwater management facilities (Design computation submitted to the State of Vermont are included as a PDF in the CD). (k) Detailed specifications and locations of planting, landscaping, screening, and/or buffering materials. On landscaping plan. (1) The location of all existing and proposed site improvements, including drains, culverts, retaining walls and fences. On Sheet C-1 (m)The location of any outdoor storage for equipment and materials if any, and the location, type and design of all solid waste -related facilities, including dumpsters and recycling bins. The dumpster location for the 4-unit multi family buildings is located on the plans. The Cottage units have connected storage areas for trash and recycling buckets and the remaining units have garage storage areas in support of curb side pick-up. (n) Location and design of all energy distribution facilities, including electrical, gas, and solar energy. On Sheet C-4.2 — Site utility Plan (o) Lines and dimensions of all property that is offered, or to be offered, for dedication for public use, with purpose indicated thereon, and of all property that is proposed to be served by deed covenant for the common use of the property owners of the development. On Sheet P-1 (p) Estimated project construction schedule, phasing, and date of completion. (On application form) (q) Estimated cost of all site improvements. Infrastructure costs are attached. (r) Estimated daily and peak hour traffic generation, and an estimate of traffic generation during the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. See attached traffic report. (s) Finished grades of walls, pavements, and storm drains. On SheetC3.0. (t) Detailed plans of retaining walls, steps, ramps, paving, and drainage structures. On Sheet C7.0 (u) Estimate of all earthwork, including the quantity of any material to be imported to or removed from the site or a statement that no material is to be removed or imported See Attached Earthworks Summary. (v) Location and dimensions of all proposed water supply, sanitary sewerage, stormwater system, and other utility lines and equipment, including connections to existing facilities. On Sheets C4.0 — C4.2 (w) Detailed landscaping plan, including type, size, and location of all materials used and plans for buffer screening and fencing in conformance with Article 13, Section 13.06, Landscaping, Screening, and Street Trees. On landscaping plan and supporting detail sheet. (x) Locations, types, and cut sheets for all exterior lighting. Locations are shown on the Site Lighting Plan (Sheet C1.2). Cuts are in the application package. (3) Plans and profiles showing existing and proposed elevations along center lines of all streets within the subdivision. On Sheet C5.0 (4) Plans and profiles showing location of street pavements, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, manholes, catch basins and culverts. On Sheet C5.0 (5) Plans showing the location, size and invert elevations of existing and proposed sanitary sewers, storm water drains, and fire hydrants and location and size of water, gas, electricity and any other utilities or structures. On Sheet C4.0 — C4.2 (6) Details of proposed connection with the existing sanitary sewage disposal system OF adequate Pr R for. on -site disposal of septic wastes. On Sheet C8.0 (7) Preliminary designs of any bridges or culverts which may be required. Not applicable. (8) The location of temporary markers adequate to enable the Development Review Board to locate readily and appraise the basic layout 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. These have been staked in the field. (9) List of waivers the applicant desires from the requirements of these regulations. Attached. (10) Base flood elevation data for proposed development that contains at least fifty (50) units or five (5) acres, if appropriate. Not applicable as this is located off property. (11) A complete survey of the subdivision, prepared by a licensed land surveyor, showing the location, bearing and length of every street line, lot line and boundary line, and existing and proposed restrictions on the land, including but not limited to access ways and utility easements. Where applicable, this information shall be tied to reference points previously established by the City. On Sheet P-1. F south' Plan Transmittal Form To: Fire Department/ Department of Public Works From: Ray Belair Date Transmitted: 7/26/13 Comments Due: August 23, 2013 Project Description/Meeting Date: Preliminary plat application #SD-13-03 & Master plan application #MP-13-01 of Rye Associates to subdivide an 18.01 acre parcel into 30 lots for development of:1) 36 single family dwellings, 2) four (4) 4-unit multi -family dwellings, and 3) four (4) commercial buildings totaling 20,000 sq. ft., 1075 Hinesburg Road. September 3, 2013 Other Notes: Landscape Review Rye Associates PUD Civil Engineering Assoc. Inc 6/28/13 General Comments 1. To clarify location of tree species either a different symbol or different colors should be used. Shades of gray are to indistinct 2. There are locations where trees are placed right on the curb line(Cottage Units Lot#6) 3. Trees planted where there is no greenbelt should be moved back from the curb a minimum of 6feet 4. Trees should be located a minimum of 6 ft. from the edge of driveways(tree@Lot#9 is planted in the driveway, tree @Lot#8 is right on the edge of the driveway) Species Selection 1. Recommend replacing Amur maackia, Maackia amurensis with a taller species to reduce pruning needs and increase ecological service benefits 2. Lowbush blueberry is a poor species selection for this site. Blueberries require very acidic, well drained soils. The soils on this site are mildy acidic to neutral and poorly drained Planting Detail 1. Should specify that burlap and wire basket should be removed or folded back into the bottom of the planting hole completely off the root ball Required Clearances 1. Recommend moving trees 3-3.5feet from the sidewalk(greenbelts are wide enough so that this won't be a problem 2. This specification will require that structural soils or soil cells be installed for all trees located in greenbelts. Specifications for structural soils and/or soil cells should be included in the construction specs Rye Associates Request for Waivers Page 1 of 3 May 23, 2013 Rye Associates Preliminary Plan Submittal May 23, 2013 Request for Waivers The following waivers are requested in support of the development of a neighborhood friendly roadway system and layout of a traditional village style environment. General Development Standards Section Title Description & Reason 3.06 Setbacks and Buffers C. Yards Abutting a Planned Street. Yards abutting a right-of-way designated for a planned public street shall (D Street as Swift Street Extension) have a minimum setback equal to the front setback requirement for the district in which the lot exists, unless the yards abut any of those streets listed in above, in Section 3.06.B in which case the minimum setback shall be fifty (50) feet from the edge of the planned right-of-way. With the assumption that the reference to "Swift Street" also means Sift Street Extension, the applicant seeks a waiver for Cottage buildings 7-1 thru 7-5 (to 5 ) and residential lots #21 and #22 (to 10 ) and Commercial Lot #1 (to 20 ) to achieve the goals set forth in the SEQ district guidelines. Southeast Quadrant District Section Title Description & Reason 9.07 Dimensional Standards - In the Southeast quadrant District, all requirements of Article XXV governing lot size, density, frontage, and setbacks shall apply. The request is to waive the following requirements: A. Minimum radius of curves for Local streets from 200' to , S Appendix Table C-2 Dimensional Standards - The following waivers are requested to allow greater interaction between the proposed buildings in support of enhancing the fabric of the neighborhood. A. Single Family Minimum Lot Size from 12,000 SF to 11,000 SF. - B. Single Family Max. Building Coverage from 15% to 42%. C. Single Family Max. Lot Coverage from 30% to 60%. D. Single Family Front Yard Setback from 20' to 10' (Lots 21 & 22). Rye Associates Request for Waivers Page 2 of 3 May 23, 2013 E. Single Family Front Yard Setback from 20' to 5' (Cottage Units 7-1 thru 7-5). F. Single Family Rear Yard Setback from 30' to 20' (Cottage Units 7-6 thru 7-10). G. Multi -Family Max. Building Coverage from 15% to 50%. H. Multi -Family Max. Lot Coverage from 30% to 65%. I. Multi -Family Front Yard Setback from 20' to 10'. J. Multi -Family Rear Yard Setback from 30' to 5. K. PUD Lot Coverage to Exclude City Recreation Paths 9.09 SEQ-VR Sub -District; Specific StandardsDimensional Standards (A)(2) Interconnection of Streets (a) Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 400 feet. Applicant seeks waiver to reflect minimization of street intersections on future collector road (D Street). 9.10 SEQ-VC Sub -District; Specific Regulations (1) Development blocks. Development block lengths should range between 200 and 300 linear feet; see Figure 9-2 for example. Blocks 300 feet or longer must include mid -block public sidewalk or recreation path connections. The applicant seeks a waiver from the absolute values to reflect eh commercial use of multiple existing or new streets for access and the inclusion of a "mid" block pedestrian connector. (2) Interconnection of Streets (a) Average intersection spacing shall be 200 to 300 feet. The applicant is not proposing any new streets within the district. D. Design Standards for Non -Residential Land Uses in the SEQ-VC Sub - District (3) Building Setbacks. New buildings with commercial uses must be built to a `build -to line' established no less than fifteen feet (15') and no more than twenty feet (20') from the edge of the curb. The area between the building and the curb shall provide for convenient pedestrian access via sidewalk or recreation path; see Section 9.10(C)(1) above. Parking is prohibited between the building and the sidewalk. Applicant seeks a waiver for all of the commercial lots as this will conflict with the requirements of section 9.11(B)(2). Applicant proposes that the `Build -to line" be referenced to the edge of the proposed sidewalk and not the curbing or edge of pavement of Hinesburg Road. The applicant also seeks a waiver of this standard for Commercial Lot#3 as it would require the likely removal of existing trees to accommodate this requirement. Rye Associates Request for Waivers Page 3 of 3 May 23, 2013 The applicant also seeks guidance as to whether the DRB wants the buildings oriented to Hinesburg Road or to C Street. 9.11 Supplemental Standards for Arterial and Collector Streets A. Setbacks. The minimum front setbacks from Dorset Street, Old Cross Road, Nowland Farm Road, Hinesburg Road, Swift Street, Swift Street Extension, and Old Cross Road Extension, shall be as set forth in Section 3.06(B) (1) and (2) of these Regulations. B. Building Orientation along Arterial and Collector Streets. (1) New developments with frontage on Dorset Street, Old Cross Road/Nowland Farm Road, or Swift Street, or which have the potential to include frontage along Swift Street Extension or Old Cross Road Extension, shall maintain a setback of twenty feet (20') from the edge of the planned right-of-way. The applicant seeks a waiver for the placement of the cottages 7-1 thru 7-5 from D Street (part of Swift Street Extension). The rights -of -way for this street is 80 feet which exceeds the 60 foot design standard for collector roads in Table 15-1 Street Design Standards(]). (2) New developments with frontage on Hinesburg Road shall maintain a setback of forty feet (40') from the edge of the planned right-of-way. The applicant seeks clarification and a possible waiver from this requirement as it runs counter to the requirements set forth in 9.10(D)(3) where the building needs to be set within 20 feet of the edge of the curbing. Although there is no specific figure for commercial uses setback from Hinesburg Road, Figure 9-13 provides guidance on how the residential buildings are to be setback from the future rights -of -way of Hinesburg Road. The conceptual commercial design complies with this layout. Planned Residential Developments Section Title Description & Reason 15.12 General Standard - Planned Residential Developments shall meet the requirements of the South Burlington Subdivision Regulations. Request to waive the following requirements of Table 15-1 of the Land Development Regulations : (D)(4) — Applicant seeks waiver for the completion of D Street to the west end of the strip of land in which an offer of dedication was previously offered to the City by a different property owner and extending the roadway would require the construction of a cul-de-sac that would provide little if any use as A Street provides a ready circulation pattern for users of D Street. l CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby cealfy that this day of 20J3 a copy of the foregoing public notice for ivv type of applica on] #50 I [application number], was sent by U.S. mail, postage prepaid to the owners of all properties adjoining the subject property to development, without regard to any public right-of-way, and including the description of the property and accompanying information provided by the City of South Burlington. I further certify that this notification was provided to the following parties in accordance with 24 V.S.A. §4464(a) and Section 17.06(B) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: List of recipients: (full names and addresses) Dated at<<>(c-ly) 'own/city], Vermont, this Printed Name: Phone number and email: Signature: Date: Remit to: City of South Burlington Department of Planning & Zoning 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 6 day of A*vs -/-; 20 ) 3 . South Burlington Sample Certificate of Service Form. Rev. 1-2012 Rye Associates, LLC Abutters List December 14, 2011 PARCEL ID cont'd OWNER OF RECORD (cont'd Lyndon Scott & Lisa 0686-00016 \16x Run Lane South rlington, VT 05403 0686-00018 r,,Cunavelis Jake ---� ox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01050 A aniel Properties, LLC \ 10 inesburg Road Unit A South B rlington, VT 05403 0860-01050 B&C valanche Development, LLC 35DQrset Lane Willisto , VT 05495 0860-01100 Mountain View, LLC 1100 esburg Road Suite 201 South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01060 Sphinx Development, LLC, c/o Gamal Eltabbakli 3 ills Point Road .� Charlo , VT 05445 0860-10700 Sphinx Development, LLC, c/o �amal Eltabbakh 3 Hills Point Road Char te, VT 05445 0860-01020 Burlington Properties Ltd. 85 dowland Drive South Burlington, VT 05403 1095-00010 CEA Properties, LLC —� Mansfield View Lane So Burlington, VT 05403 2 Rye Associates, LLC Abutters List December 14, 2011 Subject Parcel 0860-01075 Rye Associates, LLC 21 Carmichael St Suite 201 Essex Junction, VT 05452 PARCEL ID 13 OWNER OF RECORD 0860-01035 Iqansfield View Properties, LLC 10 inesburg Road ^� South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01045 ansfield View Properties, LLC 1N Hinesburg Road South urlington, VT 05403 0860-01061 e Arther H & Brisson Bernice R Trust 63 Web Road i Fairfax','VT 05454 1225-00001 B simer Linda M a 1 Oeek Road South Burlington, VT 05403 1225-00002 Frig incent M & Jovina �,.. 2 Oak ek Road South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00006 Kha ulla Mohamed 6 Fox Ru Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00010 Cerr Scott &Jill 10 Fox Lane — South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00014 man Tod H & Kelly M 14 x Run Lane South k ington, VT 05403 Pj theOther Paper • www.otherpapervt.com • August 15, 2013 • 19 SSI*fieds Pubi "'. ........................... ........ ........ ic Notices AFFORDABLE APARTMENTS ines Senior Living Community in South Burlington offers 1 & 2 bedroom apartments. Rent includes all utilities. Optional living and health services. Community tour everyWednesday at 12:30 p.m. 865-1109 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT tistrative Assistant to Children's Sunday School program !d (5 hrs a week; $17/hr) to maintain schedule of volun- , update lists and contact information for children and �s, disseminate on-line resources and regularly commu- vith parents concerning church activities and events. For scription of responsibilities, please contact the church lice at (802) 985-2269 or info@trinityshelburne.org. DRIVERS .reight is hiring FT Casual Combo Drivers/Dock Workers! igton location. Great pay and benefits! CDL-A w/Combo azmat, lyrT/T exp, 21yoa req. EOE-M/F/D/V. Able to lift 65 lbs, req. APPLY www.yrefreight.com/careers oversize tan recliner in great tires (2). $2,200. Call to view, 777-8093. a, $125.00; Gracie Bee Plain Must sell byAugustl3- deposit of$200 Frame used once $115.00; willholdit. (08/01) oil Electric Patio Caddie all: 802-864-0603 1v msg. 2006 LINCOLN ZEPHYR, blue on tan, heated leather seats, roof, power everything. 59k miles, runs great and needs nothing. New rear brakes, new tires, fresh oil change and inspection. Call or text to 802.777.3314. (08/01) brmeau Cover for Regular Cab .coma 2000-2003 $50; Butcher :)le 30 x 47 1/2 with two oak 14 x 48 $350.802-238-8478 FE: Six pieces each approxi- 8 inches by 18 inches, $20. )2 999 0625. (08/15) NE HOLDERS: 6 Lucite hold- .cellent condition, includes n of 74 Gourmet magazines, ie at $30. 865-3959 (08/01) SION KIT: Gently used Lud- ;ussion Kit. Includes a xy- , a xylophone stand, a pair ts, a practice pad that also to the xylophone stand, and drum sticks in a protective k case. Originally purchased llis Music Company for $360. Middle School Band. Asking i1862-1132 (08/08) ING TABLE: Excellent condi- .e only. $80. 999-4328 (08/08) 2005 SUBARU LEGACY STATION WAGON, good condition, 72K miles, asking $7000, call 802-860-0187. (08/08) 2003 TOYOTA COROLLA with Auto- matic, ONLY48k miles! Original owner well -maintained; newly installed serpentine drive belt. Selling price: $7,800. Call Steve 802-399-8950 (08/08) 2004 SAAB 9-3 ARC 4 DOOR SEDAN, Automatic, with power sunroof. 125K miles, very good condition, one owner, includes 2 set of rims —winter and summer rims. Color: Bordeaux Red. $5,000. 802-734-0355 (08/15) Classifieds A service for South Burlington residents. PUBLIC HEARING SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL Please Note Address Change The South Burlington City Council will hold a public hearing at the Chamberlin School, 262 White Street, South Burlington, Vermont on August 19, 2013 at 7:00 P.M. to consider the following: 1. Interim zoning application #IZ-13-05 of Pizzagalli Properties, LLC to amend a previously approved planned unit development con- sisting of: 1) razing an existing 48 room motel (Liberty Inn & Suites) consisting of five (5) buildings on two (2) parcels, 2) constructing a 3-story 31,280 sq. ft. general office building with 45 parking spaces on the southerly parcel, and 3) constructing a 72 parking space lot on the northerly parcel. The amendment consists of: 1) removal of four (4) parking spaces, 2) revising the brick screening wall on the north lot, 3) adding a sidewalk and entry canopy on the west elevation of the building, and 4) minor landscaping modifications, 462 Shelburne Road. Pam Mackenzie, Chair South Burlington City Council Copies of the applications are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall. Participation in the local proceeding is a prerequisite to the right to take any subsequent appeal. August 1, 2013 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 September 3, 2013 at 7:00 P.M. to consider the following: 1. Preliminary plat application #SD-13-22 and Master Plan application #MP-13-01 of Rye Associates, LLC for a planned unit development to subdivide an 18.01 acre parcel into 30 lots for development of: 1) 36 single family dwellings, 2) four (4) 4-unit multi -family dwellings, and 3) four(4)commercial buildings totaling 20,000 sq. ft., 1075 Hinesburg Road. 2. Conditional use application#CU-13-03 of 30 Community Drive, LLC for after -the -fact approval for a`14.5 ft. high chain link perimeter fence surrounding an emergency electrical generator, 30 Community Drive. Mark Behr, Chairman South Burlington Development Review Board Copies of the applications are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall Participation in the local proceeding is a prerequisite to the right to take any subsequent appeal. August 15, 2013 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS to the SOUTH BURLINGTON LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Public Hearing September 3, 2013 PLEASE TAKE NOTICEthatthe South Burlington City Council will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, September 31d at 7:00 PM or shortly thereafter in the Training Room at the South Burlington Fire Station, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlinaton, VT to consider the followinq amend ) CABINET: Wooden with 2 loors, great shape, $35. Call Ads from South Burlington residents for Items for Sale, Free Items, Tag Sales, NSF / \n 11 m �,Rtlr tilC 5'�,'l�.)'' (\ / 1 i l SITE ENGINEER: EXISTING CONTOUR I \ � LEGEND I ` NIF ------336 PROPOSED CONTOUR \�I'\\I \ \\ ' ' ARTHUR H. RYE &; \ , ,' /I Jy��� 0 1�/-0 c IN � 1 � � I I � BURLINOTOP - r l I V[V-TI 1/ti(T 3 Inch = 50 n 'I I BERNICE R. BRISSON _ _ v vv \ 1: PROPERTIES, L -- - - APPROXIMATE PROPERTY LINE •'t a ,V s \ TRUST , CIVIL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES. ING 10 MANSEIEfDV1EWlANE, SOUTH &AiUNGTON, WORM I __ __- - ;i b /'1 90PA64Y3ts FAR em-mrazn ae: ww.o...soom APPROXIMATE SETBACK LINE I & a DISTRICT A ! o a r O IRON PIN FOUND El CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND —SS— — GRAVITY SEWER LINE I l - /,' ACL — — —FM— — FORCE MAIN , , - / ) I, ' I�! CI—D L) W—LAND DRA DSM \ 1 — — W — — WATER LINE / ci _ il� 1PPBOr60 i7 I I & O DISTRICT _ _ DSM — —0E— OVERHEAD ELECTRIC � - - - - -UE — — UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC ` \ SEQ-NR-DISTRICT om �. I SEQ-VC / I I — T — — TELEPHONE LINE I _ �� \O'/ I OWNER: � � v� DISTRICT N " ` ' — G — — GAS LINE Vsv l '1 \ i • \ - - - - - wu NIF RYE —ST — — STORM DRAINAGE LINE `` ` 1 - AO _t+�( \ \ II SPANIEL /'� Q3 SEWER MANHOLE 39g v\\ AV SPANIEL PROF NC TRIG , II( i I LtC ASSOCIATES 1 ® STORM MANHOLE \pap\ \\ /� I �' �' '% AND roc HYDRANT ` / ' •' : • I I j AWANCI' 25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 207 ® SHUT-OFF I \\ \\ \ •'\ \ / o- t•. •,. "• I I / •o., WILLISTON, VERMONT05495 POWER POLE I ( \`V A A A\ -" //' - --'_a° •!?g?�• r I I i1 , / ,�P- E� Jg) ) \ \ \ \ ) \ \ / •,�• �---CURRENT VC W, GUY RE I \ \ \ \ \ \\ \o // •• /WETLAND/ I DISTRICT '• \ ( I / _r J �� T_ - I PROJECT: i / ®® CATCH BASIN ISA MR) LIGHT POLE v I A 200 I I I r ! PH RYE SIGN , r' y I g I o \iOP ' ASSOCIATES G� DECIDUOUS TREEI( CONIFEROUS REE , „ G „„ , II LL PLANNED UNIT I -- OF BRUSH/WOODS 7y I `� \ � 'o - l I I Tim — EDGE '( I � � I '0 DEVELOPMENT 1 �A r Il l I A I II I I J _.—.—.— FENCE DRAINAGE SWALE \ i 1075 HINESBURG RD. / PROJECT BENCHMARK v ` I po // �/ SOUTH BURLINGTON VERMONT $ \ $ v '< go AA" — �- 1 NIF L T \ n \ I CITY OF I / S. BURLINGTON I es\ o \`\ a ' I - I ` ` a v ' \ ,a.i —= —1 r 1 & (3 DISTR T �c -bi-- o /,, I V v`v v / vv �II _A LOCATION MAP r x000 \ � 7 / i pOI,a snxc sxx` ' I I \ 1 // xan cHdcno xsv�on IIII I i.u.ls xs�/�a s�rcx run suxxn'uc •\ • � o I I ass.ls xsrAa exxwo<+exr run som¢rrei i o `v N/ F � 1 EAST D(�C4� \ \\ II OUNTAIN 0 ? I I VIEW, LLC - 1 r � - \ �.\ I I,I --'__4p'`,DD_' II I EXISTINGI� \'9'KHA\\ \ A _CONDITIONS X RSITE PLAN NF-' f I a I II n.rx "unsex C&4 FIROJ?ERTI DEC., 2011 \ NIF I I NIF I Nl I /� NIF �' LOU _ CUNAVEL/S /B S LYNDO LYMAN CERRET / / I N/F I + NIF I CITY OF I I # I - 50' M PZ 8 S/MER p I _ _ FRIGO I S. BURLINGTON 1 i I 11202 0 - � I I 11202 SITE ENGINEER: GRAPHIC SCALE k 'NIF Nif 1 1, 4 BURLINOTON ARTHUR H. RYE & ('IN FEET) /I ( � I BER I NICE R. BRISSON i inck. 50 tt. PROPERT18, LTD. `129 GALL ENGINEIIIING AMOCIATEL INC. TRUST 10MUSMI)VEWLAAE, SOUTH&ALME)k VF 05M cum—c V 2o" —7 - E —I �5P�HASf I P o��E I ------ ACL +4 8+ D 6+ —te4+ 00 0 2+00 + t o ot -D MWOWLAND DRIVE DSM N, 4 412 DSM 411— LOT #21 OWNER: MAC Imlm. 'Ell 41a 1 4 NIF RYE COrrA - G—HE SPANIEL PROPER TIE� 398- 9 LLC ASSOCIATES, INC 09 0 10410.) L T AND 7- MNCHE t �AA kl 1 25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201 T* �10 . — - — / 1 . 1 0 1 1 WILLISTON VERMONT 05495 119> ----___ -----_______ ------ ExisnNG PROJECT: /WE - -, v i T 40 10, CLAS )to 2 0 RYE 1126AM Ac&A Lts Am H 408-14 ASSOCIATES _'' —�,z I `� I �e PLANNED UNIT -196 LOT#18 DEVELOPMENT - ------------------------ FF 40 1075 HINESBURG RD. COAP&RIM& III SOUTH BURLINGTON I LO LOT 71 #2 VERMONT �2. LOTMom A PA M I \ I 51 7 5-2 \4,4 —9 OT# ACI mm 4 sm T#2 NIF To 40t CITY OF IT S. BURLINGT( -1K 01 �► ,- LOCAVON MAP I- - 2000 j %up NIF EAST fOUNTAIN VIEW, LLC k GRADING & 9 4 N,A - 75� DRAINAGE RIF L 0 Or kp I FOX RUN LANE SITE PLAN IN DAU DEC., 2011 NIF NWIP 7 NIF - = ' MP3 CUNAVELIS ;IB,: LYND NIF CITY O50 F 1 ' FRIGO S. BURLINGTON: PROI, NO. ---1 11202 I t I GRAP H, SCALE CWD Specifications: I I SITE ENGINEER: All work to be performed in accordance with the I Specifications and Details for the Installation of Water I f _ N/F lines and Appurtenances for all Water Systems Owned N/F - -- -- .- — ------------ --- by the Champlain water District, the City of South B(IRLINGTON ARTHUR H. RYE & Burlington, Colchester Fire District #1 and the Village of r In.n - so n- Jericho. Details should be modified to the above PROPERTIES LTD. INSTALL VALVE&GAP BERNICE R. BRISSON _ _ _ _ ' reference specifications. FOR FUTURE CONNECTION specifications.I I CIVIL ENGINEEIDNG ASSOCIATES INC- TRUST NEW SMH as II (N I 10MANSFIEID WEIII SOUINBLRUK110N VT 05Nd LI" STREET LIGHT er p s 7 E11 P EI -- -- -- -- DRAM a A�ft ACL W9+4 . 2 a; 00 � 00 �- - 7+00 STRE_FET D a+00 — I 5+ o a+00 _ s+00 2 00 & t G *� �I o 0o I I� 6 i Cie — T m WATER MAIN I WLAND DRIVE DSM NEW 8• D.1. — — — I APPsovw WATER MAIN t i' - --__- �, NEW E&VAAPPING 0.2---- ; -- --- - -- -- - -- — — �_ - - - ' SLEEVES VALVE DSM TE.FG_ _,`ETC__0__ G - T LOT #21 „I C ( 6 J I OWNER: Iw I �, NEW SMH lla-- ' I I •� I ii I _ _ _ - - - LOT#22 \ T a 11 I I N/F RYE " I V SD+ I I SPANIEL PROPERT0 '- LLC EW SMH #tt'•'. ASSOCIATES, INC N LOT #. �, I ' 0. T#LOT#2o I I ' ® I� I AND 23 c I S 0.20AC. \--------------- I ' OTgOLgL AVALANCHE 25 OMEGA DRIVE SUITE 201 k I — R _ _ I L _ �' :;yBQr: • I I ELOPMEN , WILLISTON, VERMONT 05495 + NEW SMH p10. a ----WA I MAIN ExisT G I �? :I I _ _ _ _ _ _ PROJECT: WETLAND Dry CLASS III + A _ I (Tm.l I _ — — — — - I oo �' L0� 8 Park I Open Space' I RYE Active Use Area 2.94 ecru% PH X.I I - - _ =}� W j ASSOCIATES �' � rD€1fELOP T, / I SMH PLANNED UNIT _ >� DEVELOPMENT — LLC Lor#1a _ ' a MAx nvr RIM --- - -- 0.'a AC. 9,000 y LOT #25 _. y _ -- -- — -- I 1075 HINESBURG RD. NEW SMH #8 1 _. Mj•�+ o.zeII II DRY 'OF'Ory1 MI 111 II � L SOUTH TON"27- ; VERMONT a27Aa LOT A#1.7am c / MORFAZICIVPAYN I LOT #14 i I I LOT 18 LOT #15 0.23AC. •'• 0.27�. I 0.23AC. I �. I I :: '•':' I - - a�°AcnlJ LOT #27•. • -_ - -- ?I I I I o I 0.2eac. I I fP I : ' '. ' / I sNIF CITY OF — — — — T I I -. _ - I I I IG I X s w 1Pwfrr �- �Q S. BURLINGTON W i �, -- i l NEW SMH M2 I /,------- LOT D� H _ I #29 a I 0.28AC. -a9-- NEW SMH #7 -- LOCATION MAP rtr.� ;' WATER I ST_ f.rl --FtB'— - —I-- 8. o � - ;w — . EXIS Nc _ - - - — 1 ' � LOT #28 DATE CBBCMBO IRnH10N INr T - -- I • • • • 1 ET I n. ° Ili I r.u.Ls DeM/AC1. ssarcx PUN suerrrrAL • `•� • `• : i' ` 6.Sa.13 DSM/ACL Plt�LiNINAsI PLAN 9UBYTriAL N/F j I I I I I 11 I I �I EAST , III — O.SDAC. - : j ; + o7TA i I 10� OUNTAIN I I I 14" I �• I �• LOT VIEW, LLC -- - - 4� LOT N13 LOT #12 0 &1SIN OVETPO I 0.2BAC, I I aseAa I I 1 1 I I I I I I I _ LOT #11 LOT #10 LOT #g I .LOT #8 I I I 0.2s AC. I 0.28 AC. I LOT #4 -. a27AC. _.R027AC NEW 3MH FD N1 'i t . I LC) I — I I ICHALE L /�,,�IX UTILITY nv..ei w NEW 8• D.I. I I I / STREET LH3Fii i WATER MAIN FOX RUN El I LANE I _ P L/ /� 1N t gjI I I I �— --- — —• — — — • NEW 8W TAPPING SLEEVE &VALVE NEW SM f ,IN - I I m I i I DArs DxAIID:c NDlmaa DEC., 2011 i N/F I I N/F I N/ I .e i� orb wiz a MH NEW SMH MS I to I LLC ° x�A CUNAVEL/S IB S LYNDO LYMAN CERRET �� I N/F - I N/F CITY OF I I I 1" = 50' M P4 FRIGO I I PND,. 0 ._ B S/MER I _ _ _ _ ---f S. BURL/NGTON I I I 11202 --- Q' Rye Associates Earthworks Analysis May 6, 2013 The analysis is based upon a digital overlay of the proposed grading over the existing conditions. 5,239 CY Cut Volume 35,461 CY Fill Volume -30,222 "NEAT" cut/Fill Volume (A positive value indicates that there is excess material that needs to be removed from the site.) 10 % Expansion Factor adjustment when Cut material is removed and placed as fill material -29,698 CY Adjusted Cut/Fill Volume Imported Roadway Construction Materials - Collector Road 146 SF of Road Surfaces 2.6 FT Avg Depth of constructed base, subbase and pavement 3,096 CY Volume of Imported Materials Imported Roadway Construction Materials - Local Roads 1 Z3,51 ' SF of Road, Parking Lot Surfaces, Driveways and Curbs 2 FT Avg Depth of constructed base, subbase and pavement 9,149 CY Volume of Imported Materials Imported Sidewalk Construction Materials 29,811 SF of Sidewalk Surfaces and Rec Path 1.1 FT Avg Depth of constructed base, subbase and concrete 1,215 CY Volume of Imported Materials Imported Recreation Path Construction Materials 8,8`33 SF of Sidewalk Surfaces and Rec Path 1.1 FT Avg Depth of constructed base, subbase and concrete 362 CY Volume of Imported Materials Imported Building Floor Slab Construction Materials 8 ,i <%S SF of Building Floor Areas 1.1 FT Avg Depth of constructed base, subbase and concrete 3,286 CY Volume of Imported Materials 7,958 CY Total Imported Construction Materials Basement Excavation Displacement 4,219 SF of Basement Floor Areas 7 FEET Avg Depth of excavated basement below finish grade 8,872 CY Volume of Displaced Materials 16,830 CY Total Displaced Earth (imported const mat'Is and Basement Excavation) -12,869 CY Building Material Adjusted Cut/Fill Volume (A positive value indicates that there is excess material that needs to be removed from the site.) i SF Approximate Site Construction Area -0.4 FT Approximate Change in Finish Grade Elevation to Balance Site Rye Associates Earthworks Analysis May 6, 2013 The analysis is based upon a digital overlay of the proposed grading over the existing conditions. 5,2313CY Cut Volume 3'.�.4E- I CY Fill Volume -30,222 "NEAT" cut/Fill Volume (A positive value indicates that there is excess material that needs to be removed from the site.) 10 % Expansion Factor adjustment when Cut material is removed and placed as fill material -29,698 CY Adjusted Cut/Fill Volume Imported Roadway Construction Materials - Collector Road x1.146 SF of Road Surfaces 2.6 FT Avg Depth of constructed base, subbase and pavement 3,096 CY Volume of Imported Materials Imported Roadway Construction Materials - Local Roads 12 t SF of Road, Parking Lot Surfaces, Driveways and Curbs 2 FT Avg Depth of constructed base, subbase and pavement 9,149 CY Volume of Imported Materials Imported Pipe Bedding Materials - Water, Sewer, Power 1 iLF of Sewer, Water, Storm, Gas, Duct Bank 4 SF Avg Volume of Bedding Materials per LF 607 CY Volume of Imported Materials Imported Pipe Bedding Materials & Displaced Volume- Water, Sewer, Drainage 2.00D LF of Storm Drain 8 SF Avg Volume of Bedding Materials per LF 593 CY Volume of Imported Materials Imported Sidewalk Construction Materials T;.E 1 i SF of Sidewalk Surfaces and Rec Path 1.1 FT Avg Depth of constructed base, subbase and concrete 1,215 CY Volume of Imported Materials Imported Recreation Path Construction Materials 8.8'-3 SF of Sidewalk Surfaces and Rec Path 1.1 FT Avg Depth of constructed base, subbase and concrete 362 CY Volume of Imported Materials Imported Building Floor Slab Construction Materials ;,,t x SF of Building Floor Areas 1.1 FT Avg Depth of constructed base, subbase and concrete 3,286 CY Volume of Imported Materials 18,307 CY Total Imported Construction Materials Basement Excavation Displacement 34,219 SF of Basement Floor Areas 7 FEET Avg Depth of excavated basement below finish grade 8,872 CY Volume of Displaced Materials 27,179 CY Total Displaced Earth (imported const mat'Is and Basement Excavation) -2,520 CY Building Material Adjusted Cut/Fill Volume (A positive value indicates that there is excess material that needs to be removed from the site.) t, SF Approximate Site Construction Area -0.1 FT Approximate Change in Finish Grade Elevation to Balance Site LED AREA LIGHTS - CHALLENGER° MEDIUM (XCHM3) R =tflm, DARK -SKY FRIENDLY LIGHT OUTPUT - XCHM3 k of LEDS Lumens (Nominal) Type L Type Type IFT 3 350 mA 128 9950 10500 12700 e 450 mA U 1 128 12000 12600 15400 3 350 mA 128 "00 10100 11800 450 mA 128 11500 12100 13700 1 ceb'ss�wer- LED LIGHTING TECHNOLOGY US patent 7828456, 8002428 and CAN 2736757 & 2736757 and NIX patent 29631 and ISRL 49679 and AUS 2008312668 and US & Int'I. patents pending SMARTTECTA° THERMAL CONTROL - Sensors in both optical and driver enclosure reduce driver current when ambient temperatures exceed 50°C. Current is lowered in imperceptible 5% increments every 5 minutes until safe operating temperature is reached. EXPECTED LIFE - Minimum 60,000 hours to 100,000 hours depending upon the ambient temperature of the installation location. See LSI web site for specific guidance. LEDS - Select high -brightness LEDs in Cool White (5250°K nominal) or Neutral White (4100°K nominal) color temperature, 70 CRI (nominal). DISTRIBUTION/PERFORMANCE - Type 3, 5 and FT. Exceptional uniformity with full cutoff creates bright environment at lower light levels. Improved backlight cutoff minimizes light trespass. HOUSING - Radiused, rectangular -shaped, aluminum housing with stainless steel or electro-zinc plated steel mounting hardware. OPTICAL UNIT - Clear tempered optical grade flat glass lens sealed to aluminum housing creates an IP67 rated, sealed optical unit. Pressure stabilizing breather allows super -tight protection while preventing temperature cycling from building up internal pressures and vacuums that can stress optical unit seals. Patented integral single -blade heat sink does not trap dirt and grime, ensuring cool running performance over the life of the fixture. Two stainless steel captive fasteners allow easy access to driver. One-piece extruded EPDM gasket seals optical assembly against housing. MOUNTING - Use with 5" traditional drilling pattern. An extruded radius 8" arm is shipped standard and compatible with all fixture mounting configurations. The fixture may also be mounted to 3"-5" round poles using the round pole plate adaptor accessory (RPP2), which must be ordered separately. ELECTRICAL - Two -stage surge protection (including separate surge protection built into electronic driver) meets IEEE C62.41.2-2002, Location Category C. Available with universal voltage power supply 120-277VAC (UE-50/60Hz input) and 347-480VAC. Optional twistlock photocell receptacle is available. Photocell must be ordered separately. Fixture Watts: 350 mA -137, 450 mA -180 nominal. DRIVER - Available in 350mA and 450mA drive currents. (Drive currents are factory programmed). State-of-the-art driver technology designed specifically for LSI LED light sources provides unsurpassed system efficiency. Components are fully encased in potting material for IP65 moisture resistance. Driver complies with FCC 47 CFR part 15 RFI/EMI standard. OPERATING TEMPERATURE - -40°C to +50'C (-40°F to +122*F) FINISH - Fixtures are finished with LSI's DuraGrip° polyester powder coat finishing process. The DuraGrip finish withstands extreme weather changes without cracking or peeling, and is guaranteed for five full years. Standard colors include bronze, black, platinum plus, graphite, satin verde green, metallic silver and white. Meets requirements of ASTM 131171000-hour salt fog and ASTM G1551000-hour Xenon Arc UV tests (supersedes G53 UV6313). WARRANTY - LSI LED fixtures carry a limited 5-year warranty. PHOTOMETRICS - Application layouts are available upon request. Contact LSI Applications Group at lighting.apps@lsi-industries.com SHIPPING WEIGHT (in carton) - 33 Ibs./15Kg LISTING - ETL listed to U.S. and Canadian safety standards. Suitable for wet locations. This product, or selected versions of this product, meet the standards listed below. Please consult factory for your specific requirements. American lnn endfia IP67 C E Ss RMS � A R R A American Made COMPLIANT Funding Compliant Intertek Suitable for wet locations AlProject Name I Fixture Type 04/201 3 Industries- ©013 Am erinnlimmadcaThmughTedmakgp Catalog # I LSI INDUSTRIES INC. �ss�.wer' LED AREA LIGHTS - CHALLENGER@ MEDIUM (XCHM3) LED LIGHTING TECHNOLOGY LUMINAIRE ORDERING INFORMATION TYPICALORDER EXAMPLE: XCHM3 FT LED 128 450 CW UE WHT PCR e-..n.. n:r.rL. 4:.... I In hi Qn— M ..f I cn° nrive Curronl Cninr Tomnorahve Innut Valtane Finish Options XCHM3 - LED .' 3 - Type III LED 128 350 - 350mA CW - Cool White UE - Universal BILK - Black PCR - Photoelectric Control Challenger 5 - Type V 450 - 450mA NW - Neutral White Voltage BRZ - Bronze Receptacle' Medium (120.277) GPT- Graphite FT - Forward Throw MSV - Metallic Silver 347-480 PLP - Platinum Plus SVG - Satin Verde Green WHT - White NOTE: 1 - Photocell must be ordered separately - see Accessories. LUMINAIRE EPA CHART - XCHM3 i Single 1.4 D180° 2.9 D90° 2.5 T90° 4.0 TN120° 4.1 + 090° 5.1 Nate: House Side Shield adds to fixture EPA. Consult Factory. DIMENSIONS ACCESSORY ORDERING INFORMATION (Accessories are field installed) Description Order Number PC120 - Photocell 122514+ XCHM3 HSS - House Side Shield for Type 3 and FT 496128BLK+++ PC208-277 - Photocell for 208V. 240V or 277V _ 122515+ BKS-BO-WM-'-CLR - Wall Mount Plate 123111 CLR PC347 - Photocell 159516+ BKA-BO-RA-B-CLR - Radius Arm 169010CLR P0480 - Photocell 1225180+ BKU-BO-S-I9-CLR - Upsweep Bracket for Round RPP2- Round Pole Plate 162914CLR and Square Pales 144191CLR FK120 - Single Fusing FK120++ NOTES: FK277 - Single Fusing FK277++ +Factory installed PCR option required. DFK208 240 - Double Fusing DFK208,240++ ++Fusing must be located in the hand hole of the pole. DFK480 - Double Fusing DFK480++ +++Black only. House Side Shield adds to fixture EPA. Consult Factory. 23.1/2" --r 9 1/8° 5-3/8" 2-1/2" —r 5.3ff T-1 / 3-9/16" : - 11-7/16"---- 17 HOUSE SIDE SHIELD (496128BLK) i I L, Project Name _—____—____ Fixture Type 04/15/13 ___ _ _ _ Industries" 02013 A.,*,n I.—d.n—sh,em v Catalog # _ I LSI INDUSTRIES INC. Rye Associates Planned Unit Redevelopment 1075 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT Traffic Impact Assessment Proiect Data £t Study Scope Rye Associates is proposing a planned unit development, hereafter referred to as the Project, on the west side of Hinesburg Road between Meadowland Drive and Fox Run Lane. The Project will include a mix of residential and commercial land -uses. Access to the Project will be provided via a new "Street D" located directly opposite Meadowland Drive and via Fox Run Lane. The scope of this traffic impact analysis includes: a) Estimating background design hour volumes at the Meadowland Drive/Street D and Fox Run Lane/Mansfield Drive intersections on Hinesburg Road; b) Estimating the weekday peak hour vehicular trip generation of the Project; c) Analyzing traffic congestion conditions at the aforementioned intersection; and d) Examining traffic safety conditions in the immediate vicinity of the Project. Background Traffic Volumes Background traffic volumes were obtained from turning movement counts performed at the above two intersections by this office in February 2012. Copies of those counts are included in Appendix A. Accepted engineering practice is to analyze future traffic conditions using what is called the design hour volume or DHV. The DHV is defined as the 301h highest hour of traffic volumes occurring on an annual basis. In South Burlington, weekday traffic volumes are typically higher during the PM peak hour; thus the DHV typically occurs during that time period. Observed PM peak hour volumes were adjusted to DHV's by utilizing traffic data from VTrans Continuous Traffic Counter D061 located on US Route 2 in Williston; that being the continuous traffic counter located on a similar highway closest to this Project. That data resulted in the observed peak hour turning movements being increased by 18% to calculate design hour volumes. The estimated design hour volumes were also adjusted to a future design year of 2018. Typically this is done using growth factors calculated by VTrans. With the most recent LOLamoureux 8t Dickinson May 21, 2013 Consulting Engineers, Inc. Page 1 projections by VTrans now forecasting a -4% growth rate on urban highways over the next 20- year period, zero background growth was applied for the purpose of this study. Copies of the background DHV calculations are included in Appendix B. Project -Generated Traffic Anticipated peak hour trips for this Project were calculated using published trip generation rates'. The proposed land -uses and the ITE land -use categories used include: Land -Use ITE Category # Size Single Family Residential 210 36 units Residential Condominium 230 16 units General Office' 710 10,000 sf Medical Office' 720 10,000 sf The resulting peak hour trip generation estimates are summarized in Table 1. Table 1 - Weekday Trip Generation Land -Use Average Weekday* AM Peak Hour** PM Peak Hour** Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Single Family Residential 343 7 20 20 26 16 42 Residential Condominium 131 2 10 10 9 4 13 General Office 228 26 4 4 3 12 15 Medical Office 361 18 5 5 10 27 37 Total 1,063 53 39 92 48 59 107 * vehicle trip ends per day (vte/day) **vehicle trip ends per hour (vte/hr) The directional distribution of new project -generated trips were estimated by analogy to the existing traffic patterns entering and exiting the nearby Meadowlands Commercial Park and Fox Run Lane. Overall, 75% of new project -generated peak hour trips are estimated to travel to/from the north on Route 116, and the remainder to/from the south. Summaries of background (No -Build) design hour volumes, project -generated pm peak hour trips and the resulting future with project (Build) design hour volumes are included in Appendix C. ' Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 9th Edition A total of 20,000 sf of office space is proposed. It is estimated, for the purpose of this study, that it will be split 50/50 between general offices and medical offices. LDLamoureux Et Dickinson May 21, 2013 Consutting Engineers, Inc. Page 2 Traffic Congestion Levels of service (LOS) at intersections are determined by the average control delay; measured in seconds per vehicle. The methodology for analyzing LOS is established by the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)3. At two-way stop control (TWSC) intersections, the overall intersection LOS rating is determined primarily by the delays experienced on the minor street approach(s). Table 2 details the LOS criteria for unsignalized intersections. Table 2 - Unsi�nalized Intersection LOS Criteria LOS Avg. Delay LOS Avg. Delay A <10 D <35 B <15 E <50 C <25 F >50 It should be noted that TWSC intersections located on high -volume major roadways often experience long delays on the side street left -turn and through movement(s). This is because those movements have the lowest priority, and must yield to the major street traffic (which in turn essentially experiences little or no delay). VTrans' level of service policy at TWSC intersections is to maintain a minimum of LOS D on the side street approach(s). Additionally, the same level of service policy does not set a minimum LOS standard at TWSC intersections having very low side street approach volumes (e.g. driveways). This Project's impact on future levels of service and average delays was analyzed by performing both no -build and build capacity analyses, and comparing the results of the two sets of analyses. Table 3 presents the results of those analyses. The letter denotes the level of service, and the following number in parentheses represents the corresponding average delay in seconds per vehicle. Detailed capacity analysis output sheets are also included in Appendix D. Table 3 - Intersection Capacity Analyses Results 2018 PM Peak Hour (DHV) No -Build Build Intersection/Approach VT 116/Meadowland Dr/Street D A (9) VT116NBLT VT 116 SB LT A (8) A (8) Meadowland Dr WB LT/TH C (19) D (25) Meadowland Dr WB RT B (11) B (11) Street D EB All I- D (29) 3 Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000 LDLamoureux £t Dickinson May 21, 2013 Consulting Engineers, Inc. Page 3 2018 PM Peak Hour (DHV) No -Build Build Intersection/Approach VT 116/Fox Run Ln/Mansfield View Ln A (9) A (9) VT 116 NB LT/TH/RT VT 116 SB LT A (8) A (8) Mansfield View Ln WB All B (15) C (15) Fox Run Ln EB All C (18) C (19) The above results show that acceptable levels of service will be maintained with this Project. Additionally, we conclude that the peak hour volume warrant for signalizing the VT 116/Meadowlands Drive/Street D intersection remains unsatisfied by the above levels of service and future peak hour volumes. Traffic Safety The posted speed limit on VT Route 116 in the immediate vicinity of this Project is 40 mph. Existing available intersection sight distances at both intersections well exceed the AASHTO recommended intersection sight distance of 445 ft for that posted speed Limit. The VTrans 2006-2010 High Crash Location Report also does not identify any nearby intersections or highway segments as being high crash locations. Additionally, adjacent roadways and intersections in the immediate vicinity of this Project do not have any inherent deficiencies that would create unsafe traffic conditions. Multi -Modal Connections This Project includes the construction of new sidewalks along its VT Route 116 frontage and internally along its new streets. These new sidewalks will link with existing sidewalks located in the adjacent residential subdivision to the south. This Project also includes a new recreation path that will ultimately connect to the City's growing path network. Conclusion We conclude, based on the foregoing analyses, that this Project will not create adverse traffic congestion or unsafe conditions on adjacent roads and intersections. ®FA .V s. CA' '. 0 o: NO.3945 `� LOLamoureux Et Dickinson May 21, 2013 Consulting Engineers, Inc. Page 4 Appendix A Intersection Turning Movement Counts Location: VT 116 / Fox Run Town/City: So. Burlington V ather: Cool, light snow by_ Bill Horton tarnoureux & Dickinson 14 Morse Drive Essex, VT 05452 Groups Printed- Cars & Lt Trucks - Trucks & Buses File Name - Fox Run AM Count Site Code : 00012012 Start Date : 2/23/2012 Page No : 1 ISouthbound VT 116 CEA / VT Eye Laser Westbound VT 116 Northbound Fox Run Eastbound i --r Start Time Left Thru ;Right Peds : App- roar Left Thru Right Peds �P. rme, Left ,� T u j Right Peds . _ �, rwa ; Left Thru Right ( Peds �P r Int I ocaL 07:00 AM ( 1 28� 1 0 30 0 0 0 0 01 0 90 0 0 90 ' 5 0 0 0 5 125 07:15 AM 2 26 3 0 31 0 0 0 0 01 0 113 1 0 1141 12 0 0 0 12 157 07:30 AM 1 29 3 0 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 170 3 0 1731 11 0 0 0 11 217 07:45 AM Total j 3 7 30 4 0 113 11 0 _ 371 1311 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 160 2 533 6 0 0 1621 539 19 47 _0 0 0 0 0_ 19 0 47 218 717 08:00 AM! 5 27 3 0 351 0 0 1 0 08:15 AM 4 22 4 0 30 0 0 2 0 08:30 AM I 1 26 7 0 341 1 0 1 0 10 2; 1 120 154 6 1 0 0 126I 156 J 15 0 0 0 0 15i 177 0 21 0 92 1 0 931 19 13 0 0 0 19 207 0 13 142 1 �_ 0 94 2 0 96 4 0 2 0 6 132 6, 1 460 10 0 471 51 0 2 0 531 658 Grand Total 21 210 28 0 259 ' 1 0 5 0 61 1 993 16 0 1010 98 0 2 0 100 1375 Apprch % i 8.1 81.1 10.8 0 16.7 0 83.3 0 0.1 98.3 1.6 0 98 0 2 0 Total % 1.5 15.3 2 0 18.8 0.1 0 0.4 0 0.4 0.1 72.2 1.2 0 73.5 T1 0 0.1 0 7.3 Cam s u. Trucks j 21 195 22 0 238 1 0 5 0 6 1 976 16 0 993 97 0 Z 0 99 1336 %a au.rrocxs 100 92.9 78.6 0 91.9 100 0 100 0 100 100 98.3 100 0 98.3 99 0 100 0 991 97.2 Trucks & Buses 1 _ 0 15 6 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 17 1 0 0 0 1' 39 % Trucks & Buses 0 7.1 21.4 0 8.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.7 0 0 1.7 1 0 0 0 1; 2.8 Location: VT 116 / Fox Run Town/City: So. Burlington 1 ether: Cool, light snow by. Bill Horton Lamoureux & Dickinson 14 Morse Drive Essex, VT 05452 - ---------- i I VT 116 CEA / VT Eye Laser I _ Southbound Westbound Start Time Left LThruTght_ Peds -Avg. Taa Left Thru Ri ht Peds A L_g_ 1 _L_ Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07.30 AM Northbound File Name : Fox Run AM Count Site Code : 00012012 Start Date : 2/23/2012 Page No :2 T.W Fox Run Eastbound 07:30 AM 1 29 3 0 33 0 0 0 0 01 0 170 3 0 1731 11 0 0 0 11 217 07:45 AM 3 30 4 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 160 2 0 162 I 19 0 0 0 18 218 08:00 AM 08:15 AM 5 , 4 27 22 3 4 0 0 35 30 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 I 1 120 154 6 1 0 0 126 156 15 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 19 177 207 Total Volume I 13 108 —--- 14 ----- 0 135 0 - 0 3 ---- 0 3 — i 1 604 12 - ---- 0 --- 617 � 64 0 0 0 64 819 % App. Total PHF 1 9.6 _.650 80 .900 10.4 .875 _.006 0 .912 0 .000 0 .000 100 .375 0 _ .000 _37b 0.2 .250 97.9 .888 1.9 .500 0_ .000 _ .892 ' 100 .842 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000_ .842�t .939 VT 1`16 Out In Total 6711 135 14 _108 131 Right Thru Left Peds i I I I Peak Hour Data O m� Z..� 0 c North c ',� r---► �---� c I ~ Peak Hour Begins at 07: 0 AM c o o __._i I o ,� LL Cars & Li. Trucks r o W m oir I c Trucks & Buses -------_--.--- w o I - � O I I I I I Left Thru Right Peds i - -- — i _ 108 l_. p— Out In Total VT116 Lamoureux & Dickinson 14 Morse Drive Location: VT 116 / Fox Run Essex, VT 05452 File Name : Fox Run PM Count Town/City: So. Burlington Site Code : 00012012 V ther: Clear, Cool Start Date : 2/22/2012 By: Bill Horton Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Cars & Lt. Trucks - Trucks & Buses VT 116 CEA/VT Eye Laser VT 116 iFox Run Southbound Westbound ( Northbound Eastbound Start Time 1 Left ; Thru 1 Right Peds App. Tatar 'Left _ 1 Thru ! Right Peds App. Taal ! Left ! Thru Right Peds qpp. Total 1 Left i Th_ru FU t ' _Peds ( qpp. Total ' mc. ro a .. 04:00 PM 1. 1 79 16 0 961 1 0 2 0 3 0 42 0 0 42 ' 12 0 2 0 14 155 04:15 PM I 0 93 8 0 101 ! 0 1 3 0 4 0 43 0 0 431 10 0 0 0 10 158 04:30 PM j 0 106 14 0 1201 1 0 2 0 31 1 40 0 0 41 j 8 0 2 0 101 174 04.45 PM ; 0 105 12 0 1171 0 0_ 1 0_ 1; 0 38 0 381 8 0 0 0_ 8 1 164 Total ' 1 383 50 0 434 j 2 1 8 0 11 1 163 _ _0 0 D 164 38 0 4 _ 0 42 651 05:00 PM j 1 133 10 0 144 I 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 49 0 D 491 3 0 0 0 31 197 05:15 PM 0 118 17 0 1351 0 0 0 0 01 1 54 0 0 55 1 2 0 0 0 21 192 05:30 PM i 0 116 21 0 1371 2 0 1 0 - 31 0 45 0 D 45 8 0 0 0 81 193 05:45 PM j 2 65 7 0 74 0 0 0 0 0' 46_ 0 0 46 3 0 0_ 0 31 123 Total ; 3 432 55 0 490 3 0 1 0 4 _0 1 194 0 0 195 - I 16 0 0 0 16 705 Grand Total 1 4 815 105 0 924 5 1 9 0 15 2 357 0 0 359 1 54 0 4 0 58 1356 Apprch % 1 0.4 8&2 11.4 0 33.3 67 60 0 0.6 99.4 0 0 93.1 0 6.9 0 Total % ; 0.3 60.1 7.7 0 68.1 1 0.4 0.1 0.7 0 1.1 0.1 26.3 0 0 26.51 4 0 0.3 0 4.3 Cars & u. Trucks 4 812 103 0 919 1 5 1 9 0 15 2 352 0 0 354 1 54 0 ___4 0 58 j _ 1346 %Cars& U Trucks 100 99.6 98.1 0 99.5 100 100 100 0 100! 100 98.6 0 0 98.6 1 100 0 1000 j 99.3 Trucks & Buses i 0 3 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 _ 0 _ 0 _1_OD 0- 0 10 %Trucks & Buses 0 0.4 1.9 0 0.5 j 0 0 0 0 0 :! 0 1.4 0 0 1.4 0 0 0 0 0' 0.7 Lamoureux & Dickinson 14 Morse Drive Location: VT 116 / Fox Run Essex, VT 05452 File Name : Fox Run PM Count Town/City: So. Burlington Site Code : 00012012 \' ither: Clear, Cool Start Date : 2/22/2012 By. Bill Horton Page No : 2 % 116 CEA/VT Eye Laser VT 116 — Fox Run Southbound Westbound Northbound _ Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rlght LPeds qpp Tnt , Left Thru Right Peds qpp r_yl Left Thru Right iPeds-App. rot.1 Left Thru Right T Peds i App.Tdal IOf. TOiYI rCan nvu, m".11ya,a nvnr U+.vu nvl w uo.40 MVI - r-t Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:45 PM 04:45 PM 05:00 PM 05:15 PM 05:30 PM Total Volume pp. Total % A PHF i 0 1 0 i 0 ! 1 0.2 .250 105 133 118 116 472 887 12 10 17 21 60 714._..0000 0 0 0 0 0 _ 117 144 135 137 533 .925 I 0 1 0 2 3 .375 0 0 0 0 0 .000 1 0 0 1 2 .500 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 5 .000 .417 1 0 38 0 49 1 54 0 45 1 186 .250 861 0 0 0 0 0 .000 0 0 0 0 0 .000 __ 38 49 66 45 187 .850 I 8 3 2 8 21 j 0 0 0 0 0 Q00 0 0 0 0 0 .000 0 0 0 0 0 .000 8 3 2 8! 21 .866-1 I 164 197 192 193 746 .947 " VT 116 Out In Total 209 533 [ 42 60 4721 1- Oi Right Thru Left Pods h'I 1 Peak Hour Data 'NI ~` I( 3 N c I o 2 —► North 2 Si` o Peak Hour Begins at 04:45 PM 0 S T � � = a Cars & Lt. Trucks Trucks & Buses r cn m 0 ! l., I/1 i I I j 41 I f4 Left Thru Right Peds (, 475 L1 7j F-962i Out In Totar, Lamoureux & Dickinson 14 Morse Drive Weather: Clear, 30-40 degrees F Essex, vT 05452 File Name Counted By: Gail & Jody Site Code Lc lion: VT 116/Meadowland Drive Start Date Pi-,sct Number: 12012 Page No rZrnnne PrintaA_ Paawannor \/ahirrlac - Haaw Trurkc R Ruces Meadowland Dr AM Count 12012 2/22/2012 1 - VT 116 Meadowland Drive VT 116 Southbound Westbound Northbound Start Time j _Left ' Thru App. Total >- u- I - Left Ri ht T�otall� - Z 9 I App• �_ Thru Ri ht i A �__i App. Total Int. Total _ 06:00 AM 06:15 AM 18 I 20 12 14 30.1 341 1 3 4 1 6 7 45 54 14 16 59 70 I 93 111 06:30 AM 33 15 48 1 4 5 74 15 89 142 06:_45 AM 44 16 60 , 2 7 9 76 14 90 159 Totals _ 115 _ 57 172 5 20 25 249 59 308 505 07:00 AM 1 22 23 07:15 AM 23 _ 32 07:30 AM 25 31 07:45 AM 48 44 Total 118 130 45 I 6 21 27 ( 93 8 101 173 55. _... 2 7 .9-- 106 ...,. 17..._ 123 187 56 I 1 7 8 153 8 161 _. - -.. ..-- 92 2 2 4 167 12 179 275 I 08:00 AM 30 43 73 0 �- 3 3 143 9 152 228 08:15 AM 311'?," I 37 68 2 _. 8 0 10 158 {o 2 ' 13 ; rL .171 249 08:30 AM 21 41 62 2 2 4 78 3 81 147 08-.45 AM 14 31 45 2 3 5 94 _ 9 103 153 Total -- - -66 152 - 248 - -- 6 - - 16 -- -- 22 -- 473 34 -- _--- 507 777 09:00 AM I 9 26 351 1 6 7 64 4 68 110 09:15 AM l 7 47 541 0 2 2 63 1 64 120 09:30 AM I 5 39 44 2 4 6 65 0 65 115 09:45 AM 13 36 49 0 8 8 61 _ 0 - _ 61 118 8 Total 34 148 _- 12 - - -- 3 - __--20 - 23 253 5 258 --- 463 10:00 AM I 3 29 32 I 1 4 5 55 2 571 94 10:15 AM 7 30 37 2 3 5 65 2 671 109 10:30 AM 4 39 43 1 4 5 53 0 531 101 10:45 AM _ 5 38 - - - 43 -- 0 ----3 _ _. __. 3 --71 2 73 119 Total 19 136 155 4 14 18 244 6 250, 423 11:00 AM 5 47 521 3 9 12 52 0 52 116 11:15 AM 5 43 48 5 5 10 56 2 58 116 11:30 AM 8 42 501, 2 13 15 65 0 65 130 11:45 AM, 6 40 46 ____ 0 20 - 20 57 0 57 123 Total 24 172 196 10 47 571 230 2 2321 485 Grand Total i 406 795 1201 39 154 1931968 151 2119 3513 Apprch % 33.8 66.2 20.2 79.8 92.9 7.1 Total % 11.6 22.6 34.2 1.1 4_4 _ 5.5 56 4.3 60.3 Passenger Vehicles 386 763 1149 32 132 164 1937 148 2085 3398 % Passenger Vehicles 95.1 96 95.7 82.1 85.7 _ 85 98.4 98 98.4 96.7 s ---- ------... - ------7--._-.._ ---- - - -- -- - Heavy Trucks &Buse, 20 32 52 22 29 31 3 34 115 % Heavy Trucks & Buses ! 4.9 4 4.3 17.9 14.3 15 1.6 2 1.6 3.3 Camoureux & Dickinson 14 Morse Drive Weather: Clear, 30-40 degrees F Essex, VT 05452 File Name Counted By: Gail & Jody Site Code Lr Lion: VT 116/Meadowland Drive Start Date Pi _,jct Number: 12012 Page No Southbound Westbound : Meadowland Dr AM Count : 12012 2/22/2012 :3 Northbound Start Time ; Left I _ Thru l App. Totals _ Left f — Ric�ht1 App. Total I Thru IRicht1_ App. Total I Int. Total I Peak Hour Analysis From 06:00 AM to 11:45 AM -Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Beains at 07:30 AM 07:30 AM 25 31 56 I 1 7 8 153 8 161 225 07:45 AM 48 44 92 2 2 4 167 12 179 275 08:00 AM 30 43 73 0 3 3 143 9 152 228 08:15 AM 31 37 68 2 8 10 158 13 171 249 Total Volume 134 ----- 155 289 —-------------- 5 20 25 - — 621 42 — 663 ---- 977 % App. Total 1 _ 46.4 _ _ 53.6 _ - _ + __ 20 80 93.7 6.3 __ PHF .698 .881 .785 .625 .625 .625 .930 .808 .926 .888 VT 116 Out In Total _ 641 288 [' e3o E551 134 Thru Left L+ Peak Hour Data O North Peak Hour Begins at 07:30 AM ro i� Passenger Vehicles Heavy Trucks & Buses u, 1 N Oi ---- _ _ �o I I 1 r� Thru Ri$ht j L ... f 180 • 663; 823 —._ . _ _ i Out In Total Lamoureux & Dickinson Weather: Clear, 30-40 degrees F Counted By: Brian/Bill I ation: VT 116/Meadowland Dr F..,1ect Number: 12012 Printed - 14 Morse Drive Essex, VT 05452 File Name : Meadowland Dr PM Count Site Code : 12012 Start Date : 2/21 /2012 Page No : 1 Vehicles -Heavy Vehicles & Buses Ieadowland Drive VT Route 116 Start Time Left i 12:00 PM 1 - - 9 12:15 PM 25 12:30 PM 1 14 12:45 PM i 20 Thru i App. 54 46 36 52 Total j 63 1 71 50 721 Left 1 3 2 3 0 Right 34 17 18 5 Ap . Total I 37 19 21 5 Thru : 48 42 41 54 Right I App_ 3 6 2 3 Total I _-Int. 51 48 43 57 Total 151 138 114 134 Total 68 _ _ 188 2561 8 74 821 185 14 199 537 01:00 PM j 21 50 71 0 7 7 46 2 48 126 01:15 PM 1 19 45 64 1 6 7 I 43 1 44. 115 01:30 PM 7 43 50 2 10 12 1 69 2 71 133 01:45 PM j 6 50 56 ! 2 5 7 i 36 2 38 101 Total 53 188 241 5 28 _ 33 194 _ _ 7 _ 201 -- 475 02:00 PM 10 46 56 3 9 121 52 0 521 120 0215 PM 16 68 84 i 1 12 131 56 2 58 j 155 02:30 PM 14 64 78 1 10 29 391 40 2 42 ! 159 02:45 PM 11 72 83 i 5 22 271 47 2 49 159 Total ', - 51 250 301 j 19 72 91 195 6 201 ! 593 03:00 PM 8 59 67 ; 5 32 37 ! 66 1 671 171 03:15 PM 10 58 68 i 8 23 31 1 63 6 69 j 168 03:30 PM 03:45 PM 10 10 75 85 6 7 39 20 451 50 70 1 1 51 71 181 - -- -87 - ---97 -- _ _ . ----271 -- ---- 195 Total 38 279 317 26----- 114 14Q 249 9 258 ! 715 04:00 PM 6 95 101 11 39 50 53 0 531 204 04:15 PM 1 4 81 851 7 16 231, 56 1 57 165 04:30 PM j 4 120 1241 13 60 73 54 1 55 252 04:45 PM ! 3 110 113 1 3 26 291 63 3 66 208 Total 17 17 406 - 4231 34 141 _ 1751 226 5 A ii 829 05:00 PM 7 134 141 1 19 43 621 53 0 53 256 05:15 PM 4 123 127 ( 8 16 241 63 1 64 1 215 05:30 PM 1 113 1141 2 25 271 53 2 55 196 05:45 PM 4 88 921 2 17 19 i 43 1 44 155 Total 1 16 458 4741 31 101 13211 212 4 216 11 822 Grand Total i 243 1769 2012 ; 123 530 6531 1261 45 1306 3971 Apprch % 12.1 87.9 18.8 81.2 ! 96.6 3.4 Total % 6.1 44.5 50.7 ! 3.1 13.3 16.4 31.8 1.1 32.9 Passenger Vehicles I 219 1741 1960 j 122 510 632 1 1215 41 1256 3848 Passenger Vehicles ; 90.1 98.4 97.41 99.2 96.2 96.8 96.4 91.1 96.2 96.9 _ Heavy Vehicles & Buses " 24 28 52 _ 1 - 20 - 21 46 4 50 123 % Heavy Vehicles & Buses 9.9 1.6 2.61 0.8 3.8 3.2 3.6 8.9 3.8 3.1 Lamoureux & Dickinson Weather: Clear, 30-40 degrees F Counted By: Brian/Bill I itiom VT 116/Meadowland Dr Pivject Number: 12012 14 Morse Drive Essex, VT 05452 File Name Meadowland Dr PM Count Site Code 12012 Start Date 2/21/2012 Page No :3 Southbound Start Time Lefty Thru I 1 Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 ---- _._8pp _Total PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM 04.30 PM 4 120 124 04-45 PM 3 110 113 05:00 PM 7 134 141 05.15 PM 4 123 127 Total Volume 18 487 5 65�j % App. Total 3.6 96.4 ; PHF .643 .909 .89 ! Meadowland Drive I VT Route 116 Westbound i Northbound eft I JA.�t _8p p_Total Th uj Ap 19tal In t. Tot— 13 60 731 54 1 55 252 3 26 291 63 3 66 208 19 43 621 53 0 53 256 8 16 241 63 164 215 943 145 18-6� 3 5 238 931 ?.9 77.1 97.9 66 .604 -2.1 .417 .902 �O9 VT Route 116 Out In Total 378 —5 1--8-831 1-8" Thru Left Peak Hour Data 0 North 0 A Peak vsatb4.36 M 0 Passenger Vehicles '5i 1 Heavy y Vehicles & Buses C�D 01 Thru Right 2331 5. 2381 - 768 1 Out In Total VT Route 116 DHV Calculations LAMOUREUX & DICKINSON CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES PROJECT / TOWN: Hcinsbur0 BY: C.Day PROJECT #: CHECKED:.' + d INTERSECTION: VT 116 & Meadowland Drive COUNT DAY/DATE: L&D 4-5-13 AM/PM?: PM (4:45 - 5:55 pm) ENTER DHV ADJ. FACTOR: 1183/1002 = 1.181 ( 0)( 487)( 18) KEY ENTER GROWTH FACTORS: [ 0 ] [ 575 ] [ 21 ] ( ) OBSERVED PEAK AREA 'TYPE = Rural P/S { 0 } { 575 } { 211 HOUR VOLUME BASE YEAR 2013 = 1.00 iC 2013 DHV FUT. YEAR 2018 = 1.00 { } 2018 DHV ( 0)[ 0 ] { 0} 70 ( 0)[ o]{ 014 ( 0)[ 0]{ 01 tA K ( 145 ) [ 171]{ 1711 E( 0)[ 0]{ 01 IL ( 43)[ 51]{ 511 T T K T 71 T ( 0)( 233)( 5) T [ 0][ 275][ 61 NORTH { 0 } { 275 } { 61 TOTAL APPROACH VOLUMES: YEAR WEST EAST NORTH SOUTH COUNT ( 0) ( 211) ( 883) ( 768 ) 2013 [ 0 ] [ 249 ] [ 1042 ] [ 907 ] 2018 { 01 { 249 } { 1042 } { 9071 4/5/2013 LAMOUREUX & DICKINSON CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES PRU]E[7'/TOVVN: HenSburg BY: [Dav PROJECT #: CHECKED: INTERSECTION: �7 116 & Fox Run Lane COUNTDAY/D/TE: LQJJ 4-5-13 AM/PM?: PM(4:45'5:55pm) ENTER DHVADJ.FACTOR: 1183/1002 = 1.181 60}[ 472\/ 1KEY ENTER GROWTH FACTORS: [ 71]F 5571 OBSERVED PEAK ARLATYPE =RuralP/S / 71 l{ 5571/ 11 HOUR VOLUME Ile 40 1k K / ( 21 )| 25l{ ZSl 71 2 \[ Jl { 21 � 0\1 Ol{ 01-+ O>[ 01/ Ol ( 0 \ 1 U l / 0 l v Ae / 3 ) [ 4 ] { 41 � 11816 ) / O 41 [ 1 } [ 220 l [ 0 NORTH U{ 1 l/ 220 l/ 01. TOTAL APPROACH VOLUMES: YEAR WEST EAST NORTH SOUTH COUNT / 82\ ( b) ( 742) ( 662l 2013 [ 97 l [ 7l | 876l [ 782 l 415/2013 LDLAMOUREUX & DICKINSON Consulting Engineers, Inc. 14 Morse Drive Essex junction, VT 05452 Tel: (802) 878-4450 / Fax: (802) 878-3135 iii: LDengineering.com Project Project No. "f Sheet No. of Calculated by Date r Checked by !Q Date > € e~ Scale Vermont Agency of Transportation Technical Services Division Monthly Summary of Continuous Traffic Count Data SfaUon PeD041 Location Williston: US2 0.2 mi E of Industrial Av Hours of Day Dafe 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13- 1,17 15 14 17' 18 19 20 21 22 23 Daily total OVOII12 Wed S2 16 11 14 30 80 127 336 548 714 720 717 825 940 900 782 881 925 819 496 359 209 160 110 10771 02/02112 Thu 43 24 12 20 36 101 105 333 603 721 606 687 761 920 825 853 899 1019 881 519 393 256 1S7 132 10906 021D3112 Fri 63 32 13 18 33 87 117 316 584 709 654 804 903 1029 898 936 1037 1055 934 631 443 315 242 156 12009 02104/12 bat 96 35 23 34 24 60 78 98 190 343 429 686 873 932 935 919 805 793 642 510 338 249 191 142 9429 02105112 Sun 79 31 7 23 16 36 55 73 90 160 278 397 542 635 584 591 523 470 391 209 129 107 72 176 5673 02106112 Mon SO 23 7 21 11 102 128 320 S77 740 617 702 845 930 855 836 904 941 833 533 330 201 147 123 10776 02/07112 T. 58 15 11 16 25 78 129 337 611 730 587 669 745 901 813 844 897 892 855 510 376 256 179 98 10632 02108112 Wed 41 21 10 15 38 78 110 327 583 755 594 698 843 930 827 857 865 976 908 549 957 231 165 121 10879 02109/12 Thu 60 30 13 15 14 74 110 320 617 689 631 684 761 890 885 871 906 1111 948 572 379 288 167 314 11139 02110112 Fri 61 38 17 10 24 92 103 323 573 708 665 745 944 1126 985 953 1021 1108 914 614 406 309 278 168 12185 02/11112 sat 149 51 25 24 18 64 61 129 195 313 445 672 843 1002 892 905 84S 741 601 519 349 282 187 141 9453 02112112 sun 88 49 20 13 12 48 54 6S 211 ISO 282 409 590 719 668 711 687 553 453 327 197 138 100 91 6555 02113112 Mon 49 39 9 11 16 107 144 351 602 691 677 702 819 972 915 772 837 988 905 537 365 244 177 98 11027 02M4112 Tue 67 35 19 11 18 98 143 307 632 725 620 723 835 896 857 863 931 1092 930 566 340 249 180 132 11259 02/15/12 ma 74 30 8 17 27 98 117 333 564 736 666 700 865 956 852 789 999 913 907 S09 354 196 164 319 10893 02116/12 Thu 48 21 14 16 20 82 127 374 609 686 620 700 869 931 872 795 892 1007 977 542 342 239 176 130 11089 02/17/12 Fri 81 55 13 16 32 94 104 312 601 684 669 759 934 1062 939 962 1087 1056 997 631 475 309 245 151 M68 02/18/12 sat 164 88 25 20 29 40 51 97 173 299 495 740 945 929 945 904 900 753 648 562 394 300 211 143 9845 02119/12 8w 107 32 16 24 39 57 53 58 84 186 292 493 653 700 804 749 727 590 479 411 246 152 129 8S 71S9 OV20112 Mon 54 35 14 15 15 106 114 271 428 625 609 791 928 1028 918 889 891 950 80B 490 323 202 141 111 10755 0�.1/12 T. 69 24 15 21 29 109 139 344 635 807 693 812 821 966 865 890 940 1D07 924 551 367 263 168 97 11556 "02122112) Wad 67 31 12 13 22 89 125 32S 638 717 603 739 855 996 867 861 890 1002 895 560 368 267 164 107 11225 02123112 Thu 54 21 12 16 20 98 139 343 607 765 673 720 908 993 968 906 966 1023 975 595 358 258 197 13B 11543 02124112 Fri 79 40 21 13 35 98 100 335 610 686 747 792 933 1025 914 878 920 983 85D 534 381 280 222 142 11618 02125/12 Set 102 69 24 30 38 59 90 127 209 302 475 642 825 785 803 818 744 666 598 491 312 246 199 145 8789 02/26112 Sun 93 35 14 25 25 72 58 71 97 163 287 450 612 690 732 621 590 502 456 356 203 119 113 87 6471 02127112 Mon S3 25 9 11 18 92 120 295 560 628 581 710 860 998 837 831 882 901 885 514 284 215 146 102 10547 02/28112 Tue 67 35 16 22 26 96 121 Ill 589 631 191 119 837 911 843 824 686 171 Ill 122 349 241 367 101 10718 02/29112 Wed 55 31 14 16 30 99 119 293 593 643 622 733 839 998 862 900 987 978 875 549 376 232 159 121 11126 Adj Avg 41-F 59 30 13 16 24 93 121 323 589 704 640 727 854 972 877 863 921 996 902 549 368 252 182 123 11197 Avg Sat 128 61 24 27 27 56 68 113 192 314 459 685 872 914 894 886 824 738 622 521 348 269 197 343 9379 Avg Sun 92 37 14 21 23 53 55 67 96 165 285 437 S99 686 702 668 632 529 445 326 194 229 102 121 6463 Adj Avg Day 74 36 15 18 24 82 104 256 462 571 564 680 820 922 854 838 896 893 796 613 340 237 173 124 10261 High Hour 1126 Fri 112/10/12 2012 CTC Summary Seasonal Adjustment 30th Factor Regression #1 High High Site ID Route Town Group Group AADT AAWDT Hour Hour %k P6A018 US7 Leicester 2 C 6200 6600 746 659 10.6 P6A019 VT22A Orwell 2 C 3500 3500 582 427 12.2 P6A041 US7 New Haven 2 C 6800 7300 796 712 10.5 P6A111 VT22A Addison 2 C 4900 4900 721 584 11.9 P6B015 VT67 Shaftsbury 2 C 3000 3100 391 333 11.1 P613026 VT11 Winhall 5 C 4100 4000 834 621 15.1 P613037 US7 Pownal 2 C 6700 6900 876 729 10.9 P613041 VT9 Bennington 2 B 5400 5500 837 571 10.6 P6B282 US7 Shaftsbury 2 C 6000 6200 1015 792 13.2 P6C002 191 Sheffield 4 A 4600 4800 872 680 14.8 P6C007 VT15 Hardwick 2 C 4900 5200 656 549 11.2 P6C015 193 Waterford 4 A 5900 5800 1075 875 14.8 P6CO28 US2 Danville 2 C 6800 7200 910 759 11.2 P6C043 VT114 Burke 2 E 3500 3400 601 420 12.0 P6C309 MCO268 Burke 6 E 1100 1100 487 258 23.5 P6D001 VT127 Burlington 3 B 14500 15600 1631 1545 10.7 P6D040 US7 Colchester 3 B 15200 16600 1910 1777 11.7 P6D059 MCO223 Bolton 6 E 910 800 438 286 31.4 d�6D061' ` US2 Williston 3 B 10700 11700 1313 (118 11.1 ~P6'D091 " 189 South Burlington 3 A 55000 59400 6149 5901 10.7 P6D092 189 Colchester 3 A 30100 32600 3654 3496 11.6 P6D099 1189 South Burlington 3 A 40400 44200 4446 4279 10.6 P6D132 US7 Charlotte 2 C 11000 11400 1307 1107 10.1 P6D530 VT289 Essex 3 B 16500 17500 1862 1767 10.7 P6D531 VT289 Essex 3 B 5500 5900 899 705 12.8 P6E131 US2 Guildhall 4 C 3200 3300 500 407 12.7 P6F029 US7 Georgia 3 C 3800 4100 541 456 12.0 P617096 189 Swanton 1 A 9700 10100 1376 1090 11.2 P6G005 US2 South Hero 4 C 8700 8900 1111 1006 11.6 P6G025 US2 Grand Isle 4 C 3000 3000 559 481 16.0 P6G118 US2 Alburg 4 C 4400 4300 618 535 12.2 P61-047 VT12 Elmore 2 C 1000 1100 174 143 14.3 P61-057 VT108 Stowe 6 C 3800 3400 1178 889 23.4 P61\1002 191 Bradford 1 A 7500 7800 1077 879 11.7 P6N151 US302 Newbury 2 C 7500 7700 1011 835 11.1 P6P004 VT100 Westfield 2 C 2200 2300 302 234 10.6 P6P082 191 Derby 4 A 3000 3100 567 449 15.0 P6P215 US5 Derby 2 C 10000 10900 1694 1113 11.1 P6R001 US4 Fair Haven 1 A 6800 6500 1138 829 12.2 P6R005 US4 Killington 5 C 8700 8600 1498 1073 12.3 P6R017 VT103 Mt Holly 2 C 4700 4900 595 521 11.1 P6R022 US7 Rutland Town 3 B 21500 22800 2504 2169 10.1 P6R054 MC0159 Killington 6 E 4200 3900 1267 852 20.3 P6R084 US4 West Rutland 1 C 13100 13800 1810 1420 10.8 P6R100 US7 Brandon 2 C 5700 6000 684 604 10.6 P6W002 189 Berlin 1 A 21200 22200 3244 2661 12.6 P6W004 VT62 Barre City 3 B 10500 11600 1362 1182 11.3 P6W006 US302 Berlin 3 B 13200 14300 1520 1392 10.5 P6W024 US2 Montpelier 3 B 11900 12900 1450 1326 11.1 9 Appendix VolumeIntersection Movement Diagrams Street D Fox Run Ln VT 116 o Ln r+ r- CV Ln i< y v 0 71 K 171 04 E 0 Meadowland Dr 0 IsI iL 51 T 71 o Ln to N T North St T N r r- Ln Ln le y v 25 71 K 2 0 _ E 0 Mansfield View Ln 0 II IL 4 ft T N N VT 116 2018 No -Build DHV P:\2012\12013\turnfig.gpw 2013-05-21 Street D Fox Run Ln VT 116 r. rn o N i 32 X K 0 0 4 E 0 Meadowiand Dr 11 iL 0 K T 71 01 N O r-I North St + N o iL y v 12 21 K 0 04 0 Mansfield View Ln 4 U iL 0 K T 71 m m o VT 116 PM Project Trips PA2012\12013\turnfig.qpw 2013-05-21 Street D Fox Run Ln VT 116 N 00 N Ln � � y 32 71 K 171 0 E 0 Meadowland Dr 11 �I IL 51 � T � rn � kD N North St T N 0 00 00 (D Ln l v 37 71 IC 2 04 E 0 Mansfield View Ln 4 11 IL 4 R T 71 .ZT m o N N VT 116 2018 Build DHV PA2012\12013\turnfig.gpw 2013-05-21 Intersection Capacity Analyses HCS+: Signalized Intersections Rele J 5.6 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: R. Dickinson Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 5/21/2013 Analysis Time Period: PM DHV Intersection: Jurisdiction: South Burlington Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2018 No -Build Project ID: 12013 East/West Street: Meadowland Dr/Street D North/South Street: VT Route 116 Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 275 6 21 575 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 275 6 21 575 Percent Heavy Vehicles -- -- 5 -- -- Median Type/Storage Undivided / RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 1 1 Configuration T R L T Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Movement Westbound 7 8 L T 9 R Eastbound 10 11 12 L T R Volume 51 171 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 51 171 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Approach Movement Lane Config v (vph) C (m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service _ NB SB Westbound Eastbound 1 4 17 8 9 10 11 12 L L R 21 51 171 1264 304 757 0.02 0.17 0.23 0.05 0.60 0.87 7.9 19.2 11.1 A C B 13.0 B HCS+: U. )gnalized Intersections Relea )5.6 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: R. Dickinson Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 5/21/2013 Analysis Time Period: PM DHV Intersection: Jurisdiction: South Burlington Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2018 Build Project ID: 12013 East/West Street: Meadowland Dr/Street D North/South Street: VT Route 116 Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 9 287 6 21 584 27 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 9 287 6 21 584 27 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 5 -- -- Median Type/Storage Undivided / RT Channelized? No Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration LT R L TR Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 51 0 171 32 0 11 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 51 0 171 32 0 11 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / No / Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 0 Configuration LT R LTR Approach Movement Lane Config v (vph) C (m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service NB 1 LT SB 4 L I Westbound 7 8 LT 9 R Eastbound 10 11 LTR 9 21 51 171 43 978 1252 227 745 194 0.01 0.02 0.22 0.23 0.22 0.03 0.05 0.86 0.89 0.84 8.7 7.9 25.4 11.3 28.8 A A D B D 14.5 28.8 2 D 12 HCS+: )ignalized Intersections Rele 5.6 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: R. Dickinson Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 5/21/2013 Analysis Time Period: PM DHV Intersection: Jurisdiction: South Burlington Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2018 No -Build Project ID: 12013 East/West Street: Fox Run North/South Street: VT Route 116 Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 1 220 6 1 557 71 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 220 6 1 557 71 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 5 -- -- Median Type/Storage Undivided / RT Channelized? No Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration LTR LT R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 4 0 2 25 0 0 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 0 2 25 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 2 2 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage No / No / Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Approach Movement Lane Config v (vph) C (m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service NB SB Westbound Eastbound 1 4 7 8 9 ( 10 11 LTR LT I LTR LTR 1 1 6 25 954 1325 369 309 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.26 8.8 7.7 14.9 17.7 A A B C 14.9 17.7 B C 12 HCS+: U. )gnalized Intersections Relea ,) 5.6 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: R. Dickinson Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 5/21/2013 Analysis Time Period: PM DHV Intersection: Jurisdiction: South Burlington Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2018 Build Project ID: 12013 East/West Street: Fox Run North/South Street: VT Route 116 Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments _ Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R L T R 1.00 Volume 4 229 0 1 568 80 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 229 0 1 568 80 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type/Storage Undivided / RT Channelized? No Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration LTR LT R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 4 2 37 0 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 2 37 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade M 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage No / No / Lanes 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR LR Approach Movement Lane Config v (vph) C (m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service NB SB Westbound Eastbound 1 4 ( 7 8 9 10 11 LTR LT LR I LR 4 1 6 37 947 1351 362 300 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.12 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.42 8.8 7.7 15.1 18.7 A A C C 15.1 18.7 C C 12 1 Page 1 of 3 ray From: Cathyann LaRose Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 8:27 AM To: ray Subject: FW: Comments on Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road Ray, Here you go. Cathy Cathyann LaRose, AICP City Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 50403 802.846.4106 clarose@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 stuff, 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. /f you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return email. Thank you for your cooperation. From: Justin Rabidoux Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 1:26 PM To: Cathyann LaRose Subject: FW: Comments on Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road Cathy, Here are Tom's comments. I have already met with Dave Marshall and shared my comments with him. Justin From: Tom Dipietro Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 11:45 AM To: Justin Rabidoux Subject: Comments on Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road Justin, I reviewed the plans for the Rye Associates PUD at 1075 Hinesburg Road. The plans reviewed were developed by Civil Engineering Associates and dated May 23, 2013. 1 would like to offer the following review comments: 1. This project is located in the Potash Brook watershed, which is listed as stormwater impaired by the State of Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (ANR). Also, the project proposes to create greater than 1 acre of impervious area. It will therefore require a stormwater permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Stormwater Division. Obtaining this permit should be a condition of approval for the project. 2. The plans indicate that the project will disturb greater than 1 acre of land. Therefore, this project will need to obtain and comply with a construction stormwater permit (3-9020 or individual permit) from the 7/22/2013 Page 2 of 3 Vermont DEC Stormwater Division. Obtaining this permit should be a condition of approval for the project. 3. Provide hydrologic modeling for the project so that potential impacts on downstream structures can be evaluated. 4. Provide information on drainage conveyance for the area downstream of the proposed detention pond and tributary 7 of Potash Brook located to the west. Confirm that this water will not flow into the existing storm drain to the north of the cul-de-sac on Fox Run Lane, or onto properties located to the south. Will additional work/stabilization be necessary in this area to prevent erosion prior to water reaching Potash Brook? 5. Will the existing drainage structure on lot #6 receive increased runoff? Could this structure be reconnected to the new drainage system to prevent runoff from upstream areas from entering the drainage system under Oak Creek Drive? 6. Will the new yard drain #6 on lot #8 send increased runoff to the drainage system under Oak Creek Drive. Could this structure be connected to the proposed project's new drainage system? 7. Confirm that the swale to the rear of lots 8-13 will be sufficiently graded to prevent water from flowing onto adjacent properties to the south. 8. Backflow preventers must be installed on all foundation drains. 9. Please note that the proposed stormwater treatment pond will accept runoff from both residential and commercial properties. Past resolutions by the South Burlington City Council indicate that the "The City shall accept conveyance of and assume responsibility for the following types of Regulated Private Systems that serve exclusively residential development in the City:" (emphasis added). The proposed configuration would prohibit the City, and South Burlington Stormwater Utility, from accepting maintenance responsibility for the pond. 10. The proposed development shows wetlands on the project site. Is the applicant seeking wetland permit coverage from the State of Vermont or ACOE? Section 12.02 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations (LDRs) contains provisions to protect wetlands. The applicant should provide more information on the wetlands contained on the site so that any potential impacts can be evaluated pursuant to the regulations in the LDRs. 11. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance structures on -site. 12. Per section 12.03.F(1) of the City's Land Development Regulations, the final decision should require the submission of record drawings showing pipe invert elevations, drainage structure rim elevation, pipe material, final grading, etc. 13. The final decision should require that final hydrologic modeling be submitted to the Department of Public Works so that this information can be incorporated into the City's watershed model for Potash Brook. 14. The project proposes to send wastewater to an existing pump station located in Oak Creek Village. Has this pump station been evaluated to confirm that it can handle the increased flow from the proposed development? Thank you for the opportunity to comment. -Tom Thomas J. DiPietro Jr. Deputy Director Department of Public Works 104 Landfill Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Phone: (802) 658-7961 x108 Email: Tdipietro(c)sburl.com 7/22/2013 Page 3 of 3 Web Site: www.sburl.com Twitter: @SBPubWorks 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. Ifyou have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return email. Thank you for your cooperation. 7/22/2013 } Page 1 of 1 ray From: Tom Dipietro Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 7:33 AM To: Justin Rabidoux Subject: Comments on Rye Property Sketch Plan Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Green Justin, I reviewed the plans for the proposed Rye Property project located at 636 Hinesburg Road, dated July 31, 2013 with no revisions, and prepared Krebs & Lansing Consulting Engineers, Inc. I would like to offer the following review comments: The applicant should consider including stormwater treatment and control for runoff generated from the proposed impervious surfaces. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. -Tom Thomas J. DiPietro Jr. Deputy Director Department of Public Works 104 Landfill Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Phone: (802) 658-7961 x108 Email: Tdipietro(a-)sburl.com Web Site: www.sburl.com Twitter: @SBPubWorks 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 of or staff, or containing information relating to City business are likely to he regarded as public records which may he 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. 9/20/2013 i I � GRAPHIC ...E SITE ENGINEER: I I N/F! I N/F r ARTHUR H. RYE & l & O DISTRICT M FEET I BURLINGTON 1 1—h - 50 ft. l PROPERTIES, LTD. BERNICE R. BRISSON VT 116IMEADOWLMD DR/STREET D I ! - - GNIL ENGINEERING ASSOGATES, INC STREET D/ A STREET STREET D/ C STREET VTE SUMMARY VIE SUMMARY TRUST VIE SUMMARY ! iI� I 1OUAWFELDWEWLANE, SO MBI1NUNGMN, VT05M 197AADT 593 AADT 790AADT 17 AM PEAK 50 AM PEAK 67 AM PEAK ',.` 1 & O DIS_T_RICT a°sauzsss FAX 66aa9azzrr ..m.»,w.°...aa°, 20 PM PEAK 59 PM PEAK 78 PM PEAK -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - __ - _� -_ _- „- HASE I/ PHASE I oa 1 .c ACL ! Lu STREET D I $ MEADOWLAND DRNE DSM a- -- Arr9oP26 i & O DISTRICT _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DSM S-NRDISTRICT�_1/G' LOT Aft . _ - - _ 29 1 11' C OWNER: ! LOT #. I - T ! I R.O.W I rrt _ _ - _ o.2•AC. aw. I EQ_ i I ,�� N/F RYE _ _ _ COTTAGEUNIT5 TRICT I i I i SPANIEL PROPERTIES ASSOCIATES, INC i� _ I W � II �.�. I I LLC I LOT 111 ! ::.::•: °I I B I AND OTOAC LOa ll A _ ! :•:-':':.• COMMERGAL I AVALANCHE _ - : •: •: •:: •: •: LOT #1 I J ELOPMEN , 25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201 _ 's- - I ►I@l/a%!d e I WILLISTON, VERMONT 05495 .......... - - _ _ - - - uRRENT VC 1 I I EXISTING ! I DISTRICT _ _ _ _ — — PROJECT: WETLAND LINE ° CLASS LOT #24 + LOT #18 Perk / Open Space III ! - _�_ 0.27AC. 0.2eAc. PH X — - - - - - —+ Ate� rea ; use A2.94 6� •9 _ RYE - ... ,� UJI -� � � 1 -DEMOP T ASSOCIATES -- f- LLC PLANNED UNIT LOT#18 I �._ __ - _ AWL - I 0.2E 090 DEVELOPMENT AC. ... •.. 9,.a 1 LOT #25- 0.27AC I I m I1 - - ° ® I 1075 HINESBURG RD. COMMERCIAL SOUTH BURLINGTON LOT #2e I LOr #n I i I I LOT #2 VERMONT 0.27AC o.zeAC. I ! II AC. I lwago cs :. ......... . LOT#14 I 3 -� � _ LOT #16 LOT#1� 0.23AC. LOT#8 I -mm '` 0.27AC. - 0.23AC. I I I !I a7dAG p .c _ 1 LOT#27 I I I :::}'' I 1 ® 1 `— N/F I 1 — L-- _ _ 4, 0 CITY OF I I I _ ••.•.- 11 FoorneNr I S. BURLINGTON 1 -- I I I - I 3.o40u w ! I 1 ----? r — I& O DISTRICT` ! I o.zenc. ♦ II I • � yr r i i I P y LOCATION MAP _ p . ! �. , = 2000 �- LOT #29 T � a 0.27AC. I7 � D — — _ _ i -.. • ° I II Iu nAr9 caEc�u 999vtw6N -- i 1 ! 1.1{.19 IM/ACLa, PLAN 9C®a'1TAL - — 1 N/F 6.2919 MM/ACL PI!¢L•@IAFY PLAN 9u9 n TPRIN T� I ! ! I I li I UNITS li EAST oa �-- \ I orr reG - h I OUNTAIN - - • 0.5T# I �'' I VIEW, LLC I LOT#18 LOT BASIN IWET PO I o.2e Ac. I 0.28 AG. Ac. I LOT#ll I LOT#10 ! I ! ! I CO LOT#4 LL I I 0.29AC I 0.29AC. I LOT#9 I LOT#8 I ! LOT#4 0.27AC. 0.27AC. ^kBAL ) e1 PROPOSED ° I - - - - N/F CONDITIONS 1-F/� 1 KHALEE L FOX RUN LANE SITE PLAN L J! ! I I S - - - -3) A A FOX RUN LN/B STR AUN /MANSVIE TE SS UMMMMARR 2Cz O 80 Y SUMMARY 8oaADr I 280AADT r 1 N F 6A,� I I I I i 25AMPEW 1 25AMPEAK ! 1 TI $, DEC., 2011 N/F N/F 28 PM PEAK 28 PM PEAK 1NIF V LLC ! 1 1 N/ ! 9CA 8 CUNAVELIS IB S LYNDO LYMAN CERRET N/F - NIF I CITY OF I I 1„ = 50' M P 1 FRIGO I 1 I— — B SIMER ___ _ _ _ _ S. BURLINGTON I 1 11202 I — - Survey Notes 1. Purpose of this survey and plat is to a.) retrace the boundaries of a portion of property conveyed to Rye Associates and depicted as "Lot # 2" on Reference Plat A, and b.) depict the subdivision of said Lot #2 into a Planned Unit Development as shown. Note that the bearings differ from Reference Plat A, since it (depicts bearings from Magnetic North, this survey uses Grid North (Note 2) Other neighboring property Imes and buildings shown may be approximate only, and are shown for informational purposes only. 2 Field survey was conducted during 2012 and consisted of a closed -loop treveree utilizing an electronic total station Instrument. Bearings shown are from Grid North, Vermont Coordinate System of 1983, based upon our GPS observations on or adjacent to the site. 3. Iron pipes shown as "found" are typically labeled with inside diameter, rods with outside diameter, unless otherwise indicated. Condition of pipes, rods and markers found are "Good" unless otherwise noted. Comers denoted "Proposed" shall typically consist of I" diameter X 40" long rebar or by 4" square concrete markers, either type capped with aluminum disks stamped "Civil Engineering Assocs. - VT LS 597", and typicslly set flush with existing grade. 4. Land areas (acreages) shown are calculated to the sidelines of existing or proposed streets. - Reference Plat - A. "Lands of Brisson 6 Rye - Subdivision Plat" last revised 12/412D06 by O'Leary - Burke Civil Associates, PLC, Recorded In South Burlington Land Records. 1. Lots 6-13, 22-30 and C1-4 are subject to a 10' wide easement located along the street R.O.W. In favor of Green Mountain Power 2. Lots B-13 and 22-29 are subject to a 20' wide drainage easement In favor of the Rye HOA. 3. Lots commercial 1-4 are subject to a 10' pedestrian easement centered on the constructed walkway In favor of the Rye HOA. 4. 20, wide recreation path R.O.W. located on the south aide of Lots #26, #17 and commercial Lot #1 to be deeded to the City of South Burlington. Legend - SUBJECT PROPERTY LINE - --- OTHER (APPROX.) PROP. UNE - BUILDING SETBACK ------- - ZONING BOUNDARY IPFO IRON PIPE FOUND IRF / CRF O IRON ROD / CAPPED ROD FOUND CMFQ CONIC. MONUMENT FOUND IRP ED CAPPED IRON ROD PROPOSED 9 CONIC. MONUMENT PROPOSED AG / BG ABOVE / BELOW GRADE RECEIVED FOR RECORDING IN THE LAND RECORDS OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT, AT O'CLOCK ON THE _ DAY CIF . 20_. ATTEST: CIFYCLERK APPROVED BY RESOLUTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT, ON THE _ DAY OF 20_ SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF SAID RESOLUTION. SIGNED THIS _ DAY OF 20. BY , CHAIRPERSON A.H.Rye& I & 0 DISTRICT B. R. Brisson Trust V. 529 P. 488 III I N82.51.35"E I L fryer-- -- -- - 1048.15'-- - B. R. Brisson Trust Z to avaacTlo basrwo avca o76®a noN ROAD R.O.W.o II 8)QOr (STING NaMlOFDEDN STREET D 1.92AC Flo_ 582.51.35 t - 58251'35"- _ _ - S8251 3.`,w - _ _ 1 & Q STRICT _ 58? 51 5'�'W j _ - Sa2'S1'35"W - - 151.15' - W - Ss szso' 310.00' SEQ-NR (STRICT e 26- - ss.00' 1 778.16'; LOT#22 NI IN LOT#21 NI I pp; Im 0.26AC el £� 0.20AC. NI�iSEQ-NRI om l I SEQ-VC LOT#7 S82'51'54"VL 147AC. d DISTRICT DISTRICT 15244' I I IF v 1 0 15Z.50' O a� �� f AEI' LOT#23 1 N ^rid 1 t LOT #20 J IN 0.2eAC. b1 �a 0.2eAC. of I �o,o I COMMERCIAL I £ to of jb of - orm I I LOT *1 I hI li sez s1'Sa"w `V, _ I 0'79 A0' S8 '52 1'54"W - - - - 58 52 1 54 W - - 153.72' - - _ 152.50' 310.00' I I _ S8251'S4"W _ LOT#24 �) ,� LOT#18 NI 174.89' l0 0.27AC. of l0 a20AC. , Park / Open Space --- REQ PATH - 58 1' 4"W I rrI 2.a4 scree -y 174.53' LOCATION MAP NOT ro SCALE _ 582 51'S4"W 15500' - �z _ - 152.5 584"W 152.5.0' - z -/_ _ _ Rye Associates � roeEal�roroprvor sournewuncrou --- N 6, 6' _ � rr``,, ,, 6 1 i I -J I xx To Me best of my knowledge and belief this plat depicts the resu#s of a survey conducted Lit -, LOT #25 0.27AC. .'Id c° U, LOT #18 020 AC. g - 0° _ 44 ' I I 1 1 I I _ - I G I 1 by me as descnbed in 'Survey Notes" above, based upon our analys/s of land records and evidence found in the tiek'. Existing ,Q 81g $ $I� I I I � COMMERCIAL , Iq 4 boundetles shown ere fn substenNel with the as SB2151 54'W_ 51,54•W 152.50' - LOT#2 0.70 AC. 0I a, conformance records, except This compliance notedt iin substantial with VSA 1403, 'Recording o/ Plats'. U ----_ CURRETT m valid only when eccoinpenletic-56.28' This statement LOT#26 LOT#17 U DSS LINE by my original signature and seal. 0.27AC. , 20AC. o / r t I I 5825154"W - S82'S1'S4"W - 157 56' 152.50' P REC PA7H REC. Pr17H S82 51 54"W ---_ --- o - o -- - 582 51'S4"W 582'51'54"W d 157.90' 87.50' 75.00' 75.00' 99.38 13TAC. n ri IN LOT#27 10 6.2eAa of z Iz IZI Iz SIN LOT #18 N m LOT #15 w' l LOT #U u v u N 0.27AC. 0.29AC. ^' N J N - �58159.1ol� Iol1 l or�cd 159.13' Radius=10.50' 1 I .... TI n N 2'08'0' I I Tle 53T51'S4"W IN Lor#2s NIA I nor-Nsz•ofi'os"wl z ,o 0.26AC. g, 1 E \ 77.00' 75.00 75 00'- 125.61 -- --�� 4- �255`1�' - _ _582 51'S4•:W_ - \\ _. 582'S1 54 W _-. - _ ..- _-_ S82.51 54 W _-__-___ _._ __.___ 160.35' o - ROAD R.O.W. Z45 AC. (AB and C) IN LOT#29 o - 10 0.27AC. -I S82'551'54"W --r!�-IIII A,�, � r T-o sir rqusowNrns assocu7roN 72.,72.- wlII �mI ' - ' -0' - 7-000' 7A07- LOT #30 O.BOAC. L1 II iIz 19 8#LOT#1d LOT#f0 ILOT #B LOT rn 12 0.1 LOT#s9 0.28 AC. C. 028ACitl0.27AC. m02AI 0.2AN$i �0 rn DETENTION BASIN (WET POND) 234.36' 237.151"PF348572.00'_12 72.00' N82'2241 E 92E 0F 5-5�-.0--00 N/F N/F S- NIF NIF ' \ CunaveIIis­1 i Gibbs Lyndon. Lyman Cerreta F 11 i\��__JJJJ I I I I KhelmlUllH F-IN/F filmimer I I I 1 I / I J s82.51'S4"w 1 1 t I' I' 1 LOT#8 o.5d AC. PI I '"� L 1 150.01' 1'` - SB •52 1.54•W -' 171.35' I £ COMMERCIAL LOT#3 (A,, 0.75 AC. ul I I I I S82.51'54"W 167.N ' �I I I III III COMMERCIAL vl j LOT #4 m nl 0.7/AC. o G% II FOX RUN LANE Frig�r_ _ N/F - - -- City of S. Burlington I I I 1 _ GRAPHIC SCALE ( IN FEET ) 1 I tech = 50 it IV Timothy R. Cowan VFLS 597 SURVEYORS: C CIVIL ENGIt/EEgtIG ASSOCIATE& INC, 10I1141111F1BD NEWIANE, SOUTH BUR#13TON. VT OM e0241114 s W eaxaetinn wn »...a...a4m� ORAIIn ACL Ces- TRC MPaaVBD TRC c- ce•csv. navo;,an SUBDIVISION PLAT RYE ASSOCIATES PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT I U 1075 HINESBURG ROAD I SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT I Nuaxes o snrs MAY 23, 2013 n anmrce I a` 9r.,H 1„=50' P1 raor no. 11202 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify-lhat on this day of 20 __ , a copy of the foregoing public notice for V e� [type of application] # [application number], was sent by U.S. mail, postage prepaid to the owners of all properties adjoining the subject property to development, without regard to any public right-of-way, and including the description of the property and accompanying information provided by the City of South Burlington. I further certify that this notification was provided to the following parties in accordance with 24 V.S.A. §4464(a) and Section 17.06(B) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: List of recipients: (full names and addresses) Dated at ` f- -% [town/city], Vermont, this day of /�, C�YLA , , 20� Printed Name: Phone number and email:' Signature: I Date: n, Remit to: City of South Burlington Department of Planning & Zoning 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 South Burlington Sample Certificate of Service Form. Rev. 1-2012 Rye Associates, LLC Abutters List December 14, 2011 Subject Parcel 0860-01075 Rye Associates, LLC 21 Carmichael St Suite 201 Essex Junction, VT 05452 PARCEL ID OWNER OF RECORD 0860-01035 Mansfield View Properties, LLC 10 inesburg Road ^-� South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01045 ansfield View Properties, LLC 1 Hinesburg Road Sout urlington, VT 05403 0860-01061 e Arther H & Brisson Bernice R Trust 63 Sum Web Road Fairfax',VT 05454 1225-00001 B simer Linda M 1 Oa reek Road South Bur ington, VT 05403 1225-00002 Frig incent M & Jovina `. 2 Oak ek Road South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00006 Kha ulla Mohamed 6 Fox Ru Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00010 Cerr Scott & Jill 10 Fox Lane — South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00014 man Tod H & Kelly M 14 x Run Lane South lington, VT 05403 2 Rye Associates, LLC Abutters List December 14, 2011 PARCEL ID cont'd OWNER OF RECORD (cont'd) 0686-00016 'bbs Lyndon Scott & Lisa 16 x Run Lane South rlington, VT 05403 0686-00018 Cunavelis Jake Nox Run Lane Sou Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01050 A aniel Properties, LLC 10 inesburg Road Unit A __ South B rlington, VT 05403 0860-01050 B&C valanche Development, LLC 35 rset Lane Willisto VT 05495 0860-01100 Mountain View, LLC �--_ 1100 esburg Road Suite 201 South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01060 Sphinx Development, LLC, c/o Gamal Eltabbakh 3 ills Point Road Charlo , VT 05445 0860-10700 Sphinx Development, LLC, c/o Gamal Eltabbakh )""Hills Point Road Char te, VT 05445 0860-01020 B4rlington Properties Ltd. 85 Nbqdowland Drive South Burlington, VT 05403 1095-00010 CEA Properties, LLC -� Mansfield View Lane So Burlington, VT 05403 2 i (I I SITE ENGINEER: 1 GRAPHIC SCALE I i 1 o is . 1. — I I N/F r '-- ��— NlF BURLINGTON y cM,'� I ARTHER H. RYE & 1 inch 50 fi. I PROPERTIES, LTD. I BERNICE R. BRISSON I III j to VlwaSFIELD �NLMIE, JI ��roN,� � TRUST D� PAX e�E -b 1 ®>ro 'EASE NE r* RECEIVED 1 — — — — I — — � _— 1 MEAD6INL4ND DR/I/E DSM APPROVED DSM� L AN 15 201E LOT#22 LOT#2Y --._ .... —. - 12a OWNER: e.zeAc. 0.26AC. i Illl T 1171 City of So. Burlington In N/F RYE COTTAGEUN/TS I I tea, i SPANIEL P ASSOCIATES 1 1 I I C 1 LOT #23 1 I 1 I A D I#20- LOT AD. - - -- - •' _ I LOi#1 1 ;' J ESS ERMONT 05452 21 CARMISEX,VE MO STREET o.2eAa .......•. I o I D ELO MENT, LLC Ex v r--- I — 1 _ _ ••• EXISTING 1 I — — — — — — PROJECT: OT #19 CLASS III LOT#24WA- - L0.2eAC. l .•. PETLANO _ _ _ I�j� q,MM ,Y�0.27AC.I (TW.) W — — A517f1 a — I F Perk open space d' aaovoseo VC I SPHINX RYE -� 2.�.�., A _ _ I � DISTRICT ASSOCIATES DEVELOPMENT„ — — I I I 1 LLC _ PLANNED UNIT LOT#18 I I I = DEVELOPMENT 0.26AC. I 4 at I 1, TPWI�l7 a .c LOT #26 I I 1 •' 80LI • • •- o.27AC. I --- ® 110HIG RD. � I SOUTH BURLINGTON BURLINGTON LOT #28 I Lor # 17 I I I LOT #2 I VERMONT 1 0.27AC. 0.26AC. I Iso — LOT #5 4 at •. •. 1.32AC. Anc INPA -- -- —T N/F - I LOT#18 I LOT 1 LOT#14 .•. •; •. I ( a�4Ac �/ 1 yI h CIT I OF 0.27AC. I 0.23AC. ( 0.23AC. I I I 1 I I I 1 1 I ® I =c S. BURLINGTON La27AC I ©Ammw 1 1 1 I I g000a1'j I LOT 28 I I I e 1 — — — — — h A3E-}— LOT #28 — — — LINE 0.28 AC. I � • 1 w. I LOT 0.83AC. I 1 I I I ITE I I I I I EAST 1 CCDOUNTAIN 1 I I I I I I AilpTT8s EI I I i VIEW, LLC I 0.WAC. I DETENTION BASIN I I I I I 1 I co onar I CO LOT #13 I LOT #12 I LOT #11 1 LOT #10 I LOT #9 I LOT #8 1 m °iport I LOT #4 0.2eac. 021ac. o.nac. o.zoac. 0. AC. 0.30ac. 1 L — — N/F r N/F N/ F I N/F I KH N/F s FOX RUN LANE IGIBBS LYNDON' I CERRETA CUNAVEL/S I I LYMAN I I _ _ —Q] •— ° N/F N/F N F NIF TI S, I i BEASIMER FR/GO I CITY OF I I LLC I I S. BURLINGTON I I • LOCATION MAP ➢ATE CYECEED REV1810N l.1A.19 ➢SY/ACL 9YETCY PLAN 811R101TLL PROPOSED CONDITIONS SITE PLAN DATE ORAIIMC NDYBEN DEC., 2011 ill =50' C1 PROD. NO. 11202 LEGEND GRAPHIC SCALE r EXISTING CONTOUR NIF -336-- PROPOSED CONTOUR \�.� MRCf f r /� I ! I v 1 1 ARTHER ff. RYE $l� ,v v 1 L-2, s0 rL ` / -- APPROXIMATE PROPERTY LINE - A r l I > P 'o ! v \ C I I - - I g °� o BERNICE BRISSdN \ \ ; I `' R: APPROXIMATE SETBACK LINE o v TisT0 IRON PIN No I OUND & O DISTRICT ❑ CONCRETE FMONUMENT FOUND T - - }� —+ _ — —SS— — GRAVITY SEWER LINE -'� -� I _ — —FM— — FORCE MAIN — — W WATER LINE — —0E— — OVERHEAD ELECTRIC � � � � � � \ � \� � � � n0'I I & Q DISTRICT —UE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC - _ \ \ - \ \ SEQ-NR DISTRICT — �� — T — — TELEPHONE LINE — — G — — GAS LINE \ /'] —ST— — STORM DRAINAGE LINE \� 9,1 �v �� A\ \\\ \\\ I{\ \\ \ Oct'' \I `. \\V DISTRICT III \\\� ` \ \\ © SEWER MANHOLE �3gB_ v \ \ \ V �. D. RICT ® STORM MANHOLE I� °O1 HYDRANT SHUT-OFF •n, POWER POLE I A II \\ \V Av A /' I I I I I �� -1 VC GUY WIRE EXISTING/ 1 I I I WgTTRR� ' \ \ eMEILAA59NI I LIW o I I { LINE � A� I ®� CATCH BASIN o-o LIGHT POLE w V / 2W PROPOSED VC = SIGN DISTRICT \ UN6 DECIDUOUS TREE CONIFEROUS TREE � �396 � 1 � �. A _'.• � / / 1 a 1 �.,�.�-�--.r✓v,. EDGE OF BRUSH/WOODS -_.. .._.— FENCE • 1 I I / v l DRAINAGE SWALE I PROJECT BENCHMARK ° 7. l \ N I I I 1 v v v _I-NIF .;9PI � 9s I I I vv �_. / ••'•'•1•' '� / I I / 1 ,"I--__�-'� V O I. CITY OF S. BURLINGTON I I I ass `I II I `, :.•:•' $ i v I v vvv boh I / I v "4114-- 1 � \ r _.L \ 10 - - - - - \ \ \ 40 398' 1 v 1;`n -lesm no -4 99 C7 0 N/F 391- 12 I N/F '9� s - N/F N/F 'w FOX RUN LANE CUNAVELIS IGIBBS LYNDONI LYMAN I CERRETA Q�j w— J9� ` l N/F �w :�,. BEASIMER N/F I N/F FRIGO I CITY OF I I S. BURLINGTON I � I I I� 1 I N/F SITE ENGINEER: c I BURLINGTOI' K PROPERTIES, L - - CIVIL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES. INC, 9 RUMTON, VT 0 4M ME 10 MV07EM WLAME, SOUM 1 & O DISTRICT CE VEC r }s- I A/WOWLAIVD DRA DSM I osN 15 2PI" - - OWNER: /�/�� •+••-} }/�}� o Of SO. & roll �l l N/F RYE I i SPANIEL P ASSOCIATES I P I C 21 CARMICHAEL STREET ESSEX, VERMONT 05452 0--� PROJECT: I RYE s p� / _ �'; ASSOCIATES PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT v /_ / , 11075 HINESBURG RD. SOUTH BURLINGTON t \ I 1/I VERMONT 1 I/ `) I /I I I � / •0 - I I �cl AISTR T LOCATION MAP 1NW14' \ { • I ,� � N1f CABCYm RAPIAION I Ili j 1.14.13 DAY/= BAATCH PY AD mma NIF Ili I i EAST 0UNTAIN VIEW, LLC 1 ; EXISTING 11I CONDITIONS SITE PLAN NF AATA DRA1fAiG NII}IAEA 1 I TI DEC., 2011 LLC 1 9C 1 .1 " = 50' C I I PA01. N0. I 11202 GRAPHIC SCALE NIF v v BURLINGTON NIF e �'I � \ o ft. I '' PROPERTIES, LTD. I� ARTHER RYE I �v \ , o o 's FOB BERNICE R' BRISSON p N \ \ \ \ \ \\ T*JST r+----� .02 $ 9I 00,� _ ��+00_ 00 6+00 5�06 4+00 A 3+ 0 w 2— I � t J - 1 , 00 ,+00 ND DRIVE / F - -o F v Tv V LOT #21 \ LOT#22 p -0. T# 1 O.ZOAC I,I 0. NIF o , N/ / I N\. iPRI ?III I I vv _COTTAGEU/V/TSB i + I v 000,r. �� �II I SPANIEL P Imov F I v vs l (I I C i \ LOT#2a A aaNA- SITE ENGINEER: c CIVIL ENGINEERING ASMATES. Mr- 10WMFIEDVIEW LANE, SOUTH BURLINGTON, VI OW 9o1-0Ba-z3z8 Six BOA9esaz)1 nm: �xnv.cw.trnm I,—„'.w, © x ACL '.K.EI E nPPnOvsn DSM a n. OWNER: .y Of So. rRYE * ' ASSOCIATES )03 LOT#2dv I (I y0T#1 ( I 21 CARMICHAEL STREET _\. _ ..i . _ _ _ /SST— . — V \ '•' ' I a 1 �LO M �iqq ESSEX, VERMONT 05452 V A /' •'•t.•.••' 11 h. —� �— — — 7 _ �� ro 1 Z — — — v _ — _ —/— 1 I ' I l l / / I / l + \ \ ' I \ \ / _ EXISTING I I I I \ / —� , 7 — — — PROJECT: LOt#19 \I /NEILANO/ O N \ I LOT #24 0.28 AC. \ �� // / cuss v �+ _ _ — — I I I 0.27AC. \ I�\ \ \\ j (TW.)/ IlJ T/QN A77Y I \ \ J w . RYE ~ _ ,,, ` \ EwkI open8p— Q. $PF�/hIX I r— - - _ - -� \ - - _ -,�Ii o,�x•w r PA I \\ o DEV�L(PAf1J ASSOCIATES F V a /��� VI [1A � 61 , I �"�nc � PLANNED UNIT o _ y I I a.�_.�DEVELOPMENT I" 7PRnir Lt12 AC0. I u LOT #18 I B / 1 I n4 i� /� it � 11075 HINESBURG RD. / v I SOUTH BURLINGTON v w I LOT #2e $ / I I I LOT #2 VERMONT LbrAC. N > I ee T 1mm s� I "o.r7AG + a�eAG. I II`a� �4p4 I -. I d /II - o a p n $ LOT #8 a1 4 r v LOTW11 LOT , \ 1 s OT AQ '.J�.. �j - - G NIF I 1:• l I leT Irs Y I i� x 0.47 0.23 AC 0.29iLG• \ / I I' I I _ ram. I 1 a74AG CITY of----- ' \ — `\`CJ S. BURLINGTON Lor#27 - R 027nc. I Tg 1 \ ��I --- -- wmo I v' LOT #28 404. Do 17+00 18+00 - o- v, 20+op I �,+�o i' 22 oG CFOs _ — LOCATION MAP i LOT#29 _. .1�g�=_. _. _._. _._._. . ,- - II RI G2., , 0.28 AC. s�� II O FFcx O 60 III 1 ry °I I LOT — �/` I I �\ NIF 3y 1 I I I 11 I I AGE I, �O FOJ IIII I EAST / + p n III OUNTAIN �� I // or# 99 `\ - d i I VIEW, LLC o.cenc. - I COA/ME R OU$ 7 DETENTION BAS/ I I 1 - _ STRUCTURE \ .I I \ I \\ LorA1 I OT#10 \\ ( LOT#8 7-aoo o cg ""_� -' I LOTS- I LOT #13 LOT iAl 2 f J _ • • 0 _ \ I I SPREAD R I 0.8BAC. 0.7DAC. \ 0.4iAG\\ Q.40AG Q1YAC. \ \ \\ wem. -- �.- a0 41), j1j/F 39'r NIF ?9" °s �V%� '3e x w� NIF 1 NIF w \ w�%b` . FOX RUN LANE I \ CUNAVELIS g] IIC'/BBS LYNDONI' LYMAN I i CERRETA S — w w ' 391 _. J, NIF "w � tlw �NIF I i I ; NIF BEASIMER FR/GO I NIF CITY OF I TI S, LLC S. BURLINGTON III • I I I i 1 ---- 6 >' '19t I CtlBL'ID30 I IIBY1910Y i. Is DBY/AC1. 898fCH PLW BVBYRILL DRAINAGE SITE PLAN nera otlnwmc �uatlee DEC., 2011 1 "=50' C3 P601. N0. 11202 ¢' w 0 0 0 SITE ENGINEER: 1 I GRAPHIC SCALE I. I I N/F r � III � BURLINGTON N/F ( IN FEET PROPERTIES, LTD. II ARTHER H. RYE & L in _ 50 /t - - I iI IaAREDEa�EN„ BERNICER. BR/SSON MasLiv�SHOURxwT� INSTALL VALVE a CAP — — L�1:�- " — — — — NEW 78-HOPE I _fie rc eDzaxa2n FOR FLL VALVE AIN TRUST W/FES INV.=409.2 ' coerwc �i Au. racers aeaSsveD AEIASRIF� 9+4 .0 0 +00� — T+00+00 7+00 —5+00 5+o, srREEr4+00 — 3+t1i 00 — 2+00 — 1+00 �I 0. 00 I T;• c C' �D —+— - — — - ; + - + - - — �- +M64DOWLAND DRIVENEW 6' D.I.WATER MAIN I 'DIAN I W/FES 34 3 q• INV.�OB.2 NEW 12'xa'TAPPING OWNER: LOT #22 LOT #21SLEEVE a vALVE 0.26AC. 0.26 AC.4 of So. III Ilt� N/F gQf� + NEW SMH — 6_SDR 35 _ _ _ _ a�gz 3/4. 6'SDR - - ,III SPANIEL P , ASSOCIATES 1 I, C LOT #23 ( I I 1 0.26AC A D — LOT#20 NEW SMH I I ( LOT#1 ,+I j.l I o•I gp � 21 CARMICHAEL STREET .26ac. eD.I. _ _ WATER MAIN JW T— & . I D ELO MENT, LLC ESSEX, VERMONT 05452 s yIp B6 4 + _ _ _ _ 1 � _ _ — _ •. • E%ISTING I , I•� 4 III p — — _ _ — — PROJECT: LOT #19 WETLAND LOT#24 o.28 AC. I CLASS III I I PA7N aa6A F� RYE 2,>°��Sa•�6 w SPHINX DEVELOPMENT„ ASSOCIATES I` _ Lac PLANNED UNIT LOT#18 I I �� we.o� 1 — __ TTER 1PR,NNT aw DEVELOPMENT 0.26 AC.I2 a7,.. .a�.� jj����FF`` LOT#26 9 w 0.27AG. — 1 1 . 1 _ / 1It— � � ® � i� �' II 11075 HINESBURG RD. I — 1 LOT #2 II SOUTHBURLINGTONTON 1 LOT #28 — _ + _ _ !� LOT #17 I • •: LOT #6 4 3 4",_. N SMIi T ss /may 0.27AC. Imo` 0.26AC. II 1 _ I &) II 1.32 ACL -- -- N/F -- I �� LOT#16 I LOT#1—,T LOT#14 LOT#9h I A 1 0.27AC. 0.23AC 0.23AC. CITY OF i I' I a7,ACCb y S. BURLINGTON I LOT#27 a , -- 0.27 AC. I 3/q. P O s h'ifli�� I9 1_ � �� y N SMH LOT#28 NEW SMH I y w NEWS N 8' O.I. - LOCATION MAP I {$-C DR-3�p3iCf0 16+o Q 20+ 08 36pVC o�T z2+ WATER I � 3� - Y -- 20001 LOT #28 ao 0.29 AC. — W - _ I� New MH I — I- _ -- _ I —�� EW SM \ � s I DAre cxec�o xevislan N SMii p T I I.Ia.15 MM/ACL S� R PLON sDRem•r,w _— s - os i n-a r I LOT#30 �ry` 1 1 1 1 I I I Illp IIi N/F — . o�Ac.— — / I EAST I I I I 1 I I I o OTTAGE 1 \o � TP�NT III IUNITS o�OUNTAIN A VIEW, LLC OUTLET DETENTION BASIL( 1 I I 1 1 1 I qmr 1 s STRUCTURE \ LOT #8 I 1 LOT#13 I LOT #12 I LOT#il I LOT#10 I LOT#8 1 03oAC m pod m LOT#4 s LEVEL 0.2B AC. 0.18 AC. 0.28 AC. 0.28 AC. L029AC.READER � NEW 8MH ��-IUTILITY .. .w�ai I I I SITE PLAN N/F N/F N/F N/F TN/F WAERMAIN FOX RUN LANE CUNAVELIS GIBBS LYNDONLYMAN CERRETA Zo— — NEW 9'J#' TAPPING SLEEVE _ _ —� O I Q � N/F w 1m a VALVE N/F I m I I N F BEASIMER a 1 p I TI S, DATE DM NG NULDER ' �1� FR/GO 1 N/F I -. III DEC., 2011 1 I I oTw M.�3ffHT 62 CITY OF I rn } LLC k 1_ INV'3MI2 S. BURLINGTON CORE NEW HO I I 1" = 50' C4 --- o — NEW INV. �87.0 a I I 11202 Permit Number SD- /� - (office use only) APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN REVIEW SOUTHEAST QUADRANT All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the plans will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. For amendments, please provide pertinent information only. i) OWNER(S) OF RECORD (Name(s) as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #) Rye Associates, LLC, c/o Dousevicz Construction, Suite 201 21 Carmichael Street, Essex, Vt 054.2 Ph 879-4477 ext io.3, Fax 879-4480 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED(S) (Book and page#) Vol 774 Pg 592-596 Map slide 491page 1 g) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) Rye Associates, LLC, c/o Dousevicz Construction Suite 201 21 Carmichael Street Essex Vt 05452, Ph 879-4477 ext log, Fax 879- 4480 4) APPLICANT'S LEGAL INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY (fee simple, option, etc.) Fee Simple 5) CONTACT PERSON (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) Brad Dousevicz, Dousevicz Construction Suite 201 21 Carmichael Street Essex Vt 05452. Ph 879-4477 ext ion, Fax 879- _448o 5a) CONTACT EMAIL ADDRESS: dousevicz(&gmail.com 6) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: ioZS Hinesburg Road 7) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) 0860-01075 8) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) General project description (explain what you want approval for): • Creation of a planned unit development which includes 20,000 SF of commercial use in four buildings within the 2.86 acres of the property located in the SEQ-VC district and 52 residential units in the form of 4 quad-plex units (16 units) and 14 Cottage units and 22 SFH lots within the 15.15 acres located within the SEQ-NR district. • Creation of 2,55o LF of proposed public roadways on the property and 910 of public roadway in the offer of dedication to the City located on the adjacent property to the north (I/O district). • The Application seeks expansion of the VC district by 50-feet to the west in accordance with the provisions set forth in Article 3.03 C of the SBLDR's. b) Existing Uses on Properly (including description and size of each separate use) The existing 18.oi acre lot is undeveloped. c) Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain) 20,000 SF of commercial use in four buildings within the 2.86 acres of the property located in the SEQ-VC district and 32 units in eight (8) multi -family buildings and 27 single family lots within the 15.15 acres located within the SEQ-NR district. d) Total building square footage on proper (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain Commercial Structures (four 5,000 SF Footprint) 20,000 SF (Total) Multifamily Buildings 4 x 2,720 = io,88o SF Cottages 7 x 1,272 = 8,904 SF Cottages 7 x 956 = 6,692 SF Single Family Homes 22 x 1,942 SF (estimate) = 42,724 e) Proposed height of building (if applicable) Commercial Structures 28' Multifamily Buildings 28' Single Family Homes 28' f) Total parcel size(s) - Please see attached listing of lot sizes. g) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable) There are some small wetland areas located along drainage way flowing southwesterly. There are also two small isolated wetlands located in the west half of the property. The applicant will provide documentation in the future indicating that the loss of these wetlands will not impact the limited functions and values. 9) 9a: SEQ SUBDISTRICT (identify in each) Acreage Units -Existing Units -Proposed NRP None NRT None NR 15.15 None 52 VR None VC 2.86 None o 9b: Are Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs) being utilized? Yes If yes, please identify how many and from which parcel (street address) TBD SEQ Sketch Plan Application Page 3 of4 io) TYPE OF EXISTING OR PROPOSED ENCUMBRANCES ON PROPERTY (easements, covenants, leases, rights of way, etc.) Easements in favor of Green Mountain power for power distribution outside of the pubic rights - of -way. i1) LOT COVERAGE a) Building: Existing o% Proposed 11.55% b) Overall (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing o% Proposed 33.5% c) Front yard (along each street) Existing o% Proposed lam% 12) PROPOSED EXTENSION, RELOCATION, OR MODIFICATION OF MUNICIPAL FACILITIES (sanitary sewer, water supply, streets, storm drainage, etc.) Sewer - The project is proposed to be served by gravity sewer mains flowing to the existing collection system located on Oak Creek Drive. Water - A looped water distribution system is proposed to service the project. Water mains will be installed along all of the proposed streets. The two connection points to the existing municipal distribution system is off of Fox Run Lane to the south and at the Meadowland Drive intersection with Hinesburg Road. Streets - All of the streets are proposed to be publically owned. The westerly extension of Meadowland Drive on the west side of Hinesburg Road (Swift Street extension?) will follow the offer of dedication encumbering the property to the north. A series of interconnected local streets will serve the project. These streets will connect at two locations to the north with Swift Street extension and at one location to the south on Fox Run Lane at its intersection with Oak Creek Drive. Storm Drainage - Will be collected in an enclosed drainage system located within the local streets and will be directed to a stormwater management facility located at the low point in the southwest corner of the property. The discharge from the facility will be through a level spreader to mimic the existing drainage pattern in this portion of the property. 13) OWNERS OF RECORD OF ALL CONTIGUOUS PROPERTIES & MAILING ADDRESSES (this may be provided on a separate attached sheet and on pre - stamped and preaddressed envelopes. The city will add the return address). Please see attached listing. Envelopes are attached. SEQ Sketch Plan Application Page 4 of4 14) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE Phase I - Completion - 2015 Phase II - Completion - 2017 Phase III - Completion - 2019 15) PLANS AND FEE Plat plans shall be submitted which shows the information required by the City's Land Development Regulations. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (11" x 17") of the plans must be submitted. The application fee shall be paid to th City at the time of submitting the application. See the City fee schedule for details. I hereby certify t 11 the information requested as part of this application has been submitted vffs acc"te to the)pest of my kVowledge. x TURE OF Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: I have reviewed this ske plan ai Ar Copiplete n ���� 1114 on'and find it to be: ❑ Incomplete Date The applicant or permittee retains the obligation to identify, apply for, and obtain relevant state permits for this project. Call (8o2) 879-5676 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist. rIVIL �l 11 Ir� 10 Mansfield View Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 January 14, 2013 Mr. Ray Belair, Zoning Administrator City of South Burlington Planning & Zoning 550 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Rye Associates - 1075 Hinesburg Road PUD Sketch Plan Application Dear Mr. Belair: Phone: 802-864-2323 Fax: 802-864-2271 E-Mail: mail@cea-vt.com Rye Associates is seeking Sketch Plan re -approval for a mixed use planned unit development located on an undeveloped 18.01 acre parcel located in the northwest quadrant of the Fox Rune Lane - Hinesburg Road intersection. The project is similar to that previously approved by the DRB in march of 2012 with the following exceptions: • The number of units has been reduced from 59 to 52. • The diversity of the housing types has been furthered. • Ten percent (10%) or six (6) residential units shall be sold at a sales price affordable to families making 80% of Chittenden County median income, which currently results in a sales price of $238,000. In addition, another four (4) units shall be sold to buyers who qualify for the Vermont Housing Finance Agency's first time buyer program. • As part of this PUD, the applicant proposes the transfer of development rights for 31 units of the 52 dwelling units. The parcel of land in South Burlington's SEQ from which these development rights are transferred shall conserve at least 25.8 acres of land with soils of an equal or better quality rated soils as the soils on the subject property as defined by the USDA-NRCS Report: "Farmland Classification Systems for VT Soils," revised June 2006. The property currently sits within both the SEQ-NR (15.15 acres) and the SEQ-VC (2.86 acres) districts. We offer the following information in support of the City's review for compliance with the standards set forth in the Southeast Quadrant District. Zoning - The south lot is broken up into two separate SEQ subdistricts. The Village Commercial (VC) district occupies the eastern eighth of the site while the remaining portion lies in the Neighborhood Residential (NR) district. Mr. Ray Belair Page 2 of 5 January 14, 2013 The NR District allows up to 4 units per acre with the use of TDR's. The total property in the NR District is 15.15 acres yielding a maximum density of 60.6 units. This application seeks approval for 52 units. The VC District allows up to 8 units per acre with the use of TDR's. The total property in the VC District is 2.86 acres yielding a maximum density of 22.8 units. The application at this time does not include any residential units in this district, only commercial structures. Encumbrances - A drainage way carries stormwater runoff from properties to the north southwesterly across the property towards the residential properties located off the end of Fox Run Lane. Along this route is a series of unconnected wetland pods. There are three other small wetland pockets on the property of which the small wetland located in the southeast corner of the site appears to have been created by the original construction of Fox Run Lane. The City Official Map shows the proposed extension of Oak Creek Drive to the north to intersect with the future east -west extension of Swift Street. The same map shows the proposed extension of Swift Street along the northern edge of this property within an existing offer of dedication to the City. Village Commercial District Requirements The VC district boundary line is located 200 feet from the centerline of Hinesburg Road. The existing right-of-way width for Hinesburg Road is 66 feet leaving (200'-33') 167 feet for the VC District. The front yard setback is 50 feet on Hinesburg Road from the planned future right-of- way width of 80 feet. The current right-of-way width is 66 feet resulting in a front yard setback of (one-half of 80'-66') 57 feet from the existing right-of-way. With the requirement of the LDR's that the parking be placed behind (or on the side of) the buildings, the resulting usable space from the front of the building in VC District to the west edge of the VC district is approximately (167' - 57') 110 feet. Section 3.06 (1) of the LDR's requires that the rear yard of the VC (commercial) district which abuts the NR (residential) District NR District be increased to 65' for the buildings and parking lots. The DRB may allow this to be reduced with the use of landscaping fencing or other approved methods to protect the residential uses but it can not be reduced to less than the standard 30' setback for the District. This essentially leaves only (110'-30') = 80 feet for the placement of buildings and parking in the VC District. Article 3.03 C of the LDR's allows, with approval from the DRB, the extension of the VC boundary to the west by up to 50 feet. Previous discussions with staff indicated that this would be entertained positively for the placement of commercial parking spaces as a Mr. Ray Belair Page 3 of 5 January 14, 2013 means of increasing the development potential of the VC district but not to increase density. Therefore if the line were moved, a condition of approval limiting the maximum residential density to what exists today would be required. Specific layout standards for the NRNC Districts 0.27 Ac Minimum Lot Size for SFH (12,000 SF) 0.54 Ac Minimum Lot Size for Duplex (24,000 SF) 0.92 Ac Minimum Lot Size for Other Uses (40,000 SF) 45' Maximum Building Height (SEQ-NR District) 50' Maximum Building Height (SEQ-VC District) 15% Maximum Building Coverage 30% Maximum Lot Coverage 20' Front Yard Setback (50' + 7' along Hinesburg Road) 10' Side Yard Setback 30' Rear Yard Setback 5' for stand alone parking garages 30% max lot coverage in the VC front yard. These minimum lot sizes may be waived by the DRB provided that SEQ planning guidelines are being met. Design Approach The existing frontage on Hinesburg Road has a number of mature trees that are proposed to be retained to maintain the character and buffering of the proposed buildings. Those trees within the required 57' foot front yard setback will be retained. The more westerly trees are primarily made up of Cottonwood and are not proposed to be retained since they fall within the limited space available for the proposed VC development area. In support of the development of village scale buildings and to provide additional flexibility in the phased development of the project, four buildings were chosen to be placed in the VC district. The assumption for this layout is that adequate screening through the use of landscaping and fencing can be developed to properly separate the commercial uses from the residential uses in the adjoining NR district to the west. VC District Pro forma The development potential on the South Lot as laid out on the Conceptual Development Plan includes: 20,000 GSF commercial space in four buildings. 70 parking spaces required. 70 Parking spaces are proposed. NR District Design Approach The goal of the residential layout was to create a layered transition from the VC and to Mr. Ray Belair Page 4 of 5 January 14, 2013 districts into the heart of the NR district. The Sketch Plan depicts the use of 4-unit multi- family structures to provide this transitional approach. (lna rineinn rhnllannin With thin avtancinn of .VVlft gtraat to thin watt iC that thin ('itv LDR,s call for the minimization of private curbs cuts on collector roadways. To mitigate this, three separate roads running in the north -south direction are proposed to enable alternate frontage opportunities for the north end of the parcel. In the mid -section of the property the alignment of the middle road (C Street) was adjusted to avoid the wetlands and to provide a buffer from the single family uses and the wetland in accordance with the SEQ planning goals. NR District Pro forma The development potential on the South Lot NR District as laid out on the Conceptual Development Plan includes: • 30 residential units in the form of 4 quad-plex units and 14 Cottage units • 22 SFH lots • 2,550 LF of public roads • Stormwater Infrastructure for the entire project located within a 0.68 acres parcel. • 2.93 acre Open space parcel with neighborhood park Infrastructure Sewer - The project is proposed to be served by gravity sewer mains flowing to the existing collection system located on Oak Creek Drive. Water - A looped water distribution system is proposed to service the project. Water mains will be installed along all of the proposed streets. The two connection points to the existing municipal distribution system is off of Fox run lane to the south and at the Meadowland Drive intersection with Hinesburg Road to the north. Streets - All of the streets are proposed to be publically owned. The westerly extension of Meadowland Drive on the west side of Hinesburg Road (To be named Swift Street Extension?) will follow the offer of dedication encumbering the property to the north. A series of interconnected local streets will serve the project. These streets will connect at three locations to the north with Swift Street Extension and at one location to the south on Fox Run lane at its intersection with Oak Creek Drive. Storm Drainage - Will be collected in an enclosed drainage system located within the local streets and will be directed to a stormwater management facility located at the low point in the southwest corner of the property. The discharge from the facility will be through a level spreader to mimic the existing drainage pattern in this portion of the Mr. Ray Belair Page 5 of 5 January 14, 2013 property. This completes our summary of the proposed features of the project. If you should have any 8yuestlnnS, please feel free to nnntant me at 8F4_2323 x31 n nr Rrnri nni iceyirr7 At 79-4477 ext 103. Respectfully, David S. Marshall, P.E. Project Engineer \dsm Enclosures: Five (5) Full Size Plan Set (4 sheets) One 11" x 17" Reduced Size Plan (4 sheets) Sketch Plan Application Application Fee of $3,175.50 Base Fee of $363 plus $2, 812.50 [(2 Units x $25 + Units x $50 + 43 units (52-9) x $25 + commercial (20, 000 SF x $0. 02) $4001 x 150% _ $2,812.50. Pre -addressed Stamped Envelopes (retained by Applicant) CD of plans and documents cc: A. Senecal (w/ enclosures)r y B. Dousevicz (3 sets of enclosures) G. Rabideau (w/enclosures) CEA File 11202.00 (w/ enclosures) PAAutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\3-Permitting\1-Local Applications\1-Sketch\Belair Sketch Cover T2.1.wpd RYE ASSOCIATES LLC 56 W. TWIN OAKS TERRACE #1 SO. BURLINGTON, VT 05403 Date Pay to the Ooj VWWAV/ I A division of A-�� Fora 44-- 1YiC l7sL� CO L L 6000 6 21:1mO I- 68- 20 5 3111911' O L 0 130 58-6/116 Rye Associates, LLC Abutters List January 14, 2013 Subject Parcel nczvn_ninI< Rye Associates, LLC VUVV V 1 V / J 21 Carmichael St Suite 201 Essex Junction, VT 05452 PARCEL ID OWNER OF RECORD 0860-01035 Mansfield View Properties, LLC 1035 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01045 Mansfield View Properties, LLC 1035 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01061 Rye, Arther H & Brisson, Bernice R Trust 63 Sam Web Road Fairfax, VT 05454 1225-00001 Beasimer, Linda M 1 Oak Creek Road South Burlington, VT 05403 1225-00002 Frigo, Vincent M & Jovina 2 Oak Creek Road South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00006 Savage, Tyler D & Heidi A 6 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00010 Cerreta Scott & Jill 10 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00014 Lyman Tod H & Kelly M 14 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 1 Rye Associates, LLC Abutters List January 14, 2013 PARCEL ID (cont'd) OWNER OF RECORD (cont'd) 0686-00016 Gibbs Lyndon Scott & Lisa 16 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00018 Cunavelis Jake 18 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01050 A Spaniel Properties, LLC 1050 Hinesburg Road Unit A South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01050 B&C Avalanche Development, LLC 35 Dorset Lane Williston, VT 05495 0860-01100 East Mountain View, LLC 1100 Hinesburg Road Suite 201 South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01060 Sphinx Development, LLC, c/o Gamal Eltabbakh 391 Hills Point Road Charlotte, VT 05445 0860-10700 Sphinx Development, LLC, c/o Gamal Eltabbakh 391 Hills Point Road Charlotte, VT 05445 0860-01020 Burlington Properties Ltd. 85 Meadowland Drive South Burlington, VT 05403 1095-00010 CEA Properties, LLC 10 Mansfield View Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 2 Rye Associates Building & Lot Coverage Computation Subtotal 183,492 Subtotal 79,334 90,586 262,826 Lot Size 18.01 Ac 784,516 SF Building Coverage 11.55% Maximum Allowed 15% Lot Coverage 33.50% Maximum Allowed 30% 235,355 SF SF Rye Associates Lot Area Summary January 14, 2013 Lot # Area (Ac) C-1 0.72 C-2 0.68 C-3 0.72 C-4 0.71 MF-5 1.32 MF-6 0.56 MF-7 1.32 Single Fam 8 0.30 9 0.29 10 0.29 11 0.29 12 0.29 13 0.29 14 0.23 15 0.23 16 0.27 17 0.26 18 0.26 19 0.26 20 0.26 21 0.26 22 0.26 23 0.26 24 0.27 25 0.27 26 0.27 27 0.27 28 0.28 29 0.29 30 0.68 Park 2.93 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Report preparation date: March 14, 2012 drb\sub\staffcomments\2011\ Application received: January 11, 2012 SD_11 _46_1075H i nes burg Road_RyeAssociates nda #6 RYE ASSOCIATES LLC- 1075 HINESBURG ROAD SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION #SD-11-46 Meeting date: March 20, 2012 II Owner/Applicant I Contact ' `Y� ^ssocia es LLC Brad Dousevicz c/o Dousevicz Construction Dousevicz Construction Suite 201 Suite 201 21 Carmichael Street 21 Carmichael Street Essex, VT 05452 Essex, VT 05452 Project Engineer Property Information Civil Engineering Associates Tax Parcel 0860-01075 10 Mansfield View Lane SEQ Zoning District - South Burlington VT 05403 Neighborhood Residential (15.15 acres) Village Commercial (2.86 acres) 18.01 acres total Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING Rye Associates LLC, hereinafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking sketch plan review for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) 36 single family dwellings, 2) 16 multi -family dwelling units in four (4) buildings, and 3) 20,000 sq. ft. of commercial space in four (4) buildings, 1075 Hinesburg Road. The sketch was reviewed on January 17, 2012 and continued at the request of the Board. The staff notes herein reflect a review of the major topics for review and are, at this stage, intended to review the basic concept and site design, as well as to advise the applicant as to any potential problems and concerns relating to those major issues. For the purposes of a focused sketch plan discussion, staff has tried to narrow the discussions to the central issues that seem to present themselves at this early stage of the project: density, access and street configuration, wetlands impact, parks planning, and building orientation and design. Additional items, including but not limited to the specific requirements for recreation paths, landscaping, snow storage, adequacy of parking, etc, certainly warrant a full review and will be addressed in detail at a later stage. Associate Planner Cathyann Larose, Administrative Officer Ray Belair, and Director of Planning Paul Conner, all herein after referred to as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted by the applicant and have the following comments with respect to these very significant issues: Access is proposed via a public street connection to Hinesburg Road as well as to the existing public road of Fox Run Lane. The connection on Hinesburg Road is directly across from Meadowland Drive. This intersection had previously been studied as part of the Meadowland Drive Development and there are established thresholds for when traffic improvements are to be made, including signalizing the intersection and dedicated turn lanes. This development should review that mandate and incorporate the vehicle trip ends generated within into the study. If the trips generated as a result of this proposal exceed those limited by the Meadowland Drive development, then this applicant shall be responsible for the necessary improvements. Staff recommends the applicant submit a traffic impact analysis as part of the preliminary plat application. Staff further recommends that the Board invoke a technical review of the traffic analysis. The connection to Fox Run Lane was anticipated with the Development of Oak Creek. The north -south road to connect to Fox Run Lane is shown on the Official South Burlington Map for future road connections. Finally, Staff supports the layout which calls for a short road connection with a jog, which enables the connection without providing a long straight road which would have the potential to encourage higher speeds. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING The road shown as Street D on the plans is also on the official map to connect to the property to the west. The Recreation Path Committee has reviewed the plans and has provided written comments. A member of the committee was also present at the hearing. It appears that their comments have been incorporated into the plans. This should be reviewed again at the preliminary plat level. LOT LAYOUT & ROAD CONFI URATION Staff has reviewed the proposed lot layout in accordance with the Regulating Plan illustrated in Article 9 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations and discussed below in this report. Staff finds that the project meets the guidelines of the SEQ which call for short development blocks and limits the lengths of roadways (2) Interconnection of Streets. Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 500 feet. Dead end streets (e.g. culs de sac) are discouraged. Dead end streets may not exceed 200 feet in length. Street stubs are required at the end of dead end streets to allow for future street connections and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections to open space and future housing on adjoining parcels per section 15.12(D)(4). This guideline is mostly met. The longest street block (B street running north -south) is approximately 520 feet. The remainder of the proposal is split sufficiently. There are no proposed cul-de-sacs or dead end streets, except the stub of Street D which is proposed to connect to the west at a future date. Street widths are appropriate and in accordance with the LDRs. One sided street parking is proposed throughout. DESIGN STANDARDS The proposed project shall be subject to the design guidelines pursuant to Section 9.08 of the SBLDRs. Staff has already addressed the project's compliance with the lot layout and road configuration. The applicant has also addressed the Residential Design, pursuant to Section 9.08(C) of the Regulations, including building orientation, building facades and front building setbacks, placement of garages and parking, and mix of housing types. The applicant has submitted preliminary lot sketches which illustrate the general layout of the proposed single family and quadraplex units. At this stage in the process, the design proposed by the applicant appears to meet the goals and objectives of the design standards of the Southeast Quadrant enumerated within the Land Development Regulations. Staff recommends more detailed, smaller scale sketches of the proposed buildings at the preliminary plat level. Still, staff has included the text of the regulations with respect to the Southeast Quadrant in this report should the Board wish to CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING address any of the items at this stage, or to get a better understanding of those issues to be later discussed. Section 9 of the SBLDR states that "a range of parks should be distributed through the SEQ to meet a variety of needs Inrh irlinn ,hilr4rpn'c -1— _i ii_ _ -- - , _ _- -�•••y -11.--1. o Nlc+y, passive eiijoylilelIL UI lne outdoors, and active recreation." Furthermore, "parks should be provided at a rate of 7.5 acres of developed parkland per 1,000 population per the South Burlington Capital Budget and Program" and "a neighborhood or mini park of 10,000 square feet or more should be provided within a one - quarter mile walk of every home not so served by an existing City park or other publicly -owned recreation area." The applicant is proposing an open space area of 1.7 acres. It appears that approximately half of this is wetland or wetland buffer. Based on the proposed number of units, and resulting expectation of number of residents, 0.97 acres of parkland should be provided. Staff recommends the Board discuss this item with the applicant. There should be a plan to ensure that the wetland which is part of the park/open space be delineated and not used as park space. The Board may also wish to discuss whether the park should provide any specific ammentities, such as a small playground, swings, a gazebo or benches. Staff also recommends a path to the park from southern road so as to provide adequate access for residents of the adjacent neighborhood. DENSITY The base density of the parcel generated by the land at 1.2 units per acre, based on 18.01 acres, is 21 units. The maximum units allowed, in accordance with Chapter 9 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations and determined by the Neighborhood residential sub -district under the Transferred Development Right program, are 60 units. The maximum units allowed, in accordance with Chapter 9 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations and determined by the Village Commercial sub -district under the Transferred Development Right program, are 21 units. The applicant is proposing 52 new units. This is a proposed density of approximately 2.9 units per acre. A total of 31 transferable development rights would be required. The applicant has not stated whether they have any legal options to purchase enough development rights to build the project as proposed. Staff recommends that the Board require the applicant to submit the legal documents pertaining to the options for review by the City Attorney prior to final plat approval. Staff further recommends that the development rights be CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING purchased by the applicant prior to issuance of zoning permits for any units beyond the 21 allowed by the property's inherent density. The applicant shall submit legal documents pertaining to the options to purchase Transferred Development Rights (TDRs) to the City Attorney for approval, prior to Final Plat approval. The applicant shall submit legal documents showing clear ownership of the remaining 31 development rights to the City Attorney for approval, prior to issuance of a zoning permit for the 22 ndunit. The plans show encroachments into various wetlands on the site. It is not clear on the plans what class wetlands these are. The applicant should identify all wetlands by class, as well as show the 50 foot buffer surrounding them as part of the preliminary plat application. As the applicant is seeking encroachments, staff strongly recommends the applicant provide the Board with a full functions and values reports of all wetlands on site. There are some locations where the units or associated pavement rest directly upon the wetland or wetland buffer limits. The applicant should include a very detailed grading and erosion control plan for construction. Furthermore, staff recommends a ground delineation of the wetland buffer where it gets close to the rear of the homes or the park area so as to reduce impact by residents of those units. The wetland and wetland buffers shall be protected and should not in any case be used as useable lawn or other recreational areas. Possibilities include a line of planted cedars, split rail fencing, or other physical barrier between what is to be the grassed lawn area and the more sensitive wetland buffer. Staff also suggests additional measures of protection, including limitations on fertilizers and mowing. The following are suggested conditions: There shall be no use of pesticides or non -organic fertilizers within the wetlands or associated 50 foot buffers. This shall be reflected in the association documents which shall be reviewed by the City Attorney prior to issuance of a zoning permit for the first building on the property. There shall be no mowing within 50 feet of the wetlands on the property. Brush -hogging shall be allowed no more than three (3) times per year. This shall be reflected in the association documents which shall be reviewed by the City Attorney prior to issuance of a zoning permit for the first building on the property. Deeds and association covenants shall reflect all of the standards included above, especially the use of the wetland buffer as lawn or other recreation areas, and the use of pesticides on site. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING Section 9.08 C(5) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations states that "a mix of housing types is encouraged within neighborhoods and developments. Housing types should be mixed within blocks, along the street and within neighborhoods rather than compartmentalized into sections of identical housing types." The proposed plans include: ■ %i -,tanriarri riatarrhnr) cinnlo f__;i , h -- - .,......,...� - . 1 �y�c lai i lily i lul I ICJ, ■ 14 cottage style units; ■ 16 units in the form of 4 quadplex buildings These units are not mixed throughout the proposed development and do not meet the standard set above in section 9.08C. The placement of the buildings around the `green' in the center of the property appears to be well -designed. However, there is no mix of housing along `B street'. However, there does appear to be diversity of housing sizes and configurations offered in this area. The location of the 4-unit buildings between the commercial uses and the residential zone also helps to transition densities, from commercial, higher density residential, to lower density residential. Staff recommends further review of this criterion when housing elevations are submitted; to ensure that housing appearances are also varied. Differing colors, rooflines, and building styles would help to meet this criterion. Pursuant to Section 9.02 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: "These regulations hereby implement the relevant provisions of the City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan, and any adopted amendments to such plan, and are in accord with the policies set forth therein. In the event of a conflict between the Southeast Quadrant chapter and other provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, the Southeast Quadrant chapter shall control." SOUTHEAST QUADRANT DISTRICT This proposed subdivision is located in the southeast quadrant district Therefore it is subject to the provisions of Section 9 of the SBLDR As previously stated, staff has included the text of the regulations in the report for the reference of the Board members. Again, Staff urges the Board to discuss those items which affect the fundamental layout of the site, with other issues to be addressed at the formal hearings of Preliminary and Final Plat Plan review. 9.06 Dimensional and Design Requirements Applicable to All Sub -Districts CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING The following standards shall apply to development and improvements within the entire Southeast Quadrant Zoning District. A. Height. (1) The maximum height of any occupied structure in the SEQ-NRP, SEQ-NRT, or SEQ-NR sub -district shall not exceed forty-five feet (45); the waiver provisions of Section 3.07(E) shall not apply to occupied structures in these sub -districts. (2) The maximum height of any occupied structure in the SEQ-VR or SEQ-VC sub -district shall not exceed fifty feet (50); the waiver provisions of Section 3.07(E) shall not apply to occupied structures in these sub -districts. B. Open Space and Resource Protection. (1) Open space areas on the site shall be located in such a way as to maximize opportunities for creating usable, contiguous open spaces between adjoining parcels (2) Building lots, streets and other structures shall be located in a manner consistent with the Regulating Plan for the applicable sub -district allowing carefully planned development at the average densities provided in this bylaw. 9.07 Regulating Plans A. Description and Regulatory Effect. The regulatory text of this Article is supplemented with illustrations, officially known as the Regulating Plan, illustrating the dimensional and design concepts. The Regulating Plan contains basic land planning and neighborhood design criteria that are intended to foster attractive and walkable neighborhood development patterns. Design criteria and guidelines set forth below are intended to address basic neighborhood design relationships related to scale, connectivity, and overall orientation that promote pedestrian friendly development as follows in Section 9.07(C). The Regulating Plan is an illustrative guide; it does not have the same force of regulation as does the text in this bylaw. However, the Development Review Board will refer to both the Regulating Plan and the text of this section in its project reviews B. General Provisions (1) The Regulating Plan shall apply to new development within the SEQNRT, SEQ-NR, SEQ- VR and SEQ-VC sub -districts. (2) All residential lots created on or after the effective date of this bylaw in any SEQ sub -district shall conform to a standard minimum lot width to depth ratio of one to two (1:2), with ratios of 1:2.5 to 1:5 recommended. C. Street, Block and Lot Patterns (1) Overall Criteria: Development criteria within the Street, Block and Lot Pattern section are intended to provide pedestrian -scaled development patterns and an interconnected system of streets that allow direct and efficient walking and bicycling trips, and decrease circuitous vehicular trips. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON g DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING (2) Street Design: The intention of street design criteria is to provide a system of attractive, pedestrian -oriented streets that encourage slower speeds, maximize connections between and within neighborhoods, and contribute to neighborhood livability. (3) Building Design: The intention of the building design guidelines is to ensure that new housing and commercial development reinforce a pedestrian -friendly environment, while allowing creativity in design. (3) A plan for the proposed open spaces and/or natural areas and their ongoing management shall be established by the applicant. (4) Sufficient grading and erosion controls shall be employed during construction and after construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties. In making this finding, the Development Review Board may rely on evidence that the project will be covered under the General Permit for Construction issued by the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. (5) Sufficient suitable landscaping and fencing shall be provided to protect wetland, stream, or primary or natural community areas and buffers in a manner that is aesthetically compatible with the surrounding landscape. Chain link fencing other than for agricultural purposes shall be prohibited within PUDs; the use of split rail or other fencing made of natural materials is encouraged. C. Agriculture. The conservation of existing agricultural production values is encouraged through development planning that supports agricultural uses (including but not limited to development plans that create contiguous areas of agricultural use), provides buffer areas between existing agricultural operations and new development, roads, and infrastructure, or creates new opportunities for agricultural use (on any soil group) such as but not limited to community -supported agriculture. Provisions that enhance overall neighborhood and natural resource values rather than preservation of specific soil types are strongly encouraged. D. Public Services and Facilities. In the absence of a specific finding by the Development Review Board that an alternative location and/or provision is approved for a specific development, the location of buildings, lots, streets and utilities shall conform with the location of planned public facilities as depicted on the Official Map, including but not limited to recreation paths, streets, park land, schools, and sewer and water facilities. (1) Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity shall be available to meet the needs of the project in conformance with applicable State and City requirements, as evidenced by a City water allocation, City wastewater allocation, and/or Vermont Water and Wastewater Permit from the Department of Environmental Conservation. (2) Recreation paths, storm water facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility lines, and lighting shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 9 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING (3) Recreation paths, utilities, sidewalks, and lighting shall be designed in a manner that is consistent with City utility plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. (4) The plan shall be reviewed by the Fire Chief or his designee to insure that adequate fire protection can be provided, with the standards for evaluation including, but not limited to, minimum distance between structures, street width, vehicular access from two directions where possible, looping of water lines, water flow and pressure, and number and location of hydrants. E. Circulation. The project shall incorporate access, circulation and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unsafe conditions on of adjacent roads and sufficient to create connectivity for pedestrians, bicycles, vehicles, school transportation, and emergency service vehicles between neighborhoods. In making this finding the Development Review Board may rely on the findings of a traffic study submitted by the applicant, and the findings of any technical review by City staff or consultants. (1) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. (2) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is consistent with City roadway plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. (3) The provisions of Section 15.12(D)(4) related to connections between adjacent streets and neighborhoods shall apply. 9.09 SEQ-NR Sub -District; Specific Standards The SEQ-NR sub -district has additional dimensional and design requirements, as enumerated in this Section. A. Street, Block and Lot Pattern (1) Development blocks. Development block lengths should range between 300 and 500 linear feet. If longer block lengths are unavoidable blocks 500 feet or longer must include mid -block public sidewalk or recreation path connections. (2) Interconnection of Streets. Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 500 feet. Dead end streets (e.g. culs de sac) are discouraged. Dead end streets may not exceed 200 feet in length. Street stubs are required at the end of dead end streets to allow for future street CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 10 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING connections and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections to open space and future housing on adjoining parcels per section 15.12(D)(4). (3) Street Connection to Adjoining Parcels. Street stubs are required to be built to the property line and connected to adjacent parcels per section 15.12(D)(4) of these Regulations. Posting signs with a notice of intent to construct future streets is strongly encouraged. (4) Lots shall maintain a minimum lot width to depth ratio of 1:2, with a ratio of 1:2.5 to 1:5 recommended. B. Street, Sidewalk & Parking Standards (1) Street dimensions and cross sections. Neighborhood streets (collector and local) in the VR sub -district are intended to be low -speed streets for local use that discourage through movement and are safe for pedestrians and bicyclists. Dimensions for public collector and local streets shall be as set forth in Tables 9-3 and 9-4, and Figures 9-8 and 9-9 below. (2) Sidewalks. Sidewalks must be a minimum of five feet (5) in width with an additional minimum five-foot planting strip (greenspace) separating the sidewalk from the street. Sidewalks are required on one side of the street, and must be connected in a pattern that promotes walkability throughout the development. The DRB may in its discretion require supplemental sidewalk segments to achieve this purpose. (3) Street Trees; see Section 9.08(B)(3) Street trees are required along all streets in a planting strip a minimum of five feet wide. Street tress shall be large, deciduous shade trees with species satisfactory to the City Arborist. Street trees to be planted must have a minimum caliper size of 2.5 to 3 inches DBH, and shall be planted no greater than thirty feet (30') on center. (4) On -street parking; see Section 9.08(B)(4). (5) Intersection design. Intersections shall be designed to reduce pedestrian crossing distances and to slow traffic; see Figure 9-6 and Section 9.08(B)(5). (6) Street and sidewalk lighting. Pedestrian -scaled light fixtures (e.g., 12' to 14') shall be provided sufficient to ensure pedestrian safety traveling to and from public spaces. Overall illumination levels should be consistent with the lower -intensity development patterns and character of the SEQ, with lower, smoother levels of illumination (rather than hot -spots) and trespass minimized to the lowest level consistent with public safety. C. Residential Design (1) Building Orientation. Residential buildings must be oriented to the street. Primary entries for single family and multi -family buildings must face the street. Secondary building entries may open onto garages and/or parking areas. (Special design guidelines apply to arterial streets). A CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 11 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING minimum of thirty five percent (35%) of translucent widows and surfaces should be oriented to the south. (2) Building Fagades. Building facades are encouraged to employ a theme and variation approach. Buildings should include common elements to appear unified, but fagades should be varied from one building to the next to avoid monotony. Front porches, stoops, and balconies that create semi -private space and are oriented to the street are encouraged. (3) Front Building Setbacks. In pedestrian districts, a close relationship between the building and the street is critical to the ambiance of the street environment. Buildings should be set back twenty-five feet (25') from the back of sidewalk. Porches, stoops, and balconies may project up to eight feet (8') into the front setbacks. (4) Placement of Garages and Parking. See Section 9.08(C)(4) and Figure 9-7. The front building line of the garage must be set behind the front building line of the house by a minimum of eight feet. Rear Alleys are encouraged for small lot single-family houses, duplexes, and townhouses. (5) Mix of Housing Types. A mix of housing types is encouraged within neighborhoods and developments. Housing types should be mixed within blocks, along the street and within neighborhoods rather than compartmentalized into sections of identical housing types. OTHER Per the previous set of plans, the applicant is proposing to extend the zoning regulations between the Neighborhood Residential and the Village Residential to the west as a means of addressing the need for buffering between residential and non-residential units. This is not explicitly shown on the updated plans, but conversations with the applicant indicate that it is still a desired change. The applicant has submitted a letter itemizing their goals and citing what they believe to be the permissive Land Development Regulation which would give the DRB authority to allow this. This letter is attached in whole (see letter from Dave Marshall dated December 15, 2011) rather than copied herein. Section 3.03(A) (previously copied in whole and attached) allows the Planning Commission to determine the location of the boundaries of districts where uncertainty exists. There does not appear to be confusion as to the location of the district boundary and so this does not apply. Section 3.03 (C) states that: Where a district boundary line divides a lot which was in a single ownership at the time of passage of these regulations, the Development Review Board may permit, as a conditional use, the extension of the regulations for either portion of the lot but not to exceed fifty (50) feet beyond the district line into the remaining portion of the lot (See Article 14 for Conditional Use Review). This provision shall not apply to the boundary lines of any overlay or floating district. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 12 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING The subject lot was not in existence at the time of this regulation. It was part of a larger lot. It is unclear what the intention of the Planning Commission was with respect to reference to "single ownership" as issues of ownership of lots are not otherwise discussed anywhere else in the Land Development Regulations. Staff advises the Board to withhold judgment on this request until the City Attorney provides feedback. Staff understands the applicant's concern that it is difficult or perhaps even impossible to have mixed use development, a goal of the district, while still needing to meet the 15 foot wooded buffer requirement, especially within such a narrow strip of land in the zoning district. With provisions for where parking must be located, along with a significant setback requirement from Hinesburg Road, it is very difficult to meet the requirement for the buffer between zones while also providing a street and keeping parking to the rear of the lots. These are not large buildings, with footprints at or below 5,000 SF. Staff does not believe that the legal mechanism exists at this time to extend the zoning regulations. Staff recommends that a more appropriate method for addressing the buffering concern is to focus on the lots within the VC district and address other potential ways to ensure the commercial use and the residential district can function symbiotically. There are street trees proposed on each side of the street that separates these uses, and there is some land on each of the commercial lots for landscaping. The Board should discuss this and provide the applicant with guidance at the sketch plan level Staff recommends that the applicant work with Staff and the Development Review Board to address the issues herein. The concern with the zoning district boundary should be addressed at the sketch plan level, and decided before proceeding to the preliminary level of review. There are several items which must still be addressed as part of a more detailed, engineered preliminary plat application. Respectfully submitted, 4CathyaaRose, AICP I7 PHASE I P=1JmLmL1 Park / Open Space 1.743 acres we-tland --- ----- - REGREATION PA iH � 1 � I 1 I I I, I I I I 1 N 51TE PLAN SCALE: 1" _ &!!I , In 0 WLA ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE MASTERPLAN UMBRELLA CRITERIA: TOTAL ACREAGE: 18.01 ACRES (784,516 SF; MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE: 157 784,516 x .15=117,677 SF MAXIMUM TOTAL COVERAGE: 30% 784516 x .30 = 236-554 5F PROPOSED MAX. BUILDING COVERAGE: 15% 784,516 x .15=117,677 5F PROPOSED MAX. TOTAL COVERAGE: 30% 784,516 x .30 = 235,354 5F ALLOWABLE DENSITY PER REGULATIONS, DISTRICT 5EQ-NR MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE: 4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE AND 4 DWELLING UNITS PER STRUCTURE RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF SITE: 15.15 ACRES 15.15 x 4 = 00 UNITS ALLOWABLE UNIT COUNT _ BUILDING TYPE NUMBER SINGLE FAMILY 22 COTTAGE UNITS 14 UNITS QUADS 4 (16 UNITS) RESIDENTIAL TOTAL 52 COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS 4 BUILDINGS 0 5,000 S.F. TOTAL COMMERCIAL: 20,000 S.F. 'i M O O rI E �%a ° < �= Nc ° L .0 >ryv© In m co c• M1n m 0 Cc Ln t!1 a w SHEET NUMBER S P - 1 DATE: 11/21/2011 Rye Parcel Lot coverage calculations 0-1/08/2012 Building Type Number of Type Square Footage per unit Total SF for building type Commercial Building 4 5,000 20,000 Cottage Units 14 1,100 15,400 4-plex units 4 2,800 11,200 Other Lot Coverage Number of Type Square Footage per unit Total SF of Coverage Main Road System 1 50,212 50,212 Major Sidewalk System 1 13,026 13,026 4-plex Parking 1 14,500 14,500 Commercial parking lots 4 6,800 27,200 10 cottage parking 1 8,750 8,750 4 cottage parking 1 5,250 5,250 Misc Sidewalk allowance 1 2,000 2,000 Total Coverage not including Single Family 167,538 Allowable Total Lot Coverage 235,354 Remainder for Single Family 67,816 Number of Single Family Dwellings 22 Allowance per Single Family Dwelling 3,083 Proposed Total Coverage 235,354 Certificate of compliance CC# Certificate of occupancy CO# Chicken permit CK# Design Review DR # DRB Applications # Miscellaneous regulations photocopies postage digitized tax map Peddlers permit # Sign permit SN# Temporary sign permit TSN #, Waste water permit WW# _ Zoning permit ZP# Planning and Zoning Cash Receipt Form Property owners name: Property location: 17� --I, C 4-�, Date: 3 -(p_ 11 Code $ _ ccl $27 + 3=$30.00 cc2 $6.00 cc3 $1.00 cc4 $3.00 $40.00 _ col $3.00 co2 $6.00 co3 $1.00 co5 $3.00 co4 $140.00 $153.00 chic $20.00 signs dr1 $55.00 all others dr1 $165.00 _ drbl $3.00 drb2 $6.00 drb3 $1.00 drb5 $3.00 drb4 $ msi $ �. v 0 copi $ post $ deve $ 60.00 / $120.00 ped $ _ sgn $55.00 _ tmp $5.00 _ ww1 $50.00 ww2 $3.00 ww3 $6.00 ww4 $1.00 ww5 $3.00 $63.00 _ zp1 $3.00 zp2 $6.00 zp3 $1.00 zp5 $3.00 zp4 $ $ a s' Rabideau Architects q � � 550 Hinesburg Road, Suite 101 South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Mr. Ray Belair, South Burlington Planning and Zoning 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Fox Run / Rye Parcel. Mr Belair, In accordance with your instructions, I am hereby requesting a continuation of the hearing process for the above captioned item. In order to give the design team an opportunity to coordinate, and the City staff a chance to prepare review comments, I am asking you to move us to the next hearing date. I have attached the $50.00 fee you assessed for this request. Very Truly Yours/ t � Greg Rabi ea Phone 802-863-0222 Fax 802--863-6407 E-mail greg@rabideau- architects.com Permit Number SD- // �i - (office use only) APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN REVIEW SOUTHEAST QUADRANT All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the plans will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. For amendments, please provide pertinent information only. 1) OWNER(S) OF RECORD (Name(s) as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #) Rye Associates, LLC, c/o Dousevicz Construction, Suite 201, 21 Carmichael Street, Essex, Vt 0S4S2, Ph 879-4477 ext 103, Fax 879-4480 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED(S) (Book and page#) Vol 774 Pg C;92-.r;96 Map slide 491 Rage 1 3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) Rye Associates, LLC, c/o Dousevicz Construction, Suite 201, 21 Carmichael Street, Essex, Vt 0S4.r,2, Ph 879-4477 ext to.3, Fax 879- 4480 4) APPLICANT'S LEGAL INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY (fee simple, option, etc.) Fee Simple 5) CONTACT PERSON (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) Brad Dousevicz, Dousevicz Construction, Suite 201, 21 Carmichael Street, Essex, Vt or,4S2, Ph 879-4477 ext 103, Fax 879- 4480 5a) CONTACT EMAIL ADDRESS: dousevicz(&gmail.com 6) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: lo7.r, Hinesburg Road 7) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) 0860-01075 8) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) General project description (explain what you want approval for): • Creation of a planned unit development which includes 20,000 SF of commercial use in four buildings within the 2.86 acres of the property located in the SEQ-VC district and 32 units in eight (8) multi -family buildings and 27 single family lots within the 15.15 acres located within the SEQ-NR district. • Creation of 2,55o LF of proposed public roadways on the property and 910 of public roadway in the offer of dedication to the City located on the adjacent property to the north (I/O district). • The Application seeks expansion of the VC district by 50-feet to the west in accordance with the provisions set forth in Article 3.03 C of the SBLDR's. SEQ Sketch Plan Application Page 2 of4 b) Existing Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use) The existing 18.01 acre lot is undeveloped. c) Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain 20,000 SF of commercial use in four buildings within the 2.86 acres of the property located in the SEQ-VC district and 32 units in eight (8) multi -family buildings and 27 single family lots within the 15.15 acres located within the SEQ-NR district. d) Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain Commercial Structures 20,000 SF (Footprint) 20,000 SF (Total) Multifamily Buildings 8 x 3,600 = 28,80o SF Single Family Homes 27 x 1,820 SF (estimate) = 43,500 e) Proposed height of building (if applicable) Commercial Structures 28' Multifamily Buildings 28' Single Family Homes 28' f) Total parcel size(s) - Please see attached listing of lot sizes. g) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable) There are some small wetland areas located along drainage way flowing southwesterly. There are also two small isolated wetlands located in the west half of the property. The applicant will provide documentation in the future indicating that the loss of these wetlands will not impact the limited functions and values. 9) 9a: SEQ SUBDISTRICT (identify in each) Acreage Units -Existing Units -Proposed NRP None NRT None NR 15.15 None 59 VR None VC 2.86 None o 9b: Are Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs) being utilized? Yes If yes, please identify how many and from which parcel (street address) TBD io) TYPE OF EXISTING OR PROPOSED ENCUMBRANCES ON PROPERTY (easements, covenants, leases, rights of way, etc.) Easements in favor of Green Mountain power for power distribution outside of the pubic rights - of -way. SEQ Sketch Plan Application Page g of4 11) LOT COVERAGE a) Building: Existing o% Proposed 12.2ti% b) Overall (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing o% Proposed ,17 6o c) Front yard (along each street) Existing o/o Proposed 1 .1 12) PROPOSED EXTENSION, RELOCATION, OR MODIFICATION OF MUNICIPAL FACILITIES (sanitary sewer, water supply, streets, storm drainage, etc.) Sewer - The project is proposed to be served by gravity sewer mains flowing to the existing collection system located on Oak Creek Drive. Water - A looped water distribution system is proposed to service the project. Water mains will be installed along all of the proposed streets. The two connection points to the existing municipal distribution system is off of Fox run lane tot he south and at the Meadowland Drive intersection with Hinesburg Road. Streets - All of the streets are proposed to be publically owned. The westerly extension of Meadowland Drive on the west side of hinesburg Road (Swift Street extension?) will follow the offer of dedication encumbering the property to the north. A series of interconnected local streets will serve the project. These streets will connect at two locations to the north with Swift Street extension and at one location tot he south on fox Run lane at its intersection with Oak Creek Drive. Storm Drainage - Will be collected in an enclosed drainage system located within the local streets and will be directed to a stormwater management facility located at the low point in the southwest corner of the property. The discharge from the facility will be through a level spreader to mimic the existing drainage pattern in this portion of the property. 13) OWNERS OF RECORD OF ALL CONTIGUOUS PROPERTIES & MAILING ADDRESSES (this may be provided on a separate attached sheet and on pre - stamped and preaddressed envelopes. The city will add the return address). Please see attached listing. Envelopes are attached. 14) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE Phase I - Completion - 2014 Phase II - Completion - 2016 Phase III - Completion - 2018 SEQ Sketch Plan Application Page 4 of4 15) PLANS AND FEE Plat plans shall be submitted which shows the information required by the City's Land Development Regulations. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (11" x 17") of the plans must be submitted. The application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the application. See the City fee schedule for details. I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to.the best of my knowledge. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: I have reviewed this sketchy -Tan a plete Officer ofi and find it to be: ❑ Incomplete The applicant or permittee retains the obligation to identify, apply for, and obtain relevant state permits for this project. Call (8o2) 879-5676 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist. Rye Associates Building & Lot Coverage Computation December 14, 2011 Description # Units Building Pavement Decks Walkwa s Total Building Total Lot Typical Residential Lot 26 1,820 1,000 240 200 47,320 84,760 Commercial Lot #1 1 5,000 6,620 0 1000 5,000 12,620 Commercial Lot #2 1 5,000 6,620 0 1100 5 000 12,720 Commercial Lot #3 11 5,0001 6,6201 01 1000 5 000 12,620 Commercial 'Lot #4 1 5 000 5 930 0 1050 5,000 11,9801 MultiFamil #1 1 3,600 2,800 0 0 3,600 6,400 MultiFamil #2 1 3,600 2,050 0 0 3,600 5,650 MultiFamil #3 1 3,600 2,800 0 0 3,600 6,400 MultiFamil #4 1 3,600 2,800 0 0 3,600 6,400 MultiFamil #5 1 3,600 2,800 0 01 3,600 6,400 MultiFamil #6 1 3,600 2,350 0 0 3,600 5,950 MultiFamil #7 1 3,600 2,800 0 0 3,600 6,400 MultiFamil #8 1 3,600 3,440 0 0 3,600 7,040 Multifamily Access 3120 300 800 300 3600 0 300 100 8,520 Length Rd Width SW Width SW Width Total A Street 180 28 5 5 6,840 B Street 1192 26 5 5 42,912 B Street 538 34 5 5 23,672 C Street 560 34 5 51 1 24,640 Hinesburg Road SW 745 0 01 51 1 3,725 Lot Size 18.01 Ac 784,516 SF Front Yard Coverage Len th Width Total Hinesburg Road SW 745 5 3,725 Building Walkways 160 5 800 Parking 1900 1,900 Total 6,425 Front Yard Size 1 7451 57 42,465 Front Yard Coverage 15.13% Maximum Allowed 30% SF SF 96,120 295,649 Building Coverage 12.25% Maximum Allowed 15% Lot Coverage 37.69% Maximum Allowed 30% Rye Associates Lot Area Summary December 14, 2011 Area (SF) Area (Ac) C-1 32,500 0.75 C-2 31,820 0.73 C-3 31,188 0.72 C-4 32,889 0.76 MF-5 118,272 2.72 MF-6 24,450 0.56 Single Fam Width Depth 7 75 165 12,375 0.28 8 75 165 12,375 0.28 9 75 165 12,375 0.28 10 75 165 12,375 0.28 11 75 165 12,375 0.28 12 75 165 12,375 0.28 13 75 135 10,125 0.23 14 117 109 10,461 0.24 15 75 150 11,187 0.26 16 75 150 11,250 0.26 17 75 150 11,250 0.26 18 75 150 11,250 0.26 19 75 150 11,250 0.26 20 75 150 11,250 0.26 21 75 150 11,250 0.26 22 75 150 11,250 0.26 23 75 150 11,250 0.26 24 75 150 11,250 0.26 25 75 150 11,250 0.26 26 75 150 11,250 026 27 75 150 11,250 0.26 28 75 150 11,250 0.26 29 75 150 11,250 0.26 30 75 150 11,250 0.26 31 75 150 11,250 0.26 32 75 150 11,250 0.26 33 75 150 11,250 0.26 34 33,090 0.76 35 15,000 0.34 Width Length A Street 60 163 9,780 0.22 B Street 60 583 34,980 0.80 B Street 60 653 39,180 0.90 B Street 68 524 35,632 0.82 A Street 68 545 37,060 0.85 Subject Parcel 0860-01075 Rye Associates, LLC Abutters List December 14, 2011 Rye Associates, LLC 21 Carmichael St Suite 201 Essex Junction, VT 05452 PARCEL ID OWNER OF RECORD 0860-01035 Mansfield View Properties, LLC 1035 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01045 Mansfield View Properties, LLC 1035 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01061 Rye Arther H & Brisson Bernice R Trust 63 Sam Web Road Fairfax, VT 05454 1225-00001 Beasimer Linda M 1 Oak Creek Road South Burlington, VT 05403 1225-00002 Frigo Vincent M & Jovina 2 Oak Creek Road South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00006 Khaleelulla Mohamed 6 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00010 Cerreta Scott & Jill 10 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00014 Lyman Tod H & Kelly M 14 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 1 Rye Associates, LLC Abutters List December 14, 2011 PARCEL ID (cont'd) OWNER OF RECORD (cont'd) 0686-00016 Gibbs Lyndon Scott & Lisa 16 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00018 Cunavelis Jake 18 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01050 A Spaniel Properties, LLC 1050 Hinesburg Road Unit A South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01050 B&C Avalanche Development, LLC 35 Dorset Lane Williston, VT 05495 0860-01100 East Mountain View, LLC 1100 Hinesburg Road Suite 201 South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01060 Sphinx Development, LLC, c/o Gamal Eltabbakh 391 Hills Point Road Charlotte, VT 05445 0860-10700 Sphinx Development, LLC, c/o Gamal Eltabbakh 391 Hills Point Road Charlotte, VT 05445 0860-01020 Burlington Properties Ltd. 85 Meadowland Drive South Burlington, VT 05403 1095-00010 CEA Properties, LLC 10 Mansfield View Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 2 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Report preparation date: December 15, 2011 drb\sub\staffcomments\2011\ Application received- January 11, 2012 SD_11 _46_1075H inesburg Road_RyeAssociates RYE ASSOCIATES LLC- 1075 HINESBURG ROAD SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION #SD-11-46 Agenda #6 Meeting date- January 17, 2012 Owner/Applicant Contact M., n a i i ftj/e /'iJJVCIciICJ LLI� ^---A ^- Brad Dousevicz c/o Dousevicz Construction Dousevicz Construction Suite 201 Suite 201 21 Carmichael Street 21 Carmichael Street Essex, VT 05452 Essex, VT 05452 Project Engineer Property Information Civil Engineering Associates Tax Parcel 0860-01075 10 Mansfield View Lane SEQ Zoning District - South Burlington VT 05403 Neighborhood Residential (15.15 acres) Village Commercial (2.86 acres) 18.01 acres total Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING Rye Associates LLC, hereinafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking sketch plan review for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) 27 single family dwellings, 2) 32 multi -family dwelling units in seven (7) buildings, and 3) 20,000 sq. ft. of commercial space in four (4) buildings, 1075 Hinesburg Road. COMMENTS The staff notes herein reflect a review of the major topics for review and are, at this stage, intended to review the basic concept and site design, as well as to advise the applicant as to any potential problems and concerns relating to those major issues. For the purposes of a focused sketch plan discussion, staff has tried to narrow the discussions to the central issues that seem to present themselves at this early stage of the project: density, access and street configuration, wetlands impact, parks planning, and building orientation and design. Additional items, including but not limited to the specific requirements for recreation paths, landscaping, snow storage, adequacy of parking, etc, certainly warrant a full review and will be addressed in detail at a later stage. Associate Planner Cathyann Larose, Administrative Officer Ray Belair, and Director of Planning Paul Conner, all herein after referred to as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted by the applicant and have the following comments with respect to these very significant issues: ACCESS& TRAFFIC Access is proposed via a public street connection to Hinesburg Road as well as to the existing public road of Fox Run Lane. The connection on Hinesburg Road is directly across from Meadowland Drive. This intersection had previously been studied as part of the Meadowland Drive Development and there are established thresholds for when traffic improvements are to be made, including signalizing the intersection and dedicated turn lanes. This development should review that mandate and incorporate the vehicle trip ends generated within into the study. If the trips generated as a result of this proposal exceed those limited by the Meadowland Drive development, then this applicant shall be responsible for the necessary improvements. Staff recommends the applicant submit a traffic impact analysis as part of the preliminary plat application. Staff further recommends that the Board invoke a technical review of the traffic analysis. The connection to Fox Run Lane was anticipated with the Development of Oak Creek. The north -south road to connect to Fox Run Lane is shown on the Official South Burlington Map for future road connections. Finally, Staff supports the layout which calls for a short road connection with a jog, which enables the connection without providing a long straight road which would have the potential to encourage higher speeds. The road shown as Street D on the plans is also on the official map to connect to the property to CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING the west. The Recreation Path Committee has reviewed the plans and will provide written comments to the Board by the date of the public meeting. Staff has reviewed the proposed lot layout in accordance with the Regulating Plan illustrated in Article 9 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations and discussed below in this report. Staff finds that the project meets the guidelines of the SEQ which call for short development blocks and limits the lengths of roadways (2) Interconnection of Streets. Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 500 feet. Dead end streets (e.g. culs de sac) are discouraged. Dead end streets may not exceed 200 feet in length. Street stubs are required at the end of dead end streets to allow for future street connections and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections to open space and future housing on adjoining parcels per section 15.12(D)(4). This guideline is mostly met. The longest street block (B street running north -south) is approximately 520 feet. The remainder of the proposal is split sufficiently. There are no proposed cul-de-sacs or dead end streets, except the stub of Street D which is proposed to connect to the west at a future date. Street widths are appropriate and in accordance with the LDRs, with the exception, in Staff's opinion, of C Street. This is proposed to be 34 feet wide with parking on both sides. The Board may wish to discuss whether parking is needed on both sides on this street, or whether it would be better to narrow the street by 9 feet and allow parking on only one side. The proposed project shall be subject to the design guidelines pursuant to Section 9.08 of the SBLDRs. Staff has already addressed the project's compliance with the lot layout and road configuration. The applicant has also addressed the Residential Design, pursuant to Section 9.08(C) of the Regulations, including building orientation, building facades and front building setbacks, placement of garages and parking, and mix of housing types. The applicant has submitted preliminary lot sketches which illustrate the general layout of the proposed single family and quadraplex units. At this stage in the process, the design proposed by the applicant appears to meet the goals and objectives of the design standards of the Southeast Quadrant enumerated within the Land Development Regulations. Staff recommends more detailed, smaller scale sketches of the proposed buildings at the preliminary plat level. Still, staff has included the text of the regulations with respect to the Southeast Quadrant in this report should the Board wish to address any of the items at this stage, or to get a better understanding of those issues to be CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING later discussed. Section 9 of the SBLDR states that "a range of parks should be distributed through the SEQ to meet a variety of needs including children's play, passive enjoyment of the outdoors, and active recreation." Fi lrthermore "narks chrm drrq ha nrn%/ided at n rn+n of 7 r, �r of Ap—lam.- A I.I.... 4 p � .. N — — I .. U� J co vi %A U.upcr al u pal ru per 1,000 population per the South Burlington Capital Budget and Program" and "a neighborhood or mini park of 10,000 square feet or more should be provided within a one - quarter mile walk of every home not so served by an existing City park or other publicly -owned recreation area." The applicant is not proposing any park land on the site. This is a significant issue that staff recommends the Board address. Based on the proposed number of units, and resulting expectation of number of residents, 0.97 acres of parkland should be provided. Staff strongly recommends the Board discuss this item with the applicant, and that at least an acre of parkland is provided, either in the form of playing fields, a playground, a community garden, or some combination thereof. This should at least serve the residents of the proposed PUD, but should also be located in such a way as to be available to the residents of the adjacent development to the south. The base density of the parcel generated by the land at 1.2 units per acre, based on 18.01 acres, is 21 units. The maximum units allowed, in accordance with Chapter 9 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations and determined by the Neighborhood residential sub -district under the Transferred Development Right program, are 60 units. The maximum units allowed, in accordance with Chapter 9 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations and determined by the Village Commercial sub -district under the Transferred Development Right program, are 21 units. The applicant is proposing 59 new units. This is a proposed density of approximately 3.3 units per acre. A total of 38 transferable development rights would be required. The applicant has not stated whether they have any legal options to purchase enough development rights to build the project as proposed. Staff recommends that the Board require the applicant to submit the legal documents pertaining to the options for review by the City Attorney prior to final plat approval. Staff further recommends that the development rights be purchased by the applicant prior to issuance of zoning permits for any units beyond the 21 allowed by the property's inherent density. The applicant shall submit legal documents pertaining to the options to purchase Transferred CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING Development Rights (TDRs) to the City Attorney for approval, prior to Final Plat approval. The applicant shall submit legal documents showing clear ownership of the remaining 17 development rights to the City Attorney for approval, prior to issuance of a zoning permit for the 22d unit. 1 5 %may : ► The plans show encroachments into various wetlands on the site. It is not clear on the plans what class wetlands these are. The applicant should identify all wetlands by class, as well as show the 50 foot buffer surrounding them as part of the preliminary plat application. As the applicant is seeking encroachments, staff strongly recommends the applicant provide the Board with a full functions and values reports of all wetlands on site. There are some locations where the units or associated pavement rest directly upon the wetland or wetland buffer limits. The applicant should include a very detailed grading and erosion control plan for construction. Furthermore, staff recommends a ground delineation of the wetland buffer where it gets close to the rear of the homes so as to reduce impact by residents of those units. The wetland and wetland buffers shall be protected and should not in any case be used as useable lawn or other recreational areas. Possibilities include a line of planted cedars, split rail fencing, or other physical barrier between what is to be the grassed lawn area and the more sensitive wetland buffer. Staff also suggests additional measures of protection, including limitations on fertilizers and mowing. The following are suggested conditions: There shall be no use of pesticides or non -organic fertilizers within the wetlands or associated 50 foot buffers. This shall be reflected in the association documents which shall be reviewed by the City Attorney prior to issuance of a zoning permit for the first building on the property. There shall be no mowing within 50 feet of the wetlands on the property. Brush -hogging shall be allowed no more than three (3) times per year. This shall be reflected in the association documents which shall be reviewed by the City Attorney prior to issuance of a zoning permit for the first building on the property. Deeds and association covenants shall reflect all of the standards included above, especially the use of the wetland buffer as lawn or other recreation areas, and the use of pesticides on site. Section 9.08 C(5) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations states that "a mix of housing types is encouraged within neighborhoods and developments. Housing types should be CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING mixed within blocks, along the street and within neighborhoods rather than compartmentalized into sections of identical housing types." The proposed plans include: ■ 27 detached single family homes ■ 32 units in the form of 8 quadplex buildings These units are not mixed throughout the proposed development and do not meet the standard set above in section 9.08C. The placement of the buildings around the `green' in the center of the property appears to be well -designed. However, there is no mix of housing along `B street'. Staff might suggest a few duplex units in this area in exchange for allowing the 8-plex units to remain clustered as they are. This would also increase the diversity of housing sizes and configurations offered. The location of the 4-unit buildings between the commercial uses and the residential zone also helps to transition densities, from commercial, higher density residential, to lower density residential. Staff recommends further review of this criterion when housing elevations are submitted; to ensure that housing appearances are also varied. Differing colors, rooflines, and building styles would help to meet this criterion. Pursuant to Section 9.02 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: "These regulations hereby implement the relevant provisions of the City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan, and any adopted amendments to such plan, and are in accord with the policies set forth therein. In the event of a conflict between the Southeast Quadrant chapter and other provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, the Southeast Quadrant chapter shall control." SOUTHEAST QUADRANT DISTRICT This proposed subdivision is located in the southeast quadrant district Therefore it is subject to the provisions of Section 9 of the SBLDR As previously stated, staff has included the text of the regulations in the report for the reference of the Board members. Again, Staff urges the Board to discuss those items which affect the fundamental layout of the site, with other issues to be addressed at the formal hearings of Preliminary and Final Plat Plan review. 9.06 Dimensional and Design Requirements Applicable to All Sub -Districts The following standards shall apply to development and improvements within the entire Southeast Quadrant Zoning District. A. Height. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING (1) The maximum height of any occupied structure in the SEQ-NRP, SEQ-NRT, or SEQ-NR sub -district shall not exceed forty-five feet (45); the waiver provisions of Section 3.07(E) shall not apply to occupied structures in these sub -districts. (2) The maximum height of any occupied structure in the SEQ-VR or SEQ-VC sub -district shall not exceed fifty feet (50); the waiver provisions of Section 3.07(E) shall not apply to occupied structures in these sub -districts. B. Open Space and Resource Protection. (1) Open space areas on the site shall be located in such a way as to maximize opportunities for creating usable, contiguous open spaces between adjoining parcels (2) Building lots, streets and other structures shall be located in a manner consistent with the Regulating Plan for the applicable sub -district allowing carefully planned development at the average densities provided in this bylaw. 9.07 Regulating Plans A. Description and Regulatory Effect. The regulatory text of this Article is supplemented with illustrations, officially known as the Regulating Plan, illustrating the dimensional and design concepts. The Regulating Plan contains basic land planning and neighborhood design criteria that are intended to foster attractive and walkable neighborhood development patterns. Design criteria and guidelines set forth below are intended to address basic neighborhood design relationships related to scale, connectivity, and overall orientation that promote pedestrian friendly development as follows in Section 9.07(C). The Regulating Plan is an illustrative guide; it does not have the same force of regulation as does the text in this bylaw. However, the Development Review Board will refer to both the Regulating Plan and the text of this section in its project reviews B. General Provisions (1) The Regulating Plan shall apply to new development within the SEQNRT, SEQ-NR, SEQ- VR and SEQ-VC sub -districts. (2) All residential lots created on or after the effective date of this bylaw in any SEQ sub -district shall conform to a standard minimum lot width to depth ratio of one to two (1:2), with ratios of 1:2.5 to 1:5 recommended. C. Street, Block and Lot Patterns (1) Overall Criteria: Development criteria within the Street, Block and Lot Pattern section are intended to provide pedestrian -scaled development patterns and an interconnected system of streets that allow direct and efficient walking and bicycling trips, and decrease circuitous vehicular trips. (2) Street Design: The intention of street design criteria is to provide a system of attractive, pedestrian -oriented streets that encourage slower speeds, maximize connections between and within neighborhoods, and contribute to neighborhood livability. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 8 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING (3) Building Design: The intention of the building design guidelines is to ensure that new housing and commercial development reinforce a pedestrian -friendly environment, while allowing creativity in design. (3) A plan for the proposed open spaces and/or natural areas and their ongoing management shall be established by the applicant. (4) Sufficient grading and erosion controls shall be employed during construction and after construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties. In making this finding, the Development Review Board may rely on evidence that the project will be covered under the General Permit for Construction issued by the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. (5) Sufficient suitable landscaping and fencing shall be provided to protect wetland, stream, or primary or natural community areas and buffers in a manner that is aesthetically compatible with the surrounding landscape. Chain link fencing other than for agricultural purposes shall be prohibited within PUDs; the use of split rail or other fencing made of natural materials is encouraged. C. Agriculture. The conservation of existing agricultural production values is encouraged through development planning that supports agricultural uses (including but not limited to development plans that create contiguous areas of agricultural use), provides buffer areas between existing agricultural operations and new development, roads, and infrastructure, or creates new opportunities for agricultural use (on any soil group) such as but not limited to community -supported agriculture. Provisions that enhance overall neighborhood and natural resource values rather than preservation of specific soil types are strongly encouraged. D. Public Services and Facilities. In the absence of a specific finding by the Development Review Board that an alternative location and/or provision is approved for a specific development, the location of buildings, lots, streets and utilities shall conform with the location of planned public facilities as depicted on the Official Map, including but not limited to recreation paths, streets, park land, schools, and sewer and water facilities. (1) Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity shall be available to meet the needs of the project in conformance with applicable State and City requirements, as evidenced by a City water allocation, City wastewater allocation, and/or Vermont Water and Wastewater Permit from the Department of Environmental Conservation. (2) Recreation paths, storm water facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility lines, and lighting shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. (3) Recreation paths, utilities, sidewalks, and lighting shall be designed in a manner that is consistent with City utility plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 9 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING (4) The plan shall be reviewed by the Fire Chief or his designee to insure that adequate fire protection can be provided, with the standards for evaluation including, but not limited to, minimum distance between structures, street width, vehicular access from two directions where possible, looping of water lines, water flow and pressure, and number and location of hydrants. E. Circulation. The project shall incorporate access, circulation and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unsafe conditions on of adjacent roads and sufficient to create connectivity for pedestrians, bicycles, vehicles, school transportation, and emergency service vehicles between neighborhoods. In making this finding the Development Review Board may rely on the findings of a traffic study submitted by the applicant, and the findings of any technical review by City staff or consultants. (1) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. (2) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is consistent with City roadway plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. (3) The provisions of Section 15.12(D)(4) related to connections between adjacent streets and neighborhoods shall apply. 9.09 SEQ-NR Sub -District; Specific Standards The SEQ-NR sub -district has additional dimensional and design requirements, as enumerated in this Section. A. Street, Block and Lot Pattern (1) Development blocks. Development block lengths should range between 300 and 500 linear feet. If longer block lengths are unavoidable blocks 500 feet or longer must include mid -block public sidewalk or recreation path connections. (2) Interconnection of Streets. Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 500 feet. Dead end streets (e.g. culs de sac) are discouraged. Dead end streets may not exceed 200 feet in length. Street stubs are required at the end of dead end streets to allow for future street connections and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections to open space and future housing on adjoining parcels per section 15.12(D)(4). CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 10 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING (3) Street Connection to Adjoining Parcels. Street stubs are required to be built to the property line and connected to adjacent parcels per section 15.12(D)(4) of these Regulations. Posting signs with a notice of intent to construct future streets is strongly encouraged. (4) Lots shall maintain a minimum lot width to depth ratio of 1:2, with a ratio of 1:2.5 to 1:5 recommended. B. Street, Sidewalk & Parking Standards (1) Street dimensions and cross sections. Neighborhood streets (collector and local) in the VR sub -district are intended to be low -speed streets for local use that discourage through movement and are safe for pedestrians and bicyclists. Dimensions for public collector and local streets shall be as set forth in Tables 9-3 and 9-4, and Figures 9-8 and 9-9 below. (2) Sidewalks. Sidewalks must be a minimum of five feet (5') in width with an additional minimum five-foot planting strip (greenspace) separating the sidewalk from the street. Sidewalks are required on one side of the street, and must be connected in a pattern that promotes walkability throughout the development. The DRB may in its discretion require supplemental sidewalk segments to achieve this purpose. (3) Street Trees; see Section 9.08(B)(3) Street trees are required along all streets in a planting strip a minimum of five feet wide. Street tress shall be large, deciduous shade trees with species satisfactory to the City Arborist. Street trees to be planted must have a minimum caliper size of 2.5 to 3 inches DBH, and shall be planted no greater than thirty feet (30') on center. (4) On -street parking; see Section 9.08(B)(4). (5) Intersection design. Intersections shall be designed to reduce pedestrian crossing distances and to slow traffic; see Figure 9-6 and Section 9.08(B)(5). (6) Street and sidewalk lighting. Pedestrian -scaled light fixtures (e.g., 12' to 14') shall be provided sufficient to ensure pedestrian safety traveling to and from public spaces. Overall illumination levels should be consistent with the lower -intensity development patterns and character of the SEQ, with lower, smoother levels of illumination (rather than hot -spots) and trespass minimized to the lowest level consistent with public safety. C. Residential Design (1) Building Orientation. Residential buildings must be oriented to the street. Primary entries for single family and multi -family buildings must face the street. Secondary building entries may open onto garages and/or parking areas. (Special design guidelines apply to arterial streets). A minimum of thirty five percent (35%) of translucent widows and surfaces should be oriented to the south. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 11 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING (2) Building Fagades. Building facades are encouraged to employ a theme and variation approach. Buildings should include common elements to appear unified, but fagades should be varied from one building to the next to avoid monotony. Front porches, stoops, and balconies that create semi -private space and are oriented to the street are encouraged. (3) Front Building Setbacks. In pedestrian districts, a close relationship between the building and the street is critical to the ambiance of the street environment. Buildings should be set back twenty-five feet (25') from the back of sidewalk. Porches, stoops, and balconies may project up to eight feet (8') into the front setbacks. (4) Placement of Garages and Parking. See Section 9.08(C)(4) and Figure 9-7. The front building line of the garage must be set behind the front building line of the house by a minimum of eight feet. Rear Alleys are encouraged for small lot single-family houses, duplexes, and townhouses. (5) Mix of Housing Types. A mix of housing types is encouraged within neighborhoods and developments. Housing types should be mixed within blocks, along the street and within neighborhoods rather than compartmentalized into sections of identical housing types. OTHER The applicant is proposing to extend the zoning regulations between the Neighborhood Residential and the Village Residential to the west as a means of addressing the need for buffering between residential and non-residential units. The applicant has submitted a letter itemizing their goals and citing what they believe to be the permissive Land Development Regulation which would give the DRB authority to allow this. This letter is attached in whole (see letter from Dave Marshall dated December 15, 2011) rather than copied herein. Section 3.03(A) (copied in whole and attached) allows the Planning Commission to determine the location of the boundaries of districts where uncertainty exists. There does not appear to be confusion as to the location of the district boundary and so this does not apply. Section 3.03 (C) states that: Where a district boundary line divides a lot which was in a single ownership at the time of passage of these regulations, the Development Review Board may permit, as a conditional use, the extension of the regulations for either portion of the lot but not to exceed fifty (50) feet beyond the district line into the remaining portion of the lot (See Article 14 for Conditional Use Review). This provision shall not apply to the boundary lines of any overlay or floating district. The subject lot was not in existence at the time of this regulation. It was part of a larger lot. It is unclear what the intention of the Planning Commission was with respect to reference to "single ownership" as issues of ownership of lots are not otherwise discussed anywhere else in the Land Development Regulations. Staff advises the Board to withhold judgment on this request until the City Attorney provides feedback. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 12 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING Staff understands the applicant's concern that it is difficult or perhaps even impossible to have mixed use development, a goal of the district, while still needing to meet the 15 foot wooded buffer requirement, especially within such a narrow strip of land in the zoning district. With provisions for where parking must be located, along with a significant setback requirement from Hinesburg Road, it is very difficult to meet the requirement for the buffer between zones while also providing a street and keeping parking to the rear of the lots. These are not large buildings, with footprints at or below 5,000 SF. Staff does not believe that the legal mechanism exists at this time to extend the zoning regulations. Staff recommends that a more appropriate method for addressing the buffering concern is to focus on the lots within the VC district and address other potential ways to ensure the commercial use and the residential district can function symbiotically. There are street trees proposed on each side of the street that separates these uses, and there is some land on each of the commercial lots for landscaping. The Board should discuss this and provide the applicant with guidance at the sketch plan level. Staff recommends that the applicant work with Staff and the Development Review Board to address the issues herein. There are several items which must still be addressed as part of a more detailed, engineered preliminary plat application. R ectfully submitted, A.01 - 40AM, athyaji LaRose, AICP, Associate Planner CIVIL it'llGII EIERIl IG r�'S� �ClAt"", IHC�. 10 Mansfield View Lane Phone: 802-864-2323 South Burlington, VT 05403 Fax: 802-864-2271 E-Mail: mail 60cea-vt.com December 15, 2011 Mr. Ray Belair, Zoning Adminsitrator City of South Burlington Planning & Zoning 550 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Rye Associates - 1075 Hinesburg Road PUD Sketch Plan Application Dear Mr. Belair: Rye Associates is seeking approval for a mixed use planned unit development located on an undeveloped 18.01 acre parcel located in the northwest quadrant of the Fox Rune Lane - Hinesburg Road intersection. The property currently sits within both the SEQ-NR (15.15 acres) and the SEQ-VC (2.86 acres) districts. We offer the following information in support of the City's review for compliance with the standards set forth in the Southeast Quadrant District. Zoning - The south lot is broken up into two separate SEQ subdistricts. The Village Commercial (VC) district occupies the eastern eighth of the site while the remaining portion lies in the Neighborhood Residential (NR) district. The NR District allows up to 4 units per acre with the use of TDR's. The total property in the NR District is 15.15 acres yielding a maximum density of 60.6 units. This application seeks approval for 59 units. The VC District allows up to 8 units per acre with the use of TDR's. The total property in the VC District is 2.86 acres yielding a maximum density of 22.8 units. The application at this time does not include any residential units in this district, only commercial structures. Encumbrances - A drainage way carries stormwater runoff from properties to the north southwesterly across the property towards the residential properties located off the end of Fox Run Lane. Along this route is a series of unconnected wetland pods. There are three other small wetland pockets on the property of which the small wetland located in the southeast corner of the site appears to have been created by the original construction of Fox Run Lane. The City Official Map shows the proposed extension of Oak Creek Drive to the north to intersect with the future east -west extension of Swift Street. The same map shows the Mr. Ray Belair Page 2 of 5 December 15, 2011 proposed extension of Swift Street along the northern edge of this property within a existing offer of dedication to the City. Village Commercial District Requirements The VC district boundary line is located 200 feet from the centerline of Hinesburg Road. The existing right-of-way width for Hinesburg Road is 66 feet leaving (200'-33') 167 feet for the VC District. The front yard setback is 50 feet on Hinesburg Road from the planned future right-of- way width of 80 feet. The current right-of-way width is 66 feet resulting in a front yard setback of (one-half of 80'-66') 57 feet from the existing right-of-way. With the requirement of the LDR's that the parking be placed behind (or on the side of) the buildings, the resulting usable space from the front of the building in VC District to the west edge of the VC district is approximately (167' - 57') 110 feet. Section 3.06 (1) of the LDR's requires that the rear yard of the VC (commercial) district which abuts the NR (residential) District NR District be increased to 65' for the buildings and parking lots. The DRB may allow this to be reduced with the use of landscaping fencing or other approved methods to protect the residential uses but it can not be reduced to less than the standard 30' setback for the District. This essentially leaves _only (110'-30') = 80 feet for the placement of buildings and parking in the VC District. Article 3.03 C of the LDR's allows, with approval from the DRB, the extension of the VC boundary to the west by up to 50 feet. Previous discussions with staff indicated that this would be entertained positively for the placement of commercial parking spaces as a means of increasing the development potential of the VC district but not to increase density. Therefore if the line were moved, a condition of approval limiting the maximum residential density to what exists today would be required. Specific layout standards for the NR/VC Districts 0.27 Ac Minimum Lot Size for SFH (12,000 SF) 0.54 Ac Minimum Lot Size for Duplex (24,000 SF) 0.92 Ac Minimum Lot Size for Other Uses (40,000 SF) 45' Maximum Building Height (SEQ-NR District) 50' Maximum Building Height (SEQ-VC District) 15% Maximum Building Coverage 30% Maximum Lot Coverage 20' Front Yard Setback (50' + 7' along Hinesburg Road) 10' Side Yard Setback 30' Rear Yard Setback 5' for stand alone parking garages 30% max lot coverage in the VC front yard. Mr. Ray Belair Page 3 of 5 December 15, 2011 These minimum lot sizes may be waived by the DRB provided that SEQ planning guidelines are being met. Uses of interest in the VC District but not fully committed to include: Permitted Conditional/PUD Not Permitted Single Family Home Office, General Convenience Store Two -Family Multi -Family up to 6 units Childcare Office, Medical Restaurant Multi -Family up to 12 units Retail Food Establishment of less than 5,000 SF Financial Institution Personal Service Retail Printing Short Order Restaurant Design Approach The existing frontage on Hinesburg Road has a number of mature trees that are proposed to be retained to maintain the character and buffering of the proposed buildings. Those trees within the required 57' foot front yard setback will be retained. The more westerly trees are primarily made up of Cottonwood and are not proposed to be retained since they fall within the limited space available for the proposed VC development area. In support of the development of village scale buildings and to provide additional flexibility in the phased development of the project, four buildings were chosen to be placed in the VC district. The assumption for this layout is that adequate screening through the use of landscaping and fencing can be developed to properly separate the commercial uses from the residential uses in the adjoining NR district to the west. VC District Pro forma The development potential on the South Lot as laid out on the Conceptual Development Plan includes: 20,000 GSF commercial space in four buildings. 70 parking spaces required. 70 Parking spaces are proposed. NR District Design Approach The goal of the residential layout was to create a layered transition from the VC and to districts into the heart of the NR district. The Sketch Plan depicts the use of 4-unit multi -family structure to provide this transitional approach. One design challenge with the extension of Swift Street to the west is that the City LDR's call for the minimization of private curbs cuts on collector roadways. To mitigate this, three separate roads running in the north -south direction are proposed to enable alternate frontage opportunities for the north end of the parcel. Mr. Ray Belair Page 4 of 5 December 15, 2011 In the mid section of the property the alignment of the middle road (C Street) was adjusted to avoid the wetlands and to provide a buffer from the single family uses and the wetland in accordance with the SEQ planning goals. NR District Pro forma The development potential on the South Lot NR District as laid out on the Conceptual Development Plan includes: • 32 residential units in the form of 8 quad-plex units • 27 SFH lots • 2,550 LF of public roads • Stormwater Infrastructure for the entire project • 0.75 acres open space Infrastructure Sewer - The project is proposed to be served by gravity sewer mains flowing to the existing collection system located on Oak Creek Drive. Water - A looped water distribution system is proposed to service the project. Water mains will be installed along all of the proposed streets. The two connection points to the existing municipal distribution system is off of Fox run lane to the south and at the Meadowland Drive intersection with Hinesburg Road to the north. Streets - All of the streets are proposed to be publically owned. The westerly extension of Meadowland Drive on the west side of Hinesburg Road (To be named Swift Street Extension?) will follow the offer of dedication encumbering the property to the north. A series of interconnected local streets will serve the project. These streets will connect at three locations to the north with Swift Street Extension and at one location to the south on Fox Run lane at its intersection with Oak Creek Drive. Storm Drainage - Will be collected in an enclosed drainage system located within the local streets and will be directed to a stormwater management facility located at the low point in the southwest corner of the property. The discharge from the facility will be through a level spreader to mimic the existing drainage pattern in this portion of the property. Mr. Ray Belair Page 5 of 5 December 15, 2011 This completes our summary of the proposed features of the project. If you should have any questions, please feel feree to contact me at 864-2323 x310 or Brad Dousevicz at 879-4477 ext 103. Respectfully, David S. Marshall, Project Engineer \dsm Enclosures: Five (5) Full Size Plan Set (3 sheets) One 11" x 17" Reduced Size Plan (3 sheets) Sketch Plan Application Application Base Fee $350 plus $3,022.50.[(2 Units x $35 + 7 Units x $35 + 52 units (59-7) x $25 + commercial (20,000 SF x $0.02) $400] x 150% _ $3,022.50. Pre -addressed Stamped Envelopes CD of plans and documents cc: A. Senecal (w/ enclosures) B. Dousevicz (3 sets of enclosures) G. Rabideau (w/enclosures) CEA File 11202.00 (w/ enclosures) P:\AutoCADD Projects\201 1 \1 1202\3-Permitting\1 -Local Applications\1-Sketch\Belair Sketch Cover.wpd proposal from any city or town before beginning a negotiation to see if there are people serious about moving the project forward. David Jacobowitz made a motion that the Rec Path Committee recommends that the Rail with Trail described in the April 2004 Champlain Path feasibility study be incorporated into the SB Comprehensive Plan. The motion was approved unanimously. Committee members discussed the process by which the Planning Commission receives notice of decisions/motions made at its meetings. Rick suggested that it might be helpful to meet with the Planning Commission in the near future to review how our minutes and motions are disseminated. 6. Review Committee Tasks & Assignments: Rick asked if members had any changes to the document (there were none). Roy went over his task list and asked for feedback. Donna had a question about listing gaps and proposed sections, and will speak with Tom after the meeting. 7. Report on 3rd Annual Bike-Ped Business Forum: Roy said the forum was well - attended, and its purpose was to have businesses with interests in bikes and pedestrian issues connect with each other. There were some good presentations, particularly from the DOT regarding the response to Irene. 8. Review committee requirements in SB comp plan (continued from #3) Tom said that Paul Connor has asked for two objectives from every committee in City, and asked the committee to consider what its primary objectives might be. Roy Neuer made a motion that the committee would like to recommend the objective for the Comprehensive Plan such that any new roads that are built within the City accommodate all users. Any existing roads that are refurbished should seek to accommodate that same objective, Lou Bresee seconded the motion, there were no objections, the motion passed. Lou expressed his frustration with the long Comprehensive Plan acceptance process (2 %2 years). Bill added that it can be helpful to write a formal recommendation and go down to present it in person to the Planning Commission. 9. DRB Update: Tom told the committee that the Chittenden property discussed at N ( e last meeting (where the committee asked for an easement across the right of way) was challenged by their lawyer because it would cause them to reconstruct the whole front of the property (10 feet would cut across parking lot). Tom presented maps of the Rye Property on Hinesburg Rd near Oak Creek. The proposed development would have commercial properties on the front, with multifamily and single family homes in the back, to be built in three phases. There would be approximately 60 homes, and sidewalks internally on both sides of the street. The draft is going before DRB next Tuesday night. Oak Creek has pedestrian access to a natural area. Donna questioned whether the parcel might link to Swift Street somehow in the future. Lou said that if so, he would like to see a legal right of way to get to the city park trail system. Lou Bresee made a motion that SB Rec Path recommends that a shared use path be constructed east -west along D Street and that provisions be made to connect the southwest corner of the development to the existing trail system in the Wheeler Natural Area, Roy Neuer seconded, there were no objections, the motion passed. 10. Annual SBRPC Report: Rick said he is waiting he'll finish a draft. Tom reported that there is no date set this on next month's agenda or circulate by email for cor 11. Old Business: Roy reported on results of our I from Justin, and then a deadline. Rick will put Local Motion said they have eight active volunteers who have filed 45 r program is on hold until warmer weather. They will work with Justin of him admin rights to their system for review. Rick gave an update on walking as does work on the natural resources pre VYCC crew for three days. He said there and he will look into possible new trails. meeting (Duncan or Dana will contact to that those resources are there for TrailFir outreach. , but the to live behalf of Barry Carris. Maintenance continues ject at Wheeler Nature Park. He hopes to get a are maps in the system for all existing trails, Barry can come in for the May committee arrange). David asked Tom to tell Local Motion Bill thanked Lou and Miranda for coming to DRB meetings and stressed the importance of having a person there to advocate for bike paths in new developments. )bowitz made a motion to adjourn, Michelle Connor seconded, there were no and the meeting adjourned at 9:35 pm. The next meeting will be held on Monday, February 6, at 7 pm in the small conference room in the city office building_ Respectfully subr Michelle Connor, co a M r CV Lo r N SITE ENGINEER: ...BURLINGTONI IPROPERTIES, .•. CIVIL INGIM11JUNG ACL PHASE __!PoASE 11DSM ©. • . • i . c3"c'n :toilel; OWNER: �■��i ���■� ■III r I■■` RYE J ������� '�����i l������ -fyASSOCIATES - �: =�w ■■� ■■ ►�1 �■I I■� ■I V , ,, III �,,,, � TREET ll�� ���� �I�� �N�� ■■� �., �■■ III �� ��� .. : 410, � . , lII,� �NII 1111 III ■■ r.. ■■ !!IM► �Ih ���PROJECT: _ I�r �r I _ _ �� .ail �� M.. -.� ' ��,�. RYE —■� ;III► :��II ;III �!!� —��1 ASSOCIATES �IN� �■■ �I�b :. �� ,,PLANNED UNIT �■III:� _ �. .I�I■� il! - �_■�II .�I IIILor —■■ ■■ ll�b M�• III •.� �� ��� r - a -. I� DEVELOPMENT !/ 1p .. 11075 URG RD. . R• . _ , �r 3�` • ■Ih kl � ��� � � ON WIN ■ \� IN CONDITIONS .. SITE PLAN ..,, _ UTI DEC., 2011 _-- - : ■0. l CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this day of j 64AK , 20 12, a copy of the foregoing /�--S 2LI type of application] # [application number], was sent by U.S. mail, postage prepaid to the owners of all properties adjoining the subject property to development, without regard to any public right-of-way, and including the description of the property and accompanying information provided by the City of South Burlington. I further certify that this notification was provided to the following parties in accordance with 24 V.S.A. §4464(a) and Section 17.06(B) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: List of recipients: (full names and addresses) / '4<"'�- � C� Dated at Essex Junction, Vermont, this day of �ri�! , 20 Printed Name: �%J 1/1 c-j-5(D�, L L Z Phone number and email: E3 ? ; - 1-/1-f7 t Z 0 c_ v 1-^— Signature: Date: i 1 Remit to: City of South Burlington Department of Planning & Zoning 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 South Burlington Sample Certificate of Service Form. Rev. 12-2011 Subiect Parcel 0860-01075 Rye Associates, LLC Abutters List December 14, 2011 Rye Associates, LLC 21 Carmichael St Suite 201 Essex Junction, VT 05452 PARCEL ID OWNER OF RECORD 0860-01035 Mansfield View Properties, LLC 1035 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01045 Mansfield View Properties, LLC 1035 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01061 Rye Arther H & Brisson Bernice R Trust 63 Sam Web Road Fairfax, VT 05454 1225-00001 Beasimer Linda M 1 Oak Creek Road South Burlington, VT 05403 1225-00002 Frigo Vincent M & Jovina 2 Oak Creek Road South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00006 Khaleelulla Mohamed 6 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00010 Cerreta Scott & Jill 10 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00014 Lyman Tod H & Kelly M 14 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 1 Rye Associates, LLC Abutters List December 14, 2011 PARCEL ID (cont'd) OWNER OF RECORD (cont'd) 0686-00016 Gibbs Lyndon Scott & Lisa 16 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0686-00018 Cunavelis Jake 18 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01050 A Spaniel Properties, LLC 1050 Hinesburg Road Unit A South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01050 B&C Avalanche Development, LLC 35 Dorset Lane Williston, VT 05495 0860-01100 East Mountain View, LLC 1100 Hinesburg Road Suite 201 South Burlington, VT 05403 0860-01060 Sphinx Development, LLC, c/o Gamal Eltabbakh 391 Hills Point Road Charlotte, VT 05445 0860-10700 Sphinx Development, LLC, c/o Gamal Eltabbakh 391 Hills Point Road Charlotte, VT 05445 0860-01020 Burlington Properties Ltd. 85 Meadowland Drive South Burlington, VT 05403 1095-00010 CEA Properties, LLC 10 Mansfield View Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 2 Page 1 of 1 Dave Marshall From: ray [rbelair@sburl.com] Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 8:18 AM To: dmarshall@cea-vt.com Subject: 1075 Hinesburg Road Hi Dave, My calculations on the fee for the above referenced project is $134.50 less than the checks you gave me, so if could give me a new check for $215.50, I'll give you the $350 check back, making the total fee $3238.00. Ray Belair Administrative Officer �� M1, ", 67, 10mov,46 *19-� City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Ph: 802.846.4106 Fax: 802.846.4101 rbelair(a)sburl. com www.sburl.com 12/16/2011 --- --33e— — -- — EXISTING CONTOUR 336 PROPOSED CONTOUR — — — — APPROXIMATE PROPERTY LI — — • — — APPROXIMATE SETBACK O IRON PIN FOUND EI CONCRETE MONUMENT F —SS— — GRAVITY SEWER LINE — —FM— — FORCE MAIN — — W — — WATER LINE — —0E— — OVERHEAD ELECTRIC -- UE — — UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC — — T — — TELEPHONE LINE — — G — — GAS LINE — —ST— — STORM DRAINAGE LINE ® SEWER MANHOLE ® STORM MANHOLE HYDRANT ® SHUT—OFF POWER POLE GUY WIRE ®® CATCH BASIN as LIGHT POLE SIGN a, DECIDUOUS TREE CONIFEROUS TREE --..rw.r�., EDGE OF BRUSH/WOODS —•� FENCE DRAINAGE SWALE PROJECT BENCHMARK GRAPHIC )9 I ' SITE ENGINEER: s . I N/F c N/F BURLINGTON MANSFIELD VIEW (w PROPERTIES, Ll 1 inch � 60 ft NE I CIVA INGINIOUNG ASSOCIATES INC. PROPERTIES ,�I'Ll 'TougAlmID*wLvE, SomaulI,NGTOM. VT am LINE I& O DISTRICT / l& O DIS_T_RICT -- OUND 1 I N DIIATRI ACL `I MEADOWLAND DRI ... It / \ ` Ir DSM \\ \ \ \\ � I I I� dPP3UV6D ,1 / \ \ \\ `\ \ \ /' I & O DIST)4107 \ \ - III I - IL - - DSM 1'I 1\\ `\ \\\ \\ \\\ \\ \\ \\-aoa- /' /' SE¢N�DISTRIC , \\ \\ \; /.\J I a DWNER: 1 o� -- I SEQ-VS/ // II� _Tl- -- \�a0. N/F RYE \DhSTRICT N SPIEL P ASSOCIATES v DIST £\\ l J/ j ' % 21 CARMICHAEL STREET \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \\ \ \ — / —aoa— / - 1 U , I /� G ESSEX, VERMONT 05452 4-7—"l—I 1 •h PROJECT: o IINIMMiMMIMIM \ ` r k=r SRYE NT VC, \ \ \ p , _ — / / \ T / ` I ' ASSOCIATES 1 1 \ \ \_ \ \ / /' 1 / ( \ \ LINE / I I / /J•}M' ' \\ , , \ - •\ \ \ / / I PR0F6SEio VC \ III ( m. E PLANNED UNIT 1 — —\ _ _ f+ — — — — _ /r''11111"I'l EXISTING/ / / I DISTRICT \ I \ I o I V' / / .� \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ �x — / //wETLAMaD / / / I I LINE / \ ewsnes sNa \ I p \ ---_(YP.b DEVELOPMENT v n 1/U1 A A l l l Q 11075 HINESBURG RD. �v � , I V A � / / I / I � - - v I I I / , / 'y SOUTH BURLINGTON VERMONT v vv \ sue\ \\ I I 1\ \\ N/F CITY OF \`\ \ I I `------/' S. BURLINGTON / ` T NN \ \ o \ \\ \\\ \\\ \\ 11I `\ I \\\,\ III // // / / -----�/ eA°'' _f3' ,� 0 — 6 f3 I I I STRUCTURE \ \ s \ \�I \—---- 400---- — — — LEVEL sf' SPREADER N/F N/F N/F N F \\ Qm a N/F �iIBBS LYNDONI LyM,� I CERRETA ""-''" FOX RUN uw�i ' CUNAVELIS I I �I � .� 61 > N/F Ex ' .° a�_�o,. o• N/F BEASIMER I .ww.� FR/GO I N/F I III CITY OF I w # i I I S. BURLINGTON I • VIEW, LLO LLC LOCATION MAP I un I mc� 1 TRYiNWN I EXISTING CONDITIONS SITE PLAN him DU—IG NDID11t8 DEC., 2011 50 C2 MJ. NO. 11202 O N In _O cd 77 O N ce i 0 CV Lo N GRAPHIC ),E I ' SITE ENGINEER: o N/F c N/F I BURLINGTON IN FM MANSFIELD VIEW c f PROPERTIES, LTD. 1 Inch � 60 tL �I CIVIL INGINIIIIING ASSOCIATIS INC. PROPERTIES —II ,00111G DWIErLAW, SWWBlWAIGTOKVTOW r / I emwes,zszv rwr saxae«zn N.n: u..u•..c•••+ I I � ORAAN ' ' N ACL PHASE III PHASE II - - - - PHASE II PHASE I - I \I ME4DOWL4ND DRIVE DSM 1 �/ \ m l \ nm I v I® I i I I� I .re■oven L 11 DSM OWNER: \\ `GOT /1 LOI 2O y LOTB \ - \ \� DIM 9 ONS ° f N/F — — — RYE av I li 'I I I i SPANIEL P ASSOCIATES rf-. vmil OT 122 \LOT �1 L LOT %�V7 `\TwcWA L 1 1 I i i i� �i i� s s y✓ ��v V A I RRROOOAAAbbb wi 1 0;�,' ND�p \ 32,5f� SOFT. + \ / � I I � 21 CARMICHAEL STREET P II ESSEX, VERMONT 05452 IJ, m a .. C+ j\\ \ \\ \\ \V A `V /f I ��v 1R07ECT: LOr,f 4 ` LOT /�3 LOT S _ . 15_gT % ' o I II i kuldw+IM III \1 ' \ 4 � RYE SH DEL' P I ASSOCIATES ' \ W v� I II ly o PLANNED UNIT EXISTING/ —NG \ DEVE E I / WWW���ppp wEnANO / \ Lor 12,6 AF�CIN — — 5 Lbt /1s /' c .b ��C_ '" h LOPMENT M " �l 11075 HINESBURG RD. f I 1 I 1 1 'LOT i �� �� SOUTH BURLINGTON V v� LOT j1B 'v LIDT �1� f 31,B20 SOFT (\ ' ` VERMONT 1V � 'cif%- 4 v LOT I'i4�— \ N/F vv �` 4or /30 Lor f19v i / I � M v sI � ' F I I CITY OF \ � \ I 1 I �� ` _ _ i . �`, ' I� I/ / I I — � LOT %3 \\ o �I I I I � 1 yTg , � Inamx S. BURLINGTON \ I 31.188 SO.Fr \ I 1 \ r \ m 1 �BT j5 \ ` LOT 131 \ m LOT pi ------------- a I I I i \ ----- 154§rMSFF I I H SE I — �'• _ _ — --- LOCATION MAP Y LOT f33 �? + Lld �- - p—off- a i Mm��n�y�y ; ,,2000 si --- \ —TING su � ,a i fiiv.� i/ nrre c®cim m�ox f � \ mu-ws+• A", % I i LOT f�4 DE Ni19/� 84-VN V LOT /12 LOT i 1 LaT f 10 A LOT 9 `L�T 8 LOT ;j7- ouri� v \ i I v v LOT fql v v v L 4 Its ,�c srnucruRE v 8� vv �----aoo--- 3 9 SQ*I- `- I I y LEVEL SPREADER E\ — . ...—... \E_...—.\—... \ ...—...�—... —..._. .. -- o -- _ — — a SITE PLAN N/F — — - — _ — — N/F N/F N/F I i IBBS LYNDONI I I KH ° ` FOX RUN LAN�i CUNAVELIS G LYMAN CERRETA \ \`\ — ex. ce — II' • F-1 Q] i I NF N/F � %7.7 N/F I m I I an oN..N,� NU1®88 BEASIMER I •° FRIGO I N/F I I TI S, I /• CITY OF I I I I r,; DEC., 2011 I I I I I I I S. BURLINGTON I LLC 50' NO. 11202 — SITE ENGINEER: j GRAPHIC :. ,� I N/F c N/F BURLINGTON FM MANSFIELD VIEW �s PROPERTIES, LTD. — — PROPERTIES _ I CIVIL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES. INC, INSTALL VALVE & CAP 8' D.I. IEW eG¢ lD WIN 18MV�5f1FlD11Ew1ArrE, SounlaL�MOTOM vrama IM Vr OM FOR FUTURE CONNECTION WATER MAIN I wN — — — — — — SlWi corvnaer ©ee �+. mace aseswvm I DMA ACL PHASE III PHASE II PHASE II PHASE I I MEADOWLAND DRIE c�c� — — I I DSM ml Im m in I — -- -- --W--% -- — — --W—;—•--•--W-- DSM NEW 12W TAPPING OWNER: LOT 119 I SLEEVE & VALVE LOT 20 4 4- TYPICAL �p� LOT 18 rgMENSIONS i� �NEW SMH I III N/F RYE 8' 3DR 3s III SPANIEL P ; y.. ASSOCIATES t LOT 122 LOT 121 LOT 117 3 L I — — — �, y 10 I I 32,500 SOFT I ESSEX, VERMONT 05452 _ D ELO MENT, LLC I PROTECT: MN LOT 124 — — LOT 123 LOT 116 — — ° 1-sT ss i I F � 8' SDR 38 -- -- _SS----- — - RYE ° NEW SMH I gA EraAc " r�,,//���/IY^ ASSOCIATES NEWSMH UI i...y,._tPM� EXIS'RNG' EL PLANNED UNIT a1 I CC N 8' D.I. ' ' WETLAND NI I ®r� LOT /26 I LOT �25 LOT /15 I wA ruu (vr.1 41 wwe+° p i , LOT 15 SD 3DR36 G DEVELOPMENT ,. I 8HWNEW SMH11075 HINESBURG RD. LOT /28 LOT /27 11 SOUTH BURLINGTON ; VERMONT I, LOT 114 •�Its I l N/F LOT /3o II LOT 129 I I T ®� CITY OF _ / LOT /3 s S. BURLINGTON I — LOT /13 i 31,188 so.FT LOT /32 — I LOT J31 Sti I N, NEW SMH I u NEW SMH I I � __.---- _---------------------------------- - I I 1 SDR -- e sOR36Pvc HAS LOCATION MAP SS--- HA I 8 SDR35PVC _ Y WATER Q LOT /33 LIN 1 — 1 :n i°=200a - N -„ cnsn w v mre etvuDDN e I I * LOT I« qv DETENION 84S/N I I I I LOT 112 LOT /I I LOT 110 LOT /9 LOT 18 LOT 17 I LOT OUTLET — STRUCTURE I 32,889 SOFT. I �� 0 LEVEL I - Fnmma. saex m.. I I I I SPREADER I I NEW SMH �w"v-zx• ` ` I / l / n UTILITY ox N/F N/F N/F N/F a a I I SITE PLAN NIF.ee NEW 8'D.I. CUNAVELIS �I IGIBBS LYNDONI LYMAN I CERRETA I '° ^ WATER MAIN FOX RUN LAN, $ �� I N - NEW 8•)M' TAPPING SLEEVE — I 1 NlF wxaz�e w °; i VALVE N/F I _ �— — = m I N F BEASIMER I FRIGO I N/F I I I T/ S, DEC., 2011 I LLC R =T.sz CITY I °I I# ice, '—M— X�I S. BURLINGTON r I„ xD5. 0' NEW INV. �o C4 I —1 11202 — — POWER DP ATTORNEY FOR REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS ONLY Know all persons by these presents that we, Anthony Brisson, Timothy Brisson, Michael Brisson, Clint Rye, Katherine (Cassie) Carter (formerly Rye), Lora Churchill and Matthew LaBounty, (the "Principals") do hereby appoint Lexie R. Rye or Bernice R. Brisson, acting jointly or individually, (the "Agent") to act in our names and places, to the fidlest extent which we could act if we were personally present in connection with the transaction described in Section 1 of this Power of Attorney. Section 1. Delegation of Power. The Principals appoint the Agent to act for the Principals for the execution of sales agreements and amendments thereto, warranty deeds, tax returns, and all other documents reasonable or appropriate for the sale, conveyancing and financing of the land and premises, in one or more conveyances, situated on the westerly side of Vermont Route 116 (Hinesburg Road, so- called) as conveyed to us by Quit Claim Deed of Bernice R. Brisson and Arthur H. Rye, Co -Trustees of the Trust for the benefit of Lois R. Labounty, dated October 31, 2001 as recorded in Volume 529 at Pages 488-490 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Section 2. Term. This power of attorney shall become effective on the date the Principals sign this instrument. Section 3. I)urable Power of Attorney. This power of attorney shall not be affected by the subsequent disability or incapacity of the Principals and shall remain in full force and effect until all of said land is conveyed and all financing related thereto is paid in full. Section 4. Delegation of Powers. The Agent may delegate the powers granted to the Agent by this Power of Attorney by a delegation in writing which makes reference to this Power of Attorney and otherwise complies with applicable law. In witness whereof, the Principal has executed this instrument this T day of January, 2007. CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Received— 20PI at1al'sm ' recorded in Vol. __` — 3 on page o� O-- Of So. Burlington Land Records Attest: � 0.0--a Donna S. Kinville, City Clerk Principal a q5 / Print Name: Ath06 Brisson Affirmation by Witness 1, I'V- witnessed the signature of this Power of Attorney by the Principal, Ant ny risson, and I affirm that the Principal appeared to me to be of sound mind, was not under duress, and the Principal affirmed to me that he was aware of the nature of this Power of Attorney and signed it freely and voluntarily. J Acknowledgment of Principal State of Vermont County of Chittenden, S.S. At "V I L j , in said County and State, personally appeared Anthony Brisson, who is known to me or was otherwise suitably identified, did acknowledge to me that the execution of this Power of Attorney was his free act and deed. C" W� Notary Public " Print Name C � fin%' t' 6 AI Commission Expires: In witness whereof, the Principal has executed this instrument this day of January, 2007. Principal Print Name: I Timothy Brisson Affirmation by Witness ?uT�j / A A witnessed the signature of this Power of Attorney by the Principal, Timothy Brisson, and I affirm that the Principal appeared to me to be of sound mind, was not under duress, and the Principal affirmed to me that he was aware of the nature of this Power of Attorney and signed it freely and voluntarily. . Acknowledgment of Principal State of Vermont County of Chittenden, S.S. f�.. 17 MMII IFTM At County and State, personally appeared Timothy Brisson, who is known tome or was oche e suitably identified, did acknowledge tome that the execution of this Power of Attorney was his free act and deed. Notary ePubhC ^�j lq j Commission Expires: � In witness whereof, the Principal has executed this instrument this Y ____ y of January, 2007. Principal �1(04a J Print Name: Michael Brisson Affirmation by Witness 1, witnessed the signature of this Power of Attorney by the Principal, Michae Brisson, and I affirm that the Principal appeared to me to be of sound mind, was not wider duress, and the Principal affirmed to me that he was aware of the nature of this Power of Attorney and signed it freely and voluntarily. Witness rent Name: � � _ �. Acknowledgment of Principal State of Vermont County of Chittenden, S.S. At �Aj � L (t 5C-(T- L--\ , in said County and State, personally appeared Michael Brisson, who is known to me or was otherwise suitably identified, did acknowledge to me that the execution of this Power of Attorney was his free act and deed. Notary Public ^ . n ^N Print Name W 1+ ►`t'Vc_ ; Commission Expires: :Ij h In witness whereof, the Principal has executed this instrument this v--day of January, 2007. Principal OytIt-'It /016- Print Name: Clint Rye Affirmation by Witness I,,. - ge f /'sr>C� witnessed the signature of this Power of Attorney by the Principal, Clint Rye, and I affirm that the Principal appeared to me to be of sound mind, was not under duress, and the Principal affirmed to me that he was aware of the nature of this Power of Attorney and signed it freely and voluntarily. Witness Print Name: ,6 vG Acknowledgment of Principal State of Vermont County of Chittenden, S.S. r At _ , in said County and State, personally appeared Clint Rye, who is kno to me or was otherwise suitably identified, did acknowledge to me that the execution of this Power of Attorney was his free act and deed. 1 Ey r Notary Publ' �.� Print Name -l'-F"s� Commission Expires: i0 1 ;Z-0011 In witness whereof, the Principal has executed this instrument this r `p��"ay of January, 2007. Principal P- '4� L-, " I gv V L-- - ri�nt Name: Katherine Cassie Carter Affirmation by Witness witnessed the signature of this Power of Attorney by the Principal, Katherine Cassie Carter, and I affirm that the Principal appeared to me to be of sound mind, was not under duress, and the Principal affirmed to me that she was aware of the nature of this Power of Attorney and signed it freely and voluntarily. State of Vermont Witness r Acknowledgment of Principal County of Chitte de S.S. At said County and State, personally appeared Katherine Cassie Carter, who is known to n or was otherwise suitably identified, did acknowledge to me that the execution of this Power of Attorney was her free act and deed. ' o y- r `%1 a r 4 In witness whereof, the Principal has executed this instrument this 2;;� day of January, 2007. Principal Al a Print Name: Lora Churchill Affirmation by Witness I, feel ffA r C , C Hh5 E witnessed the signature of this Power of Attorney by the Principal, Lora Churchill, and I affirm that the Principal .appeared to me to be of sound mind, was not under duress, and the Principal affirmed to me that she was aware of the nature of this Power of Attorney and signed it freely and voluntarily. Witness A�� C" 6Ag� Print Name: :D,0j Acknowledgment of Principal State of Vermont o'AfL.�„p p, Cwj County of �E�; S.S. OO At , in said County and State, personally appeared Lora Churchill, who is known to me or as otherwise suitably identified, did acknowledge to me that the execution of this Power of Attorney was her free act and deed. W Notary me ilb C— , Print Name Commission Expires: In witness whereof, the Principal has executed this instrument this day of January, 2007. Principal NO Rri i• 1 Affirmation by Witness I, .p-0456/QI- G 6Y,-'i ,5 6 witnessed the signature of this Power of Attorney by the Principal, Matthew LaBounty, and I affirm that the Principal appeared to me to be of sound mind, was not under duress, and the Principal affirmed to me that he was aware of the nature of this Power of Attorney and signed it freely and voluntarily. Witness. Pump 5ORTI Acknowledgment of PrinciDal State of Vermont OA,,�C�kU'F> County of Ehitt�, S.S. AtGin said County and State, personally appeared Matthew LaBounty, who is knownQtrqor was otherwise suitably identified, did acknowledge to me that the execution of this Power of Attorney was his free act and deed. 1 /yam Notary Publ- LC � 1 , Print Name W Commission Expires Acceptance by Agent The undersigned, Agent, -executes this Power of Attorney, and by such execution does hereby affirm that the Agent: (A) accepts the appointment as agent; (B) understands the duties under the power of attorney and under the law; (C) understands that Agent has a duty to act if expressly required to do so in the power of attorney consistent with 14 V.S.A. §3506(c); (Dr) understands that I am expected to use my special skills or expertise on behalf of the Principal, if so specified in the Power of Attorney; and (E) acknowledges the additional duties of the Agent set forth in 14 V.S.A 3505. AGENT Date: / e% �. Acceptance by Agent The undersigned, Agent, .executes this Power of Attorney, and by such execution does hereby affirm that the Agent: (A) accepts the appointment as agent; (B) understands the duties under the power of attorney and under the law; (C) understands that Agent has a duty to act if expressly required to do so in the power of attorney consistent with 14 V.S.A. §3506(c); (I?) understands that I am expected to use my special skills or expertise on behalf of the Principal, if so specified in the Power of Attorney; and (E) acknowledges the additional duties of the Agent set forth in 14 V.S.A 3505. AGENT. OF DOCUMENT ERRY & SCHMUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 110 MAIN STREET R 0. BOX 238 BURUINGTON, VERMONT 05402 IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF DEDICATION Agreement by and between ARTHUR H. RYE, LEXIE R. RYE, BERNICE R. BRISSON, Trustee, ANTHONY BRISSON, TIMOTHY BRISSON, MICHAEL BRISSON, CLINT RYE, KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTE, LORA CHURCHILL and MATTHEW LABOUNTY (hereinafter referred to as "Owners") and the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, a Vermont municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "Municipality"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Municipality's Development Review Board has approved a final subdivision plat entitled "Lands of Brisson & Rye, #1061 & #1075 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, VT, Subdivision Plat", prepared by O'Leary -Burke Civil Associates, PLC, dated October 26, 2006, last revised November 30, 2006, and recorded as Map Slide _ t of the City of South Burlington Land Records; and WHEREAS, the final approval of the Development Review Board dated November 21, 2006 contains a condition that a strip of land 80 feet in width northerly adjacent to the northerly line of Lot 2 as shown on the above -described plan for the future extension of Swift Street to Hinesburg Road be conveyed to the Municipality for public use; and WHEREAS, the above -described land and/or interests therein are to be dedicated to the Municipality free and clear of all encumbrances, pursuant to said final approval and final plat; and NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the final approval of the Municipality's Development Review Board and for other good and valuable consideration, it is covenanted and agreed as follows: CITY LE�RK OFFIXE P imeceived 206 at �!��i, , rraam��,, 4,a -red V vi a.a -3v� e ...�;t�lG, 1n ti. Q f,)f So. Burling., -ton 1-and Rocords A, Itest: E)orma S. Kinville, City Clerk Vermont Warranty Deed KATOWALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS THAT we, ARTHUR H. RYE and LEXIE R. RYE, husband and wife, of South Burlington, BERNICE R. BRISSON, Trustee, of Williston, ANTHONY BRISSON of Williston, TIMOTHY BRISSON of Williston, CLINT RYE of South Burlington, and KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTER of Hinesburg, all in the County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, MICHAEL BRISSON of Waterbury, in the County of Washington and State of Vermont, LORA CHURCHILL of Brookfield, in the County of Orange and State of Vermont, and MATTHEW LABOUNTY of Randolph, in the County of Orange and State of Vermont, Grantors, in the consideration of Ten and More Dollars paid to our full satisfaction by CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, a Vermont municipality, Grantee, by these presents do freely GIVE, GRANT, SELL, CONVEY AND CONFIRM unto the said Grantee, 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: A strip of land 80 feet in uniform width and 1,048 feet, more or less, in length, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a concrete monument set in the ground in the apparent westerly sideline of Vermont Route 116 (Hinesburg Road, so-called), located 143.48 feet, more or less, from an iron pipe set in the ground at the southeasterly corner of land now or formerly owned by Mansfield View Properties; thence proceeding S 06°50.'41" W in and along the westerly sideline of said highway a distance of 80.01.feet, more or less, to a concrete monument set in the ground at the northeasterly corner of land conveyed or to be conveyed to Rye Associates; thence turning to the left and proceeding N 8491'44" W in and along the northerly sideline of said land of Rye Associates a distance of 1,048.07 feet, more or less, to a concrete monument set in the ground; thence turning to the right and proceeding N 06°47' 16" E a distance of 80.01 feet, more or less, to a concrete monument set in the ground; thence turning to the right and proceeding S 84011'44" E a distance of 1,048.15 feet, more or less, to the point or place of beginning. Said strip of land is to be used for municipal highway and utility purposes, and other related uses, and is more specifically depicted as "Proposed 80' Wide Right -of Way to be reserved for future extension of Swift Street, Area = 1.92 Acres, 83,848 sq. ft." on a plan entitled "Lands of Brisson & Rye, #1061 & #1075 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, VT, Subdivision Plat" prepared by O'Leary -Burke Civil Associates, PLC, dated October 26, 2006, last revised November 30, 2006, and recorded on Map Slide , Page of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Grantors reserve the right to request a permit from the City of South Burlington to install utility lines across said strip of land, pursuant to 19 V.S.A. § 1111, which request will not be unreasonably denied, provided that all construction, maintenance, repair or replacement thereof shall be in accordance with City of South Burlington regulations, including Public Works Highway Construction Standards. Being a portion of the land and premises conveyed to Bernice R. Brisson and Arthur H. Rye, individually and Trustees for the benefit of Lois R. LaBounty by Final Decree of Distribution in the Estate of Gwendolen A. Rye dated August 23, 1996 as recorded in Volume 397 at Pages 691-696 of the City of South Burlington Land Records and by Bernice R. Brisson and Arthur H. Rye, Co -Trustees, to Anthony Brisson, Timothy Brisson, Michael Brisson, Clint Rye, Katherine (Cassie) Rye (now known as Katherine (Cassie) Carter, Lora Churchill and Matthew Labounty dated October 31, 2001 as recorded in Volume 529 at Pages 488-490 of said Land Records. Reference is made to a trust deed from Bernice R. Brisson to Bernice R. Brisson, Trustee of the Bernice R. Brisson Revocable Trust dated June 26, 2002, which deed is dated November 6, 2006 as recorded in Volume 765 at Pages 510-513 of said Land Records. Reference is hereby made to the above instruments, the records and references thereof and the records and references therein contained, all in further aid of this description. Lexie R. Rye executes this deed individually to release any marital interest she may have in the premises. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD said granted premises, with all the privileges and appurtenances thereof, to the said Grantee, CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, and its successors and assigns, to its own use and behoof forever; And we, the. said Grantors, ARTHUR H. RYE, LEXIE R. RYE, BERNICE R. BRISSON, Trustee, ANTHONY BRISSON, TIMOTHY BRISSON, CLINT RYE, KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTER, MICHAEL BRISSON, LORA CHURCHILL and MATTHEW LABOUNTY, for ourselves and our heirs and assigns, do. covenant with the said Grantee, CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, its successors and assigns, that until the ensealing of these presents we are the sole owners of the premises, and have good right and title to convey the same in manner aforesaid, that they are FREE FROM EVERY E ENCUMBRANCE; And we hereby engage to WARRANT AND DEFEND the same against all lawful claims whatever, except as aforesaid. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we hereunto set our hands and seals this day of , 2007. IN THE PRESENCE OF: Arthur H. Rye Lexie R. Rye Bernice R. Brisson, Trustee Lexie R. Rye, as power of attorney for Anthony Brisson, Timothy Brisson, Michael Brisson, Clint Rye, Katherine (Cassie) Carter, Lora Churchill and Matthew LaBounty STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. At Burlington, in said County and State, this day of , 2007, ARTHUR H. RYE and LEXIE R. RYE personally appeared, and they acknowledged this instrument, by them sealed and subscribed, to be their free act and deed. Before me: STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. Notary Public At Burlington, in said County and State, this day of 2007, BERNICE R. BRISSON, Trustee, personally appeared, and she acknowledged this instrument, by her sealed and subscribed, to be her free act and deed. Before me: Notary Public STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. At Burlington, in said County and State, this day of , 2007, LEXIE R. RYE, as power of attorney for ANTHONY BRISSON, TIMOTHY BRISSON, CLINT RYE, KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTER, MICHAEL BRISSON, LORA CHURCHILL and MATTHEW LABOUNTY, personally appeared, and she acknowledged this instrument, by her sealed and subscribed, to be her free act and deed and the free act and deed of ANTHONY BRISSON, TIMOTHY BRISSON, CLINT RYE, KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTER, MICHAEL BRISSON, LORA CHURCHILL and MATTHEW LABOUNTY. Before me: Notary Public I The Owner herewith delivers to the Municipality a Warranty Deed and Vermont Property Transfer Tax Return, copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibits A and B, said delivery constituting a formal offer of dedication to the Municipality, to be held by the Municipality until the acceptance or rejection of such Offer of Dedication by the Legislative Body of the Municipality. 2. The Owner agrees that said formal Offer of Dedication is irrevocable and can be accepted by the Municipality in whole or in part at any time. This Irrevocable Offer of Dedication shall run with the land and shall be binding upon all assigns, grantees, successors and/or heirs of the Owner. Dated this 2�.J IN THE PRESENCE OF: Dated this d', ERRY & SCHMUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 110 MAIN STREET R O. BOX 238 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402 day of tPf N U&ZQ Y , 2007. Arthur H. Rye Lexie R. Rye Bernice R. Brisson, Trustee Lexie R. Rye, as power of idtorney for Anthony Brisson, Timothy Brisson, Michael Brisson, Clint Rye, Katherine (Cassie) Carter, Lora Churchill and Matthew LaBounty day of �A"41_ 12007. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON By: C'Ty Manager & Duly Authorized Agent STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. _ At 1308 Q �; 7-jN , in said County and State, this day of jyo/ynh , 2007, ARTHUR H. RYE and LEXIE R. RYE personally appeared, and they acknowledged this instrument, by them sealed and subscribed, to be their free act and deed. Before me: Notary Public—� STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. At 3IM1,, W 6-r# lu , in said County and State, this Z� day of t)All y , 2007, BERNICE R. BRISSON, Trustee, personally appeared, and she acknowledged this instrument, by her sealed and subscribed, to be her free act and deed. Before me: Notary Public STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. At 1�yAW11IG j 6AI , in said County and State, this � day of \);q u'44 , 2007, LEXIE R. RYE, as power of attorney for ANTHONY BRISSON, TIMOTHY BRISSON, CLINT RYE, KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTER, MICHAEL BRISSON, LORA CHURCHILL and MATTHEW LABOUNTY, personally appeared, and she acknowledged this instrument, by her sealed and subscribed, to be her free act and deed and the free act and deed of ANTHONY BRISSON, TIMOTHY BRISSON, CLINT RYE, KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTER, MICHAEL BRISSON, LORA CHURCHILL and MATTHEW LABOUNTY. Jam,.. ....... Before me: otary Public ERRY & SCHMUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 110 MAIN STREET R O. BOX 238 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402 STATE OF VERMONT CHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS. At S uth urlingt n, t s ,� day of �»ya1� , 2007, personally a earedG�}Qr , City Manager and Dul uthorized Agent of the pp Y CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, and he acknowledged this instrument by him signed and sealed to be his free act and deed and the free act and deed of the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON. 't. Befo ne: _ Notary Public ERRY & SCHMUCIER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 110 MAIN STREET P. O. BOX 238 BURLINGTON, VERMONT OS402 ATTORNEY'S REPORT AND OPINION ON TITLE Form of Report Suggested by Chittenden County Bar Association RECORD OWNER: ARTHUR H. RYE and BERNICE R. BRISSON, individually and as Trustees PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: A strip of land 80 feet in width and 1,048 feet, more or less, in length, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a concrete monument set in the ground in the apparent westerly sideline of Vermont Route 116 (Hinesburg Road, so-called), located 143.48 feet, more or less, from an iron pipe set in the ground at the southeasterly corner of land now or formerly owned by Mansfield View Properties; thence proceeding S 06°50'41" W in and along the westerly sideline of said highway a distance of 80.01 feet, more or less, to a concrete monument set in the ground at the northeasterly corner of land conveyed or to be conveyed to Rye Associates; thence turning to the left and proceeding N 84'11'44" W in and along the northerly sideline of said land of Rye Associates a distance of 1,048.07 feet, more or less, to a concrete monument set in the ground; thence turning to the right and proceeding N 06°47' 16" E a distance of 80.01 feet, more or less, to a concrete monument set in the ground; thence turning to the right and proceeding S 84'11'44" E a distance of 1,048.15 feet, more or less, to the point or place of beginning. Being a portion of the land and premises conveyed to Bernice R. Brisson and Arthur H. Rye, individually and Trustees for the benefit of Lois R. LaBounty by Final Decree of Distribution in the Estate of Gwendolen A. Rye dated August 23, 1996 as recorded in Volume 397 at Pages 691-696 of the City of South Burlington Land Records and by Bernice R. Brisson and Arthur H. Rye, Co -Trustees, to Anthony Brisson, Timothy Brisson, Michael Brisson, Clint Rye, Katherine (Cassie) Rye (now known as Katherine (Cassie) Carter, Lora Churchill and Matthew Labounty dated October 31, 2001 as recorded in Volume 529 at Pages 488-490 of said Land Records. Reference is made to a trust deed from Bernice R. Brisson to Bernice R. Brisson, Trustee of the Bernice R. Brisson Revocable Trust dated June 26, 2002, which deed is dated November 6, 2006 as recorded in Volume 765 at Pages 510-513 of said Land Records. The following opinion and report on the title of the record owner to the above - described property is based on an examination of the appropriate records of the City of South Burlington. It is furnished to the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON; it is for the sole use of the purchaser above named; and is not transferable. Based on such examination and the assumption that the records examined are currently and correctly indexed in the general indices, it is my opinion that, except as set forth below, on the effective date of this report the title of the record owner is a marketable title in fee simple: 1. MUNICIPAL CHARGES: (Unless otherwise indicated, these are based on oral verification by the appropriate municipal officer.) a. Assessed Valuation — Not separately assessed. b. Taxes for the current fiscal period — C. Delinquent Taxes — None of record. d. Street, Curb and Sidewalk Assessments - Not applicable. e. Water Liens — None. f. Electric Liens - g. Sewer Assessments — None. h. Fire District, School District or other Municipal Liens or Assessments - Not applicable. 2. MORTGAGES: None of record. 3. ATTACHMENTS and LIENS: None of record. 4. EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY: A well northerly of the subject land, situated on land owned by Brisson and Rye provides water to the Rye homestead southerly of the subject parcel. This water line will be discontinued when the land southerly of the highway (under contract to Rye Associates, LLC) is developed. 5. PROTECTIVE COVENANTS; OTHER RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD: None of other than zoning. 6. LEASE LAND RENT: No indication of lease land. 7. COMPLIANCE WITH BOARD OF HEALTH SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS: Not applicable. 8. OBJECTIONS TO TITLE; REMARKS: THE UNDERSIGNED ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR UNINDEXED OR MISINDEXED DOCUMENTS 9. EXCEPTIONS - This report does not cover: and this opinion is subject to: a. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown of record b. Mechanics' or Materialmen's Liens not recorded C. All applicable statutes, ordinances, and regulations of governmental bodies including use, zoning and building restrictions, imposed by them except as included in Paragraph 7 above. d. Any facts which would be disclosed by a physical survey or inspection of the premises. e. Except wherein indicated, Probate, Bankruptcy and other Court records, and records of birth, death, marriage and divorce. f. Special assessments or liens, if any, not shown of record. g. Notice and regulation of Underground Liquid Storage Tanks pursuant to 10 V.S.A., Chapter 59. h. Any right of claim, including but not limited to any right of possession or claim for damages relating to the land, which has or may be asserted of record or not, by or on behalf of any Indian or Indian tribe. This exception will not be incorporated in any title insurance policy issued in connection with this title opinion. i. The undersigned does not make any representation, or certification, as to whether or not the above -described land and premises constitute "wet lands" as such may be protected or regulated by Title 10, Vermont Statutes Annotated. j. Any facts which would render this property subject to Act 250 jurisdiction under the Vermont Supreme Court ruling set out in: In Re: Eastland, Inc., 151 Vt. 497 (1989). k. Any records not properly indexed or filed in the town clerk's office. 1. The undersigned has not undertaken any investigation whatsoever with respect to whether the property and each component thereof is in compliance with any of the required permits and states no opinion thereto. Many of the requirements of such permits require knowledge and skills in engineering, architecture and other professions outside of the legal profession. If you require additional information regarding the permits, or the status of the property regarding compliance with the permits, you should contact the undersigned. This report and opinion refer to and apply only so far back as 40 years from date and are effective down to the 241h day of January, 2007, at 12:00 o'clock P.M. PERRY & SCHMUCKER ......... . By: . bert J. Perry, Esq. PERRY & SCHMUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 110 MAIN STREET, SUITE 3A P. 0. BOX 238 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402 TELEPHONE: (802) 658-2675 TELECOPIER: (802) 658-6900 ROBERT J. PERRY RONALD C. SCHMUCKER January 24, 2007 Ray Belair Zoning Administrator 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Rye/Brisson Subdivision Dear Ray: LEGAL ASSISTANT NANCY L. BENSON Enclosed is a replacement power of attorney, which should be recorded before the other documents, which need to be signed by Chuck Hafter. Sincerely, Robert J. Perry, Esq. RJP/nlb Enclosure mi printed on recycled paper PERRY & SCHMUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 110 MAIN STREET, SUITE 3A P. O. BOX 238 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402 TELEPHONE: (802) 658-2675 TELECOPIER: (802) 658-6900 ROBERT J. PERRY RONALD C. SCHMUCKER January 8, 2007 Ray Belair Zoning Administrator 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Rye/Brisson Subdivision Dear Ray: LEGAL ASSISTANT NANCY L. BENSON Recently I sent an irrevocable offer of dedication with attached deed for the proposed Swift Street Extension on the Rye/Brisson property. Since the power companies will not install utilities within the street right of way and it cannot be determined at this point whether the installation will be on the northerly or southerly side of the strip, we need to reserve easements so that both lots can extend utility lines from one side of the road to the other, as may become necessary. With your blessing of the documents, we are ready to close. Sincerely., �J Robert J. Perry, Esq. RJP/nlb Enclosures Post -it® Fax Note 7671 Date J pag°es To F/�s r K l From Co./Dept. Co. Phone # Phone # Fax # Fax # N ®w printed on recycled paper Vermont Warranty Deed KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS THAT we, ARTHUR H. RYE and LEXIE R. RYE, husband and wife, of South Burlington, BERNICE R. BRISSON, Trustee, of Williston, ANTHONY BRISSON of Williston, TIMOTHY BRISSON of Williston, CLINT RYE of South Burlington, and KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTER of Hinesburg, all in the County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, MICHAEL BRISSON of Waterbury, in the County of Washington and State of Vermont, LORA CHURCHILL of Brookfield, in the County of Orange and State of Vermont, and MATTHEW LABOUNTY of Randolph, in the County of Orange and State of Vermont, Grantors, in the consideration of Ten and More Dollars paid to our full satisfaction by CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, a Vermont municipality, Grantee, by these presents do freely GIVE, GRANT, SELL, CONVEY AND CONFIRM unto the said Grantee, 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: A strip of land 80 feet in width and 1,048 feet, more or less, in length, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a concrete monument set in the ground in the apparent westerly sideline of Vermont Route 116 (Hinesburg Road, so-called), located 143.48 feet, more or less, from an iron pipe set in the ground at the southeasterly corner of land now or formerly owned by Mansfield View Properties; thence proceeding S 06°50'41" W in and along the westerly sideline of said highway a distance of 80.01 feet, more or less, to a concrete monument set in the ground at the northeasterly corner of land conveyed or to be conveyed to Rye Associates; thence turning to the left and proceeding N 84'11'44" W in and along the northerly sideline of said land of Rye Associates a distance of 1,048.07 feet, more or less, to a concrete monument set in the ground; thence turning to the right and proceeding N 06°47' 16" E a distance of 80.01 feet, more or less, to a concrete monument set in the ground; thence turning to the right and proceeding S 84' 11'44" E a distance of 1,048.15 feet, more or less, to the point or place of beginning. Grantors reserve the right to install utility lines crossing said strip of land, provided that all construction, maintenance, repair or replacement thereof shall be in accordance with City of South Burlington Public Works Highway Construction Standards. Being a portion of the land and premises conveyed to Bernice R. Brisson and Arthur H. Rye, individually and Trustees for the benefit of Lois R. LaBounty by Final Decree of Distribution in the Estate of Gwendolen A. Rye dated August 23, 1996 as recorded in Volume 397 at Pages 691-696 of the City of South Burlington Land Records and by Bernice R. Brisson and Arthur H. Rye, Co -Trustees, to Anthony Brisson, Timothy Brisson, Michael Brisson, Clint Rye, Katherine (Cassie) Rye (now known as Katherine (Cassie) Carter, Lora Churchill and Matthew Labounty dated October 31, 2001 as recorded in Volume 529 at Pages 488-490 of said Land Records. Reference is made to a trust deed from Bernice R. Brisson to Bernice R. Brisson, Trustee of the Bernice R. Brisson Revocable Trust dated June 26, 2002, which deed is dated November 6, 2006 as recorded in Volume 765 at Pages 510-513 of said Land Records. Reference is hereby made to the above instruments, the records and references thereof and the records and references therein contained, all 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, CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, and its successors and assigns, to its own use and behoof forever; And we, the said Grantors, ARTHUR H. RYE, LEXIE R. RYE, BERNICE R. BRISSON, Trustee, ANTHONY BRISSON, TIMOTHY BRISSON, CLINT RYE, KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTER, MICHAEL BRISSON, LORA CHURCHILL and MATTHEW LABOUNTY, for ourselves and our heirs and assigns, do covenant with the said Grantee, CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, its successors and assigns, that until the ensealing of these presents we are the sole owners of the premises, and have good right and title to convey the same in manner aforesaid, that they are FREE FROM EVERY ENCUMBRANCE; And we hereby engage to WARRANT AND DEFEND the same against all lawful claims whatever, except as aforesaid. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we hereunto set our hands and seals this day of 2007. IN THE PRESENCE OF: Arthur H. Rye Lexie R. Rye Bernice R. Brisson, Trustee Lexie R. Rye, as power of attorney for Anthony Brisson, Timothy Brisson, Michael Brisson, Clint Rye, Katherine (Cassie) Carter, Lora Churchill and Matthew LaBounty STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. At , in said County and State, this day of 2007, ARTHUR H. RYE and LEXIE R. RYE personally appeared, and they acknowledged this instrument, by them sealed and subscribed, to be their free act and deed. Before me: STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. Notary Public At , in said County and State, this day of 2007, BERNICE R. BRISSON, Trustee, personally appeared, and she acknowledged this instrument, by her sealed and subscribed, to be her free act and deed. Before me: STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. Notary Public At , in said County and State, this day of 2007, LEXIE R. RYE, as power of attorney for ANTHONY BRISSON, TIMOTHY BRISSON, CLINT RYE, KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTER, MICHAEL BRISSON, LORA CHURCHILL and MATTHEW LABOUNTY, personally appeared, and she acknowledged this instrument, by her sealed and subscribed, to be her free act and deed and the free act and deed of ANTHONY BRISSON, TIMOTHY BRISSON, CLINT RYE, KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTER, MICHAEL BRISSON, LORA CHURCHILL and MATTHEW LABOUNTY. Before me: Notary Public PERRY & SCHMUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 110 MAIN STREET, SUITE 3A P. O. BOX 238 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402 TELEPHONE: (802) 658-2675 TELECOPIER: (802) 658-6900 ROBERT J. PERRY RONALD C. SCHMUCKER December 13, 2006 Ray Belair Zoning Administrator 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Rye/Brisson Subdivision Dear Ray: LEGAL ASSISTANT NANCY L. BENSON As required by the DRB approval of November 21, I am enclosing an offer of dedication, deed and transfer return for the Swift Street extension, which is a portion of the subdivided Lot 1. We had hoped to close this year, but it looks like closing may slip into early January. However, I would appreciate your comments and those of the City attorney so we can put the final touches on the transaction. Please give me a call if you have any questions. Sincere Robert J. Perry, Esq. RJP/nlb Enclosures %J printed on recycled paper IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF DEDICATION Agreement by and between ARTHUR H. RYE, LEXIE R. RYE, BERNICE R. BRISSON, Trustee, ANTHONY BRISSON, TIMOTHY BRISSON, MICHAEL BRISSON, CLINT RYE, KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTE, LORA CHURCHILL and MATTHEW LABOUNTY (hereinafter referred to as "Owners") and the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, a Vermont municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "Municipality") WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Municipality's Development Review Board has approved a final subdivision plat entitled "Lands of Brisson & Rye, #1061 & #1075 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, VT, Subdivision Plat", prepared by O'Leary -Burke Civil Associates, PLC, dated October 26, 2006, and recorded as Map Slide of the City of South Burlington Land Records; and WHEREAS, the final approval of the Development Review Board contains a condition that a strip of land 80 feet in width northerly adjacent to the northerly line of Lot 2 as shown on the above -described plan for the future extension of Swift Street to Hinesburg Road be conveyed to the Municipality for public use; and WHEREAS, the above -described land and/or interests therein are to be dedicated to the Municipality free and clear of all encumbrances, pursuant to said final approval and final plat; and NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the final approval of the Municipality's Development Review Board and for other good and valuable consideration, it is covenanted and agreed as follows: 1. The Owner herewith delivers to the Municipality a Warranty Deed and Vermont Property Transfer Tax Return, copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibits A and B, said delivery constituting a formal offer of dedication to the Municipality, to be held by the Municipality until the acceptance or rejection of such Offer of Dedication by the Legislative Body of the Municipality. 2. The Owner agrees that said formal Offer of Dedication is irrevocable and can be accepted by the Municipality in whole or in part at any time. 3. This Irrevocable Offer of Dedication shall run with the land and shall be binding upon all assigns, grantees, successors and/or heirs of the Owner. Dated this day of 3200 IN THE PRESENCE OF: Dated this day of Arthur H. Rye Lexie R. Rye Bernice R. Brisson, Trustee Lexie R. Rye, as power of attorney for Anthony Brisson, Timothy Brisson, Michael Brisson, Clint Rye, Katherine (Cassie) Carter, Lora Churchill and Matthew LaBounty , 200 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON By: City Manager & Duly Authorized Agent STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. At , in said County and State, this day of 5200 , ARTHUR H. RYE and LEXIE R. RYE personally appeared, and they acknowledged this instrument, by them sealed and subscribed, to be their free act and deed. Before me: STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. Notary Public At , in said County and State, this day of 200 , BERNICE R. BRISSON, Trustee, personally appeared, and she acknowledged this instrument, by her sealed and subscribed, to be her free act and deed. Before me: STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. Notary Public At , in said County and State, this day of , 200 , LEXIE R. RYE, as power of attorney for ANTHONY BRISSON, TIMOTHY BRISSON, CLINT RYE, KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTER, MICHAEL BRISSON, LORA CHURCHILL and MATTHEW LABOUNTY, personally appeared, and she acknowledged this instrument, by her sealed and subscribed, to be her free act and deed and the free act and deed of ANTHONY BRISSON, TIMOTHY BRISSON, CLINT RYE, KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTER, MICHAEL BRISSON, LORA CHURCHILL and MATTHEW LABOUNTY. Before me: Notary Public STATE OF VERMONT CHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS. At South Burlington, this day of , 200 , personally appeared , City Manager and Duly Authorized Agent of the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, and he acknowledged this instrument by him signed and sealed to be his free act and deed and the free act and deed of the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON. Before me: Notary Public Vermont Warranty Deed KNO WALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS THAT we, ARTHUR H. RYE and LEXIE R. RYE, husband and wife, of South Burlington, BERNICE R. BRISSON, Trustee, of Williston, ANTHONY BRISSON of Williston, TIMOTHY BRISSON of Williston, CLINT RYE of South Burlington, and KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTER of Hinesburg, all in the County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, MICHAEL BRISSON of Waterbury, in the County of Washington and State of Vermont, LORA CHURCHILL of Brookfield, in the County of Orange and State of Vermont, and MATTHEW LABOUNTY of Randolph, in the County of Orange and State of Vermont, Grantors, in the consideration of Ten and More Dollars paid to our full satisfaction by CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, a Vermont municipality, Grantee, by these presents do freely GIVE, GRANT, SELL, CONVEY AND CONFIRM unto the said Grantee, 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: A strip of land 80 feet in width and 1,048 feet, more or less, in length, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a concrete monument set in the ground in the apparent westerly sideline of Vermont Route 116 (Hinesburg Road, so-called), located 143.48 feet, more or less, from an iron pipe set in the ground at the southeasterly corner of land now or formerly owned by Mansfield View Properties; thence proceeding S 06°50'41" W in and along the westerly sideline of said highway a distance of 80.01 feet, more or less, to a concrete monument set in the ground at the northeasterly corner of land conveyed or to be conveyed to Rye Associates; thence turning to the left and proceeding N 84°11'44" W in and along the northerly sideline of said land of Rye Associates a distance of 1,048.07 feet, more or less, to a concrete monument set in the ground; thence turning to the right and proceeding N 06°47' 16" E a distance of 80.01 feet, more or less, to a concrete monument set in the ground; thence turning to the right and proceeding S 84'11'44" E a distance of 1,048.15 feet, more or less, to the point or place of beginning. Being a portion of the land and premises conveyed to Bernice R. Brisson and Arthur H. Rye, individually and Trustees for the benefit of Lois R. LaBounty by Final Decree of Distribution in the Estate of Gwendolen A. Rye dated August 23, 1996 as recorded in Volume 397 at Pages 691-696 of the City of South Burlington Land Records and by Bernice R. Brisson and Arthur H. Rye, Co -Trustees, to Anthony Brisson, Timothy Brisson, Michael Brisson, Clint Rye, Katherine (Cassie) Rye (now known as Katherine (Cassie) Carter, Lora Churchill and Matthew Labounty dated October 31, 2001 as recorded in Volume 529 at Pages 488-490 of said Land Records. Reference is made to a trust deed from Bernice R. Brisson to Bernice R. Brisson, Trustee of the Bernice R. Brisson Revocable Trust dated June 26, 2002, which deed is dated November 6, 2006 as recorded in Volume 765 at Pages 510-513 of said Land Records. Reference is hereby made to the above instruments, the records and references thereof and the records and references therein contained, all 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, CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, and its successors and assigns, to its own use and behoof forever; And we, the said Grantors, ARTHUR H. RYE, LEXIE R. RYE, BERNICE R. BRISSON, Trustee, ANTHONY BRISSON, TIMOTHY BRISSON, CLINT RYE, KATHERINE (LASSIE) CARTER, MICHAEL BRISSON, LORA CHURCHILL and MATTHEW LABOUNTY, for ourselves and our heirs and assigns, do covenant with the said Grantee, CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, its successors and assigns, that until the ensealing of these presents we are the sole owners of the premises, and have good right and title to convey the same in manner aforesaid, that they are FREE FROM EVERY ENCUMBRANCE; And we hereby engage to WARRANT AND DEFEND the same against all lawful claims whatever, except as aforesaid. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we hereunto set our hands and seals this day of 200 IN THE PRESENCE OF: Arthur H. Rye Lexie R. Rye Bernice R. Brisson, Trustee Lexie R. Rye, as power of attorney for Anthony Brisson, Timothy Brisson, Michael Brisson, Clint Rye, Katherine (Cassie) Carter, Lora Churchill and Matthew LaBounty STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. At , in said County and State, this day of 2006, ARTHUR H. RYE and LEXIE R. RYE personally appeared, and they acknowledged this instrument, by them sealed and subscribed, to be their free act and deed. Before me: STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. Notary Public At , in said County and State, this day of 2006, BERNICE R. BRISSON, Trustee, personally appeared, and she acknowledged this instrument, by her sealed and subscribed, to be her free act and deed. Before me: STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. Notary Public At , in said County and State, this day of 2006, LEXIE R. RYE, as power of attorney for ANTHONY BRISSON, TIMOTHY BRISSON, CLINT RYE, KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTER, MICHAEL BRISSON, LORA CHURCHILL and MATTHEW LABOUNTY, personally appeared, and she acknowledged this instrument, by her sealed and subscribed, to be her free act and deed and the free act and deed of ANTHONY BRISSON, TIMOTHY BRISSON, CLINT RYE, KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTER, MICHAEL BRISSON, LORA CHURCHILL and MATTHEW LABOUNTY. Before me: Notary Public VERMONT PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX RETURN VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF TAXES (PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT CLEARLY) MONTPELIER, VERMONT 05633 SOCIAL SECURITY NO. OR TAXPAYERIDENT.NO. SELLER'S (TRANSFEROR'S) NAME(S) COMPLETE MAILING ADDRESS FOLLOWING TRANSFER See attached BUYER'S (TRANSFEREE'S) NAME(S) COMPLETE MAILING ADDRESS FOLLOWING TRANSFER SOCIAL SECURITY NO. OR TAXPAYER IDENT. NO. City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street S. Burlington, VT 05403 PROPERTY LOCATION (Address in full) DATE OF CLOSING Hinesburg Road, S. Burlington, VT 05403 INTEREST IN PROPERTY 1. X FEE SIMPLE 3. [:] UNDIVIDED 1/2 INTEREST 5. ❑ TIME-SHARE 7. ❑ EASEMENT/ROW LIFE ESTATE 4. F]UNDIVIDED I %INTEREST 6. ❑ LEASE 8. ❑ OTHER ....................... LAND SIZE (Acres or fraction SPECIAL FACTORS: HAVE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS BEEN CONVEYED X NO YES t2.[:] thereof) - WAS SALE BETWEEN FAMILY MEMBERS X NO YES STATE RELATIONSHIP 7FINANCING: El CONVENTIONAL/BANK 0 OWNER FINANCING DOTHER ------- -- -- BUILDINGS ON PROPERTY AT THE TIME OF TRANSFER (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 1. X NONE 5. 0 FARM BUILDINGS 9. EISTORE 2. 1:1 FACTORY 6. El MULTI -FAMILY WITH DWELLING UNITS 10.DOTHER (NUMBER) NUMBER) TRANSFERRED DESCRIBE ❑ ❑ 3. SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING 7. MOBILE HOME YEAR MAKE SER. NO. SERT 4. ❑ CAMPNACATION HOME 8. ❑ CONDOMINIUM WITH (NUMBER) UNITS TRANSFERRED CHECK WHETHER THE BUILDINGS WERE EVER ❑ OCCUPIED ❑ RENTED ❑ WILL BE RENTED AFTER SALE PRIMARY USE OF PROPERTY BEFORE TRANSFER (CHECK ONE): 1. F-1 PRIMARY RESIDENCE 3. ❑ CAMPNACATION 5. F] OPERATING FARM 7. [:] COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL DESCRIBE 2. X OPEN LAND 4. ❑ TIMBERLAND 6. [:1 GOVERNMENT USE 8. El OTHER DESCRIBE PRIMARY USE OF PROPERTY AFTER TRANSFER (CHECK ONE): 1. 0 PRIMARY RESIDENCE 3. ❑ CAMP/VACATION 5. El OPERATING FARM 7.000MMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL DESCRIBE 2. X OPEN LAND 4. ❑ TIMBERLAND 6. [:1 GOVERNMENT USE 8. [:1 OTHER DESCRIBE S P R P E R WAS PROPERTY PURCHASED BY TENANT NO YES DOES BUYER HOLD TITLE TO ANY ADJOINING PROPERTY X NO YES WAS PROPERTYP F U R N E CUT V ICUL- RRENT A R S CURRENT USE VALUE PROGRAM: IS ANY PORTION OF THE LAND BEING CONVEYED SUBJECT TO A LIEN OR OTHER RESTRICTIONS UNDER THE AGRICUL- U AGR TURAL AND MANAGED FOREST LAND USE VALUE PROGRAM CHAPTER 124 OF 32 V.S.A. E] YES Z NO TURAL T ANDN A U A D A F RA F IS E TRANSFER T E IF TRANSFER IS EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX, CITE EXEMPTION FROM INSTRUCTIONS AND COMPLETE SECTIONS M, N AND 0 BELOW. Tr T r ansfer t a S Transfer to a municipality without consideration. n e r 0 M U 0 T TOTAL TOTAL PRICE PAID FOR • PRICE PAID FOR I 0 PRICE PAID P E P D PRICE PAID$ 0.00 PERSONAL PROPERTY $ 0.00 -- --------------- REAL PROPERTY $ 0.00 ---------- --- E Ty E F P R STATE PERSONAL STATE TYPE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY T P . . .............. IF PRICE PAID FOR REAL PROPERTY IS LESS THAN FAIR MARKET VALUE, PLEASE EXPLAIN: MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO: VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF TAXES TAX DUE: Enter amount from rate schedule on reverse side. COMPLETE RATE SCHEDULE FOR ALL TRANSFERS $ 0.00 • DATE SELLER ACQUIRED August 23,1996 C --- ----- ------------- - I I V MO T L FA VERMONT LAND GAINS TAX RETURN IS NOT BEING FILED, CITE EXEMPTION FROM INSTRUCTIONS ON PAGE 4 OF THIS BOOKLET #1 (CONTINUED ON REVERSE SIDE) THIS SECTION TO BE COMPLETED BY TOWN OR CITY CLERK TOWN/CITY --- - --- ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TOWN NUMBER DATE OF RECORD RETURN RECEIVED (INCLUDING CERTIFICATES AND BOOK NUMBER PAGE NO. ACT 250 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT) AND TAX PAID. LISTED VALUE $_______ GRAND LIST YEAR OF PARCEL ID NO- -------------- - - SIGNED CLERK GRAND LIST CATEGORY DATE SPAN (Rev. 9/05) FORM PT RATE SCHEDULE 1. Tax on Special Rate Property: a. Value of purchaser's principal residence (not to exceed $100,000) (See Instructions)....................................................... 1. a. $ 0.00 b. Value of property enrolled in current use program................................................................................................................ b. $ .. 0.00 c. Value of qualified working farm................................................................................................................................................ c. $ 0.00 d. Add Lines 1a, b and c................................................................................................................................................................ d. $ 0.00 e. Tax rate....................................................................................................................................................................................... f. Tax due an Special Rate Property: Multiply Line 1d by Line 1e e. .005 ............................................................................................ f. $ 0.00 2. Tax on General Rate Property: a. Enter amount from Line O on front of return........................................................................................................................... 2. a. $ 0.00 b. Enter amount from Line I of Rate Schedule above.............................................................................................................. b. $ 0.00 c. Subtract Line 2b from Line 2a................................................................................................................................................... $ 0.00 d. Tax rate........................................................................................................................................................................................ c. d. 0125 e. Tax due on General Rate Property: Multiply Line 2c by Line 2d............................................................................................. e. $ 0.00 3. Total Tax Due: Add Lines 1f and 2e and enter here and on Line P on front of return.................................................................................. 3. $ 0.00 LOCAL AND STATE PERMITS AND ACT 250 CERTIFICATES Buyer(s) and Seller(s) certify as follows: A. That they have investigated and disclosed to every party to this transaction all of their knowledge relating to flood regulations, if any, affecting the property. B. That the seller(s) advised the buyer(s) that local and state building regulations, zoning regulations and subdivision regulations and wastewater system and potable water supply rules under Chapter 64 of Title 10 pertaining to the property may limit significantly the use of the property. C. That this transfer is in compliance with or is exempt from the wastewater system and potable water supply rules of the Agency of Natural Resources for the following reasons: 1. This property is the subject of Permit No. and is in compliance with said permit, or 2. This property and any retained parcel is exempt from the wastewater system and potable water supply rules because (see instructions for exemptions): a. Parcel to be sold: Exemption Number 1-403(a)(1) b. Parcel retained: Exemption Number Seller(s) further certifies as follows: D. That this transfer of real property and any development thereon is in compliance with or exempt from 10 V.S.A. Chapter 151, Vermont's Land Use and Development law (Act 250), for the following reason: 1. This property is the subject of Act 250 Permit No. and is in compliance with said permit, or 2. This property is exempt from Act 250 because: (list exemption number froml-ine D in instructions) b E. That this transfer dos / does not (strike one) result in a partition or subdivision of land. Note: If it does, an Act 250 Disclosure Statement must be attached to this return before filing with the town clerk (see Line E instructions). WITHHOLDING CERTIFICATION ❑ Buyer(s) certifies that Vermont income tax has been withheld from the purchase price and will be remitted to the Commissioner of Taxes with Form RW-171 within 30 days from the transfer, OR that the transfer is exempt from income tax withholding for the following reason (check one): ® 1. Under penalties of perjury, seller(s) certifies that at that time of transfer, each seller was a resident of Vermont or an estate. ❑ 2. Buyer(s) certifies that the parties obtained withholding certificate no. from the Commissioner of Taxes in advance of this sale. ❑ 3. Buyer(s) certifies that this is a transfer without consideration. (See instructions for Form RW-171.) ❑ 4. Sellers(s) is a mortgagor conveying the mortgaged property to a mortgagee in a foreclosure or transfer in lieu of foreclosure, with no additional consideration. WE HEREBY SWEAR AND AFFIRM THAT THIS RETURN, INCLUDING ALL CERTIFICATES, IS TRUE, CORRECT AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE. SELLER(S) SIGNATURE(S) DATE BUYER(S) SIGNATURE(S) DATE Preparer's Signature- _ Prepared by Robert J. Perry, Esq. Preparer's Address PO Box 238, Burlington, VT 05402 Buyer's Representative Tel. (Print or Type) Keep a copy of this return for your records. (Rev. 9105) FORM PT-1 ATTORNEY'S REPORT AND OPINION ON TITLE Form of Report Suggested by Chittenden County Bar Association RECORD OWNER: ARTHUR H. RYE, LEXIE R. RYE, BERNICE R. BRISSON, Trustee, ANTHONY BRISSON, TIMOTHY BRISSON, CLINT RYE, KATHERINE (CASSIE) CARTER, MICHAEL BRISSON, LORA CHURCHILL and MATTHEW LABOUNTY PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: A strip of land 80 feet in width and 1,048 feet, more or less, in length, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a concrete monument set in the ground in the apparent westerly sideline of Vermont Route 116 (Hinesburg Road, so-called), located 143.48 feet, more or less, from an iron pipe set in the ground at the southeasterly corner of land now or formerly owned by Mansfield View Properties; thence proceeding S 06°50'41" W in and along the westerly sideline of said highway a distance of 80.01 feet, more or less, to a concrete monument set in the ground at the northeasterly corner of land conveyed or to be conveyed to Rye Associates; thence turning to the left and proceeding N 84'11'44" W in and along the northerly sideline of said land of Rye Associates a distance of 1,048.07 feet, more or less, to a concrete monument set in the ground; thence turning to the right and proceeding N 06'47' 16" E a distance of 80.01 feet, more or less, to a concrete monument set in the ground; thence turning to the right and proceeding S 84'11'44" E a distance of 1,048.15 feet, more or less, to the point or place of beginning. Being a portion of the land and premises conveyed to Bernice R. Brisson and Arthur H. Rye, individually and Trustees for the benefit of Lois R. LaBounty by Final Decree of Distribution in the Estate of Gwendolen A. Rye dated August 23, 1996 as recorded in Volume 397 at Pages 691-696 of the City of South Burlington Land Records and by Bernice R. Brisson and Arthur H. Rye, Co -Trustees, to Anthony Brisson, Timothy Brisson, Michael Brisson, Clint Rye, Katherine (Cassie) Rye (now known as Katherine (Cassie) Carter, Lora Churchill and Matthew Labounty dated October 31, 2001 as recorded in Volume 529 at Pages 488-490 of said Land Records. Reference is made to a trust deed from Bernice R. Brisson to Bernice R. Brisson, Trustee of the Bernice R. Brisson Revocable Trust dated June 26, 2002, which deed is dated November 6, 2006 as recorded in Volume 765 at Pages 510-513 of said Land Records. The following opinion and report on the title of the record owner to the above - described property is based on an examination of the appropriate records of the City of South Burlington. It is furnished in connection with a proposed offer of dedication to the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON; it is for the sole use of the purchaser above named; and is not transferable. Based on such examination and the assumption that the records examined are currently and correctly indexed in the general indices, it is my opinion that, except as set forth below, on the effective date of this report the title of the record owner is a marketable title in fee simple: 1. MUNICIPAL CHARGES: (Unless otherwise indicated, these are based on oral verification by the appropriate municipal officer.) a. Assessed Valuation — Not separately assessed. b. Taxes for the current fiscal period — taxes are paid through February 28, 2007. C. Delinquent Taxes — None of record. d. Street, Curb and Sidewalk Assessments - Not applicable. e. Water Liens — Not applicable. f. Electric Liens - g. Sewer Assessments — Not applicable. h. Fire District, School District or other Municipal Liens or Assessments Not applicable. 2. MORTGAGES: None of record. 3. ATTACHMENTS and LIENS: None of record. 4. EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY: None of record. 5. PROTECTIVE COVENANTS; OTHER RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD: None other than zoning. 6. LEASE LAND RENT: No indication of lease land. 7. COMPLIANCE WITH BOARD OF HEALTH SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS: Approval will be required at the time of highway construction. OBJECTIONS TO TITLE; REMARKS: THE UNDERSIGNED ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR UNINDEXED OR MISINDEXED DOCUMENTS 9. EXCEPTIONS - This report does not cover: and this opinion is subject to: a. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown of record b. Mechanics' or Materialmen's Liens not recorded C. All applicable statutes, ordinances, and regulations of governmental bodies including use, zoning and building restrictions, imposed by them except as included in Paragraph 7 above. d. Any facts which would be disclosed by a physical survey or inspection of the premises. e. Except wherein indicated, Probate, Bankruptcy and other Court records, and records of birth, death, marriage and divorce. f. Special assessments or liens, if any, not shown of record. g. Notice and regulation of Underground Liquid Storage Tanks pursuant to 10 V.S.A., Chapter 59. h. Any right of claim, including but not limited to any right of possession or claim for damages relating to the land, which has or may be asserted of record or not, by or on behalf of any Indian or Indian tribe. This exception will not be incorporated in any title insurance policy issued in connection with this title opinion. i. The undersigned does not make any representation, or certification, as to whether or not the above -described land and premises constitute "wet lands" as such may be protected or regulated by Title 10, Vermont Statutes Annotated. j. Any facts which would render this property subject to Act 250 jurisdiction under the Vermont Supreme Court ruling set out in: In Re: Eastland Inc., 151 Vt. 497 (1989). k. Any records not properly indexed or filed in the town clerk's office. 1. The undersigned has not undertaken any investigation whatsoever with respect to whether the property and each component thereof is in compliance with any of the required permits and states no opinion thereto. Many of the requirements of such permits require knowledge and skills in engineering, architecture and other professions outside of the legal profession. If you require additional information regarding the permits, or the status of the property regarding compliance with the permits, you should contact the undersigned. This report and opinion refer to and apply only so far back as 40 years from date and are effective down to the day of December, 2006, at o'clock A.M. PERRY & SCHMUCKER Roberti. Perry, Esq. CERTIFICATE OF TRUST PURSUANT TO 27 V.S.A. § 352 The Trust. The name of the Trust is the Bernice R. Brisson Revocable Trust. 2. The Date. The date of the Trust Instrument is June 26, 2002. The Instrument has not been amended. The Grantor/Settlor. The name of each Grantor or Settlor of the Trust Instrument is Bernice R. Brisson. 4. The Trustee. The name of each Original Trustee is Bernice R. Brisson. 5. Empowered Trustee. The name and address of each trustee empowered to act under the Trust Instrument at the time of execution of this certificate is: Bernice R. Brisson of 2268 Mountain View Road, Williston, VT 05495. 6. Trust Abstract. An abstract of the provisions of the Trust Instrument authorizing the Trustee to act in the manner contemplated by the instrument follows: [Insert authorizing provision(s) directly from Trust Instrument] 7. Trustee's Certification. The undersigned Trustee hereby certifies the following: A. The Trust Agreement has not been revoked or amended as to the foregoing authorizing provisions and the same remain in force and effect; B. There are no provisions in the Trust Instrument limiting the authority so granted; and C. The Trust is NOT under the supervision of any court. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and seal this day of ,200 IN PRESENCE OF: Witness STATE OF VERMONT CHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS. Bernice R. Brisson, Trustee At , this day of R. Brisson, Trustee of the Bernice R. Brisson Revocable Trust (described above) p0ersonally Bernice appeared before me under oath and acknowledged this instrument, by her sealed and subscribed, to be her free act and deed and the free act and deed of the Bernice R. Brisson Revocable Trust and further that the statements made herein are true, correct and complete to the best of her knowledge and belief. Before me: Notary Public My commission expires: 2/10/2007 VERMONT State of Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation January 3, 2007 Daniel V. Rexford O'Leary -Burke Civil Associates, PLC One Corporate Drive, Suite #1 Essex Junction VT 05452 Dear Dan: AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES Wastewater Management Division 111 West Street Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 Telephone #(802) 879-5656 Subject: Rye & Brisson; Boundary Line Adjustment Located :t 1061 & 1075 Hinesburg Road in the City of South Burlington, Vermont. This letter is in response to your letter to me dated November 30, 2006 regarding a boundary line adjustment between two pre-existing lots identified as Lot #1 owned by Bernice R. Brisson and Arthur H. Rye and Lot #2 owned by Arthur H. and Lexie R. Rye. Lot #1 will convey 784,671 square feet to Lot #2 making Lot #1 7.87 acres and Lot #2 18.01 acres. Lot #1 is undeveloped and Lot #2 presently has a duplex that is served by municipal water and wastewater disposal systems. The boundary line adjustment is shown on the plan Job #6055, Plan Sheet #PL, "Subdivision Plat" dated 10-26-06 last revised 11-30-06 prepared by O'Leary- Burke Civil Associates, PLC. This letter only addresses the need to obtain a permit for the boundary line adjustment and no reference is made as to the status of the duplex except as required by the Wastewater System and Potable Water Supply Rules, Subchapter 4, Section 1-404(a)(4) for determining the affect the boundary line adjustment has on the water and wastewater disposal system serving the duplex. It is my opinion that the boundary line adjustment will have a negligible affect on the water and wastewater disposal systems for the duplex on Lot #2 and therefore Lot #2 qualifies for the exemption stated in Section 1-404(a)(4) of the Rules. Lot #1 is undeveloped and shall comply with Section 1- 403(a)(5) of the Rules for the creation of undeveloped lots. Please record this letter in the City of South Burlington Land Records. Further, this letter does not relieve the landowner from obtaining all approvals administered by the City of South Burlington and other State Agencies. Please contact me at 1-802-879-5675 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Ernest P. Christianson Regional Engineer c City of South Burlington n,...:,......1 n.CC...... n,.....,. /------ T, 1n._a1.,. A /01 E J Memorandum To: Ray Belair From: Daniel Rexford Subject: Rye Associates - 2-Lot Subdivision Date: December 14. 2006 cc: Attached please find 3 paper copies, 1 Mylar and a digital copy of the revised Subdivision Plat per the requirements of the Final Plan Approval dated November 21, 2006. If you have any questions, please call. O'Leary -Burke Civil Associates, PLC 1 Corporate Drive, Suite 1 - Essex Jct., VT 05452 802-878-9990 Fax 802-878-9989 E-Mail - drexford@olearyburke.com i SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH. BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4-to6 December 6, 2006 Paul O'Leary O'Leary -Burke Civil Associates 1 Corporate Drive, Suite 1 Essex Junction, VT 05452 Re: DRB Minutes Dear Mr. O'Leary: For your records, enclosed is a copy of the approved minutes from the November 21, 2006 Development Review Board meeting. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 21 NOVEMBER 2006 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 21 November 2006, at 7:30 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: J. Dinklage, Chair; M. Behr, M. Birmingham, R. Farley, G. Quimby, E. Knudson, P. Plummeau Also Present: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; C. LaRose, Associate Planner; P. O'Leary, R. Peabody, R. Skiff, C. Yandow, T. Crapo, E. Patton, C. Bolton, A. & L. Rye, J. Wakefield, B. Irish, M. Sirotkin, S. Vock, L. Bresee, D. Hewitt, R. DeWolfe, P. Malone, K. Lesser, E. Lesser -Goldsmith, A. Hunt, M. & A. Farrington, B. Hembach, G. Anderson -King, N. Hayward, L. Williams, J. Wakefield, B. Savoie 1. Other Business/Announcements: Mr. Belair reported on 4 administrative approvals he had recently made: a. Quarry Hill Road — Site modification to a 32-unit multi -family dwelling b. 1560 Williston Road — relocation of handicapped parking space c. 7 Farrell Street — new accessory structure d. 30 Community Drive — new dumpsters; 48-seat cafeteria as an accessory use Public Hearing: Preliminary Plat Application #SD-06-91 and Final Plat Application #SD-06-92 of Rye Associates for a two -lot subdivision consisting of Lot #1(7.86 acres) and Lot #2 (18.01 acres), 1061 and 1075 Hinesburg Road: Mr. O'Leary explained that currently there is a 10-acre lot to the north and a 16 acre lot to the south. Mr. Bresee noted that the Rec Path Committee has been asked to assess what they would like for rec paths near these lots. Ms. Quimby moved to approve Preliminary Plat Application #SD-06-91 and Final Plat Application #SD-06-92 of Rye Associates subject to the stipulations in the draft motion. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 3a. Sketch Plan Application #SD-06-96 of Nate Hayward for a planned unit development consisting of eight 2-family dwellings (16 units), 61 IDX Drive: Mr. Knudson recused himself due to a potential conflict of interest. Ms. Henderson -King said this was originally proposed as a 20-unit development in 5 buildings. There are now 8 duplex buildings for a total of 16 units. The development -1- Memorandum To: Ray Belair From: Daniel Rexford Subject: Rye Associates - 2-Lot Subdivision Date: November 30, 2006 cc: Attached please find 4 copies of the revised Subdivision Plat per the requirements of the Final Plan Approval dated November 21, 2006. If you have any questions, please call. O'Leary -Burke Civil Associates, PLC 1 Corporate Drive, Suite 1 - Essex Jct., VT 05452 802-878-9990 Fax 802-878-9989 E-Mail - drexford@olearyburke.com CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPAurMEN,r OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH RURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 November 22, 2006 Paul O'Leary O'Leary -Burke Civil Associates 1 Corporate Drive, #1 Essex Junction, VT 05452 Re: Preliminary Plat Application #SD-06-91 & Final Plat Application #SD-06- 92 Dear Mr. O'Leary Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision of the above referenced project approved by the South Burlington Development Review Board on November 21, 2006 (effective 11/21/06). Please note the conditions of approval, including that the amended final plat plans must be recorded in the land records within 180 days (must be submitted & recorded by May 20, 2007) of this approval or this approval is null and void. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, A9iN 4 aBetsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT: 7005 3110 0004 4484 6692 SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802) 846-41o6 November 22, 2006 Chuck Bolton 5 Prouty Parkway South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Rye Subdivision Dear Chuck: Pursuant to 24 VSA 4464(b)(3), enclosed please find a copy of the Development Review Board decision regarding the above referenced matter. You are being provided a copy of this decision because you appeared or were heard at the hearing. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact this office. Sincerely, e�3� QmtAk Betsy McDonough South Burlington Planning & Zoning Department SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802) 846-4106 November 22, 2006 Arthur & Lexi Rye 1075 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Rye Subdivision Dear Mr. & Mrs. Rye Pursuant to 24 VSA 4464(b)(3), enclosed please find a copy of the Development Review Board decision regarding the above referenced matter. You are being provided a copy of this decision because you appeared or were heard at the hearing. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact this office. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough South Burlington Planning & Zoning Department CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Interested Persons Record and Service List Under the 2004 revisions to Chapter 117, the Development Review Board (DRB) has certain administrative obligations with respect to interested persons. At any hearing, there must be an opportunity for each person wishing to achieve interested person status to demonstrate compliance with the applicable criteria. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b). The DRB must keep a written record of the name, address and participation of each person who has sought interested person status. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b). A copy of any decision rendered by the DRB must be mailed to every person or body appearing and having been heard by the DRB. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b)(3). Upon receipt of notice of an appeal to the environmental court, the DRB must supply a list of interested persons to the appellant in five working days. �24j V.S.A. § 4471(c). /\ HEARING DATE: NAME MAILING ADDRESS PRnJFCT OF INTFRFGT Ot 4) R '> ckJD sb CV1�\S ff 2, qve-ckAC- ` S -� . � P �y- Lt 7 f CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Interested Persons Record and Service List Under the 2004 revisions to Chapter 117, the Development Review Board (DRB) has certain administrative obligations with respect to interested persons. At any hearing, there must be an opportunity for each person wishing to achieve interested person status to demonstrate compliance with the applicable criteria. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b). The DRB must keep a written record of the name, address and participation of each person who has sought interested person status. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b). A copy of any decision rendered by the DRB must be mailed to every person or body appearing and having been heard by the DRB. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b)(3). Upon receipt of notice of an appeal to the environmental court, the DRB must supply a list of interested persons to the appellant in five working days. 24 V.S.A. § 4471(c). HEARING DATE: V 4 NAME MAILING ADDRFSS PPn IG('T nC IAITCMCCT `) ✓� 1� eU �C'i Z} 0 L�L1, LTUC' ��i�L��7 --- I v� 11�1 L.I\L%7 1 okOkO-off. VW Sv � r� z®� Ae-� kp tG Do 06 R MAC /Y�Z-6A/6;: `� TAA 5 6 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Interested Persons Record and Service List Under the 2004 revisions to Chapter 117, the Development Review Board (DRB) has certain administrative obligations with respect to interested persons. At any hearing, there must be an opportunity for each person wishing to achieve interested person status to demonstrate compliance with the applicable criteria. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b). The DRB must keep a written record of the name, address and participation of each person who has sought interested person status. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b). A copy of any decision rendered by the DRB must be mailed to every person or body appearing and having been heard by the DRB. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b)(3). Upon receipt of notice of an appeal to the environmental court, the DRB must supply a list of interested persons to the appellant in five working days. 24 V.S.A. § 4471(c). HEARING DATE. PO . 0 NAME MAILING ADDRESS PROJECT OF INTEREST C--V, %ydAJ►e-4 F4►e2/NG--i-z Ah,gc-p-'! pi 4 6a66AI bol-p►q► 50,�ja,eL.- Vl-054d3 5P~b6 A) TF H,9rW#-s9 P 130,RCAaT- L--- CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BUR.LINGTON, VE.RMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 November 16, 2006 Paul O'Leary, Jr. O'Leary -Burke Civil Assoc. 1 Corporate Drive, Suite #1 Essex Junction, VT 05452 Re: Rye Subdivision 1061 & 1075 Hinesburg Road Dear Mr. O'Leary: Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Development Review Board meeting and staff comments to the Board. Please be sure that someone is at the meeting on Tuesday, November 21, 2006 at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street. If you have any questions, please give us a call Sincerely, 1'_N WU1W+ Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD drb\sub\rye\rye_2Iotsub_prelim final.doc DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: November 13, 2006 Plans received: October 30, 2006 RYE ASSOCIATES — 2-LOT SUBDIVISION 1061 & 1075 HINESBURG ROAD PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION #SD-06-91 FINAL PLAT APPLICATION #SD-06-92 Agenda # 2 Meeting date: November 21, 2006 Owner Applicant Arthur Rye Rye Associates 1075 Hinesburg Road C/O Alan Bartlett So. Burlington, VT 05403 25C Pinecrest Drive Essex Jet, VT 05452 f t' Enqineer/Surveyor Property In orma ion O'Leary Burke Civil Associates Tax Parcel 0860-01061, 0860-01075 1 Corporate Drive Suite #! SEQ Zoning District- Village Residential Essex Junction, VT SEQ Zoning District- Village Commercial Industrial & Open Space Zoning District 15.6 & 10.2 acres Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sublr e\r e 2lotsub se Rye Associates, hereinafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking preliminary and final plat approval for a two (2) lot subdivision consisting of lot #1 (7.86 acres) and lot #2 (18.01 acres), 1061 & 1075 Hinesburg Road. Associate Planner Cathyann LaRose and Administrative Officer Ray Belair, referred to herein as staff, have reviewed the plans submitted on October 30, 2006 and have the following comments. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements Table 1. Dimensional Requirements LOT Industrial & Open Space Zoning. District Requirement/Limitation Proposed Min. Lot Size Max. Densit Max. Building Coverage Max. Total (overage Min. Front Setback Min. Side Setback Min. Rear Setback 3 acres n/a 30% 50% 50 ft. 35 ft. 50 ft. 7.86 acres n/a 0% 0% n/a n/a n/a n/a- no residential units are allowed; furthermore, no buildings exist or are proposed at this time. LOT2 SEQ-Village Commercial Villa a Residential Requirement/Limitation Proposed Min. Lot Size 12,000 SF 18.01 acres Max. Density- VC 1.2 units acre base density .05 units/acre Max. Density -VR max of 8/acre with TDR 1.2 units/acre base density 1 existing unit None proposed or # Max. Building Coverage max of 8/acre with TDR 150/( existing it Max. Total Coverage 30% 1.04% Min. Front Setback 50 ft. 1 2% Approx 30 ft. Min. Side Setback 10 ft. >10 ft. Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. >30 ft. 4 Pre-existing zoning non-compliance. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sublr e\r e 2lotsub se SUBDIVISION CRITERIA Pursuant to Section 15.18 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, subdivisions shall comDly with the following standards and conditions: The project is designed to be visually compatible with the planned development patterns in the area, as specified in the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose of the zoning district(s) in which it is located. The standards for this criterion are found below in a review of the regulations of the Southeast Quadrant. 1. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s). Staff feels the proposed subdivision of this property is in conformance with the South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. Southeast Quadrant District This proposed subdivision is located in the southeast quadrant district Therefore it is subject to the provisions of Section 9 of the SBLDR 9.06 Dimensional and Design Requirements Applicable to All Sub -Districts The following standards shall apply to development and improvements within the entire Southeast Quadrant Zoning District. A. Height. (1) The maximum height of any occupied structure in the SEQ-NRP, SEQ-NRT, or SEQ- NR sub -district shall not exceed forty-five feet (45'); the waiver provisions of Section 3.07(E) shall not apply to occupied structures in these sub -districts. (2) The maximum height of any occupied structure in the SEQ-VR or SEQ-VC sub- district shall not exceed fifty feet (50'); the waiver provisions of Section 3.07(E) shall not apply to occupied structures in these sub -districts. No new buildings are proposed as part of this application; therefore this criterion is not applicable to this application. B. Open Space and Resource Protection. (1) Open space areas on the site shall be located in such a way as to maximize opportunities for creating usable, contiguous open spaces between adjoining parcels As proposed, the layout of the proposed subdivision allows for ample open spaces between adjoining parcels. Staff recognizes that this may change as the lots are developed and therefore this criterion would be better addressed at that time. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING &ZONING drb\sub\r e\r e 2lotsub se (2) Building lots, streets and other structures shall be located in a manner consistent with the Regulating Plan for the applicable subdistrict allowing carefully planned development at the average densities provided in this bylaw. The site plan illustrates a proposed eighty foot wide (80') Right -of -Way which runs east -west to be conveyed to the City of South Burlington as well as the approximate location of a connecting Right - of -Way which runs north -south behind the existing barn and connects to Fox Run Lane. (3) A plan for the proposed open spaces and/or natural areas and their ongoing management shall be established by the applicant. At this time, the applicant has not identified any natural areas or open spaces. Staff recognizes that this may change as the lots are developed and therefore this criterion would be better addressed at that time. (4) Sufficient grading and erosion controls shall be employed during construction and after construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties. In making this finding, the Development Review Board may rely on evidence that the project will be covered under the General Permit for Construction issued by the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. At this time no construction is planned. Staff recognizes that this may change as the lots are developed and therefore this criterion would be better addressed at that time. (5) Sufficient suitable landscaping and fencing shall be provided to protect wetland, stream, or primary or natural community areas and buffers in a manner that is aesthetically compatible with the surrounding landscape. Chain link fencing other than for agricultural purposes shall be prohibited within PUDs; the use of split rail or other fencing made of natural materials is encouraged. At this time no construction is planned. Staff recognizes that this may change as the lots are developed and therefore this criterion would be better addressed at that time. C. Agriculture. The conservation of existing agricultural production values is encouraged through development planning that supports agricultural uses (including but not limited to development plans that create contiguous areas of agricultural use), provides buffer areas between existing agricultural operations and new development, roads, and infrastructure, or creates new opportunities for agricultural use (on any soil group) such as but not limited to community -supported agriculture. Provisions that enhance overall neighborhood and natural resource values rather than preservation of specific soil types are strongly encouraged. This criterion is not applicable to this application. D. Public Services and Facilities. In the absence of a specific finding by the Development Review Board that an alternative location and/or provision is approved for a specific development, the location of buildings, lots, streets and utilities shall conform with the location of planned public facilities as depicted on the Official Map, including but not limited to recreation paths, streets, park land, schools, and sewer and water facilities. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\r e\r e 2lotsub se (1) Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity shall be available to meet the needs of the project in conformance with applicable State and City requirements, as evidenced by a City water allocation, City wastewater allocation, and/or Vermont Water and Wastewater Permit from the Department of Environmental Conservation. At this time no construction is planned. Staff recognizes that this may change as the lots are developed and therefore this criterion would be better addressed at that time. (2) Recreation paths, storm water facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility lines, and lighting shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. Staff has already stated that the plans show easements for all proposed city streets and recreation paths. At such time as the lots are developed, the applicant shall work with Staff and the Board to better address the infrastructure needed. (3) Recreation paths, utilities, sidewalks, and lighting shall be designed in a manner that is consistent with City utility plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. Staff has already stated that the plans show easements for all proposed city streets and recreation paths. At such time as the lots are developed, the applicant shall work with Staff and the Board to better address the infrastructure needed. No new lighting is proposed. (4) The plan shall be reviewed by the Fire Chief or his designee to insure that adequate fire protection can be provided, with the standards for evaluation including, but not limited to, minimum distance between structures, street width, vehicular access from two directions where possible, looping of water lines, water flow and pressure, and number and location of hydrants. At this time no construction is planned. Staff recognizes that this may change as the lots are developed and therefore this criterion would be better addressed at that time. Staff does not find that the Fire Chief needs to review the application at this point. E. Circulation. The project shall incorporate access, circulation and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unsafe conditions on of adjacent roads and sufficient to create connectivity for pedestrians, bicycles, vehicles, school transportation, and emergency service vehicles between neighborhoods. In making this finding the Development Review Board may rely on the findings of a traffic study submitted by the applicant, and the findings of any technical review by City staff or consultants. Staff has already stated that the plans show easements for all proposed city streets and recreation paths. At such time as the lots are developed, the applicant shall work with Staff and the Board to better address this criterion. (1) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON g DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING &ZONING drb\sublr e\r e 21otsub se Staff has already stated that the plans show easements for all proposed city streets and recreation paths. At such time as the lots are developed, the applicant shall work with Staff and the Board to better address this criterion. (2) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is consistent with City roadway plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. Staff has already stated that the plans show easements for all proposed city streets and recreation paths. At such time as the lots are developed, the applicant shall work with Staff and the Board to better address this criterion. (3) The provisions of Section 15.12(D)(4) related to connections between adjacent streets and neighborhoods shall apply. Staff has already stated that the plans show easements for all proposed city streets and recreation paths. At such time as the lots are developed, the applicant shall work with Staff and the Board to better address this criterion. 9.09 SEQ-VR Sub -District S ecific Standards The SEQ-VR sub -district has additional dimensional and design requirements, as enumerated in this Section. A. Street, Block and Lot Pattern (1) Development blocks. Development block lengths should range between 300 and 400 linear feet; see Figure 9-2 for example. If longer block lengths are unavoidable blocks 400 feet or longer must include mid -block public sidewalk or recreation path connections.. (2) Interconnection of Streets. Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 400 feet. Dead end streets (e.g. culls de sac) are discouraged. Dead end streets may not exceed 200 feet in length. Street stubs are required at the end of dead end streets to allow for future street connections and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections to open space and future housing on adjoining parcels per section 15.12(D)(4). (3) Street Connection to Adjoining Parcels. Street stubs are required to be built to the property line and connected to adjacent parcels per section 15.12(D)(4) of these Regulations. Posting signs with a notice of intent to construct future streets is strongly encouraged. (4) Lots shall maintain a minimum lot width to depth ratio of 1:2, with a ratio of 1:2.5 to 1:5 recommended. B. Street, Sidewalk & Parking Standards (1) Street dimensions and cross sections. Neighborhood streets (collector and local) in the VR sub -district are intended to be low -speed streets for local use that discourage through movement and are safe for pedestrians and bicyclists. Dimensions for public collector and local streets shall be as set forth in Tables 9-3 and 9-4, and Figures 9-8 and 9-9 below. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING &ZONING drb\sublr e\r e 21otsub se (2) Sidewalks. Sidewalks must be a minimum of five feet (51) in width with an additional minimum five-foot planting strip (greenspace) separating the sidewalk from the street. Sidewalks are required on one side of the street, and must be connected in a pattern that promotes walkability throughout the development. The DRB may in its discretion require supplemental sidewalk segments to achieve this purpose. (3) Street Trees; see Section 9.08(B)(3) Street trees are required along all streets in a planting strip a minimum of five feet wide. Street tress shall be large, deciduous shade trees with species satisfactory to the City Arborist. Street trees to be planted must have a minimum caliper size of 2.5 to 3 inches DBH, and shall be planted no greater than thirty feet (30') on center. (4) On -street parking; see Section 9.08(B)(4). (5) Intersection design. Intersections shall be designed to reduce pedestrian crossing distances and to slow traffic; see Figure 9-6 and Section 9.08(B)(5). (6) Street and sidewalk lighting. Pedestrian -scaled light fixtures (e.g., 12' to 14') shall be provided sufficient to ensure pedestrian safety traveling to and from public spaces. Overall illumination levels should be consistent with the lower -intensity development patterns and character of the SEQ, with lower, smoother levels of illumination (rather than hot -spots) and trespass minimized to the lowest level consistent with public safety. C. Residential Design (1) Building Orientation. Residential buildings must be oriented to the street. Primary entries for single family and multi -family buildings must face the street. Secondary building entries may open onto garages and/or parking areas. (Special design guidelines apply to arterial streets). (2) Building Fagades. Building facades are encouraged to employ a theme and variation approach. Buildings should include common elements to appear unified, but facades should be varied from one building to the next to avoid monotony. Front porches, stoops, and balconies that create semi -private space and are oriented to the street are encouraged. (3) Front Building Setbacks. In pedestrian districts, a close relationship between the building and the street is critical to the ambiance of the street environment. Buildings should be set back fifteen feet (151) from the back of sidewalk. (4) Porches, stoops, and balconies may project up to eight feet (8') into the front setbacks. Porch, stoop and balcony areas within the front setback shall not be enclosed or weatherized with glazing or other solid materials. (5) Placement of Garages and Parking. See Section 9.08(C)(4) and Figure 9-7. The front building line of the garage must be set behind the front building line of the house by a minimum of eight feet. (6) Mix of Housing Types. A mix of housing types is encouraged within neighborhoods and developments. Housing types should be mixed within blocks, along the street and CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON g DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING &ZONING drblsublr e1r e 210tsub se within neighborhoods rather than compartmentalized into sections of identical housing types. At this time no construction is planned. Staff recognizes that this may change as the lots are developed and therefore this criterion would be better addressed at that time. the provisions of Section 15 18(B) W Staff finds that the proposed subdivision is in compliance with all provisions of this section. OTHER 1. The plat should be revised to show: 1) all existing zoning district boundaries; 2) revise note pertaining to north -south proposed city street to reflect that the ROW is shown on the "Official Map" not "Master Street Plan'; and 3) the acreage for lot #1 shall be revised to reflect that it includes the ROW for the future extension of Swift Street. 2. Prior to recording the final plat plan, the applicant shall provide a Certificate of Title to be approved by the City Attorney. 3. Prior to recording the final plat plan, the applicant shall provide the legal documents (i.e.- an irrevocable offer of dedication, warranty deeds, etc) for the east -west ROW on lot one for approval by the City Attorney. Staff recommends that the Board approve Preliminary Plat Application #SD-06-91 and Final Plat Application #SD-06-92. Respectfully submitted, /a1hyann, aRose, Associate Planner Copy to: Alan Bartlett, C/O Rye Associates, applicant Paul O'Leary, project engineer Approved by Resolution of the City of South Burlington Planning Commission on 20__. Subject to all requirements and conditions of said Resolution. Signed this day of ________- 20-_ BY. _________________________ Chairman/Clerk R8F ®� #4 Bw IPF 0.3' B6 835 Hinesburg Road, LLC ID' A6 1 00 WF Mansfield View d s • s 4681691 Properties WF -- s 668/43 1 ' ii • _� 1 ®� ----- _ ' L-------------------------- -- -- 758.88 a 1® W (� O6' A6 l.0' A6 I CMF ILO'A6_—r„�r O9 1 I - 'l—dowdmlland Mansfield View Properties e C ill Ll I WF 1 f-d fa Wit rn. Bernice R 668/53 Brinson 1 4 Arthur H. Rye Burlington Properties Et. AL $84-4448^E Limited Partnership I Lot #1 WF �- ;Z WF Site 4 Proposed BO' Wide 2H0.00 D;eded 'aye Right -of -Way 5.94 Acres 529/488 ; 514/272 I to be reserved for 258,836 sq. ff. _ 1 I 2731265 by City of South Burlington I future extension of to e Ry a Swift Street � I Area = L92 Acres 83,848sq. ft. I ICMF SS4°11'44_E_ _ _ _ __ _ .— - FLeh = _ 1048.15 mm t O 9 9 W. _ _-_-_ __--------6� MsadawlmldDrJwe 4----ram- - _- -- — - a S84°11'44E_ CMF - - - - _ 0V3 'Tie_ FPy� r - - — e]5!' 3l4 - — - — - —°� '°r ! ;' 1 CM` Locution Plan Survey Notes: t IV.TS r. This FinaPtrr l has been compiled from me 1 LLC fallowing plans: I WF a. "Oak Creek Village Final Plot", prepared by 649/84 Fitzpatrick , Llewellyn /nc., dated August IgB7 and 1 ___.____- ________ I.......... recorded on Slide 12D4cord in the City of South I 1 - _ L Burlington Land Records. i I b. Plot of Subdivision, of Lands of Oak Creek 1 investments", prepared by F"lspatrick-Llewellyn -.--'--------------------------- egen Inc., dated September 1987 ana recorded an suee I I ' I I Michael /204 in the City of South Burlington Lord Arthur H. 4 Records. I I Fyye/j11 Boundary line c. final Plat, Michael Grow]lin" prepared by 1 Lexie R. Rye -Approximate location of WF O'Leary -Burke awl Associates, PLC., dared N/F connects Right -of- December 21, 2004 and recorded in slide 453 of 1 1 9 % 6271699 Proposed Property Line the City of South Bad1igton Lone Records. 3921154 as delineated on the City d. Vermont Agency of Transportation "Plan and I Property Line 1791365 of South Burlitgton �. _ _ _ _ _ _ Adjoining Property Line 140,Proffl.d to Proposed State Highwayil project AIRS t0 be Dissolved Master Strut plan. ton I40, dated October 4.S t e H one filed in o project District 5 Highway office in Colchester u rmonr. Former Property line 1 e. Plot Showing Lord o/ A&M Construction, Inc., prepared by Llewellyn -Howley Inc.. dated ,Aloe 21, 1999 and file In slide 362 of the City of South l v $ - - - -_ -- - - Sideline of Exist. Easement Burlington Land Records. gl� 2. Bearings ore based on a single observation of � y magnetic north per/ ee an December 21, 2DO4. a �2 I MitllOel - - - - - - - - Sideline of Pro. Easement 3. Survey methods employed (total station) and the �'� I I� fraiialln I resulting error of closure/precision ratio, meet or oa�A Lot #� WF rPF exceetl minimum precision requirements far Suburban `IA 18.01 Acres I 1 O Zron Pipe Found Surveys as outlined in, 'Standards for the Practice of I 67LI641 Land Surveying", onadopted ft by the vermont Board of 1 784,671 sq. I O RBF Roby, Found Ld Surveyors. effective 10111199. to be Conveyed to l l 4. There may be additional easements, restrictions, b„� A��i�G4 1 li• CMF an e%r res—lions not shown hereon that may or ^7` e,le, 19 o Concrete Momenent Found may not be found in the City of South Burlington Land Records. 1 l ---------------_.....____------- 5. This survey depicts the property lines of Rye based I __ = A6 Above Existil f 6fVdC upon the City of South Burlington Land Records and -----i the State of Vermont District 5 Highway Office as or sCMF October 30, 2006. 1 EA I F6. 86 Below Existing $rode 6. Parcel my be subject to on unrecorded utsity N. easement and Right- f-Way Book 442 Page 707 I delineates easement and Right -of -Way benefiting 1 ;'. Iron Pipe to be Set i - __� ``- p $ Malcolm lm Concrete Monument to be Set axm-e 10-05.5 E"- I N Willard Th. Ieaafi°° of +h..ran pip..-d five-dv6n Rn ' WF o Utility Pole and Guy Wire 1 live cancnis manumur fwM wua By 371 Pq 650 I u- in v bsn fH alruvhan. All ww l l he ® I .—Pi"... I th-n 010' et w,a 6 6B0 em-t ro 4611451 cvlwkMddePicrad eonn. I I th'e ef.al. OHW— Overhead Wire I I B M 262 age H6 I Owner O Record ' x — x x Chain Link Pence Une �,."cMA� _343.6YY - LOMFA6 N84°YUw n• _ rve4°a3�Jiv 1 ,,,,,P_ta�we_r_r Bernice k B n 280.43 T Arthur H. u/4•• a 11/aI vr' e. ® Bltld r _ - Fax RIM sr-� { p'q 3 A6 10.2'Ae Yilklie Br■wster c CMF RBF '�•f\ V IVg L"ie R. Rye 053 A6 L05 _� I Ls 35 04!$ WF 6 LMF 0.3' B6 �_ _ _ — — — — #5 BAR Jake d , o' 86 az A6 Lindl 1075 Hinesburg Rd. Giro Lyndon A Tod 6 Christopher 388/89 , / ' oaF86 South Burlington Vt. 05403 Curavelis Iovilla Open Lisa Kelly I d Ck die ; ( V Jncee d - - Oak Creek r dal I McDermott I LindaWF WF w n WF / PF Beasimer l i Fr* RBF Space I 2 OCT 3 0 2006 54B/544 385/141 3721223 471/450 111/.•a WF WF �0T^6R 256/49713 o ------- L53e 49015W __ 4811450 bxsr L 1 ZO'Ewmenro I City of St' five-dvlin R,M4 D1/ - „JY y t.' BVPB 262 P 4^4 t l/4" 0 RBF L0'B6 #5 BAR ILS 3e FLUSH I DATE RENSION By i1L5415 i `11111 / /I� SURVEY DALE 0 D60A RECORD DRABINC PRELIMINARY 10-26-06 I hereby certify that the information shown hereon is correct to the best ` �0 Z7� FlNAL O SKETCHICONCEPT Lands of Brinson & Rye "1 of my knowledge and belief and is based upon a collaboration of GRAPHIC SCALE JOSEPH 6055 pertinent deeds, plats, parol, and other recorded evidence. This plat. was •-, ► #1061 & #1075 Hinesburg Road prepared in accordance with and complies with Vermont Statute Title 27, Ioo o so Iao zoo 4ao R. oRAwN O �-"-'A �` i -+� v 1��-'-� South Burlington, VT FlLE 1403, (a) through (e). F LY N - DVR6055-PL ke` o� CHECKED CIVIL ASSOCIATES, PLC PLAN SHEET / F 1N FEET F� %IOOPOR47ED16VFRtATE#1 ( ) Joseph R. Flynn, L.S. 714 Dated yrfF6 (iNp jSCALE e ereB � Subdivision Plat 1 inch = 100 ft. ��f l oil l% 1"=100' FAC878PL EM^B: eevn L CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4io6 October 31, 2006 Arthur Rye 1075 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 and Bernice Brisson 2268 Moutainview Road Williston, VT 05495 Dear Property Owner: Enclosed is a copy of a public notice published in Seven Days. It includes an application for development on your property. This is being sent to you and the abutting property owners to make aware that a public hearing is being held regarding the proposed development. Under Title 24, Section 4471 of State law, participation in a municipal regulatory proceeding is required in order to preserve your right to appeal a local development approval to the Vermont Environmental Court. State law specifies that "Participation in a local regulatory proceeding shall consist of offering, through oral or written testimony, a statement of concern related to the subject of the proceeding." Please call our office at 846-4106 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Betsy Mc onough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. cc: Paul O'Leary Alan Bartlett CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4106 October 31, 2006 Arthur Rye 1075 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 and Bernice Brisson 2268 Moutainview Road Williston, VT 05495 Dear Property Owner: Enclosed is a copy of a public notice published in Seven Days. It includes an application for development on your property. This is being sent to you and the abutting property owners to make aware that a public hearing is being held regarding the proposed development. Under Title 24, Section 4471 of State law, participation in a municipal regulatory proceeding is required in order to preserve your right to appeal a local development approval to the Vermont Environmental Court. State law specifies that "Participation in a local regulatory proceeding shall consist of offering, through oral or written testimony, a statement of concern related to the subject of the proceeding." Please call our office at 846-4106 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. cc: Paul O'Leary Alan Bartlett CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4106 October 31, 2006 Vincent & Jovina Frigo 2 Oak Creek Drive South Burlington, VT 05403 Dear Property Owner: Enclosed is a copy of a public notice published in Seven Days. It includes an application for development that abuts your property. This is being sent to you to make you aware that a public hearing is being held regarding the proposed development. You will not receive this notice if any subsequent or continued public hearings for the same applications are required. Under Title 24, Section 4471 of State law, participation in a municipal regulatory proceeding is required in order to preserve your right to appeal a local development approval to the Vermont Environmental Court. State law specifies that "'Participation in a local regulatory proceeding shall consist of offering, through oral or written testimony, a statement of concern related to the subject of the proceeding." If you would like to know more about the proposed development, you may call this office at 846-4106, stop by during regular office hours, or attend the schedule public hearing. Sincerely, 96-ojqv-� Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. PUBLIC HEARING SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD The South Burlington Development Review Board will hold a public hearing ' at the South Burlington City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on Tuesday, November 21, 2006 at 7:30 P.M. to consider the following: 1. Preliminary plat application #SD-06-91 & final plat application #SD-06-92 of Rye Associates for a two (2) lot subdivision consisting s ma of tot #1 (7.86 acres) and lot #2 (18.01 acres), 1061 & 1075 Hines- burg Rd. 2. Final plat application #SD-06- 93 of Eighty Midas Drive, LLC for re -approval of a planned unit de- velopment consisting of: 1) razing a 2526 sq. ft. general office build- ing, and 2) constructing a 3-story, 8,480 sq. ft. general office build- ing, including a drive-in bank, 80 Midas Dr. 3. Preliminary plat application #SD-06-95 of Patrick Malone for a planned unit development consist- ing of: 1) converting an existing 18,327 sq. ft. building from auto sales & service to retail food es- tablishment, 2) constructing a 15,006 gfa addition for retail food establishment use Be 1100 sq. ft. of short order restaurant use, 222 Dorset Street. 4. Preliminary plat application #SD-06-97 of Nate Hayward for a., planned unit development con- sisting of eight (8) two (2) family dwellings (16 units), 61 IDX Dr. John Dinklage, Chairman South Burlington Development Re- view Board Copies of the applications are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall. November 1, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING South Burlington Planning Commission PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the South Burlington Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Tues- day, November 21st at 7:30 PM in the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, VT to consider the following amend- ments to the South Burlington Of- ficial Zoning .:Map and Land Devel- opment Regulations: 1. Miscellaneous Changes to Defi- nitions 2.. Add provision for "processing and storage" with associated con- ditional use standards. 3. Amendments to District Bound- aries and Interpretation 4. Change planned right-of-way of Williston Road west of Hinesburg Road 5. Exempt ramps for the disabled from lot coverage calculations 6. Clarify and update provisions for accessory uses in the IC and IO districts 7. Allow multi -family dwellings of up to 12 units with Design Review Committee approval in the SEQ-NR, SEQ-VC and SEQ-VR sub -districts 8. Clarify role of Natural Resource Committee review of wetland, buf- fer and stormwater issues 9. Eliminate Spear Street -Allen Road View Protection Zone 10. Assorted amendments to Site Plan and PUD administrative pro- 15. Amend Official Zoning Map to rezone Titley'parcet from Rl-PRD to IO 16. Amend Official Zoning Map to rezone #50 Hickory from R4 to CD- 17. Amend Official Zoning Map to rezone Meadowlands Lot from SEQ to IO Copies of the proposed text and map amendments are available for inspection at the Department of Planning & Zoning, City Hall, 2nd Floor, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, between 8:00 AM and 4:30 PM Monday through Friday. November 2, 2006 Randall Kay, Chairman STATE OF VERMONT CHITTENDEN SUPERIOR COURT CHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS. DOCKET NO. S0987-06 CnC Universal Mortgage Corporation, Plaintiff Sean Benway, June Benway And Occupants residing at 178 Sandhi[[ Road, Essex Junction, Vermont,'Defendants SUMMONS & ORDER FOR PUBLI- CATION TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT: Sean Benway You are hereby summoned and required to serve upon Joshua B. Lobe, Esq., plaintiffs attorney, whose address is P.O. Box 4493, 35 King Street, Burlington, Vermont 05406, an Answer to plaintiffs Complaint in the above entitled action within forty-one (41) days after the date of the first publi- cation of this Summons, which is November 1, 2006. If you fail to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the Complaint. Your Answer must also be filed with the Court., Unless otherwise provided in Rule 13(a). Your Answer must state as a Counterclaim any related claim which you may have against the ptaintiff, or you wilt thereafter be barred from making such claim In any other action. YOUR AN- SWER MUST STATE SUCH A COUN- TERCLAIM -WHETHER OR NOT THE RELIEF DEMANDED IN THE COM- PLAINT IS FOR DAMAGE COVERED BY A LIABILITY INSURANCE POL- ICY UNDER WHICH THE INSURER HAS THE RIGHT OR OBLIGATION TO CONDUCT THE DEFENSE. If you believe that the plaintiff is not entitled to all or part of the claim set forth in the Complaint, or if you believe that you have a Coun- terclaim against the plaintiff, you may wish to consult an attorney. If ..-.. C--1 11-1 ..-...--__-.. ___J ♦.. Show and tell. View and post up to 6 photos per ad online. Plaintiff's action is a Complaint in Foreclosure which alleges that you have breached the terms of a Promissory Note and Mortgage Deed dated November 21, 2002. Plaintiff's action may effect your interest in the property described in the Land Records of the Town of Essex at Volume 513, Page 51. The Complaint also seeks relief on the Promissory Note executed by you. A copy of the Complaint is on file and may be obtained at the Office of the Clerk of the Superior Court forthe County of Chittenden, State of Vermont. It appearing from Affidavit duly filed in the above entitled ac- tion that service cannot be made with due diligence by any of the methods prescribed in V.R.C.P. 4(d) through (f) inclusive, it is hereby ORDERED that service of the above process shall be_made upon defen- dant, Sean Benway, by publication pursuant to V.R.C.P. 4(g). This Order shalt be published .once a week for three consecutive weeks on November 1, 2006, November 8, 2006 and November 15, 2006 in the Seven Days. A copy of this Order shalt be mailed to defendants at their address if their address is known. Dated at Burlington, Vermont this 16th day of October, 2006, _./s/ Matthew I. Katz_ Hon. Matthew I. Katz Presiding Judge Chittenden Superior Court. PUBLIC MEETING Discussion on Entertainment Noise Pilot Program, Thursday, Novem- ber 9, 2006, 6:00 p.m.-7:30. p.m-, Community Room, Fletcher Free Library. DON'T SEE A SUPPORT group here that meets your needs? Call Vermont 2-1-1, a program of United Way of Vermont. IAA+W. lfn _m + rive) 9-1 _1 - SEVEN DAYS I novernbc 40 Open 24/7/365. Post & browse ads at your convenience. r www. s eve n d ay s vt, c o n SEPARATED BY ADOPTION?: Concerned United Birthparents, Inc. (CUB) announces local peer support group meeting in Burlington. CUB meetings offer a safe, confidential, and nurturing environment to explore personal experiences related to adop- tion, relinquishment, search and reunion (or rejection). For those of us who have felt isolated, it is a tremendous relief to communicate with others who understand our experience. 3rd Tuesday of the month 6-7 PM. Unitarian Universalist Church on Pearl St., top of Church St., Burlington. Free. Contact Judy, regionldir@cubirthparents. org, 800-822-2777 ext. 1, www. CUBirthparents.org. 60+ SUPPORT GROUP: Small, ongoing, weekly support group to share stories about growing older. For men and women 60 and over. We have fun! Tuesdays, 4-5.30 p.m. Contact Barbara Kester at 657-3668. RAINWATER CENTER FOR HIGHER AWARENESS: At the Euro Cafe; Main St. Burling- ton, for inspirational movies, discussions and meditations on the spiritual path however one defines it and speakers including various heating practices to life coaching to spiritual leaders. Develop a deeper connection to your inner spiritual and personal growth. Join us every other Tuesday, 7 p.m: for these free events. Call Alex at 802-233- 0046, atex@rai,watercenter.com or visit website www.rainwater center.com. LA LECHE LEAGUE: We are a breastfeeding support group, we hold free, monthly meet- ings.with a warm.and respectful atmosphere; babies and older siblings are always welcome. Come whether you are pregnant or adopting and want to learn about the process; you are ex- periencirig challenges or you are having a great time and would Like to meet other nursing moth- ers. Call for more information or for breastfeeding help, Laura 985-8228. Check our website for more information www.Liti.org. SUPPORT GROUP FOR BOTH CHILDHOOD AND ADULT SURVIVORS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT. Free, confidential Beginning October 10. Call 864-0555. MEN'S GROUP FORMING: B on the work of David Deida Energetics, and other aware ness practices. The intentie the group is to serve memb into being the most extraoi dinary men that they can b It is for men who are who ¢ dying to penetrate every bi the world with their courag their presence, their unbrid passion and relentless love, their deepest burning, bubl brilliant desire. The group v function as a means for me support each other and sen the greater good. We will b working with spiritual pracl the mind and body, and tak on our lives with the utmo�' integrity, impeccability and openness. The group is not new age group, nor is it a c dedicated to therapy. Info, zach@handetgroup.com or 917-887-1276. SMART RECOVERY a cognit behavioral "recovery' prog directed at various forms of "addiction" which may be e behavioral or substance bas Meeting on WEDNESDAY, 61 82 South Winooski Avenue (above the City Market), Bu ton, Vt. For information cal at 425-4058 or email BobC; msn.com. Survivors of Suicide (SOS Have you experienced the impact of a loved one's suir Please considerjoining us. Burlington support group n on the 2nd Wednesday of e; month, 6:30 - 7:30 p.m. at Unitarian Universalist Churc 152 Pearl St. Burlington. Ti meeting will be in the Susa Anthony Room, which is on second floor at the back en of the building. This is not therapy group; this is a sul group. There is no fee. Please contact Cory Goud, P Psychologist -Master, 802-2; 4111. GIRL'S NIGHT OUT. Fun sui group for single women, di! sions, weekly activities (coi dancing, rock climbing...), childcare solutions. A great alternative to dating! Email ho rizons4u@hotmaiL com. DEBTORS ANON: 12-step recovery group. Do you hav problem with money and dE We can help. Mondays, 7-8 First Methodist Church. Con Brenda, 338-1170 or Camer, Ir;z-az47 Permit Number SD--C- CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the plans will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. 1) OWNER OF RECORD (Name as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #) Arthur Rye 1075 Hinesburg Road, 5o. Burlington, VT 05403 (863-2663) Bernice Brisson 2268 Mountainview Road, Williston, VT 05495 (878-1094) 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #) Vol 529, pg. 488 3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) Rye Associates c/o Alan Bartlett 25C Pinecrest Drive, Essex Jct., VT 05452 (343-1819) 4) CONTACT PERSON (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) Paul O'Leary Jr. O'Leary -Burke, 1 Corporate Dr., Suite #1, Essex Jct., VT 05452 (878-9990, 878-9989 fax) 5) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: #1061 and #1075 Hinesburg Road 6) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) #0860-01061 & #0860-01075 7) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) Existing Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use) Residence with attached building and barn b) Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain) The Owners will retain a 5.94 acre parcel, an 80' wide corridor for the future extension of Swift Street will be created, and the remaining 18.0 acres will be conveyed to the applicant. c) Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) There is approximately 8,139 sf of existing buildings d) Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine) There are no proposed new buildings e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) 1 existing residence to remain f) Number of employees & company vehicles (existing and proposed, note office versus non -office employees): None g) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable): Application involves Industrial and Open Space zone and the Southeast Quadrant (Village Commercial and Neighborhood Residential) h) List any changes to the subdivision, such as property lines, number of units, lot mergers, etc.: The two existing lots are to be subdivided into a 5.94 acre lot, a 18.0 acre lot, and a 80' corridor for the future extension of Swift Street. 8) LOT COVERAGE a) Building: Existing 0.72 % Proposed 1.04 % b) Overall (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing 0.84 % Proposed 1.20 % c) Front yard (along each street) Existing 8.67 % Proposed 8.67 % 9) COST ESTIMATES a) Building (including interior renovations): $ 0.00 b) Landscaping: $ 0.00 c) Other site improvements (please list with cost): N/A 10) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a) Average daily traffic for entire property (in and out): 10 vte (1 residence) b) A.M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): 1 vte (1 residence c) P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out): 1 vte (1 residence 11) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: N/A 12) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: N/A 13) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: N/A 2 14) PLEASE LIST ABUTTING LANDOWNERS, INCLUDING THOSE ACROSS THE STREET. You may attach a separate sheet. 15) PLANS AND FEE Plat plans shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (11" x 17") of the plans must be submitted. A subdivision application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the application (see Exhibit A). I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. SIGNATCIRE OF GNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: IJ// I have reviewed this preliminary plat application and find it to be: 2/complete /7 ❑ Incomplete f Planning & Zoning or Designee To Whom it Concerns: Alan Bartlett has permission from the Rye and Brisson families to act and sign the subdivision application,mi our behalf for the proposed subdivision of our property on Hinesburg Road in South Burlington. Lexie Rye da e °' Y Cke z—(lS—K—Pl Abutter List to #1061 & #1075 Hinesburg Road ( Rye and Brisson Property ) City of South Burlington Tod and Kelly Lyman (Parks and Recreation) 14 Fox Run Lane 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 South Burlington, VT 05403 835 Hinesburg Road, LLC Scott and Lisa Gibbs c/o Jeff Davis 16 Fox Run Lane J. L. Realty South Burlington, VT 05403 2822 St. George Road Williston, VT 05495 Jake and Gina Cunavelis Mansfield View Properties, LLC 18 Fox Run Road Charlotte, VT 05446 South Burlington, VT 05403 Burlington Properties, LTD c/o Dan Kalman Vincent & Jovina P.O.B. 9210 2 Oak Creek Drive South Burlington, VT 05407 South Burlington, VT 05403 Avalanche Development, LLC Linda Beasimer 1050 Hinesburg Road, Unit B 1 Oak Creek Drive South Burlington, VT 05403 South Burlington, VT 05403 Spaniel Properties, LLC 1050 Hinesburg Road, Unit A 0 South Burlington, VT 05403 ---- Michael Gravelin 1070 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Malcolm Willard 699 Nob Hill Road Williston, VT 05495 Brad Brewster and Marjorie Stygles 6 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 Christopher and Claudia McDermott 10 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 ASUTTERLIST.aoc Ec O'Leary -Burke Civil Associates, PLC CIVIL ENGINEERING I REGULATORY AND PERMIT PREPARATION I LAND SURVEYING I CONSTRUCTION SERVICES I LAND USE PLANNING October 30, 2006 Ray Belair City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Brisson & Rye Property #1061 / #1075 Hinesburg Road Dear Ray, We are writing on behalf of Rye Associates ( C/o Alan Bartlett ) to submit a Preliminary Subdivision Plat Plan for a two lot subdivision at the above referenced property. The property is located on the west side of Hinesburg Road, to the north of the Oak Creek Subdivision and is in the Southeast Quadrangle and the Industrial / Open Space zoning districts. The parcel involves approximately 25.9 acres and is the current residence of Arthur and Lexie Rye. This proposal involves subdividing the property into two (2) lots. Lot 1 will be a 5.94 acre parcel that will be retained by the current owners. This parcel is in the Industrial and Open Space zoning district and will be on the north side of an eighty (80') foot wide corridor that has been reserved for a future connection to Swift Street. Lot 2 is located in the Southeast Quadrangle and will be conveyed to Alan Bartlett ( Rye Associates ). Lot 2 will involve approximately 18.0 acres located on the south side of the future Swift Street corridor and will include the existing residence. 1 CORPORATE DRIVE SUITE #1 ESSEX JUNCTION VERMONT 05452 TEL 802 878 9990 I FAX 802 878 9989 I obca@olearyburke.com Please find the following items attached; • Preliminary Subdivision Plat Review application; • $510 fee; • Five (5) full-size plans; One (1) 11"x1T plan, • List of abutters; Sincerely, Paul O'Leary Jr., P.E. 6055 1 Belair5ketchPlan Permit Number SD- dG -� CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON APPLICATION FOR FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the plans will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. 1) OWNER OF RECORD (Name as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #) Arthur Rye 1075 Hinesburg Road, So. Burlinqton, VT 05403 (863-2663) Bernice Brisson 2268 Mountainview Road, Williston, VT 05495 (878-1094) 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #) Vol 529, pg. 488 3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) Rye Associates c/o Alan Bartlett 25C Pinecrest Drive. Essex Jct.. VT 05452 (343-1819) 4) CONTACT PERSON (Person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, address phone& fax #) Paul O'Leary Jr., O'Leary -Burke Civil Associates, 1 Corporate Drive, Suite #1 Essex Jct., VT 05452 (878-9990, 878-9989 fax, poleary@olearyburke.com) 5) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS #1061 and #1075 Hinesburg Road 6) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) #0860-01061 & #0860-01075 7) DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) Existing uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use) Residence with attached building and barn b) Proposed uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain) The Owners will retain a 5.94 acre parcel, an 80' wide corridor for the future extension of Swift Street will be created, and the remaining 18.0 acres will be conveyed to the applicant. c) Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) There is approximately 8,139 sf of existing buildings d) Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine) There are no proposed new buildings e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) I existing residence to remain f) Number of employees & company vehicles (existing and proposed, note office versus non -office employees) N/A g) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable) Application involves Industrial and Open Space zone and the Southeast Quadrant (Village Commercial and Neighborhood Residential) h) List any changes to the subdivision, such as property lines, number of units, lot mergers, etc. The two existing lots are to be subdivided into a 5.94 acre lot, a 18.0 acre lot, and a 80' corridor for the future extension of Swift Street. 8) WETLAND INFORMATION a) Are there any wetlands (Class I, II, or 111) on the subject property? Yes b) If yes, is the proposed development encroaching into any of these wetlands or their associated 50' buffers? No - no additional development is proposed as part of this subdivision. c) If yes, this project MUST be reviewed by the Natural Resources Committee prior to review by the Development Review Board. Please submit the following with this application: 1. a site specific wetland delineation of the entire property or a written statement that the applicant is relying on the City's Wetlands Map. 2. response to the criteria outlined in Section 12.02(E) of the Land Development Regulations (applicant is strongly encouraged to have a wetland expert respond to these criteria). 9) LOT COVERAGE (ALL information MUST be provided here, even if no change is proposed) a) Size of Parcel: 25.89 Acres/1,127,326 sf (acres /sq. ft.) b) Building Coverage: Existing 8,139 square feet 0.72 % Proposed 8,139 square feet 1.04 % c) Overall Coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc): Existing 9,444 square feet 0.84 % 2 Proposed 9,444 square feet 1.20 % d) Front Yard Coverage(s) (commercial projects only): Existing N/A square feet N/A % Proposed N/A square feet N/A 10) AREA DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION: 0 sq. ft. * *Projects disturbing more than on -half acre of land must follow the City's specifications for erosion control in Article 16 of the Land Development Regulations. Projects disturbing more than one acre require a permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. 11) WAIVERS REQUESTED a) List any waivers from the strict standards in the Land Development Regulations (e.g., setbacks, height, parking, etc.) that the applicant is seeking None 12) COST ESTIMATES a) Building (including interior renovations) $ 0 b) Landscaping (see Section 13.06(G) of the Land Development Regulations) $ 0 c) Other site improvements (please list with cost) No site improvements are proposed. 13) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a) Average daily traffic for entire property (in and out) 10 vte (1 residence) b) A.M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out) 1 vte (1 residence) c) P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out) 1 vte (1 residence) 14) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION N/A 15) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION N/A 16) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE N/A 3 17) ABUTTING LANDOWNERS — please list abutting landowners, including those across any streets. You may attach a separate sheet. See Attached List 16) PLANS AND FEE Plat plans shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (11" x 17") of the plans must be submitted. A subdivision application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the final plat application (see Exhibit A). I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. SIGNAT RE OF APPLICANT SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION. I have reviewed this preliminary plat application and find it to be: F Complete ❑ Incomplete 1 2 46 irector of Planning & Zoning or Designee 4 To Whom it Concerns: Alan Bartlett has permission from the Rye and Brisson families to act and sign the subdivision application in our behalf for the proposed subdivision of our property on Hinesburg Road in South Burlington. Lexie Rye dafe I /TRY eke 0 -67 O'Leary -Burke Civil Associates, PLC CIVIL ENGINEERING I REGULATORY AND PERMIT PREPARATION I LAND SURVEYING I CONSTRUCTION SERVICES I LAND USE PLANNING October 30, 2006 Ray Belair City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Brisson & Rye Property #1061 / #1075 Hinesburg Road Dear Ray, We are writing on behalf of Rye Associates ( C/o Alan Bartlett ) to submit a Final Subdivision Plat Plan for a two lot subdivision at the above referenced property. The property is located on the west side of Hinesburg Road, to the north of the Oak Creek Subdivision and is in the Southeast Quadrangle and the Industrial / Open Space zoning districts. The parcel involves approximately 25.9 acres and is the current residence of Arthur and Lexie Rye. This proposal involves subdividing the property into two (2) lots. Lot 1 will be a 5.94 acre parcel that will be retained by the current owners. This parcel is in the Industrial and Open Space zoning district and will be on the north side of an eighty (80') foot wide corridor that has been reserved for a future connection to Swift Street. Lot 2 is located in the Southeast Quadrangle and will be conveyed to Alan Bartlett ( Rye Associates ). Lot 2 will involve approximately 18.0 acres located on the south side of the future Swift Street corridor and will include the existing residence. 1 CORPORATE DRIVE SUITE #1 ESSEX JUNCTION VERMONT 05452 TEL 802 878 9990 I FAX 802 878 9989 I obca@olearyburke.com Please find the following items attached; • FinalSubdivision Plat Review application; • $510 fee, • Five (5) full-size plans; • One (1) 11"x17" plan, • List of abutters; Sincerely, Paul O'Leary r. , 60551 Belair5ketchPlan Abutter List to #1061 & #1075 Hinesburg Road ( Rye and Brisson Property ) City of South Burlington Tod and Kelly Lyman (Parks and Recreation) 14 Fox Run Lane 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 South Burlington, VT 05403 835 Hinesburg Road, LLC Scott and Lisa Gibbs c/o Jeff Davis 16 Fox Run Lane J. L. Realty South Burlington, VT 05403 2822 St. George Road Williston, VT 05495 Jake and Gina Cunavelis Mansfield View Properties, LLC 18 Fox Run Road Charlotte, VT 05446 South Burlington, VT 05403 Burlington Properties, LTD c/o Dan Kalman Vincent & Jovina P.O.B. 9210 2 Oak Creek Drive South Burlington, VT 05407 South Burlington, VT 05403 Avalanche Development, LLC Linda Beasimer 1050 Hinesburg Road, Unit B 1 Oak Creek Drive South Burlington, VT 05403 South Burlington, VT 05403 Spaniel Properties, LLC 1050 Hinesburg Road, Unit A South Burlington, VT 05403 Michael Gravelin 1070 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Malcolm Willard 699 Nob Hill Road Williston, VT 05495 Brad Brewster and Marjorie Stygles 6 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 Christopher and Claudia McDermott 10 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 ABUTTERLIST.aoc —-—-———— — — — — — -— I Approved by Resolution of the City of South Burlington Planning Commission on __ -___ __ , 20__ Subject to oil requirements and conditions of said Resolution. Signed this -_ day of -------- 20__ BY._______________________________ _--- Chairman/Clerk —- — RBF #ate IPF 0.3' 86 835 Hinesburg Road, LLC is A6 - N/F Mansfield View " 4681691 Properties e N/F 668/43 1 -- _____ _�+�+�+�—SS84°4446"E °PF =-----------------.......... z 758.88" 6' A6 1.0A6 } 1 1.0' A6 rA 1 I and IOOf Mansfield VProperties /O Al,—J. dwmdmili WF UXllty Lina. A I.j_ lwne t�uncry na� Bernice R. Brisson 1 668/53 sea d fak Arthur H. Rye I2 Et. Al. _ S84°4446"E +� 18a Proposed 80' Wide Lot #1 5291488 --_29000-t7eeded g y Right -of -Way 5.94 Acres m to be reserved for 258,836 sq. ft. future extension of to be Retained by City of South Burlington I Swift Street Brisson d Rye I a IArea = 1.92 Acres 83,848 sq. ft. - - _ — — m- _ --_- - 6� _- - S84°1144 E _ I- _�_ r __ _ — _ — - e35eTi - -- - 104B.07 I Survey Notes: ' I 1. this Final Plat has been compiled from the following plans.- 1 I o. *Oak Creek Village Final Plat: Prepared by ' Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn Inc., doted August 1987 and recorded on Slide /204 in the City of South City of South Burlington Received for Record -------------------------- A.D.------- at------------o'clock __ _________minutes-_-M and recorded in ------------------------------ attest: ------------------------------- Burlington Lond Records. b. "Plot of Subdivision, of Lards o/ Oak Creek Investments: prepared by Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn Inc., dated September 1987 and recorded on Slide I /204 in the city of South Budington cane Arthur H. d Records. c. Fine/ Plot, Michael GramWin: prepared by Lexie R. Rye 01—y-Burke Civil Associates, PLC., dated i WF December 21, 2004 and recorded in slide 453 of 392/154 the City o/ SoutA BuHinq'on Land Records. d. Vermont Agency of rronsportotion P/on and I Properly Line 1791365 Prone of Proposed State Highway, propet NRS - to be Dissolved 140. doted October 4, 1933 and Bled In District 5 I Highway office in Colchester Vermont. % e. Plat Showing Lard of A&M Construction, Inc..: _ -- - - -- prepared by Llewellyn -Howley /no'. doled 1999 and file n slide 362 of the City of SouM Burlington Lond Records. 2 2. Bearings are based on a single observation magnetic oath performed on December 21, 2004.31a J.Survey methods employed (total illation) and the resulting error of closure/precision ratio, meet or - �! a,L I Lot #'� ez d minimum precision requirements far Suburban n1 18.01 Acres Surveys as outlined in, "Stonoords for the Practice of 784,671 sq. ft. Land Surveying', adopted by the ✓comfit Board of Land Surveyors, effective 10111199. 1 to be Conveyed to 4. Thee may be additional easements, restrictions, I Rye Associates and/a reservations not shown hereon that may Or may not be found in the City of South Burlington Land Records. 1 5. This rvey depicts the property lines of Rye based upon the City of South Burlington Land Records and I the State of Vermont District 5 Highway Office as of October 30,, 2006. 1 6. Parcel my be subject to an unrecorded utility easement and Right-of-way Book 442 Page 701 delineates on easement and Right -of -Way benefiting I Gwendolyn Rye. 1 I I I I I I Approximate location of connecting Right -of -Way as delineated on the City of South Burlington Master Street Plan. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Burlington Properties jJ Limited Partnership WF 5141272 aa 2731265 CI 1 ILMF Fu,h ----- Meadowland Drive ILMF � F� luah I Avalanche 1bellopmentE: LLC N/F 649/84 1 i f Michael I` 6rovelin WF � 627/699 Exlrt. Born I 1 -� Ezl •____. i wall 1 I �0'x40B.e' Eaxmvrh I I 6wmdogn I I The IxoNan of iha iron pipe wrd rt.d. RYa j I xl the cancrrte monumww fend wan Book 371 Pogo 690 I uasmabaal in a puahm All Ma r'15 W E ammin 'nwiorpp. vas wH ,01a fnha I Oawnd I Rya rt.d calalrtW Ilne dapirtd hwwm. Illli Book 262 P° A46 I I Owner of Record 423:50 - cMF � � N84 4375NV o B A6 N84°40'S0"W _ Bernice R. Brisson _ _. ,� Tod41' 1PF Brad 280.43' // Fox Rum D,. TI t/4l 1/4" 0 / Arthur H. e vA° m oY.Bb Brewster Lexie R. Rye LS' A6 as 3B6 LS30 WF ;OFF 0.3' B6 1075 HinesburgRd. Jake d s Lyndon d Tod d Christopher I / / cw Gina I P 388/89 oil' B6 Vincent d Oak Creek South Burlington Vt. 05403 I Kelly d Claudia Linda Jovina Open Cu—elis Lyman McDermott I WF WF WF WF Beasimer Friga RBF Space 548/544 a/4• o WF 0.2 8AR 256/497 3851141 372/223 I 47u450 oa,� WF o.z'A6 - _ — _ L — - - Ls 3a 4901560 4811450 our. 20' Emamwe ro _ —dolin Rya N.d IDF - ' Rook 262 Pogo 444 11/4- 0 J�=FpAlt B6 I DA 2 LS 36 FLUSH �U -- I�I Michael 6ravelin WF y 6711641 1 �I$ s " Malcolm Willard WF 4611451 ►�T � rg�i � a I■1. I Location Plan N. T.5 Legend Boundary Line -- — Proposed Property Line Adjoining Property Line Former Property Line Sideline of Exist. Easement - - - - - - - - Sideline of Pro. Easement 0111 Iron Pipe Found ORB` Rebar Found c/ LMF Concrete Monument Found Al I Above Existing Grade B6 Below Existing Grade Iron Pipe to be Set ■ Concrete Monument to be Set a Utility Pole and Guy Wire OHw Overhead Wire x— x — x Chain Link Fence Line OCT 3 0 2006 _..___-_---.- ' 1 hereby certify that the information shown hereon is correct to the best of m knowled a and belief and is based upon a collaboration of GRAPHIC SCALE pertinent deeds, plats, parol, and other recorded evidence. This plot was Ion a for 20o aao prepared in accordance with and complies with Vermont Statute Title 27, 1403, (a) through (e). 1 inclh FEET ft. Joseph R. Flynn, L.S. 714 Dated f� JOSEPH f = R. �e F' I-'Y 11�./; (� (��'-( ■, f� ■ �+ ',tl �l"1` SURVEY OBCA RECORD DRAWNG O PREaMINARY FINAL E3 SKETCH/CONCEPT 1..IGt� O R -DlJRKE CML ASSOCIATES, PLC arAxN CHEC CHECKED JRF 1 CORPORATEDFtlYE SURE01 ESSEX F ]Carr sc'LE 100' Lands of Brisson & Rye C.,Z6-D6 #1061 d #1075 Hinesburg Road 6055 FILE South Burlington, VT 6055-PL PLAN SHEET / Subdivision Plat pL L J 1 SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4io6 October 5, 2006 Howard Snider O'Leary -Burke 1 Corporate Drive, #1 Essex )unction, VT 05452 Re: DRB Minutes - Rye Property Dear Mr. Snider: For your records, enclosed is a copy of the approved minutes from the September 5, 2006 Development Review Board meeting. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, �Jonough" C Betsy Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. On SOUTH L ILINGTON DEVELOPMENT RE,.SEW BOARD K3e_� V_ 5 SEPTEMBER 2006 for the area, and it could become a very busy place. In addition, a by-pass from Shelburne Road has been looked for, and if a way can be found to connect lower Shelburne Road to Hinesburg Road, it will change the whole character of the area. Mr. Plumeau noted there is extreme excessive speed on Hinesburg Road, and this project is talking about 61 peak hour trip ends. He felt that consolidating accesses is not just a good idea, it is essential. He suggested this property look for an access not on Hinesburg Road or at least one with a controlled access. Mr. Lyman said he lives in that area and every day he is almost clipped getting onto the road. Members all supported the shared access easement. Mr. Behr said he would also support accessing the whole property from Meadowland Drive. The proposed building would be 22,000 sq. ft., 2 stories, with underground parking. The building would have multiple accesses. There would be an elevator as well. Storm water management would be located in the back. There will be good screening along the Gravelin property. A full landscaping plan will be provided at preliminary. Ms. LaRose asked about an easement for the rec path. Mr. Dinklage said it would be outside of the right-of-way. No other issues were raised. 9. Sketch Plan Application #SD-06-73 of Rye Associates to resubdivide two parcels of 15.6 acres and 10.2 acres into two lots of 5.7 acres (lot #1) and 18.3 acres (lot #2), and a right-of-way for a proposed City street (1.9 acres), 1061 and 1075 Hiensburg Road: Mr. O'Leary said they are proposing a simple 2-lot subdivision. The southern lot is now 10.2 acres and the northern lot 15.6 acres. Swift Street Extension goes through the lots. The lots they would create would be 5.7 acres to the north and 18.3 acres to the south. They will create a right-of-way to line up with Meadowland Drive. Mr. Plumeau asked about access control, noting that this property was similar to the previous situation. Mr. Dinklage said that impact fees could be used to put in a traffic light. Mr. O'L eary Said that they might shift the right-of-way slightly to accommodate a request from the Ryes. A member of the audience asked if anything was going to be built on the lots. Mr. Dinklage said the property to the north is zoned Industrial, and the property to the south is zoned Residential, so there will probably be something built there at some time. He added that any development plan would have to come to the DRB. SOUTH L JRLINGTON DEVELOPMENT RE,,IW BOARD 5 SEPTEMBER 2006 No other issues were raised. 10. Continued Public Hearing: Preliminary Plat Application #SD-06-54 of John Illick for a planned unit development to subdivide a 177.2 acre parcel into 16 lots ranging in size from 3.98 acres to 29.46 acres, Community Drive: Mr. Dinklage noted the applicant has asked to continue until 17 October. Ms. Quimby moved to continue Preliminary Plat Application 4SD-06-54 of John Illick until 17 October 2006. Mr. Birmingham seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 11. Public Hearing: Preliminary Plat Application #SD-06-76 of Gary & Diane Provost to subdivide a 2.68 acre lot developed with a single family dwelling into three lots of 1.18 acres (lot #1), .90 acres (lot #2) and .60 acres (lot #3), 1925 Dorset Street: Mr. Young said they will talk with the Fire Chief to see exactly what he wants. Ms. LaRose noted that this property is just before the Shelburne Town Line. The Recreation Dept. doesn't seem too interested in the Rec Path on this side of Dorset Street. They are more interested in the eastern side of the road. Mr. Young said they have no building plans at this time. He asked about the Fire Chief s request for sprinklers and said they would rather not commit to that at this time. Mr. Dinklage said the Board would support whatever the Fire Chief recommends. Mr. Plumeau noted that the wetland area is used as an education site. Mr. Young said the wetland and buffer are just lawn now. Mr. Dinklage said the Board would insist on some physical delineation, such as a fence, so the buffer doesn't become someone's lawn. Ms. Quimby moved to approve Preliminary Plat Application #SD-06-76 of Gary & Diane Provost subject to the stipulations in the draft motion. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 12. Site Plan Application #SD-06-44 of Joe & Linda Bacigalupo to amend a previously approved plan for a 24,000 sq. ft. light manufacturing facility. The amendment consists of a 7900 sq. ft. addition for light manufacturing use, 3 Green Tree Drive: Mr. Dinklage noted that the applicant has asked to continue until 19 September. A neighbor raised the question of noise from the property. Mr. Dinklage said it would be best to raise that issue at the hearing. -5- CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Report preparation date: August 30, 2006 drb\sub\rye\rye_2lotsubdoc Plans received: July 25, 2006 RYE ASSOCIATES — 2-LOT SUBDIVISION 1061 & 1075 HINESBURG ROAD /� SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION #SD-06-73 Agenda # 9 Meeting date: Se tember 5, 2006 Aob Owner Applicant 6A'7,, Arthur Rye Rye Associates 1075 Hinesburg Road C/O Alan Bartlett So. Burlington, VT 05403 25C Pinecrest Drive Essex Jct, VT 05452 Engineer/Surveyor Property Information O'Leary Burke Civil Associates Tax Parcel 0860-01061, 0860-01075 1 Corporate Drive Suite #! SEQ Zoning District- Village Residential Essex Junction, VT SEQ Zoning District- Village Commercial Industrial & Open Space Zoning District 15.6 & 10.2 acres Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\rve\rye 2lotsub seg Rye Associates, hereinafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking to resubdivide two (2) parcels of 15.6 acres and 10.2 acres into two (2) lots of 5.7 acres (lot #1),18.3 acres (lot #2), and a right-of-way for a proposed City street (1.9 acres), 1061 & 1075 Hinesburg Road. Associate Planner Cathyann LaRose and Administrative Officer Ray Belair, referred to herein as staff, have reviewed the plans submitted on July 25, 2006 and have the following comments. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements Table 1. Dimensional Requirements LOT Industrial & Open Space Zoning District Requirement/Limitation Proposed Min. Lot Size 3 acres 5.7 acres Max. Density n/a n/a Max. Building Coverage 30% 0% Max. Total Coverage 50% 0% Min. Front Setback 50 ft. n/a Min. Side Setback 35 ft. n/a Min. Rear Setback 50 ft. n/a n/a- no residential units are allowed; furthermore, no buildings exist or are proposed at this time. LOT SEQ-Village Commercial Village Residential Requirement/Limitation Proposed Min. Lot Size 12,000 SF 18.3 acres Max. Density- VC 1.2 units/acre base density max of 8/acre with TDR .05 units/acre 1 existing unit Max. Density -VR 1.2 units/acre base density max of 8/acre with TDR None proposed or existing # Max. Building Coverage 15% # # Max. Total Coverage 30% # 4 Min. Front Setback 50 ft. Approx 30 ft. Min. Side Setback 10 ft. >10 ft. Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. >30 ft. # Unclear at this time; the applicant has provided some information pertaining to coverage but it appears to be incorrect. As the lot size gets smaller, the coverage should increase. The applicant CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\rve\rve 21otsub sea has stated that the existing and proposed coverages are the same. The applicant should clarify this. 4 Pre-existing zoning non-compliance. 1. The applicant should clarify the coverages for the newly proposed lots. SUBDIVISION CRITERIA Pursuant to Section 15.18 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, subdivisions shall comply with the following standards and conditions: The project is designed to be visually compatible with the planned development patterns in the area, as specified in the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose of the zoning district(s) in which it is located. The standards for this criterion are found below in a review of the regulations of the Southeast Quadrant. 2. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s). Staff feels the proposed subdivision of this property is in conformance with the South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. Southeast Quadrant District This proposed subdivision is located in the southeast quadrant district. Therefore it is subject to the provisions of Section 9 of the SBLDR. 9.06 Dimensional and Design Requirements Applicable to All Sub -Districts The following standards shall apply to development and improvements within the entire Southeast Quadrant Zoning District. A. Height. (1) The maximum height of any occupied structure in the SEQ-NRP, SEQ-NRT, or SEQ- NR sub -district shall not exceed forty-five feet (45'); the waiver provisions of Section 3.07(E) shall not apply to occupied structures in these sub -districts. (2) The maximum height of any occupied structure in the SEQ-VR or SEQ-VC sub- district shall not exceed fifty feet (50'); the waiver provisions of Section 3.07(E) shall not apply to occupied structures in these sub -districts. No new buildings are proposed as part of this application; therefore this criterion is not applicable to this application. B. Open Space and Resource Protection. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\rye\rye 2lotsub seq (1) Open space areas on the site shall be located in such a way as to maximize opportunities for creating usable, contiguous open spaces between adjoining parcels As proposed, the layout of the proposed subdivision allows for ample open spaces between adjoining parcels. Staff recognizes that this may change as the lots are developed and therefore this criterion would be better addressed at that time. (2) Building lots, streets and other structures shall be located in a manner consistent with the Regulating Plan for the applicable subdistrict allowing carefully planned development at the average densities provided in this bylaw. The site plan illustrates a proposed eighty foot wide (80') Right of Way to be conveyed to the City of South Burlington. However, the plan does not show the planned city street and planned recreation path which runs north -south on the property behind the existing barn. This should be shown on the plans. 3. The plans shall be revised to show all planned city streets and recreation paths. (3) A plan for the proposed open spaces and/or natural areas and their ongoing management shall be established by the applicant. At this time, the applicant has not identified any natural areas or open spaces. Staff recognizes that this may change as the lots are developed and therefore this criterion would be better addressed at that time. (4) Sufficient grading and erosion controls shall be employed during construction and after construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties. In making this finding, the Development Review Board may rely on evidence that the project will be covered under the General Permit for Construction issued by the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. At this time no construction is planned. Staff recognizes that this may change as the lots are developed and therefore this criterion would be better addressed at that time. (5) Sufficient suitable landscaping and fencing shall be provided to protect wetland, stream, or primary or natural community areas and buffers in a manner that is aesthetically compatible with the surrounding landscape. Chain link fencing other than for agricultural purposes shall be prohibited within PUDs; the use of split rail or other fencing made of natural materials is encouraged. At this time no construction is planned. Staff recognizes that this may change as the lots are developed and therefore this criterion would be better addressed at that time. C. Agriculture. The conservation of existing agricultural production values is encouraged through development planning that supports agricultural uses (including but not limited to development plans that create contiguous areas of agricultural use), provides buffer areas between existing agricultural operations and new development, roads, and infrastructure, or creates new opportunities for agricultural use (on any soil group) such as but not limited to community -supported agriculture. Provisions that enhance overall neighborhood and natural resource values rather than preservation of specific soil types are strongly encouraged. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\rye\rye 2lotsub seg This criterion is not applicable to this application D. Public Services and Facilities. In the absence of a specific finding by the Development Review Board that an alternative location and/or provision is approved for a specific development, the location of buildings, lots, streets and utilities shall conform with the location of planned public facilities as depicted on the Official Map, including but not limited to recreation paths, streets, park land, schools, and sewer and water facilities. (1) Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity shall be available to meet the needs of the project in conformance with applicable State and City requirements, as evidenced by a City water allocation, City wastewater allocation, and/or Vermont Water and Wastewater Permit from the Department of Environmental Conservation. At this time no construction is planned. Staff recognizes that this may change as the lots are developed and therefore this criterion would be better addressed at that time. (2) Recreation paths, storm water facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility lines, and lighting shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. Staff has already stated that the applicant should show all proposed city streets and recreation paths. (3) Recreation paths, utilities, sidewalks, and lighting shall be designed in a manner that is consistent with City utility plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. Staff has already stated that the applicant should show all proposed city streets and recreation paths. No new lighting is proposed. (4) The plan shall be reviewed by the Fire Chief or his designee to insure that adequate fire protection can be provided, with the standards for evaluation including, but not limited to, minimum distance between structures, street width, vehicular access from two directions where possible, looping of water lines, water flow and pressure, and number and location of hydrants. At this time no construction is planned. Staff recognizes that this may change as the lots are developed and therefore this criterion would be better addressed at that time. Staff does not find that the Fire Chief need to review the application at this point. E. Circulation. The project shall incorporate access, circulation and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unsafe conditions on of adjacent roads and sufficient to create connectivity for pedestrians, bicycles, vehicles, school transportation, and emergency service vehicles between neighborhoods. In making this finding the Development Review Board may rely on the findings of a traffic study submitted by the applicant, and the findings of any technical review by City staff or consultants. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\rye\rye 2lotsub seq Staff has already stated that the applicant should show all proposed city streets and recreation paths. (1) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. Staff has already stated that the applicant should show all proposed city streets and recreation paths. (2) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is consistent with City roadway plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. Staff has already stated that the applicant should show all proposed city streets and recreation paths. (3) The provisions of Section 15.12(D)(4) related to connections between adjacent streets and neighborhoods shall apply. Staff has already stated that the applicant should show all proposed city streets and recreation paths. 9.09 SEQ-VR Sub -District: Specific Standards The SEQ-VR sub -district has additional dimensional and design requirements, as enumerated in this Section. A. Street, Block and Lot Pattern (1) Development blocks. Development block lengths should range between 300 and 400 linear feet; see Figure 9-2 for example. If longer block lengths are unavoidable blocks 400 feet or longer must include mid -block public sidewalk or recreation path connections.. (2) Interconnection of Streets. Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 400 feet. Dead end streets (e.g. culs de sac) are discouraged. Dead end streets may not exceed 200 feet in length. Street stubs are required at the end of dead end streets to allow for future street connections and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections to open space and future housing on adjoining parcels per section 15.12(D)(4). (3) Street Connection to Adjoining Parcels. Street stubs are required to be built to the property line and connected to adjacent parcels per section 15.12(D)(4) of these Regulations. Posting signs with a notice of intent to construct future streets is strongly encouraged. (4) Lots shall maintain a minimum lot width to depth ratio of 1:2, with a ratio of 1:2.5 to 1:5 recommended. B. Street, Sidewalk & Parking Standards (1) Street dimensions and cross sections. Neighborhood streets (collector and local) in the VR sub -district are intended to be low -speed streets for local use that discourage CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\rve\rve 21otsub sea through movement and are safe for pedestrians and bicyclists. Dimensions for public collector and local streets shall be as set forth in Tables 9-3 and 9-4, and Figures 9-8 and 9-9 below. (2) Sidewalks. Sidewalks must be a minimum of five feet (5') in width with an additional minimum five-foot planting strip (greenspace) separating the sidewalk from the street. Sidewalks are required on one side of the street, and must be connected in a pattern that promotes walkability throughout the development. The DRB may in its discretion require supplemental sidewalk segments to achieve this purpose. (3) Street Trees; see Section 9.08(B)(3) Street trees are required along all streets in a planting strip a minimum of five feet wide. Street tress shall be large, deciduous shade trees with species satisfactory to the City Arborist. Street trees to be planted must have a minimum caliper size of 2.5 to 3 inches DBH, and shall be planted no greater than thirty feet (30') on center. (4) On -street parking; see Section 9.08(B)(4). (5) Intersection design. Intersections shall be designed to reduce pedestrian crossing distances and to slow traffic; see Figure 9-6 and Section 9.08(B)(5). (6) Street and sidewalk lighting. Pedestrian -scaled light fixtures (e.g., 12' to 14') shall be provided sufficient to ensure pedestrian safety traveling to and from public spaces. Overall illumination levels should be consistent with the lower -intensity development patterns and character of the SEQ, with lower, smoother levels of illumination (rather than hot -spots) and trespass minimized to the lowest level consistent with public safety. C. Residential Design (1) Building Orientation. Residential buildings must be oriented to the street. Primary entries for single family and multi -family buildings must face the street. Secondary building entries may open onto garages and/or parking areas. (Special design guidelines apply to arterial streets). (2) Building Facades. Building facades are encouraged to employ a theme and variation approach. Buildings should include common elements to appear unified, but facades should be varied from one building to the next to avoid monotony. Front porches, stoops, and balconies that create semi -private space and are oriented to the street are encouraged. (3) Front Building Setbacks. In pedestrian districts, a close relationship between the building and the street is critical to the ambiance of the street environment. Buildings should be set back fifteen feet (15') from the back of sidewalk. (4) Porches, stoops, and balconies may project up to eight feet (8') into the front setbacks. Porch, stoop and balcony areas within the front setback shall not be enclosed or weatherized with glazing or other solid materials. (5) Placement of Garages and Parking. See Section 9.08(C)(4) and Figure 9-7. The front building line of the garage must be set behind the front building line of the house by a minimum of eight feet. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 8 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\rye\rve 2lotsub seq (6) Mix of Housing Types. A mix of housing types is encouraged within neighborhoods and developments. Housing types should be mixed within blocks, along the street and within neighborhoods rather than compartmentalized into sections of identical housing types. At this time no construction is planned. Staff recognizes that this may change as the lots are developed and therefore this criterion would be better addressed at that time. This proposed subdivision is located in the southeast quadrant district. Therefore it is subject to the provisions of Section 15.18(B). Staff finds that the proposed subdivision is in compliance with all provisions of this section. Staff recommends that the applicant addressing the numbered items in the "Comments" section of this document before proceeding to preliminary plat application. Respectfully submitted, -.4 A �1 Cathya n CaRose, Associate Planner Copy to: Alan Bartlett, C/O Rye Associates, applicant CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 August 31, 2006 Howard Snider O'Leary Burke 1 Corporate Drive, #1 Essex Junction, VT 05452 Re: Rye Project Dear Mr. Snider: Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Development Review Board meeting and staff comments to the Board. Please be sure that someone is at the meeting on Tuesday, September 5th, at 7:30 p.m. PLEASE NOTE that the location of the meeting has changed. It will be held at South Burlington High School, 550 Dorset Street, in Cafeteria 2. Enter at the main entrance off Dorset Street and look for signs pointing you to the cafeteria. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, L Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. Permit Number SD----���— APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the plans will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. For amendments, please provide pertinent information only. 1) OWNER OF RECORD (Name as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #) Arthur Rye _ #1075 Hinesburg Road South Burlington VT 05403 (PH:863-2663) and Bernice Brisson _ #2268 Mountainview Road Williston VT 05495 (PH:878-1094) 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #) V. 529, p. 488 3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) Rye Associates C/o Alan Bartlett 25C Pinecrest Drive, Essex Jct., VT 05452 Ph: 343-1819 Fax: 879-0037 _ 4) APPLICANT'S LEGAL INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY (fee simple, option, etc.)_ Option __ 5) CONTACT PERSON (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) Howard Snider (O'Leary -Burke _ Civil Associates) 1 Corporate Drive, Suite 1 _ Essex Jct., VT 05452 Ph:878-9990 Fax:878-9989_ 6) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: #1061 and #1075 Hinesburg Road 7) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) #0860-01061 & #0860-01075 _ 8) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) Existing Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use) Residence with _. attached buildings and barn (former farm)_ b) Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain) Owners to retain 5.7 acre parcel City to be conveyed a 1.9 acre corridor. Applicant to be conveyed the remaining 18.3 acres, including the existing residence and buildinas. _ c) Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) Approximately 8,139 sf of existing buildings (no new buildinqs proposed) d) Proposed height of building (if applicable) N/A e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) 1 existing residence (application for subdivision of land only) fj Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable) Application involves Industrial and Open Space zone, Southeast Quadrangle (Village Commercial and Neiqhborhood Residential) 9) LOT COVERAGE a) Building: Existing 1.02 % Proposed 1.02 % b) Overall (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing 1.18 % Proposed 1.18 % c) Front yard (along each street) Existing 8.67 % Proposed 8.67 % 10) TYPE OF EXISTING OR PROPOSED ENCUMBRANCES ON PROPERTY (easements, covenants, leases, rights of way, etc.) Standard utility easements 11) PROPOSED EXTENSION, RELOCATION, OR MODIFICATION OF MUNICIPAL FACILITIES (sanitary sewer, water supply, streets, storm drainage, etc.) N/A 12) OWNERS OF RECORD OF ALL CONTIGUOUS PROPERTIES & MAILING ADDRESSES (this may be provided on a separate attached sheet) See attached 13) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE N/A 14) PLANS AND FEE Plat plans shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (I I" x 17") of the plans must be submitted. A sketch subdivision application fee is $125. 2 r I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT SIGNATURE OF"PROPERTY O NER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: U(v I have reviewed this sketch plan application and find it to be: L Complete ❑ Incomplete j / / 9 �altn % V�d4 i ector of Planning & Zoning or Designee I Date 3 a � O'Leary -Burke Civil Associates, PLC CIVIL ENGINEERING I REGULATORY AND PERMIT PREPARATION I LAND SURVEYING I CONSTRUCTION SERVICES I LAND USE PLANNING July 19, 2006 Ray Belair City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Brisson & Rye Property #1061 / #1075 Hinesburg Road Dear Ray, We are writing on behalf of Rye Associates ( C/o Alan Bartlett ) to submit a Sketch Plan for a two lot subdivision at the above referenced property. The property is located on the west side of Hinesburg Road, to the north of the Oak Creek Subdivision and is in the Southeast Quadrangle and the Industrial / Open Space zoning districts. The parcel involves approximately 25.9 acres and is the current residence of Arthur and Lexie Rye. This proposal involves subdividing the property into two (2) lots. Lot 1 will be a 5.7 acre parcel that will be retained by the current owners. This parcel is in the Industrial and Open Space zoning district and will be on the north side of an eighty (80') foot wide corridor that has been reserved for a future connection to Swift Street. Lot 2 is located in the Southeast Quadrangle and will be conveyed to Alan Bartlett ( Rye Associates ). Lot 2 will involve approximately 18.3 acres located on the south side of the future Swift Street corridor and will include the existing residence. 1 CORPORATE DRIVE SUITE #1 ESSEX JUNCTION VERMONT 05452 TEL 802 878 9990 I FAX 802 878 9989 I obca@olearyburke.com Please find the following items attached; • Subdivision Sketch Plan application; $125 fee; • Five (5) full-size plans; • One (1) 11"x17" plan; • List of abutters; Sincerely, Howard Snider 60551 Belair5ketchPlan Abutter List to #1061 & #1075 Hinesburg Road ( Rye and Brisson Property ) City of South Burlington (Parks and Recreation) 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 835 Hinesburg Road, LLC C/o Jeff Davis J. L. Realty 2822 St. George Road Williston, VT 05495 Mansfield View Properties, LLC Charlotte, VT 05446 Burlington Properties, LTD c/o Dan Kalman P.O.B.9210 South Burlington, VT 05407 Avalanche Development, LLC 600 Blair Park Road Williston, VT 05495 Spaniel Properties, LLC 1050 Hinesburg Road, Unit A South Burlington, VT 05403 Michael Gravelin 1070 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Malcolm Willard 699 Nob Hill Road Williston, VT 05495 Brad Brewster and Marjorie Stygles 6 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 Christopher and Claudia McDermott 10 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 Tod and Kelly Lyman 14 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 Scott and Lisa Gibbs 16 Fox Run Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 Jake and Gina Cunavelis 18 Fox Run Road South Burlington, VT 05403 ABUTTERLIST.doc t 1 JFF 1OA 8OF r i\ 1NDU$TRL44 AND Df&W SPACi, 1 Mo ............... h� I It —� i �� i i '' i i ♦1 i vv i i / /"LANCITY OF � BI/ NGTON l' ' , �I I / / 11 j ,' l / / ,,- / /\ � \ I LAlJDB OF \ ' 1 1 ' L OF 1 LO \ 1 PROPERTES LLC �\` \\-,- ' // \, ; I , ,/ BURUNGTCNNPROEFMES, LTD 1\' IT \ ' ` 1 /�..' I 1 1 ) I I ... •-� - �\ \ .. �� \ �\ � ,^- - -^� III\ \ \ \ I \ 'aNNa `0. 5.7 ACRES I ' / \ I 1 I 1 ) : L�7����� ', I I I l I \ I 1 �\ / T— 1 I _ ; \\ \\� tb b\@ retained by 6risson aK1� f` ); ' i IN INDUSTRL4L AND OPEN SPACE / i ; _ ♦\\ \ �r `\ \\ \I 1049.15' -� � T. � —7r— to r �$ PROPOSED80' WIRE SWIFT STREET RIGHT - OF - ' /' -\ i i (to be bMveyed to the City of South Burlington) , i 1. AACRES rME4DOiNLAND DRIVE LU \\ \\\ `-.\ \\ ; 7H�IGHBdRHOQD 4ESIDEN7IAL,'r- ^\ \I\ I \♦ `,\ \, \ SOIL[HE,4�T \QUADRANT - \ I LANDS OF QQ \ _'\ \ \ _ ' ♦ \ i / --,'' , 1 1 \ �♦ 1 I , AIIl ANCHE DEVELOPMENT, LLC `\ W '•♦ `♦ \\ ` ^`` `\ \\ \ `\_--, --- - \ I 1\ \ 1 I \ / I I AND \ I l / / SrAN- PROPERTIES, LLC LANDSOF CRY OF \`-\ `, _\ `\ \\ , l\ \\ I\ i ' i 1 \ f , 11 ,� ..r `�\ l _ ,/ ; 1 / / 9Durn BUTIJNGTDN \ \ \ 1 \ \ /'�'-' • I 1 / i \ ` I- 1 ' 1 k cc I LANDS OF I` / I I ; I/ /,- •"^\- - \ \ / , / I \ \\ Q ,/ 1 t , 1 1 I MIGRAVEL/N \ LOT 2 _ \ 1 ♦ ` \ / I 1 r \ 18.3 ACRES _ Q I / -- `---- '1'p be conveyed to RXEASSOCIATES tj I LANDS OF \\ \\ `\I --�_ --_ -\\ ♦_I ; II \\ l\ / "\I \\I `\ \`\---1 '\I I\ l r-\ j l\ 1' , l I I111 \\\\1\l� MICWIEL GRAVEUN \\ ♦\ ` _ '\I I 1 !1 / „ �\-\�1 `\ ,1 1 I ` ' / \__l I I / 1 r r�l lit /\ r \\` \\ \\\�__ `l\ I\ 1 ♦ //,'' - '\ \ r �_ jut \ ,n -\I \\♦`I �/' ,i _- / i i I''�i i (L`V �(/o I /- `\_� - '! :1 ofS . / 1 - \`_/ l ��\ / / I I I� ♦\ ---- / I r. \_ � I I I ,,RITE �"0Q \ BREWSTER --- ^I (IOAK GH�kK SUBDIVIISION- -�';// i S'YOLEB '.' -_ I}( I\' ' \-'r-hOX RUN LANE �\`f i ('r\,'�- - `,III, oo vv gp+we�s orwees '-I I �CreuN )r I / __7 T— -_ - "I� GRAPHIC SCALE = = �F \ \ `\ 1 , j - /{ /\ I`I i\ / ��' •.-_--.I __ - = NN - R CIVIL ASS ` L / • 0 Y 714 ZI 1 Inch 60 M1 � Ir111 �1,�� NTS LEGEND PROPERTY LINE ADJOINING PROPERTY LINE 4W CONTOUR LINE ZONING LINE SIDELINE OF EASEMENT O O PROPERTY CORNER PROJECT STATISTICS TOTAL PROJECTAREA - 25.9 ACRES ZONING DISTRICTS - SOUTHEAST DUADRANT ( VC - VILLAGE COMMERCIAL) (NR - NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL ) (fO - INDUSTRIAL A OPEN SPACE) Owners BERNICE BRISSON ARTHUR & LE%IE RYE 2208 MOUNTAINVIEW ROAD 1075 HINESBURG ROAD WILLISTON, VT 05495 SOUTH BURLINGTON. VT05403 Applicant RYE ASSOCIATES 25C PINECREST DRIVE ESSEX JCT., VT 05452