HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 06C_MP-18-01 SD-18-29_1505 Dorset St_Dorset Meadow_PlansSD‐18‐29
1505 Dorset Street
Dorset Meadows
Packet for 1/29/2019 Hearing
Table of Contents
Documents are provided in the order they are mentioned in the Staff Comments, starting with
MP‐18‐01 and proceeding to SD‐18‐29.
Applicant Cover Letter 1/18/2019
Gravel & Shea Letter pertaining to Primary Conservation Areas 1/18/2019
Natural Resource Committee Communication since previous hearing
Civil Plans 1/18/2019
Design Narrative 1/4/2019
Revised Building Elevations (undated)
BFJ Memorandum 12/21/2018
Stormwater Section Comments 1/24/2019
Public Comments since previous hearing
Page 1 of 3
South Burlington Natural Resources Committee
575 Dorset Street
South Burlington, VT 05403
(802) 846-4106
www.sburl.com
MEMORANDUM
To: South Burlington Development Review Board
From: South Burlington Natural Resources Committee
Re: Dorset Meadows Project - NRC Comments for the DRB January 29, 2019 Mtg
Date: January 25, 2019
The Natural Resources Committee presents this “NRC Comments on Dorset Meadows Development” to the
Development Review Board to provide our perspective on the natural resource issues related to this
project.
The NRC has identified the following nine priority areas that encompass various aspects of our natural
resource issues and concerns:
1. “Preservation of Open Spaces”
The NRC looks forward to the DRB’s ruling on the legal question relating to the applicability of the
Comprehensive Plan to this Development. The applicability of the Comprehensive Plan underscores
the need for the City to prepare (or require developers to prepare) the studies referred to in the
Comprehensive Plan. We believe that at the minimum the DRB should consider the Comprehensive
Plan Statements as a guide to where specific studies should be provided by the Developer.
The NRC has asked that the Developer to provide professionally prepared overlay maps of the
Development Plan compared to Comprehensive Plan pages that reference the Riparian Connectivity,
Habitat Blocks, Aquatic Resources, Agricultural Resources, Non-Native Invasive Species, and
Wetlands.
The Developer has indicated to the NRC that there will be more specific studies as part of the project’s
required completion of the Act 250 process and that they would be willing to discuss their proposed
Act 250 filing with the NRC.
Recommendations:
● The overlay maps should be required as they would assist in the evaluation of the
development’s effect on the natural resources.
● If the Developer is required to modify the plans, the NRC requests that we be included in the
revision process.
● The NRC requests that the DRB direct the Developer to include the NRC in the Act 250 process.
2. “Habitat Connectivity for Wildlife Movement”
From our assessment, there appears to be a significant amount of wildlife activity on this property.
● We recognize the applicant has reached a minimum standard for the wetlands road crossing
and recommend that they reconfigure the underpass to accommodate for larger species.
(The NRC notes that the VT AEC approval is based on a minimum standard.)
NRC COMMENTS TO DRB – ADOPTED BY NRC ON 1-24-2019
Page 2 of 3
● NRC recommends increasing the wetlands proposed minimum setback buffer of 50 ft to
accommodate further accommodate wildlife movement.
3. “Preservation of Open Spaces”
● The NRC recommends the DRB consider having the Developer grant a conservation easement
covering the proposed western open space.
4. “Tree Stewardship” (The Preservation of Tree Canopies)
We are concerned about the removal of existing 340, 6”+ diameter trees that are essential to carbon
sequestration and effectively countering the effects of climate change. From our assessment, there
are trees that are being removed unnecessarily. We appreciate that the Developer has indicated their
willingness to preserve existing and mature trees on the property.
● It is our recommendation that as many of these trees stay in place wherever possible and we
ask to be involved in any discussion regarding tree canopy protection as it relates to this
project.
As part of a developing management plan and upon NRC’s request, the applicant agreed to provide
whip planting along the proposed river corridor and wetland conservation areas.
● We recommend that the applicant plant a minimum of 3-4 ft stems of native species at 10' ft
center spacing throughout the buffer.
5. “Scenic Views”
We note and appreciate that the Developer has located the developments main street to view a “Scenic
Site” indicated in the Comprehensive Plan.
6. “Conservation of Aquatic Resources”
Currently, the NRC is concerned with potential vehicle toxins from impervious surfaces and lawn
applications contaminating the wetlands.
● NRC recommends increasing the wetlands proposed minimum setback of 50 ft to safely mitigate
any possible wetland contaminants.
● The NRC recommends our inclusion in the Developer’s Act 250 process to effectively monitor the
standards set forth.
7. “Conservation of Agricultural Resources”
We need more detailed information to appropriately evaluate this issue. It will be covered in the Act
250 review process.
● The NRC requests that the DRB direct the Developer to include the NRC in the Act 250 process.
8. “Management of Non-Native Invasive Species”
We are concerned with the lack of a management plan for the wetland areas on the property in regard
to invasive species. Invasive species such as non-native phragmites, common and glossy buckthorn
NRC COMMENTS TO DRB – ADOPTED BY NRC ON 1-24-2019
Page 3 of 3
and Japanese Knotweed may have a considerable impact on the biodiversity of the region and if not
managed, may extend beyond property boundaries.
● We recommend that the Developer develop and procure a comprehensive and ongoing land
management plan that includes and is not limited to forest, wetland, riparian areas and
invasive species.
● The NRC requests that we are involved in the development of this management plan.
9. Other – Dog Park
Dogs have an impact on water quality and existing wildlife. This parcel is particularly sensitive as it
includes a wetland, riparian corridor and for its abutment to a Natural Resource Protected Area.
● It is recommended that the applicant provide a dog park (and/or contribute to fund) on the property
or at a nearby location.
Attached for your reference is the Dorset Meadows Teams presentation to the NRC on 1/2/2019.
We thank very much for considering our comments.
Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions regarding this document.
Respectfully,
Dave Crawford, NRC Chair
For the South Burlington Natural Resources Committee
Cell Phone: 802-881-9599
Email: dacs4040@gmail.com
Attachment: NRC Committee Follow-Up from DM Team 1-10-19
Green algae as a result of phosphorus runoff in Lake Champlain. Courtesy of Chantal d’Auteuil, Missisquoi Bay Basin Corporation.A Collaborative Effort To Help Reduce Phosphorus Runoff Into Lake Champlain While Encouraging Economic ActivityIS YOURS...The Greater Burlington Industrial Corporation (GBIC), the Lake Champlain Regional Chamber of Commerce and the Lake Champlain Basin Program have combined efforts to educate both residential and commercial lawn care owners on ways that they can help reduce phos-phorus runoff into Lake Champlain. Phosphorus is a nutrient, essential for human, animal and plant growth. When too much phosphorus gets into nearby waterways, however, the nutrient provides a key source of food for microscopic plants or algae. Algal blooms can deter swimmers and recreational boaters from full enjoyment of the lake and its amenities, which restricts the recre-ational use of the lake. The blooms may also negatively affect property values and alter aquatic habitat, and in extreme cases, they produce toxins that can be danger-ous to human health. VGBIC seeks a thriving Lake Champlain region with an economic environment providing meaningful employ-ment consistent with an uncompromised natural envi-ronment, enabling present and future generations of Vermonters to live, learn, work and play in the Cham- plain Valley. The mission of the Lake Champlain Regional Chamber of Commerce is to promote and support the healthy environment that makes the Lake Champlain Region and Vermont the ideal place to live, work and do business.The Lake Champlain Basin Program (LCBP) is a fed-eral, state, provincial (Quebec) and local initiative to restore and protect Lake Champlain and its surround-ing watershed for future generations.Lake ChamplainLake ChamplainBasin ProgramBasin ProgramGBICS.Lake Champlain from Barn Rock Point, Westport, NY.Courtesy of Gary Randorf.THE CHOICEHow To Keep Them Both Healthy And BeautifulYOUR LAWNYOUR LAKE...Produced in partnership by:Greater Burlington Industrial Corporation (GBIC)(www.vermont.org/gbic)Lake Champlain Regional Chamber of Commerce(www.vermont.org)Lake Champlain Basin Program(www.lcbp.org)Printed on recycled paper with soy-base ink.Photo: Perennial garden fertilized with compost, courtesy of Windekind Farm.
Whenever possible, please try to do your part by following these 10 simple guidelines!1) Conduct soil testing before any prod-ucts are applied. Maybe your lawn or garden doesn't require fertilizer, or perhaps needs less phosphorus. Not all fertilizer has the same amount of phosphorus. It makes good sense to get some information before you apply any fertilizer.2) Recycle the nutrients in your own grass clippings first, to help mulch your lawn. As lawn clippings compost in the grass, the will release the nutrients that they stored. This should also cut down on weed growth and the need for herbicides and pesticides. A dethatching or mulching mower will assist your lawn maintenance.3) Reduce the size of your lawn mowed area if appropriate. Planting more trees, shrubs or other perennials may reduce the need for fertilizers, and save on mowing expenses over time.4) Create your own compost whenever possible. This will help cut your costs and reduce the amount of phosphorus entering the watershed over time. You can add kitchen com-post to lawn clippings using a compost bin, or buy compost or fertilizer products from area businesses.5) Avoid planting non-native invasive species to your lawn. It is important to resist planting any invasive species—like purple loose-strife or other illegal spe-cies—that tend to spread aggressively and choke out native plants.6) Leave vegetation in place, especially the areas close to rivers, streams or small trickling brooks. This water flows to Lake Champlain. If you can leave native veg-etation in place, its roots will hold the soil better and less soil will wash downstream, thus preventing phosphorus from being carried downstream. In many communities it is ille-gal to cut or remove vegetation from riparian areas near rivers and streams or the lake.7) Sweep or hose loose soil, and especially any loose fertilizer after an application, from driveways or side-walks back onto the lawn so that it will become incorporated into the turf. This will help reduce the nutrients and sediments of surface runoff that will otherwise flow down through the drainage systems and into a stream or a storm drain, and into the Lake. 8) Read fertilizer application directions very carefully. More is not usually better. More may actually be harmful, both to your property and to downstream water quality as it runs off your property. 9) Consult with those who might know more. Extension Services, Garden Centers, Garden Clubs, landscaping companies all can offer you expert assistance with soil testing, planting advice and assistance; visit www.lcbp.org for suggestions!10) Make a pledge never to dump any products down nearby storm drains. Storm drains divert water to nearby water-bodies, the lake itself or to the wastewater treatment plant. Thank you for doing your part to keep Lake Champlain clean—for all of us and our future!HERE’S WHAT YOU CAN DO!View of Lake Champlain and the “Palisades” from Vergennes, VT. Courtesy of the VT Department of Tourism and Marketing.Purple Loosestrife. Courtesy of the VT Department of Environmental Conservation.Storm drain with a message: “Don’t Dump.” Courtesy of Joel Flewelling, Ghostwriters Communications.A landscape fertilized exclusively with compost. Courtesy of Steven Wisbaum, Champlain Valley Compost Company.
South Burlington Natural Resources Committee
575 Dorset Street
South Burlington, VT 05403
(802) 846-4106
www.sburl.com
DAC-MSW2017 C:\Users\Dave\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\PM3V6G4V\Memo to Dorset Meadows Developers - DAC 12-26-2018PM FINAL V#9.docx Printed On: 12/26/2018 @ 2:54 PM Page 1 of 1
MEMORANDIUM
TO: Dorset Meadows Development, Paul O’Leary (Development Team Contact)
FROM: Dave Crawford, NRC Chair
SUBJECT: January 2, 2019 Mtg - Dorset Meadows Presentation
DATE: December 26, 2018
Good Day Paul,
Vice- Chair Betty Milizia & I meet to go over information we would like to make as be part of your presentation
to the NRC members on January 2, 2019.
We decided that the comments contained in the attached NRC Memo to the DRB (12/14/2018) makes a good
foundation for your prestation. Also attached are the DRAFT Minutes of the NRC’s 12/13/2018 mtg when we
discussed the questions to be asked the Developer.
When you & I talked you shared a short summary of the Dorset Meadows position on the applicability of the
Comprehensive Plan to the development. The other committee Members would be interested in hearing (or even
better having your comments in writing) prior to our mtg.
It also would be helpful in speeding up the mtg if you could send me the Development Team responses to our
concerns & questions which will make up your presentation. We will need to send it as an additional document
to our Agenda as the Agenda is final at 5:00 PM on Wednesday Dec.26th.
It would be greatly appreciated you could get a bullet point summary of your Team’s Presentation to me by 2:00
pm on Monday December 31st so I could send it to the Committee Members . The Committee Members can
then review it prior to our mtg & think of additional questions they want to ask during the presentation.
If you have any questions regarding your presentation that you feel I could answer, please feel free to contact me.
Dave Crawford, Chair
South Burlington Natural Resource Committee
Attached:
NRC Memo to the DRB (12/14/2018)
DRAFT Minutes of the NRC’s 12/13/2018 mtg
CC Marla Keene, City Development Review Planner
NATURAL RESOURCES
Meeting Minutes 12/3/2018
Attendance: Ashley Parker, Holly Rees, Betty Militzia (Co-chair), David Crawford (Chair), Lisa
Yankowski (member), Duncan Murdoch (member) & Alyson Chalnick (member)
Absent: Linda Chiasson
1) Holly reviewed emergency procedures.
2) No additions nor deletions to the agenda.
3) Public attendee(s): Kevin Dorn, City Manager.
4) Introductions as we welcome our newest committee members Duncan Murdoch & Alyson
Chalnick.
a. Duncan is acting time keeper tonight and Lisa the clerk.
5) Minutes from the 11/7/18 meeting- Betty adopted, Lisa 2nd. Alyson & Duncan
abstained. Minutes adopted.
6) Discussion of Dorset Meadows
a. We don’t currently have many details on it. Alyson went onto the South Burlington City
website and presented a map of proposed housing sites with an overlay of where
protected riparian and conserved areas are according to the SB Master Plan. (ref maps
2.27, 2.3)
b. David wondered about the scale of Alyson’s overlay to what the actual area is,
particularly the buffer zones along the wetland areas. (ref unit #43-46 on Alyson’s
map). He thought we should ask for a meeting with the developer. Holly advised
against this and that the committee should use the comprehensive plant to develop our
points and areas of concern the NRC has relevant to this development. This committee
has not previously been involved in this project and we need to make the Development
Review Board (DRB), become aware of our concerns. We need to make a brief, bulleted
statement to get out as a letter to the DRB to be included in their meeting packet for
presentation on Tuesday 12/19/2018. Betty will draft the letter and David will review it.
c. Our points:
i. Wetland buffers & classifications, (when was the last assessment?)
ii. The overlay and how it lines up with the adopted comprehensive plan.
iii. What about the riparian zone and wildlife connectivity. What information exists
with the city and state?
iv. What storm water treatment method is being used? (We know the
presentation will show some ponds, any other methods?)
v. What is the nature/material of the cut-through road construction? Is just the
one planned through the wetland area?
vi. Is there a management plan for the remaining forested area? Within the
development are- how many existing trees are being saved vs those being
removed.
7) Our city manager Kevin Dorn joined us to present the proposed Tri County Conservation
District. This is a proposed collaboration between South Burlington, Shelburne and Williston to
pull together their resources and information to help conserve open land. The three towns
share borders and lands that are under consideration for saving. Much of the land already
borders and includes land already being conserved and includes wildlife corridors. The
collaboration will help to better see the overall effect development is having on the affected
areas and it is easier getting conservation grant funds as a group.
a. Lisa made the motion to promote the City of South Burlington to work towards
becoming part of this collaborative effort. Duncan 2nd. Approved
8) The NRC needs to select 2 of its members for the Interim Zoning Committee. This will be a big
commitment considering we have no information about when the IZC will meet nor any other
information about the group. The rest for the NRC members may want to work at keeping up
with the other city committees to better aid our IZC members.
a. Betty made the motion for Duncan & Alyson to be the committee members with Lisa as
an alternate. Duncan 2nd.
9) We have 2 new NRC committee members, we have openings for more members. David tried
contacting Laura Williams to let her know the procedure for resigning with the city council- she
has not responded. We will need to find out how to vacate her position via the city council.
The Edlunds Development with Frank Von Turkovich is currently on hold during interim
zoning.
10) Ashley updated us on work at Red Rocks Park.
a. Timber & Stone will be evaluating what needs to be done.
b. Mile Bold is still handling the invasive control work.
c. We are looking into the erosion issues and what can be done.
d. The SoBurl magazine, February 2019 issue will have an article about Red Rocks and what
is going on.
e. Holly as head of Recreation and Parks and Ashley as her backup for the city- are working
on having a smooth transition of groups that will be working on the parks. VYCC will be
back to do some work. The Winooski Valley Park will not oversee the work as they
previously were doing. We hope to maintain the relationship and have them maintain
trails city wide.
11) We are keeping the 1st Wednesday of each month for our monthly meetings at 6pm.
a. The next meeting will be Wed January 2,2019
3139374.90CCHK 14
3140373.60EOP3141374.13TOC3142373.67EOP13143372.58EOP13144372.70CB 3145372.72CB3146372.62EOP3147373.25TOC
3148373.82CL
3149373.04CL
3150371.96TOC3151371.36EOP3152371.66CL3153371.40EOP13154370.25EOP1 3155370.54CL 3156370.11EOP3157370.68TOC
3158369.68TOC3159368.91EOP
3160369.04CB
3161369.38CL
3162369.00CB3163368.96EOP1
3164367.82EOP1 3165368.10CL 3166368.42TOC3167367.82EOP CUT
3168367.52EOP CUT
3169367.54TOC3170366.97EOP3171367.23CL3172366.92EOP13173366.74CB 3174366.83CB
3175367.23TOC3176366.74EOP3177367.23CL3178366.75EOP1
3179367.45EOP1 3180367.69CL
3181367.37EOP
3182367.94TOC3183367.88CB3184367.81CB
3185368.23EOP1 3186368.62CL 3187368.24EOP3188368.79TOC
3189369.56TOC3190368.94EOP3191369.34CL3192368.87EOP1
3193369.70EOP1 3194369.96CL 3195369.69EOP3196370.27TOC3197370.17EOP3198370.70TOC3199370.45CL3200370.19EOP13201370.65EOP13202370.68CB 3203371.05CL 3204370.67EOP3205371.20TOC3206370.57CB 3207371.46TD 6ASH3208371.01TD 6ASH3209371.10TD 6ASH
3210370.83TD 6ELM
3211369.47TD 6ELM3212368.40TD 6ELM3213367.75TD 6ELM3214366.78TD 12ASH3215365.59TD 12ASH
3216367.05TD 12ASH
3217368.31TD 12ASH
3218368.02GV
3219368.78GV
3220368.20HYD
3221369.46TD 8ASH
3222370.79TD 8ASH
3223372.75TD 6ELM
3224374.31TD 6ELM
3225376.90TD 18ELM
3226374.51EOP2
3227375.13TOC1
3228377.16TOC13229376.58EOP23230376.63EOP2
3231378.99HYD3232378.59GV
3233378.58GV3234377.88LIGHT
3235369.67LIGHT
3236367.19LIGHT
3237370.68LIGHT 3238382.32TD 8ELM3239379.86TD 6ELM3240377.42TD 6ELM3241375.43TD 6ELM3242374.20TD 6ELM3243372.56TD 6ELM3244371.98TD 6ELM3245371.51EOP3246371.72EOP1 3247371.88EOP CUT3248372.23EOP CUT3249373.14EOP3250373.81TOC3251373.70CL3252373.44EOP13253374.71EOP13254374.76EOP13255375.21EOP13256375.48GV3257375.54HYD3258376.40LIGHT3259376.30EOP13260377.02EOP13261377.19CB 3262377.51CL 3263377.11CB3264375.43EOP3265376.12TOC3266376.47GV3267378.30TOC3268377.79EOP3269378.21CL3270377.92EOP13271379.90EOP1 3272380.41CL 3273380.06EOP3274380.69TOC3275382.28TOC3276381.59EOP3277382.08CL3278381.73EOP13279382.62EOP13280382.93EOP13281383.29EOP1 END CURB3282383.96EOP13283384.61EOP1 3284382.99CL3285382.39EOP3286383.09TOC 3287382.92TOC3288382.37EOP 3289382.29EOP3290382.77TOC 3291382.10TOC3292381.57EOP 3293380.41EOP END CURB3294380.93TOC3295381.97HYD3296382.02GV3298383.38LIGHT 3299378.94CCHK 213300380.92WSO3301383.39GV 3302381.13GV 3303379.39HYD3304380.28GV 3305381.00EOP3306381.45CL3307381.07EOP1 3308381.74EOP13309382.19CL3310381.78EOP 3311382.37EOP3312382.93CL3313382.43EOP13314378.07UP GMP793315387.98UP GMP783316391.42SIGN NO FARM 3317390.21SIGN3318391.44SIGN STOP 3319385.99UP GMP80 3320389.74UP GMP81 3321394.33UP GMP823322382.93EOP3323383.40CL3324382.98EOP1 3325383.56EOP13326384.09CL 3327383.77EOP 3328384.15EOP3329384.56CL3330384.11EOP1 3331384.48EOP13332385.07CL3333384.43EOP DRIVE 3334384.48EOP DRIVE 3335384.40EOP3336384.96CL3337384.38EOP13338384.85GAS MRKR3340383.00ROAD EOP3341382.77ROAD EOW3342381.19ROAD EOW3343378.67ROAD EOW3344379.08ROAD1 EOW3345380.96ROAD1 EOW3346382.75ROAD1 EOW3347382.75ROAD1 EOP3348382.32TD 24HEM3349382.92TD 24HEM3350383.43TD 24HEM3351382.75DRIVE3352383.09DRIVE3353383.34DRIVE3354383.10DRIVE3355382.63DRIVE3356382.35DRIVE3357382.44MB 13503358389.23MB 1495EEEEEEEEE
GREEN / OPEN SPACEWETLANDSWETLANDSWETLANDSWETLANDSWETLAND BUFFERWETLAND BUFFERWETLA
N
D
B
U
F
F
E
R SEQ - NR
D
I
S
T
RI
C
T
SEQ -
V
R
DI
S
T
RI
C
T
CENTRAL AVENUE WITH VIEW TO CA
M
EL'
S HUMPSTORM-WATERTREATMENTAREA10' WID
E
R
E
C
R
E
ATI
O
N /
BIK
E
P
A
T
HOPT. GARAGE(TYP.)NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTIONDISTRICT (SEQ - NRP)revisionsdate revisions date301 college street burlington vermont 05401 802 658 3555landscape architects planning consultantshttp://www.tjboyle.comnorthscaledrawn bydatesheet no:Landscape Key PlanDorset MeadowsL-2001" = 100'T. J. Boyle Associates, LLCdesign bymjbchecked byjkh/mjb 09/21/2018mjbOwner / Applicant:44 Park Street, Essex Jct. VT 05452Dorset Meadows Associates, LLCENGINEER:13 Corporate Drive, Essex Jct. VT 05452O'Leary-Burke Civil AssociatesPLAN ISSUEDFOR REVIEW01/17/2019L202 LANDSCAPE PLAN SOUTHL201 LANDSCAPE PLAN NORTHL203 TYP. LARGE S.F. LOTPLANTING PLANL203 TYP. SMALL S.F. LOTPLANTING PLANL204 TYP. TOWNHOMEPLANTING PLANL204 NOWLAND FARM TOWNHOMEENLARGEMENTL203 TYP. DUPLEX PLANTING PLANL205 TRILLIUM TOWNHOMEENLARGEMENTSCALE 1" = 100'(at 24" x 36" ONLY)REVISED PER PRELIM. PLAT COMMENTS12/7/2018INCLUDE TREE PRESERVATION12/10/2018LEGENDDECIDUOUS STREE TREEDECIDUOUS TREEDECIDUOUS SMALL TREECONIFER TREESSHRUB DECIDUOSSHRUB CONIFERMEADOW PLANTING MIXTO BE MOWED ANNUALLYEXISTING TREE TO REMAINTREE PRESERVATION FENCINGPLANTING/SITE REVISIONS PER COMMENTS01/17/2019
E E E E
UA(6)GTH(11)PCCS(6)ZS(5)CO(4)AxFS(6)ARRS(4)CO(5)GBAG(6)ARRS(5)BNH(7)PSG(4)PCCS(4)CCL(4)QM(4)NS(5)UA(6)UT(6)GBAG(4)AxFS(3)GBAG(3)GTH(9)PSG(6)UA(7)AxFS(3)BNH(7)CCL(4)PO(3)AxFC(3)PSG(8)PO(7)ZS(6)PCCS(8)CCG(3)MAS(5)SRI(6)AxGR(2)GTHAB(2)CMGG(2)QEPG(3)BNH*TC(3)ABPG(4)AS(3)BNH*(4)GDALAxFC(5)PG(2)QR(9)AB(2)AB(2)UT(5)SJR(7)QE(2)AL(4)PS(6)CPOP(2)ARR(2)ABPG(3)UA(3)PS(3)HVG(2)HVG(3)HVG(3)HVG(2)HVG(3)BNH*(3)ARR(2)MBWTC(3)SPLIT-RAIL FENCING(TYP.)CPOPQEPG(5)MBW(2)PG(4)TC(2)BNH*(3)UT(11)PO(4)AB(2)CPOPCPOPCPOPLANDSCAPEBOULDERS (TYP.)GDSEE SHEET L205 FORTRILLIUM ST. TOWNHOMEPLANTINGSSEE SHEET L204 FORNOWLAND FARM TOWNHOMEAREA PLANTING PLANPLAYGROUNDMBW(2)TON(11)PS(15)CMGG(2)AB(3)PG(3)PS(2)ABSAT(2)SAT(2)HVGTON(14)QE(2)ABCPOP(2)TON(16)TON(8)TON(12)PO(3)revisionsdate revisions date301 college street burlington vermont 05401 802 658 3555landscape architects planning consultantshttp://www.tjboyle.comnorthscaledrawn bydatesheet no:Landscape Plan NorthDorset MeadowsL-2011" = 50'T. J. Boyle Associates, LLCdesign bymjbchecked byjkh/mjb 09/21/2018mjbOwner / Applicant:44 Park Street, Essex Jct. VT 05452Dorset Meadows Associates, LLCENGINEER:13 Corporate Drive, Essex Jct. VT 05452O'Leary-Burke Civil AssociatesMATCHLINE L-201MATCHLINE L-202SCALE 1" = 50'(at 24" x 36" ONLY)PLAN ISSUEDFOR REVIEW01/17/2019REVISED PER PRELIM. PLAT COMMENTS12/7/2018INCLUDE TREE PRESERVATION12/10/2018AL(5)QEPLANTING/SITE REVISIONS PER COMMENTS01/17/2019
UA(3)CCG(5)SRI(6)AxGR(2)AxGR(3)PSG(3)AxFC(4)BNH(5)PCCS(5)QM(2)GBAG(4)PCCS(3)PSG(6)ZS(4)GTH(7)AxFS(4)UT(4)GTH(6)PSG(3)CO(4)NS(5)CCL(4)BNH(6)ZS(5)UT(2)AxFSGTH(2)SRIMAS(3)GBAG(6)CO(3)UA(7)BNH(5)CO(2)AL(2)PG(2)AB(4)QEPG(3)AB(2)ALSAT(2)TC(4)PG(4)PS(3)QBPG(8)MBWPS(2)ASCPOPPS(3)ALQBAxFS(3)PS(4)AL(2)PG(3)MBWASCPOP(2)BNH*(3)ARR(2)ALGDAB(3)CMGGALARR(2)PS(5)HVG(3)CPOP(2)HVG(2)SPLIT-RAIL FENCE(TYP.)TC(2)CPOPCPOPMBWARRS(6)LANDSCAPEBOULDERS (TYP.)PS(7)TON(10)TON(22)PGALTON(18)AB(2)PS(5)MBWALARRARRMAPLE 8INMAPLE 18INMAPLE 6INPINE 12INPINE 12INPINE 8INPINE 8INPINE 12INPINE 8INPINE 8INPINE 8INPS(15)ASPG(3)CMGG(5)QE(4)ALAB(2)CPOP(2)revisionsdate revisions date301 college street burlington vermont 05401 802 658 3555landscape architects planning consultantshttp://www.tjboyle.comnorthscaledrawn bydatesheet no:Landscape Plan SouthDorset MeadowsL-2021" = 50'T. J. Boyle Associates, LLCdesign bymjbchecked byjkh/mjb 09/21/2018mjbOwner / Applicant:44 Park Street, Essex Jct. VT 05452Dorset Meadows Associates, LLCENGINEER:13 Corporate Drive, Essex Jct. VT 05452O'Leary-Burke Civil AssociatesMATCHLINE L-201MATCHLINE L-202SCALE 1" = 50'(at 24" x 36" ONLY)MEADOWTO BEMOWEDANNUALLYPLAN ISSUEDFOR REVIEW01/17/2019REVISED PER PRELIM. PLAT COMMENTS12/7/2018INCLUDE TREE PRESERVATION12/10/2018PLANTING/SITE REVISIONS PER COMMENTS01/17/2019
RAGM(6)TME(2)SBT(4)ISM(12)TME(3)MLMJCSG(4)QCPGASGMALCAIH(2)TME(4)HMAB(6)PTN(5)JCSG(4)JCSG(3)TME(2)TME(2)JCSG(3)HH(8)HH(8)ISM(6)SS(6)TME(2)RA(3)revisionsdate revisions date301 college street burlington vermont 05401 802 658 3555landscape architects planning consultantshttp://www.tjboyle.comnorthscaledrawn bydatesheet no:Landscape Details & Typical LotsDorset MeadowsL-203as notedT. J. Boyle Associates, LLCdesign bymjbchecked byjkh/mjb 09/21/2018mjbOwner / Applicant:44 Park Street, Essex Jct. VT 05452Dorset Meadows Associates, LLCENGINEER:13 Corporate Drive, Essex Jct. VT 05452O'Leary-Burke Civil Associates3L-203TYPICAL LANDSCAPE PLAN: LARGE SINGLE FAMILY LOTPLAN SCALE: 1" = 10'1L-203TYPICAL LANDSCAPE PLAN: DUPLEXPLAN SCALE: 1" = 10'2L-203TYPICAL LANDSCAPE PLAN: SMALL SINGLE FAMILY LOTPLAN SCALE: 1" = 10'SCALE 1" = 10'(at 24" x 36" ONLY)SCALE 1" = 10'(at 24" x 36" ONLY)SCALE 1" = 10'(at 24" x 36" ONLY)PLAN ISSUEDFOR REVIEW01/17/2019REVISED PER PRELIM. PLAT COMMENTS12/7/2018INCLUDE TREE PRESERVATION12/10/2018PLANTING/SITE REVISIONS PER COMMENTS01/17/2019
JCSG(4)TME(3)CARS(10)HSD(5)AMAM(2)TME(3)JCSG(4)TME(2)HSD(5)PG(3)AB(2)AB2)MBWMBWMLMAB(2)PG(3)AL(2)SPLIT RAIL FENCE(TYP.)CMGG(2)HVG(2)PS(7)PG(2)HVG(2)ARR(2)POAxFS(2)AxFC(2)COAxFC(2)HVG(2)PG(3)TON(7)TON(35)CPOPPG(3)CMGGAL(2)TON(13)AAB(6)VD(6)QR(2)AAB(6)VD(5)AAB(3)VD(2)TON(12)TON(3)FENCED INDUMPSTER AREAFENCED INDUMPSTERAREArevisionsdate revisions date301 college street burlington vermont 05401 802 658 3555landscape architects planning consultantshttp://www.tjboyle.comnorthscaledrawn bydatesheet no:Landscape Details & Typical LotsDorset MeadowsL-204as notedT. J. Boyle Associates, LLCdesign bymjbchecked byjkh/mjb 09/21/2018mjbOwner / Applicant:44 Park Street, Essex Jct. VT 05452Dorset Meadows Associates, LLCENGINEER:13 Corporate Drive, Essex Jct. VT 05452O'Leary-Burke Civil Associates1L-204TYPICAL LANDSCAPE PLAN: TOWNHOMEPLAN SCALE: 1" = 10'2L-204LANDSCAPE PLAN: NOWLAND FARM TOWNHOUSE AREAPLAN SCALE: 1" = 30'SCALE 1" = 30'(at 24" x 36" ONLY)SCALE 1" = 10'(at 24" x 36" ONLY)OPTIONALGARAGE(TYP.)PLAN ISSUEDFOR REVIEW01/17/2019REVISED PER PRELIM. PLAT COMMENTS12/7/2018INCLUDE TREE PRESERVATION12/10/2018PLANTING/SITE REVISIONS PER COMMENTS01/17/2019
EEETON(69)GTH(4)PG(2)CO(3)CMGG(2)CMGGMBWHVGMBWTON(11)TC(2)SAT(2)TON(14)TC(3)TON(6)MLMSAT(2)CMGGHVG(3)MBWAB(3)BNH*HVGTON(9)HVGTON(10)AAB(2)VD(1)VD(3)AAB(3)GTH(2)revisionsdate revisions date301 college street burlington vermont 05401 802 658 3555landscape architects planning consultantshttp://www.tjboyle.comnorthscaledrawn bydatesheet no:Landscape Details & Typical LotsDorset MeadowsL-205as notedT. J. Boyle Associates, LLCdesign bymjbchecked byjkh/mjb 09/21/2018mjbOwner / Applicant:44 Park Street, Essex Jct. VT 05452Dorset Meadows Associates, LLCENGINEER:13 Corporate Drive, Essex Jct. VT 05452O'Leary-Burke Civil Associates1L-205LANDSCAPE PLAN: TRILLIUM TOWNHOUSE AREAPLAN SCALE: 1" = 30'SCALE 1" = 30'(at 24" x 36" ONLY)ASGMHVGSEE SHEET L-201 FORSTREET TREESARR(2)PLAN ISSUEDFOR REVIEW01/17/2019REVISED PER PRELIM. PLAT COMMENTS12/7/2018INCLUDE TREE PRESERVATION12/10/2018HVGFENCED INDUMPSTER AREAFENCED IN DUMPSTERAREAPLANTING/SITE REVISIONS PER COMMENTS01/17/2019
E E E E E E E E E EEEEEEEErevisionsdate revisions date301 college street burlington vermont 05401 802 658 3555landscape architects planning consultantshttp://www.tjboyle.comnorthscaledrawn bydatesheet no:Lighting PlanDorset MeadowsL-301as notedT. J. Boyle Associates, LLCdesign bymjbchecked byjkh/mjb 09/21/2018mjbLEGENDPUBLIC ROAD FIXTUREPARKING LOT LIGHTPEDESTRIAN LIGHTBOLLARDCANOPY LIGHT1.00 CONTOUR LEVEL (fc)0.50 CONTOUR LEVEL (fc)0.20 CONTOUR LEVEL (fc)Owner / Applicant:44 Park Street, Essex Jct. VT 05452Dorset Meadows Associates, LLCENGINEER:13 Corporate Drive, Essex Jct. VT 05452O'Leary-Burke Civil AssociatesLIGHTING INSET 1SCALE: 1" = 30'LIGHTING INSET 2SCALE: 1" = 30'LIGHTING INSET 3SCALE: 1" = 30'LIGHTING INSET 1LIGHTING INSET 2LIGHTING INSET 3LIGHTING INSET 4LIGHTING INSET 5LIGHTING INSET 6LIGHTING INSET 7LIGHTING INSET 8LIGHTING INSET 9LIGHTING INSET 10INT2INT4INT6INT7INT8INT9INT10MB2INT5MB3MB4MB6LIGHTING KEY PLANSCALE: 1" = 100'UNKNOWN LIGHT LEVELS FROMEXISTING POLESSCALE 1" = 30'(at 24" x 36" ONLY)UNKNOWN LIGHT LEVELSFROM EXISTING POLESINT1MB1INT3MB5INT11INT1MB1INT2INT3M3M3M3M3M3M3M3M3SCALE 1" = 30'(at 24" x 36" ONLY)SCALE 1" = 30'(at 24" x 36" ONLY)PLAN ISSUEDFOR REVIEW01/17/2019REVISED PER PRELIM. PLAT COMMENTS12/7/2018INCLUDE TREE PRESERVATION12/10/2018PLANTING/SITE REVISIONS PER COMMENTS01/17/2019
E
revisionsdate revisions date301 college street burlington vermont 05401 802 658 3555landscape architects planning consultantshttp://www.tjboyle.comnorthscaledrawn bydatesheet no:Lighting PlanDorset MeadowsL-3021" = 30'T. J. Boyle Associates, LLCdesign bymjbchecked byjkh/mjb 09/21/2018mjbOwner / Applicant:44 Park Street, Essex Jct. VT 05452Dorset Meadows Associates, LLCENGINEER:13 Corporate Drive, Essex Jct. VT 05452O'Leary-Burke Civil AssociatesLIGHTING INSET 4LIGHTING INSET 5 LIGHTING INSET 6 LIGHTING INSET 7LIGHTING INSET 8LIGHTING INSET 9 LIGHTING INSET 10INT4*NOTE: ILLUMINANCE LEVELS FOR MID-BLOCK CROSSINGSCALCULATED AT 5' ABOVE ROAD SURFACE PER IESNARECOMMENDATIONS. SEE L-301 CLASSIFICATION TABLESCALE 1" = 30'(at 24" x 36" ONLY)UNKNOWN LIGHTLEVELS FROMEXISTING POLESMB2INT5INT6MB3INT7MB4INT8INT9MB5INT10MB6INT11M3M3M3M5M3M3M3M3M3M3M3M3M3M3M3M3M4M4M5M3M3M3M3M3M3M3M3M3M3M3M3PLAN ISSUEDFOR REVIEW01/17/2019REVISED PER PRELIM. PLAT COMMENTS12/7/2018INCLUDE TREE PRESERVATION12/10/2018PLANTING/SITE REVISIONS PER COMMENTS01/17/2019
301 college street burlington vermont 05401 802 658 3555landscape architects planning consultantshttp://www.tjboyle.comnorthscaledrawn bydatesheet no:jkh09/21/2018as shownT. J. Boyle Associates, LLCdesign bymjbchecked bymjbLandscape DetailsDorset MeadowsREVISION DATE3415GROUNDCOVER PLANTINGTREE PLANTING DETAILSHRUB PLANTINGLAWN & SEEDING AREANTSNTSGENERAL PLANTING NOTES:1. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE AND VERIFY THE EXISTENCE OF ALL UTILITIESPRIOR TO STARTING WORK. CONTACT DIG SAFE TWO FULL BUSINESS DAYS BEFORE PLANTING.(48 HOUR MIN.)2. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUPPLY ALL PLANT MATERIAL IN QUANTITIES SUFFICIENTTO COMPLETE THE PLANTING SHOWN ON ALL DRAWINGS. THE PLAN QUANTITIES SHALL ALWAYSSUPERCEDE THE PLANT LIST.3.4. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL CONFORM AND BE INSTALLED TO THE GUIDELINES ESTABLISHED BYTHE CURRENT ANSI Z60.1.5. NO PLANT SHALL BE PUT INTO THE GROUND BEFORE ROUGH GRADING HAS BEEN FINISHED ANDAPPROVED BY THE PROJECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR EQUAL.6. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AMENDED PLANTING SOIL AS PER THECONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS.7. SOIL DEPTH SHOULD BE AS LISTED BELOW WITH A 2/3 PLANTING SOIL TO 1/3 COMPOST MIX.EXISTING SOIL ON SITE WHICH MEETS THE CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS MAY BE USED. REMOVESUB GRADE AND OTHER GRAVEL FILL IN PLANTING AREAS ON SITE.7.1.GROUND COVER BEDS: 12” DEPTH.7.2.LAWN AREAS: 6" DEPTH7.3.SHRUB/PLANT BEDS: 18” DEPTH8. PLANTS SHALL BE INSTALLED SUCH THAT THE ROOT FLARE IS AT OR SLIGHTLY ABOVE FINALGRADE (DUE TO NURSERY PRACTICES THIS MAY REQUIRE REMOVING SOIL FROM THE TOP OFTHE ROOT BALL TO LOCATE THE ROOT FLARE).9. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE BALLED AND BURLAPPED OR CONTAINER GROWN AS SPECIFIED. NOCONTAINER GROWN STOCK WILL BE ACCEPTED IF IT IS ROOT BOUND. ALL ROOT WRAPPINGMATERIAL MADE OF SYNTHETICS OR PLASTICS SHALL BE REMOVED AT THE TIME OF PLANTING.10. WITH CONTAINER GROWN STOCK, THE CONTAINER SHALL BE REMOVED AND THE CONTAINERBALL SHALL BE CUT THROUGH THE SURFACE IN TWO VERTICAL LOCATIONS.11. THE DAY PRIOR TO PLANTING, THE LOCATION OF ALL TREES AND SHRUBS SHALL BE FLAGGEDFOR APPROVAL BY THE PROJECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR EQUAL.9. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MAY REQUIRE ALL PLANTS BE SPRAYED WITH AN ANTIDESSICANT WITHIN24 HOURS AFTER PLANTING. IN TEMPERATE ZONES, ALL PLANTS SHALL BE SPRAYED WITH ANANTIDESSICANT AT THE BEGINNING OF THEIR FIRST WINTER.10. STAKING PLANTS IS AT THE DISCRETION OF THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. ONLY STAKE PLANTSIN THE MANNER SPECIFIED IN THE PLANTING DETAILS.11. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE WATERED THOROUGHLY TWICE DURING THE FIRST 24 HOUR PERIODAFTER PLANTING. ALL PLANTS SHALL THEN BE WATERED WEEKLY, IF NECESSARY, DURING THEFIRST GROWING SEASON.12. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS FORADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.13. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE PLANT LIST FOR SEASONALREQUIREMENTS RELATED TO THE TIME OF PLANTING.6PLANT BEDNTSNTSNTSSpacing 'D' Row 'A' Number of Plants Area Unit6" O.C. 5.2" 4.611 SQ. FT.8" O.C. 6.93" 2.610" O.C. 8.66" 1.6612" O.C. 10.4" 1.1515" O.C. 13.0" 7.3810 SQ. FT.18" O.C. 15.6" 5.1224" O.C. 20.8" 2.9130" O.C. 26.0" 1.5536" O.C. 30.0" 1.254' O.C. 3.46' 7.25100 SQ. FT.5' O.C. 4.38' 4.616' O.C. 5.2' 3.28' O.C. 6.93' 1.810' O.C. 8.66' 1.1612' O.C. 10.4' 81000 SQ. FT.15' O.C. 13.0' 520' O.C. 17.3' 2.8825' O.C. 21.65' 1.8530' O.C. 26.0' 1.2940' O.C. 34.6' 7.22 10,000 SQ. FT.DDDAPLANT SPACING CHARTO.C. = ON CENTERTREE PROTECTION NOTES:xPRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY, ALL TREE PRESERVATION MEASURES MUST BEIMPLEMENTED.xCONTRACTOR CHOSEN FOR THIS WORK WILL BE AN EXPERIENCED TREE SERVICE FIRM THAT HASSUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED TREE PROTECTION, ROOT PRUNING, AND TRIMMING WORK, SIMILARTO THAT REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT.xPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION SHALL LOCATE AND VERIFY THE EXISTENCE OF ALL UTILITIES PRIOR TOSTARTING WORK. CONTACT DIG SAFE TWO FULL BUSINESS DAYS BEFORE PLANTING. (48 HOURMIN.)xPRIOR TO THE SITE VISIT ALL TREE PRESERVATION AREAS SHALL BE STAKED OUT ON SITE BYSURVEY.xTREE PROTECTION FENCING SHALL REMAIN INTACT THROUGHOUT ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY.xTHERE WILL BE NO EXCAVATION FOR PROPOSED SITE WORK WITHIN FENCED AREA.xNO MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT SHALL BE STORED, STOCKPILED OR OPERATED WITHIN TREEPROTECTION AREAS.xTREE PROTECTED AREAS WILL BE LEFT AS NATURAL AS POSSIBLE.xIN AREAS OF EXCAVATION NEAR TREE, IDENTIFY AND CUT ROOTS IN CONSULTATION WITH OWNER.xREMOVE POORLY ATTACHED AND RUBBING LIMBS. CLEAN THE CROWN OF DEAD, DISEASED ANDWEAK LIMBS. THINNING OF HEALTHY LIMBS IS NOT RECOMMENDED AT THIS TIME.xANY NECESSARY TRENCHING SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY BACKFILLED WITH REMOVED SOIL OROTHER SOIL MIX AS DESCRIBED IN CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS.xAN AIR SPADE/AIR KNIFE IS TO BE USED TO EXCAVATE DOWN TO MINIMUM OF 2'. SEE DETAILSPLANT SPACING CHART7PLANT SPACING CHART DETAILNTS2TREE PLANTING ON SLOPE DETAILNTS8TREE PROTECTIONRETENTIONAREAFENCE DETAIL:xTHIS FENCE SERVES AS A TREE PROTECTION DEVICEONLY.xROOT DAMAGE SHALL BE AVOIDED WITHIN FENCEDAREA.xFENCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUTCONSTRUCTION.9TREE PROTECTION FENCENTSNTSSIGN DETAILxATTACHMENTS OF SIGNS TO TREES IS PROHIBITED.xSIGNS SHOULD BE MADE OF VINYL OR PLASTIC.xSIGNS SHOULD BE PROPERLY MAINTAINED,PENALTIES WILL BE ENFORCED FOR REMOVAL OFSIGNS.xAVOID INJURY TO ROOTS WHEN PLACING POSTS FORTHE SIGNS.xSIGNS SHOULD BE POSTED 50' O.C. AND WITHIN 20'OF THE BEGINNING AND END OF EACH FENCE TO BEVISIBLE TO ALL CONSTRUCTION PERSONNEL.xSIGNS TO BE SECURELY FASTENED TO THE FENCEOR FENCE POSTS.xSIGNS TO HAVE A WHITE BACKGROUND ANDORANGE OR RED TEXT.ROOT PRUNING TRENCH NOTES:xUSE AN AIR SPADE/AIR KNIFE TO DIG THE 2' TRENCH AND EXPOSETHE ROOTS.xEXPOSED ROOTS SHOULD BE CUT WITH A SAW OR LOPPERS TO MAKEA CLEAN SMOOTH CUT, NOT TORN OR RIPPED.xMULCH EXPOSED ROOTS DURING THE CUTTING PROCESS TO KEEPFROM DRYING OUT.xBACKFILL TRENCH WITH MIXTURE OF TOPSOIL AND COMPOST AS PERCONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS.10TREE PRUNING ILLUSTRATIONNTSTREE PRUNING NOTES:xREFER TO ANSI A300 (Part 1, MOST UPDATED VERSION) PRUNINGSPECIFICATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.xWORK SHOULD BE PREFORMED BY A CERTIFIED ARBORIST ORPROFESSIONAL TREE COMPANY.xAVOID DAMAGING BARK AND OTHER LIVING TISSUE THROUGHOUT THEPRUNING PROCESS.xMAKE SURE PRUNING TOOLS ARE SHARP.xMAKE CLEAN CUT AS CLOSE TO THE BRANCH COLLAR AS POSSIBLE. DONOT LEAVE A STUB.xREDUCE THE SIZE OF THE BRANCH FOR A BETTER CUT.xTHE FIRST AND SECOND CUTS SHOULD BISECT THE ANGLE BETWEENITS BRANCH BARK RIDGE AND AN IMAGINARY LINE PERPENDICULAR TOTHE BRANCH OR STEM.xNOT MORE THAN 25% OF GROWTH SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM ACANOPY DURING A GROWING SEASON.FOR USE WHEN PLANTS ARE SHOWNEQUIDISTANT FROM EACH OTHER (AS SHOWN)GROUND COVER2" FINE CHIPPED BARK MULCH, NO MORE.DO NOT COVER FOLIAGE.12" MINIMUM PLANT BED DEPTHCONTAINING 2/3 PLANTING SOIL AND 1/3 COMPOST MIXUNDISTURBED OR COMPACTED SOILPRUNE TO REMOVE DEADWOOD AND CROSSING BRANCHESTOP OF ROOT BALL TO BE SAME HEIGHT AS PREVIOUSLY GROWN2" FINE CHIPPED, PINE BARK MULCH, NOT MORE. DO NOT PLACEAGAINST PLANT STEM.2" EARTH SAUCER.AMEND BACKFILL AS SPECIFIED, BREAK UP CLODS AND REMOVEDEBRIS AND STONES.UNDISTURBED OR COMPACTED SOILREMOVE BURLAP FROM TOP 2/3 OF THE ROOT BALL. NEVER LEAVEBURLAP EXPOSED ABOVE THE SOIL. IF CONTAINER GROWN, REMOVEPOT COMPLETELY. LOOSEN ROOT MASS TO PREVENT GIRDLING.3 TIMESDIAMETER OFROOT BALL3 TIMESDIAMETER OFROOT BALLUSE WIDE BELT-TYPE TIES; DO NOT USE ROPE OR WIRE IN HOSESLEEVESxPRUNE DAMAGED OR BROKEN BRANCHESREUSABLE PERFORATED PLASTIC TREE WRAP (TO BE REMOVED ONEYEAR AFTER PLANTING). USE IF NECESSARY.3 - 2" X 2" HARDWOOD STAKES 1/3 HEIGHT OF TREE OR MIN. OF72" ALLOW FOR A DEPTH OF 12" BELOW UNDISTURBED GRADE.(STAKING TO BE REMOVED ONE YEAR AFTER PLANTING.)ROOT FLARE SHALL BE PLANTED AT R SLIGHTLY ABOVE FINAL GRADE(DUE TO NURSERY PRACTICES, THIS MAY REQUIRE REMOVING SOILFROM THE TOP OF THE ROOT BALL TO LOCATE THE ROOT FLARE).2-3" FINE CHIPPED BARK MULCH, NOT MORE. DO NOT PLACE MULCHDIRECTLY AGAINST TRUNK.2" EARTH SAUCER.AMEND BACKFILL AS SPECIFIED, BREAK UP CLODS ANDREMOVE DEBRIS AND STONES. ADD PLANT MIX CONTAINING2/3 PLANTING SOIL AND 1/3 COMPOST MIX. MIX COMPOST INTHE TOP 6" FROM THE FINAL GRADE.SCARIFY SUB GRADE TO 4".xCUT & REMOVE ALL OF THE WIRE BASKET, EXCEPT THAT WHICH ISUNDER THE ROOT BALL. LEAVE NO BURLAP EXPOSED ABOVE THESOIL SURFACE. REMOVE BURLAP FROM THE TOP 2/3 OF ROOT BALLIF BURLAP IS MADE OF NATURAL FIBER. IF BURLAP IS PLASTIC ORTREATED, CUT AND REMOVE ALL BUT THAT WHICH IS UNDER THEROOT BALL.UNDISTURBED OR COMPACTED SOILLOOSEN SUB GRADE BY DRAGGING TEETHOF THE BUCKET6" MINIMUM PLANT BED DEPTH CONTAINING2/3 PLANTING SOIL AND 1/3 COMPOST MIX.xSOIL COMPACTION AFTER INSTALLATIONSHALL BE 75-250 PSI AT SOIL MOISTUREBETWEEN FIELD CAPACITY AND WILTINGPOINTxSOIL COMPACTION AFTER INSTALLATIONSHALL BE 75-250 PSI AT SOIL MOISTUREBETWEEN FIELD CAPACITY AND WILTINGPOINTLAWNUNDISTURBED OR COMPACTED SOILLOOSEN SUB GARDE BY DRAGGING TEETH OF THE BUCKET18" MINIMUM PLANT BED DEPTH CONTAINING 2/3 PLANTINGSOIL AND 1/3 COMPOST MIX.2-3" FINE CHIPPED BARK MULCH, NO MORE. DO NOT COVERFOLIAGE.EDGE LAWN PER PLAN, 1" REVEAL (MAX.)ROOT PRUNING TRENCH (MIN. 2' DEPTH);SEE BLOW UP TRENCH DETAIL B ABOVE.TREE PROTECTION FENCE PLACED AT EDGE OFSIDEWALK, CURB, OR 1' BEYOND DRIP LINE ORFURTHER, IF POSSIBLE,DRIP LINE OF TREE1'AIR KNIFE/SPADE TO BEUSED TO DIG 2' TRENCHCLEAN CUTSTREE ROOTSEXPOSED ROOTS IN TRENCH1'2" STEEL OR WOOD POST.HIGHLY VISIBLE FLAGGING.SECURE FENCE TO HORIZONTAL2" X 4" ALONG TOP.ORANGE MESH SNOW FENCE.8" WIRE "U" TO SECURE BOTTOM OFFENCE.ANCHOR POST MUST BE INSTALLEDTO A DEPTH OF NO LESS THAN 1/3 OFTHE TOTAL HEIGHT OF THE POST.SIGN(SEE DETAIL B ABOVE)8'(MAX.)4'(MIN.)SECOND CUTFIRST CUTCUT AT ANGLE TOTHE BRANCH COLLARBRANCH COLLARFINAL CUT15"(MIN.)11"(MIN.)L-400L-400USE WIDE BELT-TYPE TIES; DO NOT USE ROPE OR WIRE IN HOSESLEEVESxPRUNE DAMAGED OR BROKEN BRANCHESIF STAKING: 3 - 2" X 2" HARDWOOD STAKES 1/3 HEIGHT OF TREE ORMIN. OF 72" ALLOW FOR A DEPTH OF 12" BELOW UNDISTURBEDGRADE. (STAKING TO BE REMOVED ONE YEAR AFTER PLANTING.)ROOT FLARE SHALL BE PLANTED AT R SLIGHTLY ABOVE FINAL GRADE(DUE TO NURSERY PRACTICES, THIS MAY REQUIRE REMOVING SOILFROM THE TOP OF THE ROOT BALL TO LOCATE THE ROOT FLARE).2-3" FINE CHIPPED BARK MULCH, NOT MORE. DO NOT PLACE MULCHDIRECTLY AGAINST TRUNK.2" EARTH SAUCER.AMEND BACKFILL AS SPECIFIED, BREAK UP CLODS ANDREMOVE DEBRIS AND STONES. ADD PLANT MIX CONTAINING2/3 PLANTING SOIL AND 1/3 COMPOST MIX. MIX COMPOST INTHE TOP 6" FROM THE FINAL GRADE.SCARIFY SUB GRADE TO 4".xCUT & REMOVE ALL OF THE WIRE BASKET, EXCEPT THAT WHICH ISUNDER THE ROOT BALL. LEAVE NO BURLAP EXPOSED ABOVE THESOIL SURFACE. REMOVE BURLAP FROM THE TOP 2/3 OF ROOT BALLIF BURLAP IS MADE OF NATURAL FIBER. IF BURLAP IS PLASTIC ORTREATED, CUT AND REMOVE ALL BUT THAT WHICH IS UNDER THEROOT BALL.3 TIMESDIAMETER OFROOT BALLEXISTING GRADE.L-400L-400L-400L-400L-400L-400L-400L-400L-400REVISED PER PRELIM. PLAT COMMENTS12/7/2018INCLUDE TREE PRESERVATION12/10/2018PLANTING/SITE REVISIONS PER COMMENTS01/17/2019
301 college street burlington vermont 05401 802 658 3555landscape architects planning consultantshttp://www.tjboyle.comnorthscaledrawn bydatesheet no:jkh09/21/2018as shownT. J. Boyle Associates, LLCdesign bymjbchecked bymjbLighting DetailsDorset MeadowsREVISION DATE1LIGHT POLESCALE: NTSL-500L-5002POST-TOP FIXTURESCALE: NTSL-500SEE LIGHTING PLAN FORLUMINAIRE SCHEDULEREVISED PER PRELIM. PLAT COMMENTS12/7/2018INCLUDE TREE PRESERVATION12/10/2018PLANTING/SITE REVISIONS PER COMMENTS01/17/2019
MEMORANDUM
BUCKHURST FISH & JACQUEMART, INC. 115 FIFTH AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10003 T. 212.353.7474 F. 212.353.7494
Date: December 21, 2018
To: Marla Keene, PE, Development Review Planner
Paul Conner, AICP, MCIP, Director of Planning & Zoning
Ray Belair, Administrative Officer
From: Georges Jacquemart
Contact Information: T. 212.353.7477 F. 212.353.7494 E. G.Jacquemart@bfjplanning.com
Subject: Review of Revised Traffic Impact Assessment for Dorset Meadows Application
We have reviewed the Revised Dorset Meadows Traffic Impact Assessment dated December 6, 2018 by
Lamoureux & Dickinson (L&D) for the proposed Dorset Meadows development proposed in the southwest
quadrant of the Dorset Street/Nowland Farm Drive intersection. In response to our October 30 comments, L&D
undertook slight revisions of the base peak-hour traffic volumes, in effect increasing the volumes at the Spear
Street/Nowland Farm Road intersection slightly and reducing the volumes at the Dorset Street/Nowland Farm
intersection slightly. In addition, L & D changed the project traffic distribution to and from the south of the site.
Whereas the earlier traffic study assigned all traffic to and from the south to Dorset Street, the revised study
assigns half of the traffic to/from the south to Dorset and half to Spear.
Note that the number of dwelling units remained the same (130 SF homes and 20 multi-family homes) even
though some homes have shifted from one location to another location.
As the result of the above changes traffic conditions at the Spear Street intersection become slightly worse and
at the Dorset Street intersection they become slightly better for all scenarios being analyzed (without this project
and with the project). In the earlier study the 2024 pm peak-hour traffic movement turning left from Nowland
Farm Road onto southbound Spear Street was estimated to incur delays of 63 seconds per vehicle. The revised
study projects delays of 72 seconds per vehicle for the 39 vehicles that are projected to make this move. As
mentioned in our earlier review memo this condition is likely to limit the amount of project traffic deciding to use
Spear Street to drive to the south.
The conclusions by L & D remain the same as before. Even though there are a few movements that change from
LOS B to LOS C as the result of this project, the changes in delay are not significant, i.e. they change from a
“bad” B to a good “C”. We concur with L & D’s conclusions.
Please let us know if you have any questions.
The Stormwater Section (City) has reviewed the “Dorset Meadows” site plan prepared by O’Leary‐Burke
Civil Associates (OBCA), dated 8/8/18 and last updated on 1/18/19. Comments were originally provided
by the City on 10/25/18. Responses (shown in red here) were provided by OBCA in a cover letter dated
12/7/18. Further comments or clarifications by the City are provided below (shown in blue here). Further
responses (shown again here in red and underlined) were provided by OBCA in a cover letter dated
1/18/19. The City has provided its latest comments and clarifications below in green and underlined.
Responses by OBCA that did not warrant additional comment were not included in this document.
1. The proposed project will discharge to a tributary of Muddy Brook which drains to Shelburne
Pond.
Response: Agreed. It should be noted that Muddy Brook is not an impaired waterway.
It should be noted that Shelburne Pond is an impaired waterbody.
2. The project proposes to create greater than 1 acre of impervious area and disturb greater than 1
acre of land. It will therefore require an operational stormwater permit and construction permit
from the Vermont DEC Stormwater Division.
OK
3. The project proposes to impact class 2 wetlands and their buffer. These impacts are only allowed
in conjunction with issuance of a wetlands permit by the Vermont DEC.
OK
4. As the project proposes to create more than one‐half acre or more of impervious surface, the
project is subject to the requirements of section 12.03 of the LDRs.
OK
5. The applicant should provide a written narrative that requirements in Section 12.03(C) of the
City’s Land Development Regulations (LDRs) are met.
a. The Water Quality Volume must infiltrated using Low Impact Development (LID). If
infiltration is not feasible, the applicant should provide written justification, in accordance
with §12.03(D)(1)(d) of the LDRs. Please provide any soil borings or test pits to confirm D
soils on site.
OK
6. Sheet S1 – Overall Stormwater Management Plan, shows drainage areas for each treatment
practice. It is unclear if the drainage areas are depicted accurately. For example, the back half of
the lots along the east side of Elderberry Lane appear to drain to the Class II wetland and not to
the stormwater treatment practices depicted on Sheet S1.
a. Update Sheet S1 in accordance with §12.03(D)(a).
Response: Please refer to SH S1 – Overall Stormwater Management Plan, a stormwater
conveyance swale has been proposed around most of the exterior lots along Linnea Drive and
Elderberry Lane. With the proposed swale the point of interest boundaries have been
adjusted slightly but remain basically the same.
Regarding the walkway to the basketball court, it appears to overlap the swale. What is
the grading plan in this location to ensure the grading of the path does not obstruct the
swale?
Response: Please refer to SH4 – Site Plan (South). The swale has been relocated to cross
the path at more of a right angle and a small culvert is being proposed.
OK. The applicant may also want to consider a small footbridge for this location, based on
the minimal buried depth for a culvert.
b. Providing additional elevation labels on the proposed contours on Site Plans ‘A’ through
‘D’ would make it significantly easier to determine how the site is draining. Additionally,
the existing contours could be plotted as a shade of grey (as is done in the landscaping
plans) to allow for a higher contrast between existing and proposed contours.
OK
c. All new imperious surfaces must meet the requirements of §12.03(C).
OK
7. While 12’ maintenance access is provided around each stormwater treatment practice, a clear
maintenance access should be provided to the road with a curb‐cut, free of trees or shrubs. Tress
should not be planted within easements for storm drains or sewers proposed to be taken over by
the City. Landscaping plans should be revised to permit access to Stormwater ponds for
maintenance.
Response: Please refer to SH 5 – Site Plan ‘A’ and SH 7 – Site Plan ‘C’ for the curb cut
locations to be provided for stormwater maintenance. Please refer to SH L201 –
Landscaping Plan (North) and SH L202 – Landscaping Plan (South), which have been
revised only propose trees/shrubs around the edge of the proposed stormwater
easements/ right‐of‐way.
Please revise landscaping plans to remove all trees and shrubs from within the 12’
maintenance access, beginning at the top of slope of each treatment practice.
Further, please revised Subdivision Plat sheets to read “Proposed Stormwater Easement
to the City of South Burlington” (all locations).
Response: Please refer to SH L201 – Landscaping Plan (North) and SH L202 – Landscaping
Plan (South) for the revised landscaping around the treatment ponds. The applicant is
requesting the Subdivision Plats to be revised with all of the changes as part of the final
plat application.
As shown on Sheets 5 & 7 and L‐201, the curb cuts to access gravel wetlands A & B, for
maintenance purposes, are located at the same position as clumps of Dark Green
Arborvitae. These are a hedge type species and will prevent access to the gravel wetland.
8. Sheet S2 – Gravel Wetland Detail
a. There is a discrepancy between the Gravel Wetland Detail and the Outlet Structure
Profile. In the Gravel Wetland Schedule, POI A & POI C, Elevation B is set at 364.00’, as
where in the Outlet Structure Schedule, POI A & POI C, Orifice 2 is set at an elevation of
365.00’. It is understood that these elevation should be one and the same. The permanent
pool should be placed 4” below the top of the wetland soil media. Consider relocating
Elevation B/Orifice 2 to an elevation of 364.66’.
i. For POI B use 361.66’.
ii. Revise other elevations accordingly.
Response: Please refer to SH S2 – Stormwater Details, elevation B has been revised to be
12” foot below the bottom of the gravel wetland surface. The elevation of Orifice 2, which
controls the elevation of the underground permanent pool, remains at 12” below the
bottom of the gravel wetland surface. The VSMM does not give design guidance to the
exact location of the underground permanent pool but does say at least 50% of the WQv
must be stored within the gravel section of the treatment practice. Prior experience with
the Vermont Stormwater Program has indicated the permanent pool elevation should be
completely within the gravel section. Since the project will require a State stormwater
permit the applicant would like to get the input of the State Stormwater Program on this
issue.
It is the City’s understanding, based on the UNH Stormwater Center gravel wetland
guidance documents, that the permanent pool should be located centered within the
wetland soil media, or 4” below the surface of the gravel wetland.
The soil in the cells should remain continuously saturated 4 inches below the ground
surface to promote water quality treatment conditions and to support wetland
vegetation.
Response: Please refer to SH S2 – Stormwater Details. An “Elevation H” has been added
to the gravel wetland schedule to set the permanent pool elevation 4” below the surface.
OK
b. The perforated riser pipe and forebay appear to be depicted on opposite sides of the
system. The perforated riser pipe should be nearest to the forebay, with the outlet
structure shown at the far end of the system. Or more simply, the forebay moved to the
opposite end of the gravel wetland.
Response: Please refer to SH S2 – Stormwater Details, the typical gravel wetland profile
has been revised to show a perforated risers in each of the cells. The gravel wetland detail
has a note that the outlet structure location is shown on the site plan and the site plans
show the outlet structure in the cell furthest from the forebay for all 3 proposed gravel
wetlands.
The perforated riser pipes shown on Sheet SH S2 are depicted incorrectly. Within each
cell, the perforated riser pipes should be located nearest the inflow side. Otherwise, this
can result in short‐circuiting of the treatment system. The plan and profile of the detail
should be revised to reduce any confusion for a contractor who may not be familiar with
these systems. Again, this could be more easily corrected by depicting the forebay on the
“right side” of the diagram.
Response: Please refer to SH S2 – Stormwater Details. The gravel wetland plan and profile
detail has been revised accordingly.
OK
c. The perforated riser pipe should be 2x the diameter of the inflow pipe to ensure that the
riser pipe is not a hydraulic restriction.
Response: The largest inlet pipe to any of the gravel wetlands is proposed at 24”. In our
opinion, proposing the riser pipes at 48” is not realistic. In the VSMM the gravel wetland
detail calls out the perforated riser pipes and underdrains at 6”. The gravel wetlands are
designed to provide 50% WQv storage above the bottom of the ponding area of the
treatment practice. Proposing the riser pipes at much larger diameters than what is
shown in the VSMM may create a condition where the runoff is passing through the gravel
medium at a faster rate than intended. Since the project will require a State stormwater
permit the applicant would like to get the input of the State Stormwater Program on this
issue.
Agreed that a 48” pipe may not be realistic. Rather, two (2) 24” perforated risers should
be used at the inlet to the system. These pipes will not pass water through the gravel
media at a higher rate, as the flow of water through the system is controlled by the outlet
orifice. Undersized perforated inlet pipes may became clogged.
Response: Please refer to SH S2 – Stormwater Details. The gravel wetland plan and profile
detail has been revised accordingly.
OK
d. The 12” of mounded crushed stone around the riser pipe should extend down through
the wetland soil media to the aggregate filter. This provides additional hydraulic
connectivity if the riser pipe plugs.
OK
New Comment: Remove note on Gravel Wetland Detail that says “Install Fabric Around
Top of Stone” Do not use a geotextile fabric as it will restrict root growth.
Response: If the fabric is removed from the top of the stone there will be no barrier to
stop the aggregate filter and wetland planting fines from migrating down into the stone
voids over time. If the stone becomes clogged with fine material, the storage capacity
within the stone voids will be reduced. We don’t feel the wetland plantings will require
more than the 12” of material being placed above the stone and the nutrients available
within the stone layer is minimal. If the City feels strongly about removing the fabric on
top of the stone layer, we can revise the detail, but request the City reconsider the fabric
from the top of the stone layer.
Remove note on Gravel Wetland Detail that says “Install Fabric Around Top of Stone” Do
not use a geotextile fabric as it will restrict root growth. While the roots may not require
more than 12” of material to survive, root growth from some of the species in the
specified Wetland Shrub Mix may extend down into the gravel layer. While the stone does
not provide nutrients, there will be an abundance of nutrients from the stormwater
runoff. The purpose of the choker layer of stone is to prevent the migration of fines from
the wetland soil down into the gravel layer. It is important that the choker layer of stone
is clean washed stone (such as pea gravel) and does not contain fines.
New Comment: Specify 1.5” Crushed Stone to be Clean Crushed Stone.
Response: Please refer to SH S2 – Stormwater Details. The gravel wetland plan and profile
detail has been revised accordingly.
OK
9. Sheet S2 – Storm System Maintenance – Provide specific language relative to the gravel wetland
systems.
OK
10. HydroCAD
a. Revise to reflect any changes from comment 8.a.
No response was provided. Revisions were only made to the initial storage elevation in
the HydroCAD model. Cumulative storage capacity was not revised based on these
modifications. As a result, the model is still not meeting the intent of the comments
below, regarding bypass of treatment during the WQv storm event.
b. POI A
i. WQv: Treatment should be provided for the entire WQv and therefore should
pass through the gravel media, not through the 2.6” orifice. The HydroCad model
showed a portion of the runoff bypassing treatment and discharging through this
orifice.
Response: Please refer to the HydroCAD model for POI A, the second orifice is set
at the 50% WQv to provide the adequate amount of storage required by the
VSMM. The 50% WQv volume is calculated using the Standard Compliance
Worksheet, attached. The WQv event is only included in the HydroCAD analysis
to show the post construction conditions do not have a higher peak flow than the
existing conditions.
As currently designed, water from the WQv storm is bypassing treatment in the
gravel wetland. Please revise Elevation D orifice, so that it is above the peak water
elevation during the WQv storm. Additionally, Orifice 2 (Elevation B) size should
drain the WQv down over a 24 hour period. Update accordingly.
Response: Please refer to attached HydroCAD models and SH ST2 – Stormwater
Detail for the revised orifices and sizes and locations. The WQv storm is now
passing through the gravel wetland without bypassing the system.
When the permanent pool elevation was revised, per comment 8.a, revisions
were only made to the initial storage elevation in the HydroCAD model.
Cumulative storage capacity was not revised based on these modifications. As a
result, the model is still showing bypass of treatment during the WQv storm
event.
ii. Post 1‐YR: The HydroCAD model shows the 1‐year storm discharging out of the
emergency spillway (concrete weir). The channel protection volume should not
overtop the emergency spillway.
Response: Please refer to the HydroCAD model for POI A, the 1‐year storm event
no longer discharges out of the 100‐year spillway.
OK. Confirm this is still true after updates are made based on WQv comment.
No response provided, but condition is now met. OK
iii. A revised Standard Compliance Worksheet has been provided with updated
Hydraulic Lengths and Average Catchment Slopes. Update plans to reflect these
changes and confirm that all standards are met, including the 10‐yr and 100‐yr
storm event requirements.
OK
c. POI B
i. WQv: Treatment should be provided for the entire WQv and therefore should
pass through the gravel media, not through the 4” orifice. The HydroCad model
showed a portion of the runoff bypassing treatment and discharging through this
orifice.
Response: Please refer to the HydroCAD model for POI B, the second orifice is set
at the 50% WQv to provide the adequate amount of storage required by the
VSMM. The 50% WQv volume is calculated using the Standard Compliance
Worksheet, attached. The WQv event is only included in the HydroCAD analysis
to show the post construction conditions do not have a higher peak flow than the
existing conditions.
As currently designed, water from the WQv storm is bypassing treatment in the
gravel wetland. Please revise Elevation D orifice, so that it is above the peak water
elevation during the WQv storm. Additionally, Orifice 2 (Elevation B) size should
drain the WQv down over a 24 hour period. Update accordingly.
Response: Please refer to attached HydroCAD models and SH ST2 – Stormwater
Detail for the revised orifices and sizes and locations. The WQv storm is now
passing through the gravel wetland without bypassing the system.
When the permanent pool elevation was revised, per comment 8.a, revisions
were only made to the initial storage elevation in the HydroCAD model.
Cumulative storage capacity was not revised based on these modifications. As a
result, the model is still showing bypass of treatment during the WQv storm
event.
ii. Post 1‐YR: The HydroCAD model shows the 1‐year storm discharging out of the
emergency spillway (concrete weir). The channel protection volume should not
overtop the emergency spillway.
Response: Please refer to the HydroCAD model for POI B, the 1‐year storm event
no longer discharges out of the 100‐year spillway.
OK. Confirm this is still true after updates are made based on WQv comment.
No response provided, but condition is now met. OK
iii. A revised Standard Compliance Worksheet has been provided with updated
Hydraulic Lengths and Average Catchment Slopes. Update plans to reflect these
changes and confirm that all standards are met, including the 10‐yr and 100‐yr
storm event requirements.
OK
d. POI C
i. WQv: Treatment should be provided for the entire WQv and therefore should
pass through the gravel media, not through the 1.5” orifice. The HydroCad model
showed a portion of the runoff bypassing treatment and discharging through this
orifice.
OK. The elevation of the office appears to have been lowered such that the WQv
is no longer bypassing.
When the permanent pool elevation was revised, per comment 8.a, revisions
were only made to the initial storage elevation in the HydroCAD model.
Cumulative storage capacity was not revised based on these modifications. As a
result, the model is now showing bypass of treatment during the WQv storm
event.
ii. A revised Standard Compliance Worksheet has been provided with updated
Hydraulic Lengths and Average Catchment Slopes. Update plans to reflect these
changes and confirm that all standards are met, including the 10‐yr and 100‐yr
storm event requirements.
OK
11. Submit a downstream analysis of all culverts, to the point of Shelburne Pond, to determine that
they have adequate capacity to pass the 25‐year storm event in accordance with §12.03(E)(3).
OK
12. Provide EPSC plans for review.
OK
13. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all stormwater
treatment and conveyance infrastructure.
OK
14. New Comments: Catch Basin Detail on Sheet S2, revise note regarding adjusting height of frame
and grate. Remove reference to brick and mortar. Frame and grate to be adjusted to grade using
concrete grade ring.
1
Marla Keene
From:Ray Gonda <gonda05403@yahoo.com>
Sent:Thursday, December 27, 2018 2:53 PM
To:Marla Keene
Subject:Testimony to DRB on Dorset Meadows Proposed Housing Project
Extension of my verbal comments to Development Review Board on Dec 18, 2018
from:
Ray Gonda
27 Pinnacle Drive
South Burlington, VT 05403
264-4886
Dear sirs,
At the public hearing on Dec 18, I briefly detailed some of my experience as a wildlife expert as an
outcome of practical experience.and commented on the Dorset Meadow proposed housing project.
Herein I will extend that testimony.
The brook running through the proposed project area is the only reasonable and direct way for
animals to travel between the class 1 wetlands at Shelburne Pond and the National Country Club
pond's class II wetlands - by following the brook. At present the brook is a corridor for semi-aquatic
mammals such as mink, muskrat, raccoons, and possibly otters and beavers, as well as various
large shore (wading) birds such as great blue herons, green herons, and bitterns.
2
If a buffer strip of willows and alders were created along both banks of the stream it would also serve
as a more highly-used corridor by upland animals which naturally choose such routes when
protective tree cover is present along brooks and streams - animals including coyotes, deer, foxes,
opossum, raccoons, weasels, and even bears – especially if the buffer strip extended all the way to
the road crossing under Dorset Street to the south. Such a buffer also cools the water in the brook
such that it can hold more oxygen, providing healthier living conditions for aquatic life. Finally, such a
buffer would introduce additional food sources as well as protective cover for most animals as well as
enhanced insect life – most importantly the pollinators.
By looking at Google Earth or Google maps one can easily trace travel corridors
emanating from the golf course area northwest into the East Woods area near the
intersection of Speer and Swift streets where access is possible to Potash Brook and from
there east (upstream) to the heart of South Burlington and west (downstream) possibly as
far as Lake Champlain and finally north under 189 into the UVM properties on both sides
of Speer street.
From the area just west of the proposed development, lies the Underwood property and associated
fields and woodlands. Here, there exists access across Speer Street west to the UVM horticultural
farm possibly all the way to Lake Champlain (though crossing Shelburne Road might be problematic).
Other travel routes exist emanating from the golf course to the north and north-northeast.
3
Abundant wildlife exists throughout the SEQ. Wildlife that I have observed in daylight hours include
coyotes, squirrels, owls and hawks in the Underwood property forest just west of the proposed project
area along with a myriad of deer trails just west of the Underwood along the wetlands there.
I photographed mink at the proposed project area.
In or near my own yard at 27 Pinnacle Drive I have seen deer, foxes, a bobcat, rabbits, woodchucks,
squirrels, hawks, vultures, rabbits, skunks and have seen tracks of other animals – unidentified. Many
of these creatures need to have travel corridors or other means of getting about. Some of these
predators are critical to controlling populations of rabbits that can be and have been be quite
destructive to my lawn plants and shrubs during all seasons. This summer there were up to eight
rabbits at a time in my lawn. Come October the predators became more active here and rabbit
sightings shrunk to one or two at the most at a time in my yard and they have remained that way.
These predators also keep down the population of mice and chipmunks which are vectors for Lyme
disease.
In terms of conservation of wildlife purposes in SEQ, one would have a difficult time picking a worse
place for a housing project. Such a development would introduce people, roaming cats and possibly
dogs which are sure to negatively impact wildlife pesticides and herbicides into the immediately
surrounding terrain. This would be bad news for all forms of wildlife, including microorganisms and
insects as well as birds and mammals. Such chemical will eventually find their way along the stream
banks and into the brook itself. All of this would greatly diminish the viability of the brook for wildlife
4
and as a travel corridor without requiring serious major efforts at mitigation. It would also
introduce a means of pollution that would travel all the way to Shelburne Pond – a
tremendous natural resource whose watershed should be a priority for protection.
If the project proceeds, as is, it would make moot all the efforts of various citywide committees and
research studies concerning natural resources. That would be a travesty and render meaningless
citizen participation in local government.
If the project proceeds, it could be made less intrusive on the corridor by eliminating all buildings
between Elderberry Lane and the brook and planting a tree-lined strip along the brook, for the entire
property north-south length - willows and alders not to be less than 100 foot width transverse to the
brook with an added condition to plant a buffer all the way to the brook crossing under Dorset Street
to the south. Such a strip would become an enhanced wildlife corridor for upland mammals such as
fox, deer, coyotes, skunks, opossums and others.
- end
275 COLLEGE STREET, PO BOX 4485 BURLINGTON, VT 05406-4485 PHONE 802 861-7000 FAX 861-7007 MSKVT.COM
January 24, 2018
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Mr. Bill Miller, Chair
South Burlington Development Review Board
City of South Burlington
575 Dorset Street
South Burlington, VT 05403
C/o Mr. Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning
Email: pconner@sburl.com
Re: 1505 Dorset Street, Master Plan Application No. MP-18-01 and Preliminary Plat
Application No. SD-18-29
Dear Chairperson Miller:
I serve as counsel for Tom and Donna Anfuso, 695 Nowland Farm Road; Robert
Brinckerhoff and Louise Hammond, 15 Shea Drive; Andrew Chalnick, 670 Nowland Farm
Road; Rosanne Greco and Higley Harmon, 63 Four Sisters Road; William and Kathy Hays, 51
Old Schoolhouse Road; Noah Hyman, 1575 Dorset Street; Claudia J. Miller, 48 Old Schoolhouse
Road; Steven and Dunia Partilo, 64 Shea Drive; and Darrilyn Peters, 37 Old Schoolhouse Road,
all of whom are South Burlington residents as well as persons interested in the above-referenced
Applications (collectively, “Save Open Spaces South Burlington” or “SOS South Burlington”).1
A planned unit development (“PUD”) must be “consistent with the goals and objectives
of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s).” SBLDR § 15.18(A)(10). One of the
Comprehensive Plan’s goals for the City, including the Southeast Quadrant (“SEQ”), is
“conservation of identified important natural areas” (Comp. Plan, p. 1-1 (emphasis added)).
And one of the objectives for the SEQ is prioritizing and conserving existing contiguous and
interconnected open space areas (see Comp. Plan, p. 3-38, Objective 60).
As detailed in SOS South Burlington’s Handout to the DRB dated December 18, 2018,
much of the proposed Dorset Meadows development is located on a riparian connectivity area
that the Comprehensive Plan designates as a primary conservation area that is off-limits to
development. The Comprehensive Plan further mandates that only “limited encroachment” may
1 Save Open Spaces South Burlington continues to maintain that the DRB lacks jurisdiction to
consider Master Plan Application No. MP-18-01 and Preliminary Plat Application No. SD-18-29 due to
the DRB’s lack of a final decision and vote on Sketch Plan Application No. SD-18-23 (please see my
December 17, 2018 letter to the DRB concerning this issue, which issue is now the subject of a pending
Environmental Court appeal (In re Dorset Meadows Associates LLC PUD, Dkt. No. 2-1-19 Vtec).
Letter to DRB Chairperson Bill Miller
January 24, 2019
Page 2 of 4
275 College Street, PO Box 4485 | Burlington, VT 05406-4485 | phone 802 861-7000 | Fax 861-7007 | mskvt.com
be allowed in “Secondary Conservation Areas” (see Comp. Plan, page 2-103, and Map 8) (a
copy of Map 8 appears in the Appendix, below). The following graphic depicts the proposed
Dorset Meadows PUD overlaid on Map 8 (“Secondary Conservation Areas”):
Letter to DRB Chairperson Bill Miller
January 24, 2019
Page 3 of 4
275 College Street, PO Box 4485 | Burlington, VT 05406-4485 | phone 802 861-7000 | Fax 861-7007 | mskvt.com
The above graphic demonstrates that a substantial portion of the Dorset Meadows
proposed development is located in areas designated as “Habitat Blocks” and various forested
areas (Comp. Plan Map 8), which are secondary conservation areas in which only “limited
encroachment” is permissible (Comp. Plan, p. 2-103) (emphasis added). As such, Dorset
Meadows is inconsistent “with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan,” SBLDR
§15.18(A)(10) (emphasis added). Further, SBLDR Section 9.06(B)(3) states that “existing
natural resources shall be protected through the development plan, including (but not limited
to) primary natural communities, streams, wetlands, floodplains, [and] conservation areas
shown in the Comprehensive Plan. . . .” SBLDR § 9.06(B)(3) (emphasis added).
In sum, the proposed Dorset Meadows PUD is inconsistent with the goals and objectives
of the Comprehensive Plan and fails to protect the natural resources reflected as conservation
areas in the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, the members of Save Open Spaces South
Burlington request that the DRB reject the Dorset Meadows PUD.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Daniel A. Seff
Daniel A. Seff
cc: Mr. Paul Conner, Planning and Zoning Director (via e-mail)
Ms. Dalila Hall, Zoning Administrative Officer (via e-mail)
Ms. Marla Keene, Development Review Planner (via e-mail)
Robert H. Rushford, Esq. (via e-mail)
Save Open Spaces South Burlington (via e-mail)
Letter to DRB Chairperson Bill Miller
January 24, 2019
Page 4 of 4
275 College Street, PO Box 4485 | Burlington, VT 05406-4485 | phone 802 861-7000 | Fax 861-7007 | mskvt.com
APPENDIX -- Comprehensive Plan, Map 8 (“Secondary Conservation Areas”)