HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP-22-028 - Supplemental - 0004 Harbor View Road (3)
180 Market Street, South Burlington, Vermont 05403 | 802-846-4106 | www.southburlingtonvt.gov
1
TO: South Burlington Development Review Board
FROM: Marla Keene, Development Review Planner
SUBJECT: #SP-22-028 4 Harbor View Road
DATE: November 15, 2022 Development Review Board meeting
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Site plan application #SP-22-028 of Rieley Cohen Partnership, LLC to amend a previously approved site
plan for a 13,000 sf contractor or building trade facility with outdoor storage. The amendment consists
of constructing a 5,500 sf addition and additional outdoor storage, 4 Harbor View Road.
CONTEXT
The Board held a hearing on this application on October 18, 2022. The Board provided feedback to the
applicant and continued the hearing for the purpose of allowing the applicant to make necessary
modifications to the project.
The applicant provided revised materials on October 31. Review of these revised materials is
incorporated herein; criterion which Staff considers to have been addressed have been removed from
this report.
COMMENTS
A) SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS
14.06 General Review Standards
General review standards pertain to relationships between the site and its structures, and to the adjoining
area. The proposed building addition consists of a loading dock area with interior partitions. The
proposed addition reduces the distance between the building and the street, and the expanded
stormwater management system requires removal of the existing vegetated area between the building
and the street, making the building more visible. Therefore compliance with these general standards
becomes more reliant upon the configuration of the building.
A. Relationship of Proposed Structures to the Site.
(1) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from
structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and
adequate parking areas.
The DRB shall consider the following:
#SP-22-028
(a) Street Frontage. Maintain internally-consistent building setbacks and
landscaping along the street.
(b) Building Placement, Orientation. Maintain or establish a consistent orientation
to the street and, where a prevalent pattern exists, shall continue the manner in
which the site’s existing building foundations relate to the site’s topography and
grade.
(c) Transition Contrast in Scale. Minimize and mitigate abrupt contrasts in scale
between existing, planned or approved development, and proposed development.
(d) Pedestrian Orientation. Improve and enhance pedestrian connections and
walkability within the area proposed for development.
(e) Solar Gain. Orient their rooflines to maximize solar gain potential, to the
extent possible within the context of the overall standards of these regulations.
See also 14.06B below for an additional related criterion. On October 18, the applicant described that
the building is being expanded towards the street and will be screened from the street by a row of
arborvitae. The openings on the proposed building addition are oriented towards the parking lot;
there are no windows facing the street and the façade is proposed to consist of uniform steel siding
with a flat roof. Adjoining properties are mixed in their orientation. The Board was divided on
whether they would require the applicant to add windows or architectural interest to the street-facing
façade. It was mentioned that the purpose of the regulations is to improve appearance over time, so
if the Board asked for improvements, it would be expected that they would ask other future applicants
to do the same.
1. The Board agreed to discuss criterion 14.06A(1) in deliberation.
(2) Parking:
(a) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings. Any side of a building facing a
public street shall be considered a front side of a building for the purposes of this subsection.
The applicant has significantly modified parking from what was presented on October 18. Based
on Board comments pertaining to parking location and adequacy of parking, and the
requirement that parking spaces be striped (parking of registered vehicles outside of the
designated parking spaces is prohibited), the applicant has increased the proposed parking from
18 to 24 spaces, and has relocated parking to no longer be blocked by outdoor storage areas or
to block access to overhead doors. Parking width to the side of the building is no greater than
the width of the building. Staff considers this criterion now met.
B. Relationship of Structures and Site to Adjoining Area.
(1) The Development Review Board shall encourage the use of a combination of common
materials and architectural characteristics (e.g., rhythm, color, texture, form or detailing),
landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between
buildings of different architectural styles.
(2) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain and to
existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed
structures.
(3) To accomplish (1) and (2), the DRB shall consider:
#SP-22-028
(a) Pattern and Rhythm. Update or maintain or extend the overall pattern of
development defined by the planned or existing street grid, block configurations,
position and orientation of principal buildings, prevalence of attached or detached
building types.
(b) Architectural Features. Respond to recurring or representative architectural
features that define neighborhood character, without adhering to a particular
architectural style.
(c) Privacy. Limit impacts and intrusions to privacy on adjoining properties,
including side and back yard areas through context sensitive design.
Discussion of these criteria is included under 14.06A(1) above.
C. Site Amenity Requirement
(1) Sites are required to include a specific minimum area for appropriate Site Amenities. This
section does not apply to projects within the City Center FBC District (which are governed by Section
8.08).
(2) Applicability. Applications for the following shall be required to provide Site Amenities:
(a) Additions or expansions exceeding 5,000 SF for existing non-residential structures.
(3) The required area shall be:
(a) For Non-Residential development, a minimum of 6% of non-residential building gross
floor area.
The proposed 5,500 sf addition requires a 330 sf amenity space.
(4) The DRB may, in its discretion, provide a credit for up to 50% of the required Site Amenity
area if the Applicant demonstrates a safe, walkable connection to an existing Civic Space or public
park that is accessible by the general public and located within five-hundred (500) feet of at least
one pedestrian access point for each building on the lot via a walking route and/or pedestrian way.
A “safe, walkable connection” shall not include or require crossing a four-lane road.
No existing civic spaces or public parks are within five-hundred feet.
The applicant has proposed a snippet/parklet type amenity. On October 18, the Board directed the
applicant to revise the snippet/parklet to meet the applicable criteria to comply with that typology.
The minimum size of a snippet/parklet is 600 sf, must be directly adjacent to the public right of way
and sidewalk or operable building entry, and must have seating as the main focus of the space.
Specifically, the LDR requires the following.
Seating must be the main focus of the space. Seating must be present year-round and composed
of high quality materials. Fixed seating is required unless the applicant demonstrates that
moveable seating will meet the stated goals of the type. Landscaping shall also be a primary component of the space. Because the space is inherently small, it shall be carefully landscaped
in a higher proportion than larger spaces. Landscaping should not interfere with seating, but
instead compliment it. Spaces should appear warm and inviting and permanent rather than
temporary.
2. The applicant has provided revised plans which expand the area to 600 sf. The space is now more
enclosed by landscaping. Staff recommends the Board consider whether to require the applicant to
#SP-22-028
provide a second bench pursuant to the above, but otherwise considers this criterion met. Staff
acknowledges that adding a second bench may necessitate removing some of the proposed plantings.
14.07 Specific Review Standards
In all Zoning Districts and the City Center Form Based Codes District, the following standards shall
apply:
H. Disposal of Wastes. All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including
compliance with any recycling, composting, or other requirements, shall be accessible, secure
and properly screened with opaque fencing to ensure that trash and debris do not escape the
enclosure(s). Small receptacles intended for use by households or the public (ie, non-dumpster,
non-large drum) shall not be required to be fenced or screened.
3. The applicant has revised the plan to provide a dumpster enclosure, but no detail or description
has been provided. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to describe the proposed
enclosure at the hearing, and revise the plans as a condition of approval. Staff notes the enclosure
must be complete (ie not open on one side) and must be at least as tall as the dumpsters
themselves.
B) SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS
13.02 Off Street Parking and Loading
G. Design requirements for Parking Spaces, Parking Aisles, Lighting and Landscaping
(1) Design requirements for off-street parking and loading are provided in Table 13-2
and Figure 13-1, Section 13.04, Landscaping , Screening, and Street Trees, and Section
13.07, Exterior Lighting. All paved parking spaces shall be striped or otherwise
physically delimited.
Staff considers the applicant has revised the plan to address this criterion, as discussed
above.
13.04 Landscaping, Screening & Street Trees
B. Except for parking spaces accessory to a one-family or two-family dwelling, all off-street
parking areas subject to review by the Development Review Board, shall be curbed and landscaped
with appropriate trees, shrubs, and other plants including ground covers, as approved by the
Development Review Board. Sections of recessed curb are permitted if their purpose is to allow stormwater runoff from the adjacent parking area to reach stormwater collection, treatment and
management infrastructure. The Development Review Board shall consider the adequacy of the
proposed landscaping to assure the establishment of a safe, convenient, and attractive parking area
and the privacy and comfort of abutting properties.
(4) Landscaping Requirements
(a) Landscaping shall include a variety of trees, shrubs, grasses and ground covers. All
planting shall be species hardy for the region and, if located in areas receiving road runoff or
salt spray, shall be salt-tolerant.
The City Arborist reviewed the revised plans and indicated there were no concerns. Staff
considers this criterion met.
#SP-22-028
(7) Snow storage areas must be specified and located in an area that minimizes the potential for
erosion and contaminated runoff into any adjacent or nearby surface waters.
The applicant has revised snow storage areas to be behind parking areas. Staff considers this
criterion met.
C. Screening or buffering. The Development Review Board will require landscaping, fencing, land
shaping and/or screening along property boundaries (lot lines) whenever it determines that a) two
adjacent sites are dissimilar and should be screened or buffered from each other, or b) a property’s
appearance should be improved, which property is covered excessively with pavement or structures or
is otherwise insufficiently landscaped, or c) a commercial, industrial, and multi-family use abuts a
residential district or institutional use, or (d) a parking or loading area is adjacent to or visible from a
public street.
Staff includes this criterion as it works in conjunction with 14.06B above. No changes have been
proposed to compliance with this criterion since the October 18 hearing. The applicant is proposing to
remove a large wooded area with little understory growth between the existing building and the street, and expand the building and outdoor storage towards the street by 42 ft. This front area was required
to be heavily planted as part of the original approval for the property, likely to achieve compliance with
the version of this criterion that existed at the time of that original approval. Existing trees to be
removed in this area consist of mostly large white pine, with some interspersed deciduous trees. The
applicant is proposing a vegetated stormwater basin in this area, and is proposing to screen the outdoor
storage with a row of arborvitae.
G(3) Landscaping Budget Requirements. The Development Review Board shall require minimum
planting costs for all site plans, as shown in Table 13-4 below. In evaluating landscaping requirements,
some credit may be granted for existing trees or for site improvements other than tree planting as
long as the objectives of this section are not reduced. The costs below are cumulative; for example, a
landscaping budget shall be required to show a planned expenditure of three percent of the first
$250,000 in construction or improvement cost plus two percent of the next $250,000 in construction or
improvement cost, plus one percent of the remaining cost over $500,000. The landscaping budget shall
be prepared by a landscape architect or professional landscape designer.
The cost of the proposed building addition is $660,000, requiring $11,100 in plantings. The applicant has
proposed $43,986 in trees and shrubs. The additional plantings beyond the required minimum have
been provided in response to criterion I below.
I. Landscape Maintenance. Maintenance and responsibility. All planting shown on an approved site
plan shall be maintained by the property owner in a vigorous growing condition throughout the
duration of the use. Plants not so maintained shall be replaced with new plants at the beginning of the
next immediately following growing season. Trees with a caliper of less than 5” may be replaced on an
inch-by-inch basis with trees of the same genus of at least 2” caliper each. No permit shall be required
for such replacements provided they conform to the approved site plan. Replacement of trees with a
caliper of greater than 5” shall require an amendment to the site plan.
The Board considered this criterion met at the October 18 hearing.
13.05 Stormwater Management
Stormwater standards apply when one-half acre or more of impervious surface exists or is proposed to
exist, and where 5,000 sf of impervious is created or reconstructed. The City Stormwater Section
reviewed the proposed plans on 6/24/2022 and offers the following comments.
#SP-22-028
The Stormwater Section has reviewed the “4 Harbor View Road” site plan prepared by Lamoureux &
Dickinson Consulting Engineers, dated 4/1/22 and last updated on 6/2/22. We would like to offer the
following comments:
1. This project is located in the Bartlett Brook watershed. This watershed is listed as stormwater
impaired by the State of Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC).
2. The property currently has an expired State stormwater permit (2-0153).
3. The project is only proposing treat stormwater runoff form the new and redeveloped
impervious surfaced. However, projects with an expired permit seeking permit renewal
within a stormwater impaired watershed, with less than 3 acres of impervious surface,
subject to §3.1.C.4.a of the 3-9050 Stormwater General Permit, are required to meet the
redevelopment standard and channel protection standard for the whole site, unless the
TMDL has already been met. The applicant should confirm what treatment standards are
required for this site to obtain valid permit coverage.
4. The applicant indicated that the seasonal high groundwater table was found less than 2 feet
from the ground surface, with a reference made to Sheet ST1 for soils data. Please provide
Sheet ST1 for review.
a. Is the bioretention system being proposed in the seasonal high groundwater table? The
Vermont Stormwater Management Manual §4.3.1.1 indicates that the bottom of the
bioretention practice shall be located at or above the seasonal high groundwater table.
5. As the project has more than one-half acre or more of impervious surface and is proposing to
develop more than 5,000 sf of impervious surface, the project is subject to the requirements
of section 13.05 of the LDRs.
6. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all
stormwater treatment and conveyance infrastructure.
The applicant provided a letter from the State stormwater section indicating that treatment for existing
impervious surfaces is not required (Comment #3). The applicant has made modifications to the
stormwater details to respond to other comments of the City Stormwater section provided in June. The
City Stormwater Department reviewed the revised plans on October 20 and indicates their comments
have been addressed.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board discuss the project in deliberation prior to the meeting and with the
applicant work and then close the hearing.
Respectfully submitted,
Marla Keene, Development Review Planner