HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP-22-060 - Supplemental - 0224 0268 Market Street (23)180 Market Street, South Burlington, Vermont 05403 | 802-846-4106 | www.southburlingtonvt.gov
TO:The Snyder-Braverman Development Co., LLC
FROM:Marla Keene, Development Review Planner
SUBJECT: #SP-22-### 268 Market Street First Round Comments
DATE:December 1, 2022
RESPONSES ADDED December 9, 2022
The purpose of this memo is to provide comments on the compliance of the proposed 3-building
development on Market Street Lot B. Comments are based on the plans and materials submitted
November 15 and November 23, 2022. These comments do not yet include a review of Building
Envelope Standards or comments of the South Burlington Water Department; these will be forthcoming
shortly.
The three buildings are referred to as follows:
a.268 Market Street – “Building B1,” consisting of 73 units and 9,089 sf non-residential space
and located on the southern corner of the lot
b.224 Market Street – “Building B2,” consisting of 62 units and 9,132 sf non-residential space
and located on the western side of the lot
c.339 Garden Street – “Building B3,” consisting of 26 residential units and located on the
eastern side of the lot
Comments of Department of Public Works
Overall Site Plan
1.Can the parking lot detectable warning surfaces be relocated to be in the direction of the
crosswalk, not along the radius (unless it is serving 2 perpendicular crosswalks)
RESPONSE: Plans revised to adjust the location of the detectable warning surfaces.
Pavement markings & sign plan
1.Please bring all pavement markings to front in black (like crosswalks) on this plan. Fine to be
grey on other sheets
RESPONSE: Done
2.Check locations of accessible parking spot signs. Some are in walkways, far from parking space,
blocking bike racks, etc.
RESPONSE: Done
3.Eastern most parking area has “K” pointing to wrong space (or that space is missing the
striping?)
RESPONSE: Plan revised
4.I’d recommend signs towards street (and maybe towards the parking lot as well) at the
emergency vehicles access be “Do Not Enter” (R5-1) and “Authorized Vehicles Only” (R5-11)
mounted together on single post
RESPONSE: Done – sheet 11 revised to reflect these sign changes
Public ROW Comments
1.Confirm where Stop signs are proposed. I do not see any at the Garden / Market intersection,
but I do see stop bars on the Garden Street approaches to Market Street.
RESPONSE: An existing stop sign is located on the northerly Garden Street approach to Market
Street. A stop bar is also proposed at this location.
Note that prior to completion of the southerly segment, the approved plans show a stop sign
and stop bar on the Garden Street approach to Market Street.
2.Please provide a detail for the mountable curb.
RESPONSE: See sheet 7 for details of concrete mountable curb and granite mountable curb.
3.It is difficult to fully understand the work proposed at the SW approach to Market Street from
the Poon property (the access across from “City Hall / School Driveway Future Public Street”).
My preference is that this intersection get reworked so that the roads are in alignment, but I’d
like to better understand the impacts to the existing infrastructure in the Market St ROW.
RESPONSE: No work is proposed with this application on the future street that will align
opposite the existing City Hall / School Driveway Future Public Street. Construction of this
future street, including adjustment of the existing curb cut, will be proposed with development
on Lot N (Buildings A1-A3).
4.Please confirm that the existing stormwater pipe under Market St that will receive water from
this development can manage the increased flow of water during the 25 year storm event (City’s
design standard).
RESPONSE: See attachment ‘Market St pipe 12-05-22’
5.Garden Street reconfiguration shall be as shown on the below sketch for consistency with
support street typology.
RESPONSE: Plans have been revised to match the sketch below.
6.Market Street concrete scoring patterns shall be as shown on attached plan. Please also note
the specifications require a 12” crushed stone base under 6” reinforced concrete (grid
throughout & dowels into adjoining jointed sections to preclude shared use path heaving).
RESPONSE: Sheet 7A was added to incorporate details for sidewalks within the public right of
way.
7.There is an existing light pole within the 25-ft clear zone of the driveway entrance. This light
pole will need to be relocated.
RESPONSE: The plans have been revised to show the light being relocated (sheet 4).
Comments of Planning Department
1.We would like to schedule a meeting to review the non-residential portion of the building within
the T5 zoning district.
RESPONSE: The architectural plans for level 1 in Building B1 and Building B2 will be revised to
identify the interior area adjacent to the plaza as commercial tenant space. This will increase
the total commercial tenant space within both buildings. The new total commercial tenant
space areas are listed on sheet 1. See commercial tenant spaces outlined below:
Comments of Stormwater Section
1.This project is located in the Potash Brook watershed. This watershed is listed as stormwater
impaired by the State of Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). Please note
that Potash Brook is now classified as a warm water stream.
RESPONSE: Understood
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 a stormwater permit and construction permit from the
Vermont DEC Stormwater Division. The applicant should acquire these permits before starting
construction.
RESPONSE: CGP authorization 7736-9020.6 and Discharge Permit 7736-INDS.A are attached.
3.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 13.05 of the LDRs.
RESPONSE: Understood
4.On the provided soil investigation logs, the VHB TP#4 lists SHWT at 3.5’ below grade, which is
approximately 310.5’. The mulch layer of the bioretention practice is at 313’, which would mean
that the bottom of the practice would be at 311’ as the VSMM requires a 24-48 inch deep
planting bed. The bioretention practice would have ≤0.5’ to SHWT, which is not incompliance
with the VSMM for an infiltration practice. The applicant should propose to line the practice.
RESPONSE: The bio-retention area was approved to meet the recharge and WQv requirement
only. The overflow catchbasin (CB 7) conveys runoff from the larger storms to gravel wetland #2
for detention. VSMM 4.3.1.1 (required elements) states that:
-The bottom of the bioretention practice shall be located at or above the seasonal
high groundwater table (SHGWT).
-The separation to SHGWT requirements identified in Section 4.3.3.1 are not
applicable to bioretention practices designed to treat the water quality and
groundwater recharge volumes only.
5.Sheet D2 – Stormwater Details from VHB
a.The bioretention detail calls out a minimum of 24” from the mulch layer to SHWT. This is
inaccurate – SHWT should be two feet from the bottom of the bioretention soil media
since less than 1 acre of drainage area contributes to the system. The applicant should
revise the bioretention area detail to reflect requirements set by the VSMM.
RESPONSE: The bio-retention area was approved to meet the recharge and WQv
requirement only. See also above.
b.The bioretention detail does not show a layer of bioretention soil media. The callout
says 18” of concrete sand. Per the VSMM, the bioretention planting bed should be 24 to
48 inches.
RESPONSE: The note has been revised to refer to the bioretention soil mixture and the
specification included on sheet D2
6.Sheet L-1.1 – Planting Plan
a.Several trees shown on the planting plan are too close in proximity to proposed
stormwater structures and pipes. The applicant should increase the separation between
proposed tree locations and stormwater infrastructure to prevent future damage.
b.There is a shrub proposed <1 ft away from a cleanout to the north of the lower trash
building. The applicant is advised to move this shrub location to prevent difficulty
maintaining the cleanout.
7.Sheet 5: EPSC Plan
a.What will be the phasing of construction regarding construction of buildings, site
grading, construction of stormwater treatment, etc.?
RESPONSE: A construction phasing plan has been prepared.
8.The applicant should provide a maintenance plan for the proposed stormwater infrastructure
per Section 13.05B(5). The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly
maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance infrastructure.
RESPONSE: See VHB Maintenance Plan, sheet SW4
Comments of Fire Marshal’s Office
1.The tree by the NW fire access will need to be moved back toward the property line with the
school. As shown, the aerial and Engines will hit the branches. All FDC shall be kept clear of
landscaping features. Three feet on either side of the FDC and clear to the public way. It is
acknowledged that this is on the school property; we believe we have an easement that includes
maintenance of the referenced tree.
RESPONSE: While this is noted on the civil drawings, the landscaping plans will also call out the
relocation of the tree near the emergency vehicle access.
FDC connections are shown on sheets 4 & 10. A note has been added to sheet 10 regarding the
access requirements, and the landscaping plan has been revised to provide clear access from the
public way.
Comments on Landscaping
1.Need a Plant Schedule, Planting Details and Specifications, and Landscaping Cost, affecting:
a.Parking lot perimeter planting compliance
b.Variety of landscaping compliance
c.Tree caliper compliance
d.Landscaping budget compliance
2.The parking lot island computation omits the 13 spaces behind building B3. Please revise.
RESPONSE: See exhibit file named ‘Application - landscaped island areas Rev11-22-22’
3.Shade trees are not evenly placed. Please locate shade trees on south end of central parking lot
aisles. Understood that this may replace proposed shrubs.
4.Landscaping adjacent to former dog park may or may not meet screening or buffering
requirements; awaiting revised plans to review.
5.More information is needed about the features that resemble retaining walls between the
building and the street. Provide detail, height, material, update architectural rendering, or if not
present, update plans.
RESPONSE: See Sheet L2.0 for images of the board formed concrete walls. Typical elevations
and dimensions will be added to the wall detail. The top of the wall will typically be slightly
lower than the adjacent finish floor elevation to allow drainage away from the building.
6.Revise plans to indicate locations of snow storage.
RESPONSE: Areas will be identified on the Planting Plan for limited onsite storage of snow. For
larger or multiple snow storms, removal of snow from the site may be required.
Comments on Lighting
1.Lighting levels from fixture type “W” are too high, particularly on Garden Street. Please revise.
RESPONSE: This light fixture has been revised to lower it’s illumination.
Building Comments
1.224 Market Street is located predominantly within the secondary build-to-zone. 85% of the
building façade must be located within the primary build-to-zone.
RESPONSE: The majority of the Building B2 façade is 6 feet or less off the edge of the street right
of way. See the Build-To Zone exhibit.
2.268 Market Street is located predominantly within the secondary build-to-zone. 85% of the
building façade must be located within the primary build-to-zone.
RESPONSE: The majority of the Building B1 façade is 6 feet or less off the edge of the street right
of way. See the Build-To Zone exhibit.
3.Rooftop plans have not been provided therefore it is not possible to determine whether rooftop
elements are proposed. If rooftop structures other than the rooftop towers are proposed, such as
elevator towers, their height and area must be provided.
RESPONSE: No elevator tower is proposed. The height of rooftop mechanical equipment is
noted on the Solar Zone and Rooftop Visibility exhibits.
4.Height of rooftop towers must be provided. If they are more than 14 ft above the floor of the
fourth floor, size must also be provided.
RESPONSE: The height of rooftop mechanical equipment is noted on the Solar Zone and Rooftop
Visibility exhibits.
5.Provide demonstration of how the project will meet the standards of Appendix CA: – Solar-Ready
Zone of the Commercial Building Energy Standards as prepared and revised by the Vermont
Public Service Department.
RESPONSE: See notes on the Solar Zone and Rooftop Visibility exhibits.
General Comments
1.To understand what is included in each phase, for the purpose of landscaping, open space, and
certificate of occupancy issuance, please provide a plan showing each phase cumulatively as
well as a narrative description of what is included in each phase.
RESPONSE: A construction phasing plan has been prepared.
2.Qualifying open space areas should be outlined and labeled on the plans. At this time
compliance of open spaces with requirements cannot yet be evaluated.
RESPONSE: A plan identifying the open space areas has been added to the Open Space
Narrative.
3.Please quantify Class III wetland and wetland buffer impacts and show on plans.
RESPONSE: A small class 3 wetland was previously located on Lot B near the intersection of
Garden Street and Market Street. However, this wetland was filled with the City’s construction
of the Market Street improvements. There are no class 3 wetland or buffer impacts proposed
on Lot B.
4.Please provide a future cross-lot access easement between the property and the school
property to the north in the location of the trash enclosure by 339 Garden Street (20-ft wide
driveway easement) and by the sidewalk accessing the bioretention area (15-ft path easement).
No changes to plan are required.
RESPONSE: A draft easement is being prepared. We will provide this draft for review by the City
attorney.
Sincerely,
Marla Keene, P.E.
Development Review Planner