HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-24-05 - Supplemental - 0252 Autumn Hill RoadCITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
SD-24-05_252 Autumn Hill Rd_Bolduc_SK_2024_04-16
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
Report preparation date: April 10, 2024
Application received: March 22, 2024
252 Autumn Hill Road
SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION #SD-24-05
Meeting date: April 16, 2024
Owner /Applicant
Allyson M. Bolduc Trust & Vincent L. Bolduc Trust
252 Autumn Hill Road
South Burlington, VT 05403
Property Information
Tax Parcel IDs: 0085-00252
Lot size: 16.46 ac
Southeast Quadrant Neighborhood Residential Transition &
Natural Resource Protection
Engineer
O’Leary Burke
13 Corporate Drive
Essex, VT 05452
Location Map
#SD-24-05
2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Sketch plan application #SD-24-05 of Allyson and Vincent Bolduc to subdivide an existing 16.46
acre lot developed with a single family home and accessory structures into two residential lots of
2.0 acres and 14.46 acres, and retain the existing single family home and accessory structures on
the 14.46 acre lot, 252 Autumn Hill Road.
PROJECT CONTEXT
This existing single family home lot is located in the SEQ-NRT and SEQ-NRP zoning districts and is
largely encumbered by wetlands, wetland buffers, and habitat block. Improvements to this lot
require master plan approval, with a limited allowance for a one-time carve out of no more than
two (2) acres without master plan approval. This is the route the applicant has chosen to pursue.
Development of this lot is also impacted by Act 47, which changes the limitations a municipality
can place on development so that a duplex is permitted to the same dimensional standards as a
single family home, and multifamily buildings up to four units must be permitted (though it is
silent on the dimensional standards therefor).
The Planning Commission is currently working on amendments to the LDR to incorporate the
changes required by Act 47. The applicant is aware of the pending modifications, which may
significantly alter how subsequent applications for this subdivision are approved. The Board
should anticipate that the standards reviewed herein are likely to be modified by the next
application for this development.
COMMENTS
Development Review Planner Marla Keene and Planning and Zoning Director Paul Conner, herein
after referred to as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted by the applicant on December 21,
2023 and offer the following comments.
A) 15.C PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
15.C.02 Applicability
C. Required Planned Unit Development.
PUD review and approval by the DRB under this Article is required for any subdivision and
development of a tract or parcel with a total area of four (4) or more acres within any zoning district
listed for CON PUD and TND PUDs under Table 15.C-1. General PUDs are not mandatory in any
district.
As a 16.46 acre parcel in the SEQ-NRT and SEQ-NR, a conservation PUD is required by this provision.
15.C.05 Conservation Development
C. Applicability.
(1) A Conservation PUD is required for the subdivision and development of a tract or parcel of four
(4) or more acres within the following Southeast Quadrant Sub-Districts, as shown on the map
entitled “Official Zoning Map”: SEQ -NR, SEQ-NRT, and SEQ-NRN.
(a) Within these SEQ Sub-districts, for a tract or parcel in existence as of November 10, 2021
that is more than four (4) acres in total area; one “carve out” of no more than two (2) acres
under applicable subdivision and zoning district regulations may be allowed before a
Conservation PUD will be required, as long as the remaining, retained tract or parcel within
#SD-24-05
3
one or more of the above-listed sub-districts is a minimum of four (4) acres, as required for
subsequent development as a Conservation PUD.
This provision is applicable to the proposed subdivision: the carve out is proposed to be 2.0
acres and the remaining lands will be 14.46 acres. Under this provision, no further review of
Conservation PUD or other PUD criteria are required. The remainder of this document
addresses the applicable overlay, subdivision, and zoning district regulations.
B) 12 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION STANDARDS
The subject property is encumbered by habitat block, Class II wetland, and Class II wetland buffer.
Class II wetlands and buffers are considered hazards, while habitat block is considered a Level 1
resource.
12.04 Habitat Block Overlay District
Development within a habitat block is prohibited, including clearing of trees and creation of new
lawn areas. The applicant has proposed a small on-site habitat block exchange.
1. It appears the habitat block is shown incorrectly on the applicant’s plans. Staff
recommends the Board require the applicant to correct their plans to clearly show the
limits of the adopted habitat block.
Nonetheless, the habitat block lines are approximately correct, therefore Staff has proceeded with
review assuming the necessary modifications will not substantially alter the applicant’s proposal.
D. Modification of Habitat Block.
There are three options for modification of a habitat block.
A development application may not include more than one option for any application. Land located
within the SEQ-NRP zoning sub-district, Hazards, or Level I Resources, previously approved as open
space or conserved land, subject to a deed restriction prohibiting development, subject to a
conservation or density reduction easement, or owned by the City of South Burlington or the
Winooski Valley Parks District and designated as a park or conservation parcel shall not be eligible
for any of the three options to modify a Habitat Block.
2. The 0.5 acres to the east of the site is located within the SEQ-NRP and the 0.8 acres
proposed to be preserved on the west of the site is located within a Class II wetland or
buffer. Therefore pursuant to this provision, Staff considers these areas are not eligible for
exchange. Staff recommends the Board confirm their agreement with this interpretation.
Given that the areas not encumbered by habitat block on the subject property are either located in
the SEQ-NRP or within a hazard (Class II wetland and buffer), Staff considers habitat block
exchange to not be viable for this property.
E. Substantially-Habitat Block-Covered Lots.
Staff considers it appears the 16.46 acre lot may be substantially covered by habitat blocks and
hazards. The main area that is not covered by habitat block where the existing homestead is located
is approximately 2.8 acres. 30% of the 16.46 acre lot would be 4.94 acres. If the lands outside the
existing homestead, outside the habitat block, and outside the wetland and wetland buffer are less
than 1 acre, the applicant may be eligible for consideration under this provision.
3. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant for a computation of what percent of the lot
is covered by habitat blocks and hazards.
#SD-24-05
4
A lot containing a combination of Hazards and Level I Resources exceeding seventy (70) percent of
the total lot area is eligible for relief from Habitat Block standards in the following manners:
(1) As a Conservation Planned Unit Development, subject to the standards of Section 15.C.05;
and,
As noted above, the applicant is eligible for a carve-out without a conservation PUD.
(2) The applicant is entitled to re-designate a portion of the Habitat Block, to allow for thirty
(30) percent of the total parcel area as Buildable Area. The applicant shall provide a
proposed redesignation to the Development Review Board with land designated as, and
added to, the parcel’s Buildable Area in the following order:
First: Land not a Hazard or Level I Resource;
Areas of the parcel that are neither a hazard or a level 1 resource include only the
approximately 2.8 acres around the existing home.
Second: Land that is not characterized by a preponderance of mature trees;
Areas that are within a Hazard or Level 1 resource, but are not characterized by a
preponderance of mature trees, are primarily located within the Class II wetland and buffer
west of the area the applicant has indicated as “building envelope.” This area is partially
regulated by the state as state-designated 50-ft Class II wetland buffer, but a portion of the
is outside of that 50-ft buffer and within only the South Burlington 100-ft wetland buffer.
The area within the 100-ft buffer but outside the 50-ft buffer is potentially developable under
this provision. By definition, the maximum width of this area would be 50-ft.
Third: Land within Habitat Blocks, excluding Core Habitat Block Areas or areas which
would sever a Habitat Connector.
Staff considers that the areas outside of state-protected wetlands and buffers would not
sever a habitat connector and are along the perimeter of habitat block area.
Fourth: Land within Habitat Blocks, avoiding Core Habitat Block Areas to the greatest
extent possible;
(a) Calculation: Land shall be selected from first to fourth. If all applicable land on the lot
from one category is designated as Buildable Area, and the allotment of thirty (30)
percent of the total parcel area has not been reached, then land from the next category
shall be selected.
4. Staff considers the applicant should apply this approach for this property and
recommends the Board direct the applicant to prepare a map showing clearly how the
revised area was selected, including indication of areas selected under each of the
above four criteria. Since this exercise has the potential to significantly modify the
development configuration for the carve-out, Staff recommends the Board direct the
applicant to prepare this map prior to concluding the sketch plan meeting.
(b) Special Circumstances: Where the DRB finds that designation of land as Buildable Area
pursuant to the priority order above is in conflict with the purposes of this section, or
where it finds that strict adherence to the priority order does not allow for a unified PUD
consistent with the purposes or intent of these regulations, it may approve
modifications to the land selected. Any such modifications shall be minimized in terms
of land area and changes to, or reordering, the priority order.
Staff considers no such exception to be appropriate in this case. There do not appear to
be areas that are inconsistent with the purpose of this section outside of the prioritization
above, and the applicant is not proposing a PUD.
(c) Any land excluded from Habitat Blocks regulated under this subsection and
redesignated as Buildable Area shall remain subject to all other provisions of these
#SD-24-05
5
Regulations.
C) 12.06 WETLAND PROTECTION STANDARDS
The applicant has identified Class II wetlands and the associated 100-ft buffers on their plans in
proximity to the proposed carve out. Additional delineation, or at minimum annotation on the
plan, may be necessary on the western side of the lot in order to determine whether 70% of the
parcel is encumbered under 12.05 above.
Development within the Class II wetland or buffer is generally prohibited, except as a
redesignation pursuant to 12.6E(2) above. At this time the applicant is not proposing development
in the wetland or buffer.
D) 15.A SUBDIVISION REVIEW
15.A.04 Classification
(1) A Minor Subdivision, to be reviewed under Section 15.A.07, which is limited to:
(a) The subdivision of an existing lot, tract or parcel of land into two lots, including
the parent or retained lot, if the lot to be created is less than two times the minimum lot
area for the district in which it is located, and either has required street frontage, or shares
highway access with the retained lot;
(2) A Major Subdivision, to be reviewed under Sections 15.A.06 and 15.A.07, which includes
a subdivision of land that involves any of the following:
(a) The subdivision of an existing lot, tract or parcel of land into two lots, which does not
qualify as a minor subdivision under (A)(1);
At this time, the minimum lot size in the SEQ-NRT is 9,500 sf for a single-family home,
12,000 sf for a duplex, and 6,000 sf per unit for multifamily buildings.
Under the draft LDR being considered by the Planning Commission, the minimum lot size
will continue to be tied to the type of building, and will be smaller than it is today.
Therefore this subdivision will be considered a major subdivision.
15.A.05 Pre-Application Sketch Plan Review
This application constitutes the required sketch plan review.
15.A.06 Preliminary Subdivision Review (Major Subdivisions)
A. Purpose.
Preliminary subdivision review by the DRB, required for all Major Subdivisions, except for a
Transect Zone Subdivision, but including a Planned Unit Development (PUD) under Article 15.C, is
intended to evaluate a proposed subdivision under the standards of these Regulations, to
determine conformance with an approved master plan, to preliminarily allocate available
infrastructure capacity, to identify specific issues or concerns that must be addressed or mitigated
prior to final subdivision review and, upon preliminary approval, to allow the applicant to seek
other necessary permits or approvals that may result in project modifications, prior to preparing a
final survey plat, engineering plans, and required legal documents.
B. Combined Review.
(2) At the request of an applicant, the DRB may agree to combine preliminary and final
subdivision review for one or more phases of subdivision and development where either a Master
#SD-24-05
6
Plan under Article 15.B has been previously approved and is in effect, or where no Master Plan
Review under Article 15.B is required.
5. Given the purpose statement above, Staff recommends the Board consider permitting the
applicant to combine preliminary and final subdivision review. No master plan review is
required.
15.A.10 Subdivision Standards
A. Applicability.
Any subdivision of land subject to these Regulations must meet applicable subdivision standards
under this Article unless modified or waived by the DRB under Section 15.A.01(B).
(1) The DRB, in determining compliance with these standards, may require:
(a) Disclosure of the intended use and development of all land to be subdivided, including
subsequent development plans for any retained portion of the existing tract or parcel to
be subdivided.
6. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to describe in detail their plan for
development of the land proposed for subdivision. The applicants’ submitted materials
were particularly unspecific in this regard. Information should include the use, building
type, and rough configuration for the two acre parcel, as well as a plan for the retained
portion of the parent parcel.
15.A.11 General Standards
A. Development Suitability.
The applicant must demonstrate that the land to be subdivided is physically suited for its intended
use and the proposed density or intensity of development, and that the proposed subdivision will
not result in undue adverse impacts to public health and safety, environmental resources as
identified and regulated under Article 12, neighboring properties and uses, or public facilities and
infrastructure located on or within the vicinity of the land to be subdivided.
(1) Physical Site Constraints. Land that is physically unsuited for development, including land
that is characterized by periodic flooding, poor drainage, shallow soils, landslides,
environmental site contamination or other known physical hazards or constraints, must
not be subdivided for development unless the applicant can demonstrate that such
limitations can be overcome, remediated, or mitigated as necessary to allow for
subsequent development.
As described above, the proposed building envelope must be modified to reflect the criteria
of 12.06E. However, the following feedback will likely apply to the modified building
envelope as well. The applicant’s proposed building envelope is extremely irregularly
shaped, and, due to the irregularity of its shape, includes only limited areas that are suitable
for a building of reasonable size. See screenshot. As discussed above pertaining to natural
resource protection standards, encroachment into wetland buffers, including creation of
new lawn areas, is prohibited. Staff considers the proposed building envelope does not
foster protection of natural resources due to its irregular shape.
7. If natural or manmade boundaries do not exist, Staff has repeatedly observed that it is
human nature to expand development areas through tree clearing, establishment of
additional lawn, clearing of undergrowth, or even placement of yard debris, all of which
would be prohibited in the land outside of the buildable area. Staff recommends the Board
require the applicant to propose a regularly shaped buildable area to be defined by either a
natural or manmade barrier that enables compliance over time.
#SD-24-05
7
8. Once a revised development area is determined based on the standards of 12.06, Staff
recommends the Board ask the applicant to demonstrate how a home (or multifamily
home, depending on the applicant’s objectives) could be located with a reasonably sized
cleared buffer and appropriate driveway and parking areas in the buildable area.
(2) Buildable Area. For purposes of these Regulations, including the platting of building lots and
the calculation of the density or intensity of development allowed within a subdivision,
“Buildable Area” is defined as the total area of the tract or parcel to be subdivided, less the
area occupied by the following physical and legal site limitations or constraints:
“Hazards” as defined and regulated under Article 12, as indicated on sketch and Master
Plans, and as field verified and delineated on preliminary and final subdivision plans and
plats,
“Level I Resources” as defined and regulated under Article 12, as indicated on sketch and
Master Plans, and as depicted on preliminary and final subdivision plans and plats,
Existing and planned street and railroad rights-of way,
Transmission line corridors or easements, except upon request of the applicant that it be
designated as Buildable Area.
(a) The land area within a Habitat Block that is excluded from the Habitat Block through an
exchange of land, an exclusion intended to provide relief from associated standards, as
approved by the DRB under Section 12.04 (Habitat Block Overlay District), or relocation of
a Habitat Connector as approved by the DRB under Section 12.05 (Habitat Connector
Overlay District) may be included in the “Buildable Area” as defined above for purposes of
subdivision and development, and the calculation of development density.
Staff considers these criteria will be addressed when 12.06E above has been addressed.
C. Development Context.
#SD-24-05
8
The applicant must demonstrate that the subdivision conforms to the planned pattern of
subdivision and development in the area, as defined by district purpose statements and standards,
or as specified for a type of Planned Unit Development (PUD) under Article 15.C. In addition to
meeting required zoning district, transect zone, or PUD standards:
(1) Overlay Districts. Overlay districts applicable to this lot include natural resource protection
districts discussed under Article 12 above.
(2) Multiple Districts. This is a lot located in multiple districts, but the subdivision is proposed only
in the SEQ-NRT therefore compliance with this criterion is not a concern.
(3) Compliance with Other Regulations. Subdivision and subsequent development will be
required to meet applicable provisions of the Department of Public Works Standards, Fire
Prevention and Safety Ordinance, Water Ordinance, Sewer Ordinance, Impact Fee Ordinance,
and E-911 Ordinance.
(4) Conformance with an Approved Master Plan.
9. Staff considers the use of the “carve out” provision exempts this project from provision of a
master plan and any subsequent subdivision of the remaining lands will be required to pursue a
master plan. Staff recommends the Board to affirm their agreement with this interpretation.
D. Development Connectivity.
The applicant must demonstrate that the subdivision, to the extent physically feasible, is
configured and laid out to maximize connections with adjoining parcels and neighborhoods, and
to avoid creating isolated and disconnected enclaves of development, except where necessary to
separate incompatible land uses, or to avoid undue adverse impacts to resources identified for
protection under Article 12. Accordingly, the applicant must demonstrate that the subdivision is
laid out to connect with and extend existing and planned streets, sidewalks, recreation paths,
transit routes, and utility and greenway corridors located adjacent to or within ½-mile of the
subdivision, or as indicated on the City’s Official Map. Off-site improvements necessary to serve
the proposed subdivision must be provided in accordance with 15.A.18.
The applicant’s current development lot is proposed to be accessed Autumn Hill Road and use
municipal water and sewer. Any revisions to the design necessitated by habitat block standards
above should either be accessed via Autumn Hill Road or via the existing driveway.
15.A.12 Resource Protection Standards
These standards prohibit subdivision and building area lines from crossing natural resources.
Staff considers these standards largely follow from the environmental protection standards of
article 12 and do not warrant individual review at this sketch plan stage of review.
15.A.14 Street Network
These standards pertain to street design. The applicant is proposing a driveway to access the
carve out, and to access the proposed home on the adjacent 6 acre lot. The selection of this as a
driveway will dictate what can take place on the carve-out in terms of total development. The
Board will be encouraged to make this a condition of approval at later stages of review.
Comments on the driveway design for the adjacent lot are included in that conditional use review.
15.A.18D Stormwater Facilities
Stormwater treatment and control pursuant to 13.05 is required when one half acre or more
impervious surface exists or is proposed to exist on the lot. The applicant has indicated that the
proposed development will result in the creation of greater than ½ acre of impervious, and
#SD-24-05
9
therefore an analysis of compliance with stormwater management standards will be required at
the next stage of review.
E) DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS
The purpose of the Southeast Quadrant (SEQ) District is: “To encourage open space preservation,
scenic view and natural resource protection, wildlife habitat preservation, continued agriculture,
and well-planned residential use in the approximately 3,200-acre area of the City shown on the
Official Zoning Map as the Southeast Quadrant. The natural features, visual character and scenic
views offered in this area have long been recognized as very special and unique resources in the
City and worthy of protection. The design and layout of buildings and lots are intended to create
pedestrian-oriented neighborhoods while supporting the continued functions of natural
resources.”
Dimensional standards in the SEQ-NRT and SEQ-NRP include a minimum lot size of 9,500 sf per
single family home, 12,000 sf per duplex home, and 6,000 sf per unit for mutlfamily homes. As
noted above, these dimensions are expected to be reduced with the next LDR amendment, which
will likely be warned for public hearing before the applicant submits their next application for
review. Building coverage is limited to 20% and lot coverage to 40%.
The applicant’s currently proposed development lot meets minimum lot size standards, though as
noted above, has not shown any concept for how development could feasibly occur on the
proposed carve-out.
For principal structures, front setbacks are 20-ft, rear setbacks are 30-ft, and side setbacks are 10-ft.
For accessory structures, rear and side setbacks are 5-ft. Building height for a pitched roof is
limited to 28-ft to the midpoint of the roof.
F) OTHER
13.17 Residential Design for New Homes
These standards apply to all new homes on lots less than 1 acre in size. Depending on the
ultimate configuration of the development, these standards may apply, and require buildings to be
oriented to the street, to maximize solar gain potential, to have garages set back from the front lot
line by at least 8 ft relative to the front line of the building, and for the garage to be less than 40%
of the width of the façade.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board work with the applicant to address the issues identified herein.
Respectfully submitted,
Marla Keene, Development Review Planner