HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 04_SD-20-10_500 Old Farm Rd_OBrien Farm Road LLC_SKCITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
SD‐20‐10_550 Old Farm Rd_OBrien Farm Road
LLC_SK_2020‐04‐07.docx
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
Report preparation date: April 1, 2020
Plans received: December 20, 2018
500 Old Farm Road
Sketch Plan Application #SD‐20‐10
Meeting date: April 7, 2020
Applicant
O’Brien Farm Road, LLC
1855 Williston Road
South Burlington, VT 05403
Engineer
Krebs & Lansing Consulting Engineers, Inc.
164 Main Street
Colchester, VT 05446
Property Information
Tax Parcel 0970‐00255, 0970‐00255.C, 0980‐00055, 1260‐0200F
Residential 12, Commercial 1‐LR, Residential 1‐PRD Zoning Districts
91.18 acres
Location Map
#SD‐20‐10
Staff Comments
2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Sketch plan application #SD‐20‐10 of O’Brien Farm Road, LLC for a master plan and planned unit
development to develop 82.9 acres with a maximum of 415 dwelling units, up to 1,285,000 sf of
commercial space and 22.1 acres of open space, and realign the north end of Old Farm Road, 500 Old
Farm Road.
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 and offer the following
comments.
Planning and zoning staff has reviewed the project internally with the Fire Department, Department of
Public Works, and City Stormwater Section. These staff comments incorporate comments from those
departments throughout.
A) Overview
The applicant’s letter of February 14, 2020 provides the details of their proposal. This application is for
master plan sketch plan, as required under 15.07C, and for PUD sketch plan.
This project represents a separate, but adjacent Master Plan from the one previously approved. For the
purposes of these notes, the prior master plan will be referred to as MP1.
Master Plan is not required for this project. However, Staff supports the applicant’s request for Master
Plan for the following reasons.
The project includes a number of interconnected roadways and mixed uses. Traffic impacts
should be considers on an overall basis rather than phase by phase.
Open spaces are being considered on an overall basis
Setback and height waivers are being sought
The applicant seeks a timeline greater than the standard 180 days to commence construction of
each phase.
Generally, as a 82.9 acre development, this project has the potential for as many units as the
combination of Cider Mill I and Cider Mill II combined, or 50% more units than the entirety of South
Village. There is the potential for development of nearly as much commercial square footage as the
entirety of Community Drive.
1. Staff recommends the Board keep the scale of this development in mind during their review, and not
hesitate to ask for more detailed information or take more time to review individual elements discussed
below.
The applicant is seeking Master Plan approval for a PUD to construct:
126 units in single family, duplex and multi‐family buildings on 10 residential lots, generally
located along Old Farm Road.
o The applicant has indicated in their cover letter they intend to apply for preliminary and
final plat approval for this and for the realignment of Old Farm Road with the goal of
being ready to construct in 2021.
#SD‐20‐10
Staff Comments
3
252 or up to 289 (with affordable offsets) units and up to 375,000 commercial square feet in the
north end of the subject properties, generally shown as a pink color in their attached overview
plan
o The applicant indicated in their cover letter they intend to apply for the lot configuration
and density for these lots as part of the same preliminary and final plat application as
the 126 units along Old Farm Road, because the density of these lots will drive the
traffic at the north end of the realigned Old Farm Road.
2. Staff considers the optimal layout for these lots will depend strongly on whether they will
be residential or commercial, and recommends the Board discuss with the applicant the
level of detail needed for these lots in order for the Board to feel comfortable issuing
preliminary and final plat approval.
Up to 910,000 commercial square feet east of the residential core
o At this time the applicant has indicated they only will seek final plat approval for the
roadway and lot layout within this area.
3. Staff recommends the Board discuss with the applicant their proposed timeline for this
application.
4. Because of the substantial potential square footage, Staff recommends the Board
discuss with the applicant that this area should be considered as it’s own final plat
application rather than combined with the residential and mixed use portions of the
development.
22.1 acres of open space
o It appears the applicant has included 15+/‐ acres of small parks, an area designated as
Village Green (the location of the former farm’s barn), and approximately 4 acres they
are referring to as environmental corridors.
5. Staff recommends the Board invite the applicant to describe how these areas can be
used by residents and tenants of the commercial space.
6. The applicant already has master plan approval for 458 dwelling units in MP1. With the
potential for an additional 415 units, Staff recommends the Board discuss whether
recreation fields should be included in the open space.
7. Staff recommends the Board direct the applicant to meet with the Recreation and Parks
Committee to receive feedback on their proposed open spaces.
8. Staff additionally recommends the Board direct the applicant to meet with the Bicycle
and Pedestrian Committee to receive feedback on their proposed open spaces.
9. Staff recommends the Board invite the applicant to discuss how the existing master plan area will
relate to the area currently proposed for redevelopment.
B) Approval and Amendment of Master Plan
Pursuant to Section 15.07(D)(3) of the South Burlington Land Development regulations, “any application
#SD‐20‐10
Staff Comments
4
for amendment of the master plan, preliminary site plan or preliminary plat that deviates from the
master plan in any one or more of the following respects, shall be considered a new application for the
property and shall require sketch plan review as well as approval of an amended master plan.” As the
initial master plan, the review of these standards establishes the parameters for the project.
(a) An increase in the total FAR or number of residential dwelling units for the property subject to
the master plan;
The LDRs limit the residential density to what is allowed within each zoning district. LDR
15.02A(6) pertaining to the Board’s authority with respect to PUDs states the following.
The modification of the maximum residential density for a zoning district shall be
permitted only as provided in the applicable district regulations and/or for the
provision of affordable housing pursuant to Section 13.14 of these Regulations.
In other words, the project contains lands in the C1‐LR zoning district which allows a maximum
residential density of 12 units per acre, and lands in the R1‐PRD zoning district which allows a
maximum residential density of 4 units per acre. Each zoning district may not exceed its
inherent density.
10. Staff recommends the Board request the applicant provide a more accurate calculation and an
accompanying map of the area of each zoning district, and the total area, and the number of
units proposed for each zoning district, at the next stage of review.
11. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to describe the source of the uncertainty in their
potential dwelling unit and commercial square footage numbers, and work through what
questions need to be resolved to solidify this number prior to the next stage of review.
(b) An increase in the total site coverage of the property subject to the master plan;
12. At the next stage of review, the applicant must provide a requested maximum site coverage.
Staff recommends the Board discuss what level of detail they will need to be comfortable with
the requested lot coverage.
(c) A change in the location, layout, capacity or number of collector roadways on the property
subject to the master plan;
Additional comments related to transportation infrastructure and connectivity are provided
below. The minimum ROW width for a collector roadway is 60‐feet, with minimum of 30 feet of
pavement, curbing, and a number of other geometry limits. Staff considers the minimum
pavement width to be waivable.
13. Staff recommends the Board discuss whether to establish Old Farm Road and the east roadway
as collector roadways.
(d) Land development proposed in any area previously identified as permanent open space in the
approved master plan application; and/or
The applicant has shown where they are proposing open space.
(e) A change that will result in an increase in the number of PM peak hour vehicle trip ends
projected for the total buildout of the property subject to the master plan.
At the next stage of review, the applicant must provide an estimated maximum PM peak hour
vehicle trips. It is desirable to have a reasonable estimate of the maximum number of trips
#SD‐20‐10
Staff Comments
5
rather than an overly high maximum to prevent infrastructure from being over‐designed.
14. Staff recommends the Board discuss what level of detail they will need to be comfortable with
the request.
C) Criteria for Review of PUDs
Pursuant to Section 15.18 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, master plans are subject
to PUD standards and conditions. PUD standards pertain to water and wastewater capacity, natural
resource protection, traffic, visual compatibility with the surrounding area, open space, fire protection,
relationship to the Comprehensive Plan, and public infrastructure.
Water Supply and Wastewater Connection
Staff notes that there are different requirements for water service for light industrial, general office, and
residential.
15. Staff recommends the Board direct the applicant to meet with the Fire Department to understand
these requirements prior to investing heavily in infrastructure design.
Grading and Erosion Control
16. Staff recommends the Board invite the applicant to describe their proposed phasing and how it
pertains to blasting and earth disturbance. Based on feedback from City Staff on the master plan
currently under construction, Staff recommends the Board consider including a condition requiring
City Stormwater Section approval of final stabilization measures prior to being issued a zoning
permit for each subsequent project phase.
Roadways, Access, Circulation and Traffic Management
Along with density, Staff considers the roadway layout to be the most significant element of this application.
There is one roadway shown in this area on the official map, which connects from the southern end of the
property to Kimball Avenue in roughly the same alignment as the eastern‐most roadway shown by the
applicant.
17. Staff recommends the Board discuss with the applicant the following elements of the roadway
layout. To reiterate what was mentioned above, each of these elements represents a sizeable
project and warrants full consideration by the Board.
a. Old Farm Road and Hinesburg Road – in the past there has been some discussion of the
applicant providing off‐site mitigation at this intersection. City staff feel strongly that the
connection should be continued, but all participating departments were supportive of traffic
calming measures being installed to reduce the desirability of Old Farm Road as a cut through.
b. Old Farm Road and Kimball Avenue – All participating City departments were supportive of
realigning the intersection to be farther away from Kennedy Drive. Staff recommends the
Board invite the applicant to describe why they selected a divided roadway cross section for the
northern terminus of Old Farm Road, and discuss whether this is desirable.
c. Northern mixed commercial and residential blocks – Staff notes that buildings must be on
streets, and recommends the Board ask the applicant how they plan to lay out these blocks to
meet this criterion, and whether additional streets are needed.
#SD‐20‐10
Staff Comments
6
d. Dead end streets
i. Staff recommends the Board consider whether the dead end street between the
residential section and the mixed commercial residential area east of old farm road
should connect to the eastern loop road off Old Farm Road.
ii. Staff recommends the Board discuss connectivity between the industrial commercial
area to the east and the residential area to the west. Because this project is all one
master plan, and the applicant has referred to the commercial area as a neighborhood
employment center, Staff considers connectivity between zones an important element.
iii. There are two roadways with 90‐degree bends in proximity to one another at the
northern end of the western loop road off Old Farm Road. Staff considers connectivity
to be important here. Staff recommends the Board discuss whether a vehicular or
pedestrian connection is preferred.
iv. There is a “spur” road at the south end of the development. Staff recommends the
Board ask the applicant to describe the concept for this roadway. Roadways are
required to extend to adjacent property lines. If the applicant does not wish this
roadway to extend to the property line to the south, it should be connected to the
neighborhood employment center to the east.
v. Block lengths should be no greater than 600‐feet. Pedestrian connections may be used
as mid block connections. Staff recommends the Board discuss whether the applicant
should include a vehicular or a pedestrian mid‐block connection on each of the loop
roads off Old Farm Road.
As discussed above, the applicant will be required to provide a maximum number of anticipated vehicle trip
ends at the next stage of review.
Natural Resource Protection
18. It appears the open spaces are located in the proximity of wetland buffers. Staff recommends the
Board ask the applicant to show wetlands and wetland buffers on their plans so impacts to wetland
buffers can be evaluated. Wetland and wetland buffer impacts should be limited.
19. Staff also recommends the Board ask the applicant to show River Corridors and Stream Setbacks on
plans in order to determine compliance with standards for each.
Compatibility with Planned Development Patterns
Considerations related to roadway compatibility are addressed under roadway standards above.
20. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to present how the project will relate to adjacent
areas, with consideration for the the following context.
Connectivity, scale, and community connection between MP1 and current Master Plan
(including parks)
Kimball Ave development areas
Residential neighborhood at the south end of Old Farm Road
Outparcel that is embedded within the master plan area
#SD‐20‐10
Staff Comments
7
Tilley Drive development
Possible Exit 12B
Potash Brook as a Natural resource
Open Space Design
21. This criterion pertains to contiguity of open spaces between parcels and between stream buffers.
Related to block length, Staff recommends the Board review the design northern end of the western
loop road, and discuss whether shifting the bend to the south would improve open space
connectivity and roadway design.
Fire Department Review
The Building Inspector and Fire Chief have reviewed the plans and offer the following comments.
o If the applicant is proposing 20 foot wide roads with sidewalk on one side, there cannot be a
curb
o If the commercial buildings are sprinklered there must be a hydrant within 100 ft of the fire
department connection (FDC). The applicant is encouraged to think about this spacing and
how it relates to adjacent residential layout.
Compatibility with Infrastructure
22. Staff recommends the Board discuss with the applicant what elements of the project they intend
to turn over to the City and which they intend to remain private.
23. Staff notes the CCTA stations the applicant has shown on the plan are not anticipated to remain
and should not be included in future submissions.
Low Impact Development/Stormwater
The City Stormwater Section has reviewed the plans and has requested the applicant include planning
for stormwater maintenance access in their design.
D) Requested Waivers and Considerations
In review of master plans, the DRB must specify the level of review and process required for subsequent
applications pursuant to the master plan. For example, the DRB may specify that final site plan only
shall be required for specified portions of a project, or that certain elements of the PUD may be
amended by final plat application only.
The applicant has noted they anticipate requesting setback waivers and height waivers, though specific
waiver requests have not been enumerated at this time.
24. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to specifically enumerate the requested
waivers and demonstrate the resulting impacts prior to granting approval. This may mean that
waivers are more appropriately granted as part of PUD approvals for each phase rather than on
an overall master plan basis.
Review elements that are specified for master plans already in the LDR include:
Any application which does not reduce the total area or alter the location of proposed
permanent open spaces does not require sketch plan review. The DRB should determine
whether the applicant may combine preliminary and final plat into one action for such
#SD‐20‐10
Staff Comments
8
applications.
The DRB may specify additional minor land development activities that will not require DRB
action. Examples include additions of decks or porches to dwelling units.
The DRB must maintain a record of criteria that are applicable to the project such as residential
density, total site coverage, sewer capacity and the location and status of public amenities.
E) Phasing
25. The Applicant has provided a loose discussion of phasing in their application cover letter. Staff
recommends the Board request the applicant to show on their plans the limits of each described
phase in order to allow the Board to evaluate the phasing plan as it pertains to access,
circulation, and open space.
26. Staff considers the phasing plan should also take into consideration communal elements of the
Project such as parks and paths so that each phase is accompanied by a proportional amount of
infrastructure, and recommends the Board request the Applicant assign the communal elements
to phases.
F) Affordable Housing
The City Council has warned draft amendments to the LDRs which include minimum requirements for
affordable housing. 10% of ownership and 15% of rental units will need to be “affordable” as defined. In
exchange, there is an offset of more market rate units.
Key elements of the standard include:
‐ Must be physically integrated into the overall layout, scale and massing of the development
‐ Average number of bedrooms must equal those of the market rate. Size of units have a
minimum.
‐ Must be made available for occupancy concurrently with Market Rate units.
27. Since this project will fall under the revised LDR, Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant
to discuss their approach with respect to affordable housing.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board discuss the project with the applicant. In consideration of the scale of the
project, Staff recommends that the Board take ample time to review each element and continue the
hearing if necessary.
Respectfully submitted,
____________________________
Marla Keene, Development Review Planner
VIA HAND DELIVERY AND ELECTRONIC MAIL
February 14, 2020
South Burlington Development Review Board
C/O Ms. Marla Keene, Development Review Planner
City of South Burlington
575 Dorset Street
South Burlington, VT 05403
Re: Hillside at O’Brien Farm Planned Unit Development
Dear Board Members:
O’Brien Farm Road, LLC (“Applicant”) is filing for Sketch Plan Review for a proposed
development of approximately 91.18 acres of land to become a planned community consisting of 126
single-family, duplex and multi-family for sale homes located on ten (10) newly created residential lots;
and a mixture of yet undetermined compliant commercial and residential uses located throughout the
involved lands adjacent to Kennedy Drive, Old Farm Road and Kimball Avenue on seventeen (17) newly
subdivided commercial, industrial and mixed use lots with the allocation of 252 or up to 289 (with
affordable offsets), residential units to be built across the lots located in the C1-LR zoning district
identified as the “Project,” herein. The Project will be located on Ɛŝdž existing lots shown on existing
conditions plans previously submitted. The Applicant submitted its application for the Project on
January 24, 2020. Subsequent to the submission, the Applicant met with City staff on February 10,
2020. Staff advised the applicant that some additional information would be useful for your review of
the Project. That information is provided below.
Further to our conversation with City staff, the following additional information is provided:
I. High level timeline of what will progress through preliminary and final plat.
The Applicant intends to pursue preliminary and final plat for all infrastructure, lots and
approvals required for full permits to build 126 residential dwelling units located as shown on the sketch
plans filed, attached hereto as Exhibit 002. The Applicant intends to begin construction on home sites
shown in these plans in 2021 to facilitate a smooth transition from the existing Hillside neighborhood,
which is selling at a brisk pace.
As part of the approvals for the 126 units proposed, the Applicant believes that the
reconfiguration of Old Farm Road will be necessary. As such, the Applicant intends to permit any
needed improvements to Old Farm Road, as well as the re-orientation and inclusion of a signal if
required. The applicant will provide a traffic analysis and proposed trip end triggers for the construction
of such infrastructure at the Preliminary Plat review.
2
Because Old Farm Road will need to be reconfigured, it is important that the Applicant confirms
in this application the layout and capacity of the commercial lots being created. The Applicant will
pursue plat permit findings that solidify the density of the PUD C1-LR lands, and that solidify conditions
that will allow that density to be realized on the lots being created; likely in the form of reduced
setbacks and height waivers for the C1-LR lots proposed. The Applicant will propose for construction as
part of this application all infrastructure to serve those lots, including extension of utilities from Kennedy
Drive, Old Farm Road and O’Brien Farm Road as required. Lots shown will be fully permitted with the
intent that subsequent development on those lots will require only site plan review, pursuant to the
findings of the PUD now filed.
The Applicant also proposes a nine-lot commercial subdivision on a portion of the involved lands
in the Mixed IC zoning district. Final Plat permits will be sought solidifying the construction of the
proposed road network with triggers for construction of any traffic improvements needed at the Kimball
Drive intersection. The outcome will be an approved industrial commercial subdivision where lots can
be marketed and tenants or owners sought for the development and developed with site plan approval
only.
Overall, the Applicant will request findings regarding phases and phasing of the Project, as well
as findings regarding common amenities of the PUD. For instance, findings solidifying the common
green space and path networks are sufficient for all the components of the PUD. The intention is to
accommodate now all amenities needed for the full buildout of the lots proposed and to streamline
future permitting projects.
The Applicant is prepared to file these applications in full in the coming 45-60 days. The
Applicant has been working with City Staff and community members on this phase of the Hillside Project
since at least 2016. When Hillside was originally filed, the Applicant shared with the Board concepts for
these remaining lands similar to what is now proposed. We appreciate that this is a very large project
and a large undertaking by the Board and by City staff. We appreciate and are committed to the process
and to working with you every step of the way to make this Project a great benefit for the City of South
Burlington. This is a unique opportunity for the City to realize a true mixed-use, walkable development
capitalizing on existing infrastructure and surrounded by existing patterns of development on a site long
identified for development by the owner, the City, and the Chittenden County Regional Planning
Commission.
II. High level information on commercial square footage anticipated.
Attached as Exhibit 001 please find a slide deck prepared detailing the Project proposed from a
high-level perspective. This presentation includes information on the specific amounts of commercial
square footage possible within the project area. It also includes some potential/plausible layouts for
that commercial square footage in the C1-LR zoned lands of the Project, per your request. Please note
that these uses are not currently proposed, and no review is being requested for those specific buildings
at this time. This layout is conceptual, as are the square footage numbers provided. Each use would
need site plan review and approval prior to construction, and would be measured against the trip end
ceilings established by this PUD.
The potential square footage of uses within the IC lands has been extrapolated by determining
the compliant amount of building coverage allowed on each lot, and by multiplying that square footage
by the permissible building height of three stories. It is not anticipated that all lots available will be built
3
out at three stories. However, this is the magnitude of the size of uses permissible on this land. At this
time only the subdivision and road are being permitted. Allowing for future applications to present a
user and building for each lot. A traffic study will be provided to analyze the requirements for the
intersection proposed with Kimball Avenue. A PM peak trip trigger will be established for any
intersection improvements required.
III. Information on Infrastructure and Green Space Proposed
Exhibit 001 contains a slide dedicated to an overview of Green Space proposed. Each green
space is shown and labeled. Connections between the spaces are highlighted. The Project contains
significant amounts of open space. In total 22.2 acres of open space are provided. Of that 22.2 acres,
4.4 acres are resource lands, but the vast majority of the 17.8 acres of open space proposed are usable
and programmed open spaces. We believe this represents a great opportunity for open space
recreation within the Project and provides protection to all recognized natural resources located on the
property.
Further, the exhibits show the interconnected nature of the open space proposed. A trail
network map is provided demonstrating how the project is connected by various pedestrian paths. We
feel that the connections proposed are more than adequate, and the goal has been to create an
interconnected and pedestrian friendly neighborhood.
IV. Summary of Waivers Requested:
The applicant believes that setback waivers will be required to complete the development. The
specific waivers requested are shown on an area by area basis at Exhibit 001. Different zones of the
neighborhood have been named to provide for ease of reference. The Applicant will also request height
waivers be granted for the C1-LR area to allow for future development of taller structures and is
prepared to provide architectural renderings if required. There may be the need for road standard
waivers depending on the radius, slope, etc., of streets as final design is determined. While this may or
may not be a waiver, Applicant will request extended durations for when zoning permits must be issued
pursuant to plats granted, based on phases and timing of improvements proposed because this Project
will require an extended build-out period.
At this point no additional waivers are anticipated, though it may be the case that they are
required to facilitate the plan as laid out in detail in the January 24, 2020 filing, as well as in the slides
attached at Exhibit 001.
We appreciate your review of the enclosed additional materials and look forward to our March
16th hearing. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Andrew Gill, Director of Development
Enclosures
/DPRXUHX[ 'LFNLQVRQ WĂŐĞϭ
&RQVXOWLQJ(QJLQHHUV,QF
d ,E/>D DKZEhD
WƌŽũĞĐƚ͗ K͛ƌŝĞŶƌŽƚŚĞƌƐEĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚͲWŚĂƐĞ//
ĂƚĞ͗ĞĐĞŵďĞƌϭϮ͕ϮϬϭϵ
&ƌŽŵ͗ ZŽŐĞƌŝĐŬŝŶƐŽŶ͕W ͕WdK
^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗ WƌĞůŝŵŝŶĂƌLJƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚŽĨKůĚ&ĂƌŵZŽĂĚdƌĂĨĨŝĐ/ŵƉĂĐƚƐ
WƌŽũĞĐƚͲ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚĞĚdƌŝƉƐ
ƐƚŝŵĂƚĞƐŽĨƚŚĞƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌƚƌŝƉŐĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶǁĞƌĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚƵƐŝŶŐ/d ƚƌŝƉŐĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƌĂƚĞƐ͘ džƚĞƌŶĂů
ƚƌŝƉƐǁĞƌĞƚŚĞŶĐĂůĐƵůĂƚĞĚƵƐŝŶŐƚŚĞE,ZWϲϴϰ/ŶƚĞƌŶĂůdƌŝƉĂƉƚƵƌĞ ƐƚŝŵĂƚŝŽŶdŽŽů͘>ĂƐƚůLJ͕ƉĂƐƐͲďLJ
ƚƌŝƉƐǁĞƌĞĐĂůĐƵůĂƚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞƌĞƚĂŝůĂŶĚƐƵƉĞƌŵĂƌŬĞƚƵƐĞƐďĂƐĞĚŽŶĂϯϲйƉĂƐƐͲďLJƌĂƚŝŽ͘dŚĞƌĞƐƵůƚŝŶŐ
ƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌƚƌŝƉƐĂƌĞƐƵŵŵĂƌŝnjĞĚŝŶƚŚĞƚĂďůĞďĞůŽǁ͘
^ŝnjĞ DWĞĂŬ,ŽƵƌ WDWĞĂŬ,ŽƵƌ
dŽƚĂůdƌŝƉƐ
^ŝŶŐůĞ&ĂŵŝůLJ
DƵůƚŝͲ&ĂŵŝůLJ
^ĞŶŝŽƌ,ŽƵƐŝŶŐ
,ŽƚĞů
KĨĨŝĐĞ
ZĞƚĂŝů
^ƵƉĞƌŵĂƌŬĞƚ
dŽƚĂů
ϭϰϮƵŶŝƚƐ
ϮϱϮƵŶŝƚƐ
ϵϮƵŶŝƚƐ
ϴϬƌŽŽŵƐ
Ϯ͕ϱϬϬƐĨ
ϭϮ͕ϱϬϬƐĨ
ϰϲ͕ϬϬϬƐĨ
ϭϬϱ
ϴϱ
ϭϴ
ϯϴ
ϯ
ϴ
ϭϳϲ
ϰϯϯ
ϭϰϮ
ϭϬϴ
Ϯϰ
ϰϴ
ϯ
ϭϭϳ
ϰϯϴ
ϴϴϬ
/ŶƚĞƌŶĂůĂƉƚƵƌĞΘdƌĂŶƐŝƚͬWĞĚdƌŝƉƐ ͲϯϮ ͲϮϭϲ
džƚĞƌŶĂůsĞŚŝĐůĞdƌŝƉƐ ϰϬϭ ϲϲϰ
WĂƐƐͲLJdƌŝƉƐ Ͳϲϰ Ͳϭϲϱ
EĞƚĚĚĞĚWĞĂŬ,ŽƵƌdƌŝƉƐ ϯϯϳ ϰϵϵ
ƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞDƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌ͕ƚŚĞƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůĂŶĚĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƵƐĞƐǁŝůůŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞϭϴϯĂŶĚϭϱϰƚƌŝƉƐ͕
ƌĞƐƉĞĐƚŝǀĞůLJ͕ŽĨƚŚĞϯϯϳŶĞǁDƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌƚƌŝƉƐ͘^ŝŵŝůĂƌůLJ͕ĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞWDƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌ͕ƚŚĞƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůĂŶĚ
ĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƵƐĞƐǁŝůůŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞϭϲϱĂŶĚϯϯϰƚƌŝƉƐ͕ƌĞƐƉĞĐƚŝǀĞůLJŽĨƚŚĞϰϵϵŶĞǁWDƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌƚƌŝƉƐ͘
WĞĂŬ,ŽƵƌdƌŝƉŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶƐ
ƐƚŝŵĂƚĞƐŽĨƚŚĞƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌƚƌŝƉĚŝƌĞĐƚŝŽŶĂůƐƉůŝƚƐǁĞƌĞŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞĚƵƐŝŶŐϮϬϭϭͲϮϬϭϱŵĞƌŝĐĂŶŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ
^ƵƌǀĞLJũŽƵƌŶĞLJƚŽǁŽƌŬĚĂƚĂĨŽƌ^ŽƵƚŚƵƌůŝŶŐƚŽŶ͘dŚŝƐĚĂƚĂŝƐĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞŝŶƚǁŽĨŽƌŵĂƚƐ͖ƚŚĞǁŽƌŬƉůĂĐĞ
ĚĞƐƚŝŶĂƚŝŽŶƐŽĨ^ŽƵƚŚƵƌůŝŶŐƚŽŶƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞŽƌŝŐŝŶƐŽĨƉĞŽƉůĞƚƌĂǀĞůŝŶŐƚŽǁŽƌŬŝŶ^ŽƵƚŚ
ƵƌůŝŶŐƚŽŶ͘^ŝŶĐĞƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůƚƌŝƉƉĂƚƚĞƌŶƐĂƌĞƉƌŝŵĂƌŝůLJĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚďLJƚŚĞŐĞŽŐƌĂƉŚŝĐĚŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶŽĨ
/DPRXUHX[ 'LFNLQVRQWĂŐĞϮ
&RQVXOWLQJ(QJLQHHUV,QF
ĞŵƉůŽLJŵĞŶƚŽƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚŝĞƐ͕ƚŚĞǁŽƌŬƉůĂĐĞĚĞƐƚŝŶĂƚŝŽŶƐŽĨ^ŽƵƚŚƵƌůŝŶŐƚŽŶƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐĐĂŶďĞĂƉƉůŝĞĚƚŽ
ĞƐƚŝŵĂƚĞƚŚĞĚŝƌĞĐƚŝŽŶĂůƉĂƚƚĞƌŶƐŽĨƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůƚƌŝƉƐ͘
ŽŶǀĞƌƐĞůLJ͕ĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƚƌŝƉƉĂƚƚĞƌŶƐĂƌĞƉƌŝŵĂƌŝůLJĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚďLJƚŚĞŐĞŽŐƌĂƉŚŝĐĚŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶŽĨ
ƉŽƉƵůĂƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚŝŶĂŶĂŶƚŝĐŝƉĂƚĞĚƐƉŚĞƌĞŽĨŝŶĨůƵĞŶĐĞ͘dŚƵƐ͕ĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƚƌŝƉƉĂƚƚĞƌŶƐĂƌĞƉƌŝŵĂƌŝůLJ
ďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞŽƌŝŐŝŶƐŽĨƉĞŽƉůĞƚƌĂǀĞůŝŶŐƚŽǁŽƌŬŝŶ^ŽƵƚŚƵƌůŝŶŐƚŽŶ͘
dŚĞƌĞƐƵůƚŝŶŐĐĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐŽĨĚŝƌĞĐƚŝŽŶĂůĚŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶƐŽĨǁĞĞŬĚĂLJƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌƉƌŽũĞĐƚƚƌŝƉƐĞƐƚŝŵĂƚĞƚŚĂƚ
ϮйŽĨƚŚĞĞdžƚĞƌŶĂůƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůƚƌŝƉƐĂŶĚϱйŽĨƚŚĞĞdžƚĞƌŶĂůĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƚƌŝƉƐǁŝůůƵƐĞKůĚ&ĂƌŵZŽĂĚƚŽ
ƚƌĂǀĞůƚŽͬĨƌŽŵƉŽŝŶƚƐƐŽƵƚŚǀŝĂsdϭϭϲ;,ŝŶĞƐďƵƌŐZŽĂĚͿ͘dŚŝƐƌĞƐƵůƚƐŝŶƚŚŝƐWƌŽũĞĐƚŝŶĐƌĞĂƐŝŶŐKůĚ&Ăƌŵ
ZŽĂĚ;ƚŽͬĨƌŽŵƚŚĞƐŽƵƚŚͿƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌǀŽůƵŵĞƐďLJϭϭǀƉŚĂŶĚϮϬǀƉŚĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞDĂŶĚWDƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌƐ͕
ƌĞƐƉĞĐƚŝǀĞůLJ͘KŶĂƌŽĂĚǁĂLJƚŚĂƚƉƌĞƐĞŶƚůLJŚĂƐƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌǀŽůƵŵĞƐŽĨϭϮϬͲϭϯϬǀƉŚ͕ƚŚŽƐĞĂƌĞƌĞůĂƚŝǀĞůLJ
ŵŽĚĞƐƚŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞƐŐŝǀĞŶƚŚĞƐĐŽƉĞŽĨƚŚĞWƌŽũĞĐƚ͘
dƌĂĨĨŝĐĂůŵŝŶŐDĞĂƐƵƌĞƐ
dŚĞƌĞĞdžŝƐƚĂŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨƚƌĂĨĨŝĐĐĂůŵŝŶŐŵĞĂƐƵƌĞƐƚŚĂƚĐŽƵůĚďĞŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞĚŝŶƚŽƚŚĞWƌŽũĞĐƚ͛ƐĚĞƐŝŐŶƚŽ
ƐůŽǁĂŶĚĚŝƐĐŽƵƌĂŐĞƚŚƌŽƵŐŚƚƌĂĨĨŝĐĨƌŽŵƵƐŝŶŐKůĚ&ĂƌŵZŽĂĚ͘dŚĞĂƚƚĂĐŚĞĚŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶƐŽĨĐŽŵŵŽŶůLJ
ƵƐĞĚƐƚƌĞĞƚĚĞƐŝŐŶĞůĞŵĞŶƚƐƚŽĐĂůŵƚƌĂĨĨŝĐĂŶĚƚŽĐƌĞĂƚĞĂƐĂĨĞƌƐƚƌĞĞƚĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĨŽƌĂůůƵƐĞƌƐĂƌĞ
ĨƌŽŵƚŚĞhƌďĂŶ^ƚƌĞĞƚĞƐŝŐŶ'ƵŝĚĞ͕EĂƚŝŽŶĂůƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶŽĨŝƚLJdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶKĨĨŝĐŝĂůƐ͕ϮϬϭϯ͘
^ƚĂĨĨŶŽƚĞ͗ĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƉĂŐĞƐƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞĚŝŶƚŚŝƐƉĂƌĂŐƌĂƉŚĂƌĞĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞĨƌŽŵƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐĂŶĚnjŽŶŝŶŐƐƚĂĨĨƵƉŽŶ
ƌĞƋƵĞƐƚ