HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 09_SP-20-21_96 Aiken St_South Village_Lot 4BStaff Comments
#SP‐20‐021
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
SP‐20‐21_96 Aiken St_South Village_Lot 4B_2020‐05‐19.docx
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
Report preparation date: May 13,2020
Plans received: March 31, 2020
96 Aiken Street
Site Plan Application #SP‐20‐021
Meeting Date: May 19, 2020
Owner
South Village Communities, LLC
PO Box 2286
South Burlington, VT 05407
Engineer
CEA
10 Mansfield View Lane
South Burlington, VT 05403
Property Information
Tax Parcel 0007‐00096
SEQ Zoning District‐ Neighborhood Residential
Location Map
Staff Comments
#SP‐20‐021
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Site plan application #SP‐20‐021 of South Village Communities, LLC to construct a twelve‐unit
three story multifamily building with underground parking on an existing 0.52 acre lot (Lot 4B),
96 Aiken Street.
PROJECT HISTORY
The applicant previously received approval SP‐11‐42 to construct a substantially similar building
on this lot. That approval expired. The master plan approval for this project, MP‐05‐02 and
subsequent amendments, does not establish a set of applicable standards for this project,
therefore the current LDR, with amendments effective November 29, 2019, applies to this
project. However the current LDR is not substantially different from the LDR in existence when
MP‐05‐02 was approved. The master plan does establish a set of dimensional standards
applicable to multifamily homes:
‐ Multi‐family maximum building coverage of 50%
‐ Multi‐family maximum lot coverage of 65%
‐ Multi‐family front yard setback of 10’
‐ Multi‐family rear yard setback of 5’
The applicant is concurrently applying for site plan approval #SP‐20‐020 for a similar building at
64 Aiken Street, and incidental grading on adjacent Lot 1 under MS‐20‐03. Staff comments for
SP‐20‐020 incorporate discussion of issues applicable to all three applications, while staff
comments for this application focus only on issues specific to 96 Aiken Street.
Staff notes the applicant submitted one narrative and planset for both this and SP‐20‐020.
Those materials are included in the agenda item for SP‐20‐020 and are not duplicated here.
CONTEXT
As for SP‐20‐020, nothing in this application inconsistent with the requirements of MS‐20‐02.
This lot is presently undeveloped. Subdivision is not proposed.
COMMENTS
Development Review Planner Marla Keene and Director of Planning and Zoning Paul Conner
have reviewed the plans submitted on March 31, 2020 and offer the following comments.
Numbered items for the Board’s attention are in red.
DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS
SEQ‐NR amended by MP‐05‐02 Required Proposed
@ Min. Lot Size 40,000 sf 22,651 sf
Max. Building Coverage 50 % 37.0 %
X Max. Overall Coverage 65 % 71.4 %
Min. Front Setback 10 ft. 10 ft.
Staff Comments
#SP‐20‐021
Min. Side Setback 20 ft. 30 ft.
Min. Rear Setback 5 ft. 24 ft
X Max. Height (pitched roof) 28 ft. 45 ft.
Max. Stories 4 3
Max. Stories below roofline 3 3
X Max. Stories facing street 2 3
@ approved as part of MP‐05‐02
X Non‐compliant,
For coverage, see note 1.
For height and stories, see 9.06A below.
1. The applicant has indicated they would like to provide an overall coverage of 71.4%. The
master plan approval increased the allowable lot coverage for multifamily buildings from
35% to 65%. The Board may choose to grant a further waiver of overall coverage to 72% in
this case if the overall approved coverage of 13.9% (from MP‐05‐02) and the SEQ‐NR
coverage of 35% allowed in the LDR is not exceeded. Staff recommends the Board grant
this waiver if the applicant demonstrates that the other coverage limits are not exceed.
SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
9.06 Dimensional and Design Requirements Applicable to All Sub‐Districts. The following
standards shall apply to development and improvements within the entire SEQ:
A. Height. See Article 3.07.
3.07C Where a structure has been approved as part of a master plan prior to January
9, 2012 with a height greater than that permitted in these Regulations, such
approved maximum height shall remain in effect.
As for SP‐20‐020, Staff considers this project contemplated two three‐story multifamily
buildings on Aiken Street at the master plan stage of review, therefore the proposed height
and number of stories are allowed per this exemption.
B. & C. These criteria are discussed in the staff comments for SP‐20‐020.
C. Public Services and Facilities. In the absence of a specific finding by the Development
Review Board that an alternative location and/or provision is approved for a specific
development, the location of buildings, lots, streets and utilities shall conform with the
location of planned public facilities as depicted on the Official Map, including but not
limited to recreation paths, streets, park land, schools, and sewer and water facilities.
(1) Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity shall be available to
meet the needs of the project in conformance with applicable State and City
requirement, as evidenced by a City water allocation, City wastewater allocation,
and/or Vermont Water and Wastewater Permit from the Department of
Environmental Conservation.
2. Since this project was required under the master plan approval to obtain individual site
plan approval, Staff assumes no water allocation was obtained for this particular
building as part of Phase I approvals. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant
Staff Comments
#SP‐20‐021
to obtain preliminary water and wastewater allocations as a condition of approval.
approvals issues more than 10 years ago are no longer valid.
(2) Through (4) These criteria are discussed in the staff comments for SP‐20‐020.
D. Circulation. These criteria are discussed in the staff comments for SP‐20‐020.
9.08 SEQ‐NR Sub‐District; Specific Standards
The SEQ‐NR sub‐district has additional dimensional and design requirements, as enumerated
in this Section.
A. & B. These criteria are discussed in the staff comments for SP‐20‐020.
B. Residential Design
(1) Building Orientation. Residential buildings must be oriented to the street.
Primary entries for single family and multi‐family buildings must face the street.
Secondary building entries may open onto garages and/or parking areas. (Special
design guidelines apply to arterial streets; see Section 9.11). A minimum of thirty‐
five percent (35%) of translucent windows and surfaces should be oriented to the
south.
As for SP‐20‐020, the applicant has not attempted to demonstrate compliance with
the translucence criterion.
3. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to calculate how much translucent
windows and surfaces are oriented to the south so that the Board may evaluate
compliance with this criterion.
(2) Through (4) These criteria are discussed in the staff comments for SP‐20‐020.
SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS
14.06 General Site Plan Review Standards
A. Relationship of Proposed Development to the City of South Burlington Comprehensive
Plan. Due attention by the applicant should be given to the goals and objectives and the
stated land use policies for the City of South Burlington as set forth in the
Comprehensive Plan.
These types of buildings on Aiken Street were contemplated in the approved master plan.
Staff considers compliance with this criterion unchanged.
B. 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.
27 parking spaces are proposed while 21 are required. Other elements of this criterion
are discussed under SP‐20‐020.
(2) Through (4) These criteria are discussed in the staff comments for SP‐20‐020.
C. Relationship of Structures and Site to Adjoining Area. These criteria are discussed in
Staff Comments
#SP‐20‐021
the staff comments for SP‐20‐020.
14.07 Specific Review Standards
A. Through C. These criteria are discussed in the staff comments for SP‐20‐020.
D. Landscaping and Screening Requirements. (See Article 13, Section 13.06)
Pursuant to Section 13.06(A) of the proposed Land Development Regulations, landscaping
and screening shall be required for all uses subject to planned unit development review. The
total cost of the is estimated at $2,335,500 by the applicant. The minimum landscaping
budget is $30,855 as calculated below.
Total Building Construction or
Building Improvement Cost
% of Total Construction/
Improvement Cost
Minimum
Landscaping Budget
$0 ‐ $250,000 3% $7,500
Next $250,000 2% $5,000
Additional over $500,000 1% $18,355
Minimum Landscaping $ $30,855
Proposed Landscaping $23,559.20
The City Arborist indicated on April 28, 2020 in an email to staff that there are no
comments on the proposed plantings.
4. Staff considers the Board must require the applicant to provide the minimum amount of
required landscaping
F. Low Impact Development. This criterion is discussed in the staff comments for SP‐20‐
020.
G. Standards for Roadways, Parking and Circulation. This criterion is discussed in the staff
comments for SP‐20‐020.
OTHER
Lighting, Energy Standards and Bicycle Parking These criteria are the same as those discussed
in the staff comments for SP‐20‐020.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the applicant work with Staff and the Development Review Board to address
the issues identified herein.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________________
Staff Comments
#SP‐20‐021
Marla Keene, Development Review Planner