Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 07_SD-20-25_105 Swift St_responses August 3, 2020 re: Sketch Plan #SD-20-25 105 Swift Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Attn: Ms. Marla Keene Response to Staff Comments pg 3 of the pdf: mention is made (below the DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS table), that the applicant proposes “to include four affordable units and therefore be authorized to construct four bonus market rate units pursuant to Section 18.02”. This is not correct. Our proposal is based upon 18.02(C)(2): Mixed Rate Housing Development. The Development Review Board may grant a density increase of no more than twenty-five percent (25%) in the total number of allowed dwelling units for a Mixed Rate Housing Development. For each additional market-rate dwelling unit produced as a result of the density increase, one (1) comparable below market rate unit must be provided. Such application shall be subject to Article 14, Site Plan and Conditional Use Review, and Article 15, Subdivision and Planned Unit Development Review. Based upon this section, with an allowable density of 16 units, and increase of 25% would be four units, of which half (2) must be affordable. We are asking for an increase of 4 units, and propose to make two of them affordable. The following responses follow the numbering of the staff comments that were listed in red text. 1.Staff recommends that the DRB ask the applicant to describe the proposed innovative design and layout that would quality this project to be a Planned Unit Development. The adjacency of 105 Swift St to 99 Swift Street provides a perfect opportunity to create a PUD, and to create a site plan that better reflects current planning standards and the City’s desire to increase its housing opportunities without additional roadway development. This site plan improves access/egress from 99 Swift St, the ability to share parking at mutually beneficial times reduces the number of spaces required, locating new parking and circulation behind the new building reduces its visibility and visual impact on local travelers. The new building presents itself to the street with a prominent pedestrian entrance, and it transitions nicely in height from 99 Swift to 109 Swift, as the building changes from three stories on its west end to two stories on its east end, thus using the building massing to integrate into the sloping site. All properties on Swift St to the west are commercial in nature, and this building is essentially both commercial and residential, thus it transitions nicely between a commercial zone and a residential zone, both because of its massing and its function. Additionally, creating a PUD allows for the density of housing units to be applied over the total property, which benefits the community by increasing both its total housing stock and designated affordable housing units. 2.The Board should discuss the possible removal of the existing parking access on the western boundary of 99 Swift Street and include the assessment in the application’s traffic study. The applicant will review the traffic accident history at this location and if it is found to be problematic then a review of eliminating this access will be undertaken. It is the current understanding that this access to Farrell Park access and subsequently to Swift Street has not been an issue and would prefer to retain this access so as to enable the 99 Swift Street Parcel to operate as it was originally intended with a circular routing through the parking lot. 3.Staff recommends the applicant provide sufficient detail at the next stage of review for the Stormwater Division to evaluate the function of the subsurface stormwater chamber and any applicable standards for the chamber’s construction below an existing wetland buffer. Acknowledged. 4.Staff recommends that the applicant discuss its proposed transition from the planned 3‐story building to the adjacent Residential‐4 Zoning district and existing single family home, including a comparison of relative height of buildings and proposed buffering. This item was discussed in #1 above. Please refer to attached site section identifies the change in elevation from the neighbor’s home down to the project site. 255 South Champlain Street Burlington, VT 05401 802.864.6693 DuncanWisniewski ARCHITECTURE 5.Staff recommends that that applicant design the landscaping and greenspace management along the eastern boundary of the property to promote the expansion of the small forested area and connectivity of the natural open spaces between Farrell Street and Eastwood Natural Area. We are in the process of working with our landscaping consultant on a landscaping plan, and will include these comments in the discussion. 6.Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to take the City Arborist’s comments into consideration at the next stage of review, taking into consideration the City goals of tree preservation. We will absolutely consider the City Arborist’s comments and opinions in our landscaping design and would welcome getting contact info so we can make direct contact. 7.Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to address the comments of the Director of Public Works prior to the next application for the property. The applicant will work with the Public Works Department on the 4 comments. 8.Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to incorporate the comments of the South Burlington Water Department prior to the next application for the property. The applicant agrees with the acceptance of the proposed location and the recommendations of the water department. 9.Staff recommends that the Board ask the applicant to modify their plans to comply with CWD’s comment as part of the preliminary plat. The Public Works Department has accepted our proposed waterline connection off of Swift Street, whereas CWD would prefer a connection that requires ten times the distance, which we think is onerous. We will be in communication with DPW and CWD to resolve this conflict. 10.Staff recommends that the Board discuss whether the applicant should extend the sewer line further to the eastern boundary of the property, and/or to collaborate with interested neighbors east of the building in designing such an extension. The applicant will follow the recommendations provided by the Department of Public Works. 11.Staff recommends that Board ask the applicant to review on‐site pedestrian circulation, as well as how to best plan for an accommodate access to Farrell Park (in coordination with the Recreation & Parks Department). There are multiple paths and sidewalks to traverse the site and public property. First, there is direct pedestrian connection at grade from Swift St into the building, and from Swift St to the east-west sidewalk just south of the building. This sidewalk makes a direct connection to the existing parking lot that primarily serves 99 Swift, but which could serve 105 Swift if the parking demand ever exceeds available spaces in the lot primarily serving 105 (i.e., a resident may be hosting a social event that increases car usage beyond normal). We have not shown a direct connection to Farrell Park, because of the wetlands designation along that border and the subsequent difficulty of creating an access across it; however, there are multiple ways to traverse the site and then use the existing public access to Farrell Park. 12.Staff recommends that the Board ask the applicant to describe the massing and architectural relationship between the existing and proposed buildings as well as with buildings in the vicinity. Some comments in #1 above apply here as well. The existing local context includes many different styles and materials, ranging from masonry to clapboards to metal siding, from flat roofs to gable roofs. The immediate context are the buildings to the east and west, recognizing that there is a fairly dense wooded area between 105 and 109 Swift St. 99 Swift is a three story (35’ tall) flat-roofed masonry clad building of 7500 SF/floor, so is comparable in scale, massing and is about 15% larger in footprint than the proposed building. 109 Swift is a single family home of unknown footprint and one and half story height. The proposed building is a three story (35’ tall), flat-roofed fiber cement clad building, that transitions in height above grade from 3 stories on the west end to two stories on the east end. So the new building is both smaller in footprint than it commercial neighbor, and reduces in height above grade as the zoning district changes from commercial to residential. In this way, the building, through its height, massing and materials, itself becomes the transition from a commercial zone to a residential zone. The building also responds to its immediate site and context, first by orienting its long axis east/west, to maximize its south facing solar exposure, thus animating its south facade with solar shading devices and the expressions of the stair and elevator elements there. By placing the building close to the street and concealing parking behind it, the building addresses the street with its own entry tower, connecting residents and visitors to the public sidewalk that eventually connects to Shelburne Road, and via a crosswalk, to Farrell Street and points north, including the bicycle/walking path that terminates at the UVM campus. Building materials include fiber cement lap siding, accents of slate shingle siding, and wood siding at the main entrance. Windows will be fiberglass, selected for its durability, energy efficiency and low embodied carbon. The windows are grouped with color accent bands between them to increase their apparent scale and bring color to the facades. The flat roof will be designed to carry the structural load of solar panels, which will be incorporated as budget allows. 255 South Champlain Street Burlington, VT 05401 802.864.6693 13.Staff recommends the Board discuss the location of this dumpster area with the applicant. Its placement will likely require haulers to either back in or back out of the parking area, immediately adjacent to the Residential 4 district and single family home to the east. Staff recommends the Board invite the applicant to explore alternatives that would mitigate future hauler noise. We have reconsidered the dumpster location and have suggested a revised location that will be shared by both residential and commercial users. This places the trash, recycling and compost receptacles in a more central location, as well as places it further from the residence at 109 Swift St. 14.Staff recommends the Board discuss the applicant’s front setback waiver request and provide feedback prior to the applicant advancing to the next stage of review. Acknowledged. Clearly, this is an important issue, and the applicant will be prepared to discuss this in further detail at the Sketch Plan hearing. 15.As noted above under Open Space, Staff recommends the Board discuss supplemental landscaping and the establishment of an expanded forested area along the eastern boundary of the property. As per the comments under item 6, we look forward to discussing landscaping with the City Arborist. 16.Staff recommends the Board discuss whether any additional information is needed beyond the affordable units being in the same building with the market rate units to demonstrate compliance with this criterion. The affordable units will be fully integrated into the development, with no reduction in features, aesthetics, etc. that would distinguish them differently. Unit designs are still being refined, so a determination of which units will be designated as affordable is still being contemplated; however, full compliance with the ordinance will be provided. 17.Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to demonstrate compliance with this criterion at the next stage of review. Compliance with the 70% apartment size for affordable units is suggested to be demonstrated at the next stage of review, and as per item 16 above, will be fully demonstrated at the next level of review. 18.Staff recommends that the Board have the applicant present their general approach to meeting the criteria for the Affordable Housing Density bonus at this stage of review, to provide overall feedback, and to have the applicant present how the specific standards will be met at the preliminary plat stage. We will defer to the DRB for its direction on how best to prove compliance with the density bonus, but given that there will not be any material or aesthetic differences in units, all will comply with the Fair Housing Act’s accessibility requirements, and all will be built to the same energy efficiency standards, we believe we are in full compliance with the intent and requirements of the ordinance. 19.Staff recommends that the Board direct the applicant to address the short‐term bicycle requirements for the building at 99 Swift Street as part of their Preliminary Plat application. 99 Swift St is a total gross area of 22,500 SF. As per Section 13.14(B)(1)(a)(i), the requirement for short term bicycle parking for previously approved zoning applications is 50% of the requirement for short term bicycle parking for new zoning applications, and long term parking is not required. Table 13.10 requires one space/5000 SF. 22,500/5,000= 4.5 spaces, 50% of 4.5 = 2.25, rounded to 3 spaces to be provided. Site plan will be revised to demonstrate compliance. Sincerely, Bob Duncan, RA, AIA 255 South Champlain Street Burlington, VT 05401 802.864.6693 SITE SECTION Scale: 1" = 20'-0"35'-0"T.O. PARAPET 242'-8" FLOOR 1 209'-0"34'-10"AVE. GRADE PLAN 207'-9.6" DATE: 07.31.2020 S O U T H B U R L I N G T O N SWIFT STREET COPYRIGHT © 2020 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED DUNCAN • WISNIEWSKI ARCHITECTURE A Professional Corporation SCHEMATIC DESIGN D u n c a n W i s n i e w s k i A ERUTCETIHCR BU RLI N G TO N, V E R MO N T T: 8 02.8 64.6 693 05401 S O U T H C H A MP LAI N S T RE E T 4 255 DRAWN: ABC , SB 207'±135'±30'-0"' S3#4" IPF FLUSH DY H to Spear Street to Shelburne Road/Route 7 5#8" RBF 0.2 BG3#4" IPF FLUSH 1" IPF DISTURBED 1 1#2" IPF 0.4 AG 1 1#2" IPF 0.7 BG CEDARS 22" OAK 6" (3 BOLE)10" ASH 18" MAPLE (2 BOLE) 14" MAPLE 20" ASHBRUSH WOODS WOODS WOODS 14" ASH 26" PINE 12" MAPLE 30" ASH 20" BIRCH 30" MAPLE EX. SHEDEX. SHED42" PINE SWALESWIFT STREET EX. CONC.SIDEWALK 3#4" IPF FLUSH 203204205206207209210211212213214215216217218220221222219223224208EX. GRAVEL TO BE REMOVED EX. PAVEMENT 30' FRONT YARD SETBACK 30' REAR YARD SETBACK 10' SIDE YARD SETBACK10' SIDE YARD SETBACK2252202202 1 5 2102 1 0 20520 0 19 7 19 6 19 5 19 4 (TYP.) PAVED PARKING TRANS . CEDARS BIKE RACK A/C UNIT EXIS T I N G DUM P S T E R ENCL O S U R E STR E A M S 24" WATER MAIN 8" SDR35 PVC6" SDR35 PVCW 193'±15'±216'±85'±236'±215'±252'±NEW 5' SIDEWALK 99 SWIFT ST. EXISTING BUILDING 105 SWIFT ST. PROPOSED BUILDING (F.F. EL. 209.0) C.O.238 L.F. - 6" SDR 35 PVC (2.0% MIN.) 51 L.F. - 12" HDPE 55 L.F. - 15" HDPE186 L .F. - 15" HDPE 21521520523022530' FRONT YARD SETBACK 10' SIDE YARD SETBACK30' REAR YARD SETBACK 10' SIDE YARD SETBACKD D C.O.6" SEWER SERV.NEW 5' SIDEWALK2 1 0 EX. WELL TO BE ABANDONED WOVEN WIRE FENCE 36" HDPE INV.=193.0 COM. VAUL T FINISH FLOOR ELEV.=201.2 EX. SMH RIM=197.4 INV.IN=190.9 (8"S) INV.OUT=190.8 (8"W) PROPOSED 6" C900 PVC WATER SERVICE NEW SMH RIM 197.8 INV. _____ (EX .) INV. _____ (E) PROPOSED 10' SEWER EASEMENT INV. 193 .5 CB #2 RIM 208.7 INV. 203 .8 CB #1 RIM 206.0 INV. 201 .75 (E) INV. 201 .65 (SW) DMH #2 RIM 203.3 INV. 194 .5 (NE) INV. 194 .0 (S) INV. 194 .4 (W) DMH #1 RIM 201.2 INV. 195 .0 (N) INV. 195 .0 (E) INV. 196 .0 (SW) SUBSURFACE STORM WATER CHAMBER SYSTEM GAS SERVICE RETAINING WALL TRASH ENCLOSUREPROPOSED 6' WOOD PRIVACY FENCE PROPOSED 6" TAPPING SLEEVE AND GATE VALVE EX. WELL TO BE ABANDONED WOVEN WIRE FENCE 36" HDPE INV.=193.0 COM. VAUL T FINISH FLOOR ELEV.=201.2 EX. SMH RIM=197.4 INV.IN=190.9 (8"S) INV.OUT=190.8 (8"W) PROPOSED 6" C900 PVC WATER SERVICE NEW SMH RIM 197.8 INV. _____ (EX .) INV. _____ (E) PROPOSED 10' SEWER EASEMENT INV. 193 .5 CB #2 RIM 208.7 INV. 203 .8 CB #1 RIM 206.0 INV. 201 .75 (E) INV. 201 .65 (SW) DMH #2 RIM 203.3 INV. 194 .5 (NE) INV. 194 .0 (S) INV. 194 .4 (W) DMH #1 RIM 201.2 INV. 195 .0 (N) INV. 195 .0 (E) INV. 196 .0 (SW) SUBSURFACE STORM WATER CHAMBER SYSTEM GAS SERVICE RETAINING WALL TRASH ENCLOSUREPROPOSED 6' WOOD PRIVACY FENCE PROPOSED 6" TAPPING SLEEVE AND GATE VALVE RETAINING WALL 6' HIGH BLOCK RETAINING WALL 2'-10" HIGH EXG EXG EXG EXG EXG EXG EXG EXG EXG EXG EXG EXG EXG EXG EXG SNOW STORAGE UP EXG SNOW STORAGE, (PLANT ACCORDINGLY) SNOW STORAGE, (PLANT ACCORDINGLY) EXG W/D REF.DW OPTIONAL KITCHEN CART REF.DW W/DREF.DWW/DREF.DWW/DLOBBY DESIGN IN PROGRESS SITE PLAN Scale: 1" = 20'-0" 0103050 FT 105 SWIFT STREET PROPOSED APARTMENTS 105 SWIFT STREET EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING C.B.& J LUSSIER