HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 04_SD-20-28_430 Meadowland Dr_SBRC Properties_FP
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
TO: South Burlington Development Review Board
FROM: Marla Keene, Development Review Planner
SUBJECT: SD‐20‐28 430 Meadowland Drive Subdivision Application
DATE: September 1, 2020 Development Review Board meeting
SBRC Properties, LLC, has submitted final plat application #SD‐20‐28 for reapproval of a previously approved
plan to subdivide a 27.8 acre parcel into two lots of 6.2 acres and 21.2 acres, 430 Meadowland Drive.
The applicant previously received subdivision approval under #SD‐19‐12, but the mylar was not recorded within
the required 180 days, and no application for extension was requested, therefore the approval expired.
Since #SD‐19‐12 was approved, the applicant has obtained site plan approvals #SP‐20‐016 and #SP‐20‐017 for
development on the lots that would result from this subdivision. Since the lots do not exist, the applicant must
obtain subdivision approval prior to issuance of a zoning permit for those two site plans.
Staff has prepared a draft decision for this application. It is similar to the decision on #SD‐19‐12, with
modifications reflecting the revised driveway layout approved in #SP‐20‐016 and #SP‐20‐017. Staff
recommends the Board review the draft decision, confirm the applicant has no issues, and conclude the
hearing.
#SD‐20‐28
1
1 of 5
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
SBRC PROPERTIES, LLC
430 MEADOWLAND DRIVE
FINAL PLAT APPLICATION #SD‐20‐28
FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION
Final plat application #SD‐20‐28 of SBRC Properties, LLC for reapproval of a previously approved plan to
subdivide a 27.8 acre parcel into two lots of 6.2 acres and 21.2 acres, 430 Meadowland Drive.
The Development Review Board held a public hearing on Tuesday September 1, 2020. The applicant
was represented by ___.
Based on testimony provided at the above‐mentioned public hearing and the plans and supporting
materials contained in the document file for this application, the Development Review Board finds,
concludes, and decides the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The Project consists of final plat application #SD‐20‐28 of SBRC Properties, LLC to subdivide a
27.8 acre parcel into two lots of 6.2 acres and 21.2 acres, 430 Meadowland Drive. Subdivision
triggers site plan review.
2. The applicant previously received subdivision approval under #SD‐19‐12, but the mylar was not
recorded within the required 180 days, and no application for extension was requested,
therefore the approval expired. A condition of #SD‐19‐12 was to obtain site plan approval prior
to recording the mylar. Site plan approval has been issued, and later amended due to issues
obtaining a state wetlands permit. Since the proposed project has an existing valid site plan, the
Administrative Officer determined is was redundant to require an additional sketch plan.
3. The applicant received site plan approval for each of the subject properties, the 6.2 acre lot
under SP‐20‐017 and the 21.2 acre lot under SP‐20‐016.
4. The owner of record of the subject property is SBRC Properties, LLC.
5. The application was received on July 15, 2020.
6. The subject property is located in the Industrial Open Space Zoning District; Hinesburg Road
North View Protection District.
7. The plans submitted consist of fourteen (14) pages of civil drawings, fifteen (15) pages of details
and specifications, a floor plan and an elevation drawing, prepared by Civil Engineering
Associates and by Walter M. Adams Jr. Construction Consulting. The most recent revision for
the civil drawings and details was on May 8, 2020. The most recent revision for the floor plan
and elevation drawing was July 7, 2019.
8. There are Class 2 wetlands on the west of the property, outside the area proposed for
development. There is a 200‐foot open space buffer along the south side of the property. There
was a previous subdivision on the western end of the lot which established three development
lots and Randall Street. There is an existing stormwater pond on the property which captures
runoff from Meadowland Drive.
#SD‐20‐28
2
2 of 5
A) ZONING DISTRICT & DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Industrial Open Space
Zoning District
Required Existing Proposed Lot 1 Proposed Lot
1G
Min. Lot Size 3 ac. 27.9 ac. 21.7 ac. 6.2 ac.
Max. Building Coverage 30% 0%
Information pertaining to
development is contained in the
site plan applications for the
relevant properties (SP‐20‐017
for Lot 1G and SP‐20‐016 for Lot
1)
Max. Overall Coverage 50% 0%
Min. Front Setback 50 ft. N/A
Max Front Setback
Coverage
30% 0%
Min. Side Setback 35 ft. N/A
Min. Rear Setback 50 ft. N/A
Building Height (flat
roof)
35 ft. N/A
Zoning district requirements are addressed in site plan decision #SP‐20‐017.
B) 15.18 CRITERIA FOR REVIEW OF PUDS, SUDVIDISIONS, TRANSECT ZONE SUBDIVISIONS AND MASTER
PLANS
(1) Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity is available to meet the needs of
the project in conformance with applicable State and City requirements, as evidenced by a
City water allocation, City wastewater allocation, and/or Vermont Water and Wastewater
Permit from the Department of Environmental Conservation.
The applicant has received preliminary water and wastewater allocations. The Board finds
this criterion met.
(2) Sufficient grading and erosion controls will be utilized during construction and after
construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous
conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties. In making this finding, the DRB
may rely on evidence that the project will be covered under the General Permit for
Construction issued by the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation.
No construction is being reviewed as part of this subdivision application. Compliance of the
site plan with this standard is discussed in the decision on application #SP‐20‐017.
(3) The project incorporates access, circulation and traffic management strategies sufficient to
prevent unreasonable congestion of adjacent roads. In making this finding the DRB may rely
on the findings of a traffic study submitted by the applicant, and the findings of any
technical review by City staff or consultants.
Section 13.01F states that all commercial lots located adjacent to other commercial lots must
provide a driveway connection to any adjacent commercial lot. The driveway connection or
easement should be located where the vehicular and pedestrian circulation is most feasible.
#SD‐20‐28
3
3 of 5
The proposed access road is on lot 1, with a driveway for the use of lot 1G. The Board finds this
criterion met.
Traffic is discussed in the decision on application #SP‐20‐017.
(4) The project’s design respects and will provide suitable protection to wetlands, streams,
wildlife habitat as identified in the Open Space Strategy, and any unique natural features
on the site. In making this finding the DRB shall utilize the provisions of Article 12 of these
Regulations related to wetlands and stream buffers, and may seek comment from the
Natural Resources Committee with respect to the project’s impact on natural resources.
There are no wetlands proposed to be impacted by the development. Stormwater impacts
are discussed under criterion #11 below.
Landscaping is discussed in the decision on application #SP‐20‐017.
(5) The project is designed to be visually compatible with the planned development patterns in
the area, as specified in the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose of the zoning district(s) in
which it is located.
On an overall basis, the Board finds the configuration of the property compatible with the
existing and planned development patterns of the area. Detailed discussion of the aesthetics
of the building itself is provided in the decision on application #SP‐20‐017.
(6) Open space areas on the site have been located in such a way as to maximize opportunities
for creating contiguous open spaces between adjoining parcels and/or stream buffer areas.
The applicant is proposing to configure the lots to with development near Meadowland Drive
but set back behind an existing wetland and wetland buffer and an existing storm pond which
provides treatment for runoff from adjoining properties. To the rear of the properties there
is an existing earthen berm and vegetated area which buffers the Meadowland area from the
adjacent industrial district. The earthen berm and vegetated area are located in a 200‐ft open
space buffer which contains an existing recreation path. The Board finds this criterion met.
(7) The layout of a subdivision or PUD has been reviewed by the Fire Chief or his designee to
insure that adequate fire protection can be provided, with the standards for approval
including, but not be limited to, minimum distance between structures, street width,
vehicular access from two directions where possible, looping of water lines, water flow and
pressure, and number and location of hydrants. All aspects of fire protection systems shall
be designed and installed in accordance with applicable codes in all areas served by
municipal water.
The Board finds this criterion met.
The Fire Chief reviewed the plans on April 16 and May 7, 2019, and concerns were addressed
as part of the site plan approvals. The Board finds this criterion met.
(8) Roads, recreation paths, stormwater facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility lines and
lighting have been designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such
services and infrastructure to adjacent properties.
#SD‐20‐28
4
4 of 5
Compliance with this standard and Section 15.12 of the LDRs is discussed in the decision for
#SP‐20‐017.
(9) Roads, utilities, sidewalks, recreation paths, and lighting are designed in a manner that is
consistent with City utility and roadway plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific
agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City
Council.
The subdivision does not affect compliance with this criterion. Compliance of the proposed
development project is discussed in the decision for #SP‐20‐017.
(10) The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the
affected district(s).
Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the Northeast Quadrant address allowing
opportunities for employers in need of larger amounts of space, and providing a balance of
open spaces. The Board finds this criterion met for the proposed subdivision.
(11) The project’s design incorporates strategies that minimize site disturbance and integrate
structures, landscaping, natural hydrologic functions, and other techniques to generate less
runoff from developed land and to infiltrate rainfall into underlying soils and groundwater
as close as possible to where it hits the ground. For Transect Zone subdivisions, this standard
shall apply only to the location of natural resources identified in Article XII of these
Regulations.
The Board finds the proposed subdivision does not affect compliance with this criterion.
Compliance of the site plan with this standard is discussed in the decision on application #SP‐
20‐017.
SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS
Compliance with site plan review standards is discussed in the decision for application #SP‐20‐017.
DECISION
Motion by ___, seconded by ___, to approve final plat application #SD‐20‐28 of SBRC Properties, LLC,
subject to the following conditions:
1. All previous approvals and stipulations will remain in full effect except as amended herein.
2. This project must be completed as shown on the plat submitted by the applicant and on file in the
South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning.
3. The plat plan must be revised to show the changes below and shall require approval of the
Administrative Officer.
a. The plat plan must be revised to include the signature and seal of the land surveyor.
#SD‐20‐28
5
5 of 5
4. A digital PDF version of the full set of approved final plans reflecting changes as required by
condition #3 included, must be delivered to the Administrative Officer before recording the final plat
plan.
5. A digital file consisting of an ArcGIS or AutoCAD formatted file of the proposed subdivision, including
property lines, easements, and rights of way, either georeferenced or shown in relation to four
easily identifiable fixed points such as manholes, utility poles or hydrants, must be provided to the
Administrative Officer before recording the final plat plan.
6. Any changes to the final plat plan will require approval of the South Burlington Development Review
Board.
7. The final plat plan (survey plat) must be recorded in the land records within 180 days or this
approval is null and void. The plat plan must be signed by the Board Chair or Clerk prior to recording.
Prior to recording the final plat plan, the applicant must submit copies of the survey plat in digital
format. The format of the digital information will require approval of the South Burlington GIS
Coordinator.
Mark Behr Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Matt Cota Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Jim Langan Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Dawn Philibert Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Elissa Portman Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Brian Sullivan Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
John Wilking Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Motion carried by a vote of _ – _ – _.
Signed this ____ day of September, 2020 by
_____________________________________
Matt Cota, Chair
Please note: An appeal of this decision may be taken by filing, within 30 days of the date of this
decision, a notice of appeal and the required fee by certified mail to the Superior Court, Environmental
Division. See V.R.E.C.P. 5(b). A copy of the notice of appeal must also be mailed to the City of South
Burlington Planning and Zoning Department at 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, VT 05403. See
V.R.E.C.P. 5(b) (4)(A). Please contact the Environmental Division at 802‐828‐1660 or
http://vermontjudiciary.org/GTC/environmental/default.aspx for more information on filing
requirements, deadlines, fees and mailing address.
The applicant or permittee retains the obligation to identify, apply for, and obtain relevant state
permits for this project. Call 802.477.2241 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist.