Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMS-07-11 - Decision - 0004 Birch Lane#MS-07-11 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING KATE MCMAHON - 4 BIRCH LANE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION #MS-07-11 FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION Kate McMahon, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking approval to expand a non -complying structure by adding a 5' x 15' deck and a 6' x 8' addition, 4 Birch Lane. The Development Review Board held a public meeting on Tuesday, October 2, 2007. The applicant was present at the meeting. Based on testimony provided at the above mentioned public meeting 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 applicant is seeking approval to expand a non -complying structure by adding a 5' x 15' deck and a 6' x 8' addition, 4 Birch Lane. 2. The owner of record of the subject property is Kate McMahon. 3. A similar proposal was reviewed by the Development Review Board on August 21, 2007. At that time, staff recommended denial of the request as building coverage appeared to exceed 20%. However, staff has since worked with the applicant to more accurately determine building coverage and has discovered that the previous coverage presented by the applicant was erroneous. The new numbers provided by the applicant meet the regulatory limits. 4. The subject property is located in the Queen City Park (QCP) Zoning District. 5. The plans submitted consist of a nine (9) page set of plans, page one (1) entitled, "Kate McMahon Residence 4 Birch Lane, South Burlington, Vermont 05403" prepared by Anne Connell, dated 7/23/07. - 1 - N I #MS-07-11 Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements: QCP Zoning District Required Proposed w► Min. Lot Size 7500 S.F. 2084 S.F Max. Building Coverage 20% 18.5% �l Max. Overall Coverage 40% Less than 40% �► Min. Front Setback loft 2 ft Min. Side Setback 5 ft. Approx 12 ft. 4• Min. Rear Setback 10 ft. Approx 9 ft. q Max. Building Height 25 ft. 19 ft. w► Pre-existing non-compliance + Zoning Non -Compliance. Many of the homes in the Queen City Park neighborhood are eligible for relief from setbacks and coverages under Section 3.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations for pre-existing non -compliant lots which existed prior to February 28, 1974. However, staff research has identified that this very small lot was only created as part of a 2-lot subdivision in 1991. Therefore, this lot is not eligible for the relief and must adhere to the dimensional requirements stipulated in Table C-2 of the current South Burlington Land Development Regulations The Board has further reviewed the application under Section 4.08 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. A. Purpose: A Queen City Park District is herby formed in order to encourage residential use at densities and setbacks that are compatible with the existing character of the Queen City Park neighborhood. It is designed to promote the area's historic development pattern of smaller lots and reduced setbacks. This district also encourages the conversation of seasonal homes to year round residences. The proposed addition is in compliance with the purpose of the QCP Zoning District. B. Comprehensive Plan The proposed addition is harmonious with the City's Comprehensive plan. C. Permitted Use The proposed residential addition is a permitted use in the QCP district. D. Conditional Uses The proposed project does not require conditional use review. -2- { #MS-07-11 E. Area, Density, and Dimensional Requirements The existing property is a non -complying structure in the QCP District and thus shall be reviewed under Section 4.08(G) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. In no circumstance may the building coverage on the property exceed 20%. The existing building coverage on the property is stated by the applicant to be 18.52%. F. Height of Structures The maximum height for all structures shall be no more than twenty-five feet above the average pre -construction grade adjoining such structure. The proposed height of the roof is 19'. This is within the standard allowable use in the district. G. Non -Complying Structures Structures in the Queen City Park District are not subject to all provisions of Article 3, non -complying structures shall be subject to the following requirements and restrictions: (1) Any non -complying building or structure may be altered provided such work does not: a. Exceed in aggregate cost thirty-five percent for residential properties and twenty five percent for non-residential properties of the fair market value as determined by the City Assessor or by a separate independent appraisal approved by the Administrative Officer; or b. Involve an increase to the structures height or footprint, or otherwise involve an increase to the square footage of the building or structure. The applicant has proposed a building cost of $18,000 and is thus in compliance with part 'a' of this criterion. However, the square footage of the building will be increased. Therefore, Section 4.08(G)(2) applies: (2) The Development Review Board may approve any alteration which exceeds the thirty-five and twenty-five percent rule described above or which involves an increase to the structure's height, footprint, or square footage subject to the provisions of Article 14, Conditional Use Review. Staff has evaluated compliance with the criteria in the section of this report titled 'Conditional Use Review'. (3) In addition to the provisions set forth above, the DRB shall determine that the proposed alteration or expansion will not adversely affect: a. Views of adjoining and/or nearby properties; b. Access to sunlight of adjoining and/or nearby properties; and c. Adequate on -site parking. These criteria are evaluated below as part of conditional use review. -3- l #MS-07-11 CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA Pursuant to Section 14.10(E) of the Land Development Regulations, the proposed conditional use shall meet the following standards: 1. The proposed use, in its location and operation, shall be consistent with the planned character of the area as defined by the City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. The proposed addition is not in conflict with the planned character of the area, as defined by the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed use shall conform to the stated purpose of the district in which the proposed use is located. According to Section 4.08(A) of the Land Development Regulations, the QCP Zoning District is formed in order to encourage residential use at densities and setbacks that are compatible with the existing character of the Queen City Park neighborhood. It is designed to promote the area's historic development pattern of smaller lots and reduced setbacks. This district also encourages the conversation of seasonal homes to year round residences. Again, the proposed addition is in compliance with the proposed purpose of the district. 3. The Development Review Board must find that the proposed uses will not adversely affect the following: (a) The capacity of existing or planned municipal or educational facilities. The proposed addition will not adversely affect municipal services. (b) The essential character of the neighborhood or district in which the property is located, nor ability to develop adjacent property for appropriate uses. The proposed addition will not adversely affect the character of the neighborhood. The QCP district is historically a very dense neighborhood. The proposed addition is to the rear of the property and will be largely unseen. (c) Traffic on roads and highways in the vicinity. The proposed addition will not affect traffic in the vicinity. (d) Bylaws in effect. The proposed addition adheres to the applicable regulations in all instances except for consideration of the existing structure as a pre-existing non -conforming structure. (e) Utilization of renewable energy resources. -4- #MS-07-11 The proposed addition will not affect renewable energy resources. (t) General public health and welfare. The proposed addition will not have an adverse affect on general public welfare. Pursuant to Section 3.060)(3) of the Land Development Regulations, the proposed building expansion shall meet the following standards: (a) views of adjoining and/or nearby properties; The proposed addition will be at the rear of the house. It will not be wider or higher than the existing home and will therefore not adversely affect views. (b) access to sunlight of adjoining and/or nearby properties; Due to the size and location of the addition as described above, the proposed addition will not have an adverse affect on access to sunlight of adjoining or nearby properties. (c) adequate on -site parking; and The proposed addition will not have an undue adverse affect on adequate on -site parking. Adequate on -site parking is available. (d) safety of adjoining and/or nearby property. The proposed addition will not have an undue adverse affect on the safety of adjoining properties. DECISION Motion by U, Q01A4Z -,seconded by to approve Misc Ilaneous Applicati n #MS-07-11 of Kate McMahon, subject to the following conditions: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations, which are not superseded by this approval, shall remain in effect. 2. This project shall be completed as shown on the plans submitted by the applicant and on file in the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning. 3. The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months pursuant to Section 17.04 of the Land Development Regulations, or this approval is null and void. 4. Any change to the site plan shall require approval of the South Burlington Development Review Board or the Administrative Officer. -5- #MS-07-11 Mark Behr a /nay/abs in/not present Matthew Birmingham ye nay/abst ' not present John Dinklage — X a/nay abstai not presen Roger Farley — nay/abstain/no present Eric Knudsen — e nay/abstain/not nt Peter Plumeau — /nay/abstain not presen Gayle Quimby a nay/abstain/no presen Motion carried by a vote of d - a D� rn ��� Signed this day , 2007, by Mark Behr, Vice Chairman Please note: You have the right to appeal this decision to the Vermont Environmental Court, pursuant to 24 VSA 4471 and VRCP 76 in writing, within 30 days of the date this decision is issued. The fee is $225.00. If you fail to appeal this decision, your right to challenge this decision at some future time may be lost because you waited too long. You will be bound by the decision, pursuant to 24 VSA 4472 (d) (exclusivity of remedy; finality).