HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-20-16 - Supplemental - 0255 Kennedy Drive (3)CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
SD-20-16_255 Kennedy_OBrien_Ph2_PP_2020-07-21B.docx
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
Report preparation date: July 15, 2020
Plans received: April 7, 2020
255 Kennedy Drive
Preliminary Plat Application #SD-20-16
Meeting date: July 21, 2020
Owner/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
Residential 12, Commercial 1-LR, and Residential 1-PRD Zoning Districts
Traffic Overlay District T-1 and T3, Transit Overlay District
39.16 acres
Location Map
/
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Continued preliminary plat application #SD-20-16 of O’Brien Farm Road, LLC for the next phase of a previously approved master plan for up to 458 dwelling units and up to 45,000 sf of
office space. The phase consists of six (6) multi-family residential buildings with a total of 342 dwelling units, of which 48 are proposed inclusionary units, and an additional offset
of 48 market rate units, for a total of 390 dwelling units and underground parking, and 3,500 sf of commercial space, 255 Kennedy Drive.
PERMIT HISTORY
The Project received master plan approval in 2016 (#MP-16-03). Staff considers the proposed project does not trigger any of the criterion for master plan amendment.
The Board reviewed sketch plan application #SD-18-34 for this project on February 5, 2019, and held hearings on this preliminary plat application on May 19 and July 7, 2020. At those
hearings, the Board reviewed zoning district standards, dimensional standards, planned unit development standards, site plan standards for the site as a while, and site plan standards
for Lots 14, 15 and 17. The Board then continued the hearing to review site plan review standards for Lots 10 – 13 and other miscellaneous standards applicable to this application.
CONTEXT
The project is located in the Residential 12, Commercial 1-LR, and Residential 1-PRD Zoning Districts. The project also lies in Traffic Overlay Districts T-1 and T-2 as well as the Traffic
Overlay District. The portion of the property that is the subject of this application crosses all three zoning districts though the majority is in the Residential 12 district. The
development is subject to PUD/subdivision standards, site plan standards, and the standards of the applicable zoning districts, including allowed uses.
The Project has received master plan approval for the overall Project’s wetland impacts, pedestrian access to abutting properties, and pedestrian circulation, street layout, and open
space. No changes are proposed to these approved elements therefore this sketch plan review omits discussion of them.
The prior phase approved 118 units in single family and two family homes. This application includes 390 units, for a total of 508 units. This application also includes 3,500 square
feet of office space located in one of the multifamily buildings.
This phase of the project, submitted on April 7th, is subject to Inclusionary Zoning Regulations adopted by Council on July 6, 2020. The Inclusionary Zoning requirements apply to site
plans and preliminary or final plats submitted following public notice of the amendments. Where the Inclusionary Zoning requirements allow for an “offset” of additional market rate
units to compensate for the costs of providing inclusionary units, these offset units may exceed the total number of dwelling units in an approved Master Plan without triggering an
amendment to the Master Plan
COMMENTS
Development Review Planner Marla Keene and Planning Director Paul Conner (“Staff”) have reviewed the plans submitted on April 7, 2020 and offer the following comments.
Comments already reviewed on May 19 and July 7, 2020 are omitted except where there is an update, but still apply. With consideration for this being a very large project, comments are
provided for Lots
10, 11, 12 and 13, being the lots at the major four-way intersection within the development. These notes complete the first round of staff comments for this project.
Numbered items for the Board’s attention are in red.
ZONING DISTRICT & DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Setbacks
The master plan approved a front setback waiver to 6 feet for building greater than or equal to five stories and 20 feet for buildings less than five stories. No waiver was granted
for side setbacks (10 ft in the R12 and C1-LR) or rear setbacks (30 ft in the R12 and C1-LR). All involved parcels have two fronts and two sides, with the exception of Lot 10 which
has three fronts and one side.
Based on calculations provided by the applicant, the 6-foot front setback applies to the buildings on lots 10-13.
The applicant has provided an exhibit showing the provided setbacks for all proposed buildings. The buildings on lots 10-13 meet the required setbacks.
Heights
As discussed on May 19, the applicant is requesting a height waiver for each of the buildings from 35 ft for flat roofs to heights between 52 and 69 feet above average preconstruction
grade. These staff comments address each of the proposed buildings, and a discussion of height is included in for each. Specific height waiver requests are discussed on a lot by lot
basis under site plan review criteria 14.06B(1) below.
SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS
Site plan review standards are addressed for each Lot.
14.06 General 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.
The Project’s conformance with the Comprehensive Plan was discussed on May 19.
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.
Overall
Staff recommends the Board consider whether the amount of façade dedicated to usable inside space is sufficient. While Staff recognizes the need for parking, the facades should not rely
entirely on the “illusion” of active space but should instead include spaces such as a lobby area, gym, marker space, lounge, or other amenities chosen by the applicant to increase
the marketability of the buildings. The applicant indicated on July 7 that they would take such spaces into consideration, but Staff recommends the Board specifically require the applicant
to consider such spaces with respect to the street-facing building facades.