HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 08_SD-21-07_1 Johnson Way_Connolly#SD‐21‐07
Staff Comments
1
1 of 5
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
SD‐21‐07_Johnson Way_Connolly_SK.docx
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
Report preparation date: February 12, 2021
Plans received: January 21, 2021
1 JOHNSON WAY – BRENDAN CONNOLLY
SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION #SD‐21‐07
Meeting date: March 3, 2021
Owner/Applicant
Brendan & Alexandra Connolly
P.O. Box 2577
Sag Harbor, NY 11963
Engineer
O’Leary Burke Civil Associates
13 Corporate Drive
Essex Junction, VT 05452
Property Information
Tax Parcel 0850‐00030, 0850‐00040
Southeast Quadrant – Village Residential (SEQ‐VR)
10.29 acres
Location Map
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Sketch plan application #SD‐21‐07 of Brendan Connolly to create a planned unit development of three
lots by subdividing a 7.98 acre lot developed with an existing single family home into Lot 1 (7.02 ac), Lot
#SD‐21‐07
Staff Comments
2
2 of 5
3 (0.48 ac), Lot 4 (0.48 ac) for the purpose of developing a single family home on each of Lots 3 and 4
and retaining the existing single family home. Lots 3 and 4 would be accessed off Sadie Lane, 1 Johnson
Way.
COMMENTS
Development Review Planner Marla Keene and Director of Planning and Zoning Paul Conner (“Staff”)
have reviewed the plans submitted on 1/28/2020 and offer the following comments. Numbered items
for the Board’s attention are in red.
A) CONTEXT
The property is located in an area subject to Interim Zoning. The applicant has not yet submitted an
application for exemption to City Council. If the applicant proceeds to preliminary plat while the Interim
Zoning bylaw is in place, they will be subject to Interim Zoning and will need both approvals prior to
recording the subdivision.
1. Though no particular order of approval is needed, Staff recommends the Board urge the applicant
apply for City Council approval prior to proceeding to preliminary plat. No additional plans beyond
those submitted for this sketch are required, and if the Council chooses not to approve, any DRB
review will become meaningless.
The City Council’s review will consider whether the project is consistent with proposed amendments to
the LDR currently under development by the Planning Commission. Staff considers the Board need not
concern themselves at this time with the LDR under development, except to note the proposed
subdivision specifically incorporates certain elements of the LDR under development, including that
natural resource areas should not be subdivided between parcels.
2. Staff recommends the Board give deference to this possible future element of the LDR while
providing feedback on the proposal to the applicant.
All subdivisions in the SEQ require review as a PUD. The property most recently received PUD approval
in 2017 under final plat #SD‐17‐22 for a three‐lot subdivision. That approval resulted in the creation of
Johnson Way and the two lots approved for single family homes at the north end of Johnson Way. The
approval imposed certain conditions on the appearance of the homes based on the building design
requirements of 9.09, but also specific configurations of the homes was approved, thus limiting the
required conditions.
The current application proposes to further subdivide the Lot 1, which is significantly encumbered by
wetlands and wetland buffers, into three lots, with each of the two smaller lots accessed off Sadie Lane
and proposed for a single family home. Sadie Lane is an existing public road.
B) ZONING DISTRICT AND DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS
The total PUD is 10.29 acres. The property is located in the SEQ‐VR district, which allows 1.2 units per
acre or eight (8) units per acre with Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs). Without TDRs, the PUD
allows for a maximum density of 12 units (10.29 x 1.2 = 12.3 rounded down to the nearest whole unit.
The applicant has proposed a total of five (5) units, therefore no TDRs are required.
Front, side and rear setbacks are 20 ft, 10 ft and 30 ft, respectively. Rear lot line is defined as the lot line
#SD‐21‐07
Staff Comments
3
3 of 5
opposite and most distant from the front lot line. Proposed lot #4 does not appear to meet the required
rear setback. Given the context of the applicant’s proposal, Staff recommends the Board provide
feedback to the applicant about under what circumstances they would approve a rear setback waiver
request.
Other dimensional requirements, including minimum lot size of 12,000 sf, maximum height of 28 ft, lot
coverage and building coverage of 15% and 30%, respectively, appear to be achievable with the
proposed lot and home configuration.
9.06 SEQ General Standards
SEQ general standards pertain to Open Space and Resource protection, Agriculture, Public Services and
Facilities, and Circulation.
The applicant is required to provide a plan for ongoing management of the resource areas, including
wetlands and steep slopes.
C) Staff recommends the Board discuss with the applicant their management plan, and request
they provide a written management plan suitable for recording in compliance with 9.06B(3) at
the next stage of review.
Standards pertaining to circulation require roads to be designed to be compatible with the extension to
adjacent properties. The applicant is proposing a shared driveway for Lots 4 and 5. If the project is
developed as proposed, no connection between Sadie Lane and Windswept Lane to the south will be
possible. The lands at the south east side of Lot 1 are not wetland, but cannot be accessed without
crossing a Class II wetland.
D) Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant whether they have had discussions with the
State wetlands program regarding access to the south east side of Lot 1. If such an access
may be permissible, Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to design the project
to allow for such future connection. If no such connection will be permitted by the State
Wetlands program, Staff recommends the Board direct the applicant to substantiate this
claim at the next stage of review.
Finally, Staff notes the wetland buffers are shown with a rectilinear 50‐ft offset from the wetlands. Wetland
buffers are measured using a 50‐ft curvilinear offset from the wetland boundary, and should be updated
prior to the next application.
9.07 SEQ Regulating Plan
The SEQ regulating plans pertain to dimensional and design concepts intended to foster attractive and
walkable neighborhood development patterns. They pertain to street and block patterns and parks, and
are enforced by each zoning district’s specific standards, discussed immediately below.
9.09 SEQ‐VR Specific Standards
SEQ‐VR specific standards pertain to street, block and lot pattern; street, sidewalk and parking standards;
and residential design.
No streets are proposed. However, as alluded to above, if this development could potentially serve as the
beginning of a connection between Sadie Lane (and its possible future extension north) and Windswept
#SD‐21‐07
Staff Comments
4
4 of 5
Lane, Staff considers the connection should be designed to meet the street dimensional and cross section
requirements for a local road. Such a street would be 20 – 26 feet wide with a 50‐ft right of way and include
sidewalks and street trees.
Lots shall have a minimum lot width to depth ratio of 1:2. If no connection across the wetland is possible,
the applicant is proposing a width to depth ratio of less than 1:1. If a connection to Windswept Lane is
possible, which dimension is width and which is depth would flip, though the width to depth ratio would still
be less than 1:2.
Residential design standards pertain to building orientation, front building setbacks, and location of garages
and parking. Homes are required to be oriented to the street, with primary entries facing the street.
Homes should be set back only 15‐feet from the back of sidewalk (or in the case of Sadie Lane, from the
recreation path), with porches permitted to encroach up to 8‐feet into the front setback. As configured, the
northern home has the potential to meet the orientation and setback requirements, but the southern home
does not.
6. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to describe why they selected their proposed lot
configuration, and, if no connection across the wetland is possible, whether a configuration of two
narrow north to south oriented lots with homes nearer to Sadie Lane would work. Staff considers such a
configuration would result in better compliance with multiple provisions of the LDR, including lot ratios
and building orientation. Other advantages include that the homes would be able to have living spaces
instead of garages facing southwest, likely to have the best views, and the home on Lot 5 would be
within 150‐ft of a public road, avoiding the need to install a sprinkler system.
Regarding building appearance, buildings should have common elements to appear unified but facades
should be varied from one building to the next to avoid monotony. Visual compatibility is also a subdivision
review criterion. Staff considers in this instance that the homes on Lots 4 and 5 could be designed to be
complementary with the homes on Sadie Lane rather than the other homes in the PUD, and should also
meet the specific setback and garage placement requirements even if those requirements are not met by
the homes on Sadie Lane. Staff considers that demonstration of building appearance compatibility should
be provided at the next stage of review.
C) SUBDIVISION STANDARDS
Subdivision standards pertain to water and wastewater capacity, natural resource protection, traffic,
visual compatibility with the surrounding area, open space, fire protection, relationship to the
Comprehensive Plan, and public infrastructure.
The project is proposed to connect to the Cider Mill wastewater system and municipal water on Sadie
Lane.
Subdivision criterion #4 requires the project to respect and 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.
7. Staff recommends the Board discuss with the applicant what protection measures will be provided to
prevent encroachment of lawn areas into wetland buffers.
Subdivision criterion #6 requires open space areas to be located in such a way so to maximize
opportunities for creating contiguous open spaces between adjoining parcels and/or stream buffer areas.
#SD‐21‐07
Staff Comments
5
5 of 5
Staff supports the proposal to access Lots 4 and 5 off Sadie Lane as it avoids the need to cross a wide
section of the wetland.
Staff considers there do not appear to be issues with compliance with other subdivision criteria, but
they will be reviewed in detail at the next stage of review.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board discuss the Project with the applicant and close the meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Marla Keene, Development Review Planner