HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 06_SD-21-10_1720 1730 Spear St_Alan Long_SK#SD‐21‐10
Staff Comments
1
1 of 7
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
SD‐21‐10_1720 1730 Spear St_Alan
Long_SK_2021‐04‐06.docx
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
Report preparation date: March 31, 2021
Plans received: February 25, 2021
1720 1730 Spear Street
Sketch Plan Application #SD‐21‐10
Meeting date: April 6, 2021
Owner/Applicant
Alan K. Long
43 Great Road
Bedford, MA 01730
Property Information
Tax Parcel 1640‐01720/1640‐01730
Southeast Quadrant Neighborhood Residential,
Natural Resource Protection
39.21 acres
Engineer
O’Leary‐Burke Civil Associates, PLC
13 Corporate Drive
Essex Jct., VT
Location Map
#SD‐21‐10
Staff Comments
2
2 of 7
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Sketch plan application #SD‐21‐10 of Alan Long to for a planned unit development on two existing 39.2
acre lots each developed with a single family home. The planned unit development consists of forty
nine homes including five (5) perpetually affordable units and 9.3 acres of open space proposed to be
dedicated to the City of South Burlington, 1420 & 1430 Spear Street.
PERMIT HISTORY
These parcels are subject to interim zoning. The project began interim zoning review on March 15, and
the hearing was continued to have the Board’s first Sketch Plan meeting take place prior to the Council’s
review.
CONTEXT
The project as presented will be subject to PUD review and site plan review. The property is located
geographically between South Village to the south and South Pointe to the north. Both South Village
and South Pointe neighborhoods were laid out in anticipation of development on these parcels, and
development of these parcels will add to the already‐established network of local roadways east of
Spear Street. Development of these parcels will connect South Pointe Drive to a traffic signal at Allen
Road.
The applicant has worked with Staff to propose a development pattern that the applicant feels is
compatible with future PUD regulations. As noted above, a review under the Interim Zoning bylaw has
initiated before the City Council. Staff considers the presented configuration as supportive of several
goals, including neighborhood connectivity, preservation of contiguous natural areas, neighborhood
parks, shared access, and mixed housing types. Staff recommends the Board read the applicant’s cover
letter for a description of how these elements have been incorporated into the project.
This proposal will be subject to Master Plan, Preliminary Plat, and Final Plat review. The applicant may
request as part of the Master Plan application determinations on the level of review required for
subsequent states of the project proposal.
COMMENTS
Development Review Planner Marla Keene and Director of Planning and Zoning Paul Conner (“Staff”)
have reviewed the plans submitted on 2/25/2021 and offer the following comments. Numbered items
for the Board’s attention are in red.
A) DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS
The property is located in the SEQ‐NR (shown in tan) and the SEQ‐NRP (shown in green). As required, no
development is proposed in the SEQ‐NRP. These boundaries are reflected in the Comprehensive Plan’s
Future Land Use map (Map 11), with the western portion of the property within the “Lower Intensity,
primarily residential” district and the eastern portion within the “very low intensity, primarily
conservation” district.
#SD‐21‐10
Staff Comments
3
3 of 7
Standards setbacks are 20 ft front, 10 ft side, and 30 ft rear. Minimum lot size for single family homes is
12,000 sf, with maximum building coverage of 15% and maximum overall coverage of 30%. The majority
of homes are proposed on shared lots, with five homes on individual lots. At this time, it appears all
dimensional standards are proposed to be met, with the exception of Lot 29 which is slightly less than
the minimum lot size. As has been discussed recently for other projects, Staff considers the Board
should grant necessary waivers in order to achieve a desirable project configuration in the case of a
PUD, therefore Staff has no concern about the dimensional standards at this time.
The applicant has indicated their intent is to construct buildings that meet the maximum allowable
height. Staff notes height waivers are not available in the SEQ zoning districts.
The properties have an inherent density of 47 dwelling units, with the potential for transfer
development rights up to 69 units, and an affordable housing density bonus of 17 to 34 units (allowing a
total of 86 to 103 units) if the affordable units are income restricted to families earning no more than
80% AMI. At this time the applicant has laid out the development to include only 49 units, of which five
units are proposed to be affordable.
1. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to describe how the affordable units will meet the
distribution standards of 18.02D.
B) ZONING DISTRICT STANDARDS
SEQ standards are in three sections:
dimensional standards and design requirements for all sub‐districts
regulating plans
specific standards by sub‐district
Dimensional Standards and Design Requirements for all sub‐districts
These standards pertain to height, open space and resource protection, agriculture, public services and
facilities and circulation.
Open Spaces & Resource Protection
Open Spaces
The project proposes three areas of open space within the SEQ‐NR district portion of the
properties. The first, labeled as area “A” on the submitted plan, is a large area to the east
adjacent to the Natural Resource Protection district. This area is proposed to be differentiated
from private yard space by the inclusion of a walking path. Area “B” is located within the center
of the site and includes a well‐established walking path that the current owners of the property
have allowed neighbors to use. This area serves as a proposed buffer between the existing
homes on South Pointe Drive and the proposed homes. The third open space area, Area “C,” is
0.28 acres, and is located within the loop of a proposed driveway. Staff considers this open
space represents an effective use of the area where the road bends to connect to South Pointe
Drive, a desirable connection because it reduces the number of access points onto Spear Street
and supports neighborhood connectivity, a specific goal of the SEQ. Further, it has the potential
to serve as a small focal point of the neighborhood, similar to that which exists in Mayfair Park.
2. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to describe their vision for each of the open
spaces, including what the conceptual trails will look like and how they will be accessed, and
what, if any amenities would be included in Area C, and that the Board provide feedback at this
time. Staff further recommends the applicant discuss the NRP lands to be dedicated to the City
#SD‐21‐10
Staff Comments
4
4 of 7
with the recreation and parks committee.
Resource Protection
A plan for ongoing management of open spaces and natural areas is required. Natural resources
to be protected include wetlands, for which an approximate location is shown on the provided
plans. Staff considers the applicant should provide an updated wetland delineation. Staff
considers additional discussion will be needed If the proposed trail crosses the wetland or
wetland buffer.
Based on recent guidance provided by the Board, Staff notes that the comprehensive plan
identifies primary conservation areas in Comprehensive Plan Map 7 as “environmentally
sensitive and hazardous areas that are off limits to development regardless of their setting or
context,” and secondary conservation areas in Comprehensive Plan Map 8 as “other resource
areas also identified for conservation or protection in which limited encroachment may be
allowed in accordance with siting and management practices that are intended to avoid,
minimize or mitigate the adverse impact of development.” Further, the Resource Protection
standards of LDR 9.06 require that “the Development Review Board shall use the provisions of
Article 12 of this by bylaw related to wetlands and stream buffers.” Staff notes that the only
resource area identified on Comprehensive Plan Map 7 are wetlands, therefore Article 12
provisions shall be used to implement the Comprehensive Plan.
The Board has not provided guidance on the use of Comprehensive Plan Map 8. Staff considers
that LDR 9.02, “These regulations hereby implement the relevant provisions of the City of
South Burlington Comprehensive Plan, and any adopted amendments to such plan, and are in
accord with the policies set forth therein. In the event of a conflict between the Southeast
Quadrant chapter and other provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, the Southeast Quadrant
chapter shall control,” governs the application, particularly with respect to the resources
identified on Comprehensive Plan Map 8 for which specific standards exist in the LDR.
Comments of the Natural Resource Conservation Committee
The NRCC has provided to the Board an initial review letter, included in the packet for the
Board. As always, the responsibility of the Board is to require compliance with the Land
Development Regulations.
Agricultural Resources
Conservation of agricultural production values is encouraged. The project provides connectivity to
the agricultural area at South Village.
3. Staff recommends the Board, in conjunction with the discussion of open spaces, ask the applicant
to consider inclusion of community gardens in further support of this criterion.
Public Services and Facilities & Circulation
The Official Map includes a north‐south proposed road with recreation path or trail through the
subject property, connecting to a road with recreation path or trail in South Village and in South
Pointe. Staff considers the project provides appropriate connections, given that neither South
Pointe nor South Village actually have recreation paths as required on the Official Map. South
Village provides a sidewalk, while there are no path features in South Pointe. Staff considers the
applicant should work with the Bike & Ped committee to determine if there should be a rec path
instead of a sidewalk along the eastern‐most roadway
Staff notes that the development of this parcel has been included in the future build scenario for
#SD‐21‐10
Staff Comments
5
5 of 7
traffic studies along the Spear Street corridor.
4. Staff recommends the Board direct the applicant to prepare a traffic study for the proposed 49‐
unit development.
Other trails include an easement to the Natural Resource protection zoning district connecting to
the existing South Village trails as well as the City’s underwood property trails. A similar easement
exists in the South Point development to the north.
5. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to discuss the trail layout in this area.
6. The applicant is proposing a connection in the vicinity of the South Village trail network to the
south. Staff recommends the Board discuss with the applicant whether it makes sense to
connect this trail across the central proposed roadways and into the wooded open space “B.”
Some of the homes on the loop road are more than 175 feet from the public road. Staff considers
the applicant should coordinate with the Fire Department on whether these homes need to be
sprinklered prior to proceeding to preliminary plat.
Finally, Staff considers the applicant should provide an easement for a future recreation path along
the front of the property where it abuts Spear Street to allow the City to construct such a path in the
future.
Regulating Plan
The regulating plan provides the substantiation for the required street, block and lot patterns, and
provides standards for provision of parks. The applicant has provided an analysis of parklands, and has
demonstrated that the three open space areas provide the amount of park land proscribed in the
regulating plan.
SEQ‐NR Standards
Street Patterns
Substantiated by the regulating plan, the SEQ‐NR standards require development blocks no more
than 500 feet (with 300 feet preferred), no dead end streets, and lot depth to width ratios of 1:2.
The road segment is crossed by private roads at a 300 to 500 ft interval. Staff supports the provided
street layout, but considers that additional attention to roadway cross sections is needed at the next
stage of review when driveway and street tree locations are developed.
Residential Design
Homes are required to face on streets. The applicant has proposed a mix of single family, two
family, and four family homes, interspersed through the neighborhood. The four family homes are
rear loaded, share a driveway. Staff supports this approach as it allows the four‐family homes to be
designed to have a strong street presence and be complimentary to the one and two family homes
and the adjacent neighborhood. The location of the four family homes are nearest to the twelve
family homes in South Village, and in fact a trail connection is proposed to the South Village trail
network.
In terms of housing design, Staff recommends the Board direct the applicant to provide sample
home elevations at the next stage of review. Staff considers a design requirements document,
which specifies both a minimum amount of similarity and variation between homes, should be
provided.
7. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to describe how the homes will be either screened or
made visually compatible with adjacent development, and provide feedback as necessary.
#SD‐21‐10
Staff Comments
6
6 of 7
C) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
PUD criteria pertain to water and wastewater capacity, grading and erosion control, traffic and
circulation, wetland protection, visual compatibility, open spaces, fire safety, roadway and infrastructure
design, compatibility with the comprehensive plan, and stormwater management. Many PUD criteria
are identical to SEQ criteria.
The City Stormwater Section reviewed the provided plan on March 22, 2021 and offers the following
comments.
The Stormwater Section has reviewed the “1720 & 1730 Spear Street‐ Site Plans” site plan prepared
by O’Leary‐ Burke Civil Associates, PLC, Inc., dated 2/21/2021. We would like to offer the following
comments:
1. This project is divided between Bartlett Brook and Munroe Brook watershed. Both
watersheds are listed as stormwater impaired by the State of Vermont Department of
Environmental Conservation (DEC).
2. Has the applicant verified the wetland delineation with VT DEC? ANR mapping shows a Class
2 wetland delineation in line with the actual development.
3. The project proposes to create greater than 1/2 acre of impervious area. It therefore
requires the applicant to follow the standards set forth in the South Burlington Land
Development Regulations (LDRs) Article 12.03.
Staff considers the proposed configuration unlikely to be affected if the wetland delineation is modified
slightly.
The South Burlington Water Department reviewed the plan on March 18, 2021 and offers the following
comment.
I foresee a pressure reducing valve in the design, and some large diameter pipe on one street,
but nothing extreme.
D) SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS
General site plan review standards relate to relationship to the Comprehensive Plan, relationship of
structures to the site (including parking), compatibility with adjoining buildings and the adjoining area.
Specific standards speak to access, utilities, roadways, and site features.
Landscaping
8. There is a minimum required landscaping required for all new buildings except single family homes on
their own lots. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to describe how they propose to expend
the minimum required landscaping budget, which will be substantial, given that the open space areas
are already relatively well landscaped.
Waste Disposal
It does not appear the applicant has yet contemplated waste disposal and dumpster areas for the four‐
family homes. Staff recommends this be addressed at the next stage of review.
#SD‐21‐10
Staff Comments
7
7 of 7
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board discuss the Project with the applicant and close the meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Marla Keene, Development Review Planner