Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-93-0000 - Decision - 1600 Spear Street (2)PLANNING COMMISSION 30 MARCH 1993 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a meeting on Tuesday, 30 March 1993, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall_, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: William Burgess, Chairman; Mary -Barbara Maher, Terry Sheahan, David Austin, Catherine Peacock, William Craig Also Present: Joe Weith, City Planner; Sid Poger, The Other Paper; Charles Hafter, City Manager; Gerald Milot, John Larkin, Lance Llewellyn, John Steele Charlie Van t�i :':� t..._ ^��' -; 11 Cimonetti / � , 1 l_. l� V 1 L \ U 1. � t. \w J , 1 , L. Long, Frank Pichon, Marvll Lawlor, Ginnv & Arthur Greenblatt, Gary Farrell, Bill Schroeder, Brad Merritt, Vincent Bolduc, Al Bartlett, Dick Underwood, Laura DeMaroney, Jen-Fu Chiu, Brendan Kelly, Nancy Bell, Louise & Thomas Kleh, Bruce Coty, Charles Scott 1. Other Business: a. Mr. Weith said he'd gotten a call from David White regarding the Minutes of 26 January. He wanted it noted that he had already met with the Natural Resources Committee 3 times. Also, with regard to comments made about the Saturn access, any con- nection to the rear of the Saturn lot would be in addition to Saturn's Shelburne Rd. access. b. Mr. Weith advised that at a joint meeting of the S. Burlington City Council and Shelburne Selectboard last night, a joint Route 7 Committee was formed to review plans, communicate with the Agency of Transportation and review any changes to the plans. A member from the Planning Commission is needed. Mr. Craig was chosen for this. 2. Minutes of 16 March 1993 Mr. Craig moved the Minutes of 16 March be approved as written. Mrs. Maher seconded. Motion passed 5-0 with Mr. Sheahan abstain- ing. 3. Public Hearing: Continued Preliminary Plat application of Larkin-Milot Partnership for a planned residential development consisting of 73 single-family lots on 66.7 acres of land located on the east side of Spear Street opposite Deerfield Drive: Mr. Steele noted that traffic, sewer and school capacity were the most outstanding issues. There has also been a question of the northern access from Spear St. With regard to this access, the applicant proposes to shift it to between lots 9 & 10. it appears this is the best place to avoid having headlights shine PLANNING COMMISSION 30 March 1993 page 2 into houses across the street. Some substitutions have been made on street trees with consideration given to view pro- tection zones. G Mr. Kelly addressed traffic. There have already been some de- velopments on the signal at Swift/Spear Sts. A time of day operation has been used, and as of yesterday morning, the queue has been significantly reduced on Spear St. during the AM peak hour. There will be more fine tuning on this. Mr. Craig asked if the improvement at the northbound Spear/ Swift turn has been incorporated into this plan. Mr. Kelly said it hasn't because it isn't needed for traffic flow or for safety. Mr. Milot noted they have agreed to make the improvements. Mr. Kelly noted there had been a question as to how many vehicles could be added and still maintain a level of service "C". He said their calculations show 80 cars could be added. The project adds just over 30. Mr. Steele addressed the schools issue. Mr. Weith noted the School Board has 2 main concerns: physical capacity for grades K-5 (they are at action point capacity now), and the cost to put additions on the schools and who would pay these costs. The School Board is working on plans to add some classroom space and are also working on an impact fee plan. These will be presented to the City Council in June. The schools would be comfortable with the project being approved because the physical capacity will be on line in a few years. Their present concerns would be satisfied by a mitigation fee. The City Attorney recommends a possible finding of no impact, providing there be a stipulation that no building permit for a home be issued until the impact fee issue is settled. Mr. Milot said if a fee is warranted, they will pay it. Regarding sewers, Mr. Steele said they would like to reserve the full allocation, but the City Planner is proposing something less. Mr. Weith noted the applicant is requesting 46,000 gpd and he is recommending 41,500. Mr. Milot said their estimate is based on 4-bedroom homes and this is what the market is right now. Mr. Hafter noted the City Council wants some action on upgrading the treatment plant, but this may depend on the Pres- ident's economic stimulus plan. Mr. Milot noted this project is hypothetical like the Shelburne Rd. sketch plans (Pomerleau) the Commission heard recently and which may never be built at that intensity. Mr. Austin suggested tying the sewer allocation to the building of the project's roads. Mr. Milot noted if they build the second road and the sewer capacity has been given to someone else, the project would lose out. He also noted they can't get Act 250 approval without full sewer capacity. Mr. Sheahan suggested giving the full capacity with a stipulation 1 P_LAN_N_IG_CO_M_M_IS_SION 30 March�1993 J�fy page 3 that they would lose the capacity if the project isn't built in a specific peritod of time. Mr. Craig suggested that if 500 of the roads haven't been built at the end of 3 years, they would have to return 25% of the sewer allocation. Members felt this was fair to all. Mr. Austin asked if the required 2 trees per lot are keyed to view protection. Mr. Steele said they are. Mr. Austin said he was concerned with the visual impact from the road, and one way to mitigate this could be to have a line of trees to soften the impact of the houses closest to Spear St. He said the present plan looks very stark, especially since people driving by will be looking at the backs of houses. Mr. Steele agreed to look at this between now and final plat. Mr. Craig asked if the homeowners association will be responsible for upkeep of the access to mailboxes and also drainageways. Mr. Milot said they will. The Chairman then asked for comments from the public. Mr. Boyd noted that the distance between the proposed homes is less than the distances between existing homes. He felt this would drastically change the character of the neighborhood. He noted a petition signed by 49 residents who feel the proposed density is too much. Mr. Schroeder, representing Fred Hackett, said it is their feeling that this plan does not comply with the Comprehensive Plan which indicates the area should be 2 units per acre, not 4. Following the questions from the public, Mrs. Maher moved that the public hearing be closed. Ms. Peacock seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Austin said he is not sure the plan satisfies the p.r.d. requirements (re: view protection, sewer capacity) and allows for construction in restricted areas. He also did not like the fact that all the density is up to the roadway. He didn't feel traffic or the school capacity were issues but felt the mod- ifications regarding the sewer capacity were OK. Mr. Criag asked how the commission could measure "aesthetics," since this was the major concern. Mr. Buryess said his concerns are the same as Mr. Austin's. He said the plan seems to maximize development and then try to mitigate the impacts. He said he is uncomfortable that the project does "the best it can with the greatest density possible." 1'15. YCdI;UUX dbriCU 11 I.LLC l.Ulltwil b1U11 CVCL LCd11Y appLuveb d project that doesn't have an adverse impact on views. She said PLANNING COMMISSION 30 March 1993 page 4 she was satisfied with school and sewer issues. Mr. Sheahan said he would like to see something happen with lots 1-6 to make them more aesthetically pleasing, possibly more screening, larger lots. He had no problems with the other layout. He felt it met the intent of the Ordinance. Mr. Craig felt the problems were borderline and would have to be truly �ygregious for him to vote against it. Mrs. Maher said she would vote for the plan. She felt it qualified as a p.r.d. She acknowledged it wasn't perfect but felt it complied with zoning. She felt the project would be a �N7=derft,l neiS tC 11N e Mr. Austin moved the Plannin Commission a rove the Preliminary_ Plat application of Larkin-Milot Partnership for a planned res- idential development consisting of 73 single-family lots on 66.7 acres of land located on the east side of S ear Street o osite Deerfield Drive as depicted on a twent a e set of laps, a e one entitled "Nowland Two South Burlin ton, Vemront," prepared by_Fitzpatrick-Llewellyn, Inc, and dated October, 1992 (stamped "received 1/3/93) with the following stipulations: 1. ,nE=EEvious approvals and stipulations affectincrWthe subject property which are_not superseded by_tiiis approval shall remain in effect. - - - ---- - - - -- - - --- 2. In accordance with section 26.602 of the South Burlington Zon- inq Re ulations the P1ann_in2Commission approves the creation of lotsfor_ deve_lopmentWu�onWland designated as "restricted area" on the Southeast Quadrant Official Zoning Map. It is the Commis- sion's opinion that based on the information submitted _b the ap- licant theW�roposedWdevelopment will not adversely affect wet- lands on the_propert . Also, it is the Commission's o inion that ------- -- ----- .Y�._.---------------- - ---- ��..J.aEL ----- --- the goals for maintainin an open space corridor alon the north- - - - - -- -- - -- - - --.�...._..�.� --.�..K..v�.u.0 -- -- - -- - -- - - - south arterial roadways in the Southeast Quadrant will be pro- moted through the establishment of building envelopes on lots 8 t_h_rou h 10.� The allowance of buildin s in this manner W_is_compat- ible with adjacent development along Spear Street. Finally, the Plann_ina_Commissio_n_ supports moving—the-r.o.w. for a future north-sou_thWcollect_orWroad _to the east a�roposed�so as not to impact the wetland area.— 3.�The Commission approves the 1000 foot lonq cul-de-sac street .--------- serving lots 54-73. It is the Commission's —opinion that the 1000 foot length will not result in unsafe or inefficient traffic con- ditions narticularly sinr- r.o.w.'s are being reserved for road- way-.-connections Wto�future deve lo�ments�on�ad�oin'_E_EIrce_1s. PLANNING COMMISSION 30 March 1993 page 5 4. In order_ for the_ Commission to find that the WprMosed devel- o ment willWnot causeWunreasonableWhiWhwaWWcon estion or un- ----------- safe conditions with respect to use of the highways, the Wappli- cant shall be responsible for the fol_lowingL- a. The final plat plans shall include design plans for_thhe pro- posed southbound left turn lanes at each project access on wear Street as recommended in the traffic im act analysis submitted by the applicant. --- ---------------- b. The applicant shall construct the southbound left turn lanes identified _a_bo_v_e_ rior to issuance of a zonin building_ ermit for ythe W38th�lot. c. The final -_ plat - plans - shall .include WProposed-_improvements to the corner_ radius for northbound ri ht turns at the Spear Street Swift Street intersection and construction of a ri ht turn lane_ 50 feet in length with 150 foot tapes as approved by the City Engineer. d. The applicant shall construct the improvements_ identified in "c" above rior_ to the_issuan_ce_of a zonin buildin ermit for construction ofWany residential structures. e. Prior to issuance of any zonin /building permits for this de- velopemnt, the_ aEElicant shall post a -bond toWcover Wthe costs_ of constri.irti n(7 thr, improvements _ referenced in "a" and "c" above. This bond -or bonds shall remain in effect until such time as the im rovements are constructed. f. Prior to issuance _of_anyWzoningZbuilding_permitsWfor Wthis de- velopment{_ the a,Mlicant shall be responsible for retiming theWW -------- - -- signal phasin at_the Spear St./Swift Sty intersection as recom- mended inWthe traffic analysis submitted by the applicant. 5. The an Plnin mission a r _ _ _- _ � Com - _ _ _ _ _ pp oyes a - -credit for construction of the _portion of the proposed recreation__path located outside of any_publicWstreet-right-of-way.—ThisWcredit W may -be -applied toward required recreation fees. The exact amount of credit to be applied toward recreation fees shall be determined at final plat --- -L14- - - - --- - 6. The developer shall be required to install two trees on each lot as required in Section 19.104(a) of the South Burlington Zoning_Regulations The landscape plan shall be revised prior to final plat submittal to include a "typical" or note addressing this requirement. A "Notice of Condition" a_d_dressing this re- quirement �shallWbeWrecorded in�the WSouth Burlington land records rior_ to recording the final plat plans PLANNING COMMISSION 30 March 1993 page 6 7. Prior to issuance_ of any zonin /building permits, the appli- cant shall post a landscape bond to cover the installation cost and value _of�proposed street and lot trees. The bond_ shall re- main in effect for three years to assure that thW e-_�lanted�� landscaping_has taken root and has a ood chance of survi���ving. The amountofthe bond shall be determined at final plat. 8_. Leo21 documents for all public streets (i.e., irrevocable offer of dedication) and easements (e.g, utility easements and recreation -oath easements) shall be submitted to the Cit Attor- ney for approval and shall be recorded in the South Burlington land records -prior to issuance of_aLnyWzoning/buildingWoermits. 9. A_ "Notice o_f_Condition" addre_s_sin_g-the-hei,qht-limitations for structures Wand Wlandscaping on�each ylot shall be submitted to the City Attorneyyfor_ approval and shall be recorded in the South Burli�--noton Land records prior to recording the final plat plans. 10. In_ accordance with section 301.5 of the_ subdivision re ula- as tions within 14 dofWcom letion oef ruiredWimprovementsW _. _._,�..4.c.�......��..�..._.�.�.. --- y p -- - -..�_ -------r-r--- ----------------- (e.g.,_ streets,, water_ mains, sanitary sewers- storm drains,__etc)_ the developer shall submit to the City Engineer "as -built" con- - structionWdrawinWgsjcerti-Lid eby a reg�isteredWengineer_. 11. A_"Notice of Condition" adjE2Esin2 the building envelopes on lots 8-11 and purpose- and restrictions thereof shall be sub- mitted to the City Attorney for approval and shall be recorded in - ----------------------- t_he South Bu_rlington land records prior to- recordiing the_ final latWplans. 12. Prior to final plat submittal, the plans shall be revised to show theWfollowingL a . proposed building envelopes on lots 8-11 similar to those - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - shown on the sketch entitled "Nowland Two Buildinq Envelopes" dated 11 24�92_ b. _landsc_aping--soecies that will meet the height_ limitations_ of the Scenic View Protection Overlay District. c. eight foot wide recreation path _f_or entire_ length of Deer- field Drive. d. twenty_ (20 ) foot wide easement alonq portions of recreation ath not located within public street r.o.w. e._ any changes necessary to address comments of Bob Gardner (South Burlington Water ,--De-a-tm-- ) -; n-- -- :-- -- � 2 -- / f_. an 8 inch stub northerly for MH S-6 and southerly for MH S-7. PLANNING COMMISSION 30 March 1993 page 7 - - g. the draina e pipe between lots 45 and 46 extended to the rear line of the lots. h. mail box turnouts located on the side street rather than on Deerfield Drive. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _- _ _ _ _ i. no_rtherly-roadway connection to Spear Street moved -approxim- ately 150 feet to the south so as not to adversely impact houses on west side of Spear Street with headlight glare. iWWaWstormwater-pipe WalongWthe_east�side �of--Spear Street-as�rep- resented by the applicant_ k. the landscaping plan --revised to show additional_ landscaping along the side of lots closest to Spear Street to lessen or soften the visual impact of this development from Spear Street. 13. A bond for Wstree_t_s► sidewalks,__recreationWpaths, sewer and water shall bepostedprior �toWissuance �of a_zon_inq/building per- mit. --The amount of theWbond shallbeapprovedWby theWCity En- 14. No zoning/buildingW�ermit shall be issued for a lot until the street serving -that �lot Whas a gravelsub-base installed in -con- formance with -City specifications. 15. At this oint in time the Commission a roves a total sewer - - - ���.� .t. - - - �proves - - - - - - alloc_atio_n_of_46,957 gpd for this development. The lengthof time that �this Wsewer allocation a royal shall remain in effect shall be tied to roadwa construction. The roadways servin this development_shall -be_Wcompleted within four years of final -lat approval.___WThe�sewer allocation for any lots served by roadw which are not completed within this four near time limit shall be lost_ unless__reapproved b_y the Planning Commission. WIn addition, if at the end of_three ears no more than _50%Wof the roads have been completed, of the total sewer allocation shall be lost unless reapproved b the Planninq Comm8issi-on. The sewer allocation issue shall be finalized at final plat. 16. No zonin building permit will be issued for construction of and dwellinq_unit within this development -until after the_ City adopts anYdtiit fe ordinance SeptemberW1 1993' _ ----- -- eucaon impact eoance on ----- ---- -----t- whichever first occurs. This condition is bein im osed to rovide the school district a reasonable period of time to complete development_ of an impact ordinance and resent the ordinance to the South Burlington City---Council-for adoption. No zoning/building permits shall be issued after the adoption of such an impact fee until that impact fee hasWbeea-paid. PLANNING COMMISSION. __ 30 MarchW1993 a e -8 --- - - - - 17. A "Notice of Condition" shall be recorded in the land records prior_to__recordin the final plat which addresses the requirement of the homeowner's association to maintain the community mailbox area and all drainage ditches.W 18. The final plat plans, includiri survey plat, shall be sub- mitted within�12 months or this approval is null and void. Mrs. Maher seconded the motion. In the vote that followed, the motion passed 4-2 with Messrs. Austin anj_E2r3ess_2p22sing. Mr. Milot asked if they did some rethinking on lot sizes between now and final plat, would that require them to go back through preliminary plat. Members said they could go right to final plat with such revisions. 4. Public Hearing: Continue preliminary plat application of MBL Associates for a planned residential developement involving 202.2 acres of land and consisting of 157 single family lots and 64 multi -family units, Southeast Summit, Dorset St: Mr. Steele noted they had made changes to pulllots 154-157 out of the wetlands. That space will be left open. The total number of lots will stay the same. Also, lots 85-87 on the northwest corner have been removed and the space left open. Lots on the east side of the project have been made narrower to make up for lots removed elsewhere. There will now be 4 multi -family units on the north side of the utility right-of-way. This will result in a total of 161 single family lots and 60 multi -family lots. Ms. Peacock expressed concern with planning the access road to the adjacent property when that road may not be built for many years. She added that she didn't think this developer should have to build the road if there was no development for many years. Mr. Steele noted they have met with the Rec Path Committee and will place the path according to their preference. A $47,000 shortage in landscaping was noted. The original figure was based on a larger project. Mr Steele said if the landscaping figure is calculated on the present project, the total required shold be $45,180, and they propose more than that. Mr. Weith sair7 he would like to see more landscaping on the east of the multi -family units for screening. Mr. Steele said they can't plant in the Velco r.o.w. but will do what they can. It was suggested that more parking for multi -family units be provided. The applicant felt street parking plus the 2 per unit would be enough. Some members felt this wasn't adequate.