The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda 08_SD-21-25_255 Kennedy_OBrien_Lot 10 11_FP 1 1 of 26 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD-21-25_255 Kennedy Dr_Lots 10 11_2021-11-16 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: November 2, 2021 Plans received: October 15, 2021 255 Kennedy Drive Preliminary Plat Application #SD-21-25 Meeting date: November 16, 2021 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, R1 PRD, Transit Overlay District Location Map #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 2 2 of 26 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Final plat application #SD-21-25 of Green Mountain Development Group, Inc 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 two (2) four story multi-family residential buildings on Lots 10 and 11 with a total of 94 dwelling units, of which 79 are proposed inclusionary units, and two city streets, 255 Kennedy Drive. PERMIT HISTORY The Project received master plan approval in 2016 (#MP-16-03). The multi-family/mixed use portion of the project received preliminary plat approval #SD-20-16 which included 392 units in six buildings, of which 49 units +/-5% were required to be inclusionary, and 3,500 sf of commercial space. The Board later approved preliminary plat #SD-21-13 to allow the final plat submission for the project approved in #SD-20-16 to be submitted in phases. The prior phase of #MP-16-03 approved 118 units in single family and two-family homes (#SD-17-17). CONTEXT #SD-20-16 preliminarily approved the following buildings. Lot # # of Units Commercial SF Max Height (# of habitable stories) 10 44 0 55’ (4) 11 44 0 56’ (4) 12 48 (inclusionary) 0 62’ (4) 13 118 3,500 58’ (4) 14 33 0 52’ (3) 15 103 0 57’ (4) It also included the following condition pertaining to phasing: The applicant must obtain a zoning permit for the building containing the inclusionary units no later than the fourth building, but may obtain a zoning permit for the fifth building while the inclusionary building is under construction. The applicant must receive a certificate of occupancy for the building containing the inclusionary units prior to issuance of a zoning permit for the sixth and final building. This application proposes to modify the number of units on Lots 10 and 11 to 47 each, and for 79 of the units of the total 94 proposed to be inclusionary. 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 Zone 1 and Zone 3 as well as the Transit Overlay District. The portion of the property that is the subject of this application includes a small area in the R1-PRD zoning district though the majority is in the Residential 12 district. At preliminary plat, the Board found the requirements of the R12 zoning district may be applied to the involved area within the R1-PRD zoning district as allowed under 3.03C Split Lots. Therefore this report only provides analysis of the project under the R12 zoning district standards. COMMENTS #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 3 3 of 26 Development Review Planner Marla Keene and Director of Planning and Zoning Paul Conner (“Staff”) have reviewed the plans submitted on October 15, 2021 and offer the following comments. Numbered comments for the Boards attention are in red. A) ZONING DISTRICT & DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS R12 District Required Proposed, Lot 10 Proposed Lot 11 √ Min. Lot Size, Multifamily 6,000 sf/unit N/A, overall density approved in master plan √ Max. Building Coverage1 35% 24.6% 19.5% √ Max. Overall Coverage1 50% 67.7% 61.3% @ Min. Front Setback 6 ft 12 ft 12 ft √ Min. Side Setback 10 ft 79 ft 95 ft √ Min. Rear Setback 30 ft N/A N/A # Height (flat roof) 35 ft. 55 ft 56 ft 1. building and overall coverage are reviewed on a PUD-wide basis as approved in master plan. See additional notes below under “Lot Coverage.” √ Standard met @ The Board approved waiver of the front setback from 20-ft waiver to 6-ft as part of #MP-16-03. # The Board preliminarily approved a waiver to allow the proposed heights in #SD-20-16, based on the provision of high quality, varied and complimentary architecture for all buildings and landscaping. Staff considers this finding to have become slightly more difficult to implement given the Board’s subsequent approval of a phased final plat. As more phases are approved, the definition of “varied and complementary” will necessarily narrow. If the applicant’s final proposals remain consistent with the elevations provided at preliminary plat, Staff considers the subsequent phases will continue to be eligible for the preliminarily approved height waivers. However, that appears to not be the case here. See discussion pertaining to the appearance of inclusionary units below. Lot Size The applicant has noted in their cover memo that they are proposing to reconfigure the previously approved property boundaries. Staff has confirmed that this refers to the same reconfiguration proposed at preliminary plat, and merely represents the finalization of the proposed (and preliminarily approved) property line adjustment. All lots are proposed to be above the minimum lot size for the zoning district. Lot Coverage The master plan approved maximum overall coverage of 50%, and a maximum building coverage of 35%. 15.02A(4)(b) prohibits the site coverage in each zoning district from exceeding the maximum allowable in that zoning district. Coverages for the involved zoning districts are as follows. District Max Lot Coverage Provided Lot Coverage Max Building Coverage Provided Building Coverage R12 60% 45.0% 40% 21.0% C1-LR 70% 62.8% 40% 35.7% R1-PRD 25% 12.1% 15% 10.7% #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 4 4 of 26 This phase involves only lands within the R12 zoning district and lands for which the Board has allowed the standards of the R12 to apply under 3.03C Split Lots. The applicant has indicated that lot coverage in the R12 is proposed to be 35.5%, which is the same value presented at preliminary plat. Staff considers this criterion met. 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. The buildings on Lots 10 and 11 will have four habitable stories, and one level of partially subsurface parking. The definition of “story” defines a parking level as a story if the level above is an average of 4-feet above average preconstruction grade or the parking level is exposed more than 12 feet at any point. Based on calculations provided by the applicant, both proposed buildings are considered to have five stories. Phasing The applicant indicated that due to the intention for the majority of the units to be inclusionary, and the inherent uncertainty in funding sources for inclusionary units, they are requesting that Lots 10 and 11 be approved as separate phases without a required order. Preliminary plat amendment #SD-21-13 found that the applicant could construct each lot as a separate phase, though the first final plat application (this one) was required to include the final design of both roadways. Further, the Board reserved the right to permit the applicant to construct the roadways concurrently with the first lot developed on each. Staff supports the applicants request to permit Lots 10 and 11 to be subject to separate zoning permits, and recommends the Board allow the zoning permits for Lots 10 and 11 to be issued in either order. Staff further recommends the Board require the roadways to be permitted as a third separate zoning permit, though Staff recommends the Board include a condition requiring the roadway zoning permit to be issued no later than concurrently with the first of the zoning permits for Lots 10 and 11. Bonding is discussed later in this report. 1. Staff recommends the Board discuss and make a determination on this request for separate zoning permits. B) 18.01 INCLUSIONARY ZONING At the preliminary plat level, the Board prepared findings on the characteristics of the proposed inclusionary housing, but deferred findings on how the required percentages are attained to final plat. This is because the applicant indicated that they were uncertain about the total proposed number of units. Under 18.01, 15% of approved rental dwelling units subject to this application must be inclusionary. The applicant is then allotted one additional market rate dwelling unit for each required inclusionary rental unit as an offset. The Board at preliminary plat found that the applicant must propose and commit to a specific number of units at final plat, which number may differ from preliminarily approved unit count of 392 units and 47 inclusionary units by no more than 5%. 2. Staff recommends the Board confirm with the applicant that all units in the multi-family/mixed use portion of the master plan are proposed to be rental units. The applicant is now proposing 79 inclusionary units, which represents an increase of far more than 5% in the preliminarily approved number of inclusionary units. Staff considers the Board has, with cause, the authority to modify the findings of the preliminary plat decision. The applicant has further indicated #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 5 5 of 26 they wish to retain the previously proposed 345 (+/-5%) market rate units, which, if permitted, would increase the number of units in the development from 392 to 424. 3. Staff considers the Board should defer the decision on whether to allow the requested additional 32 total units to such time as the applicant demonstrates the preliminarily approved project can support them, but that they allow the proposed increase in inclusionary units. Staff considers factors in the future decision to allow an increase in total units to include traffic, adequacy of open spaces, and adequacy of parking. Staff recommends the Board discuss whether to accept Staff’s recommendation, and if so, what conditions to place on such an increase. Further discussion of the proposed increase in inclusionary units is immediately below. (2) Inclusionary units required under this section shall be: (a) Constructed on site, unless off-site construction is approved under Subsection (E)(1)(b) (Off-Site Construction) of this Article. The applicant is proposing to construct units on site. (b) Integrated into the overall project layout and similar in architectural style and outward appearance to market rate units in the proposed development. (i) Inclusionary units shall be physically integrated into and complement the overall layout, scale, and massing of the proposed development; this criterion may be achieved in a single building or multiple buildings. At preliminary plat, the Board found the applicant may provide all inclusionary units within the building on Lot 12 and may elect to not provide any market rate units within the building on Lot 12. The applicant has now revised their proposal to provide two buildings of mixed inclusionary and market rate units. The applicant’s testimony at preliminary plat included that allowing all inclusionary units to be in a single building “may achieve a deeper affordability than they otherwise would, if mixed into each market-rate building, due to the financing mechanisms.” The applicant also noted that Lot 12 “is prominent in the project, occupying one of the four corners of the major intersection proposed, directly across the street and in between two other market rate buildings.” The applicant is now proposing to locate the inclusionary units on Lots 10 and 11, which Staff considers are less central to the project, but equally prominent. 4. Staff recommends the Board discuss whether they continue to consider the physical integration element of this criterion to be met. A discussion of the remainder of this criterion is incorporated into the discussion of criterion (ii) below. The applicant indicated that though they are committed to 79 inclusionary units and 94 total units between the two buildings, the availability of funding will determine how many inclusionary and how many market rate units are in each building. In addition to the flexibility in phasing discussed above, the applicant has requested that the number of market rate and inclusionary units on each of Lots 10 and 11 be allowed to be flexible, though they are willing to commit to 79 inclusionary units and 94 total units on the two lots combined. Each building will have 47 units with an identical (but mirrored) floor plan. #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 6 6 of 26 5. Staff recommends the Board allow the applicant’s request with the following manner. Building 10 Min 37, max 42 inclusionary units Min 5, max 10 market rate units Building 11 Min 37, max 42 inclusionary units Min 5, max 10 market rate units (ii) Inclusionary units shall be constructed with the same exterior materials and architectural design details quality of those of the market rate units in the development. However, the exterior dimensions of the inclusionary units may differ from those of the market rate units. At preliminary plat, the Board found this criterion preliminarily met. This finding was incumbent on the final appearance of the building or buildings containing the inclusionary units being indistinguishable from the buildings containing solely market rate units. At preliminary plat, the applicant anticipated submitting final plat applications for all six multifamily buildings simultaneously. Now that the applications are being submitted separately, Staff considers the Board is entitled to rely on consistency between the proposed appearance of the buildings on Lots 10 and 11 with the preliminarily proposed appearance of the remaining multi-family buildings as the way to evaluate compliance with this and other “consistency” criterion. The below rendering & elevation show the same portion of the building on Lot 10 from the preliminary plat approval. Rendering Approved at Preliminary Plat #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 7 7 of 26 Lot 10 Elevation approved at Preliminary Plat At preliminary plat, the applicant placed emphasis on the fact that each of the buildings proposed for the corner of Two Brothers Drive and O’Brien Farm Road had a prominent entry tower, a characteristic mentioned several times in the Board’s findings. The Board’s findings also specifically call out the applicant’s proposal to provide • a “theme and variation” approach to the entry towers, with similar exterior architecture but differing interior treatments visible through the tower windows • slatted ventilation and decorative inserts to screen street-level garage openings • an entrance into street level common space near the center of the garage where it faces on a street • complimentary entrances at the main four-way intersection to include short term bicycle parking, flush granite curbing, seat walls, raised planting beds, bench seating, and landscaping The Board found that if the presented improvements are integrated into the design, the buildings would be complementary throughout and that proposed structures will respond to the terrain and provide a sufficient street presence. 6. The elevation below shows the current proposal for the same portion of the building shown in the above preliminary plat rendering. Staff encourages the Board to review the full architectural elevations. #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 8 8 of 26 Currently Proposed Partial Lot 10 Elevation The currently proposed buildings eliminate the entry tower, removes balconies, and reduces window variation and size. The large parking garage openings appear to have been replaced with standard double hung residential windows, instead of using the screens and decorative features the applicant proposed. The entrance at the four-way intersection has been made a secondary entrance into a narrow stairwell which has no common elements. The principal entry has been moved to the rear of the lots, as has the elevator, the consequence being that anyone with limited mobility or a stroller must use the back of the building and then go around to access the pedestrian infrastructure on which the applicant and Board have placed so much emphasis. The complimentary entry towers were represented and accepted by the Board as being the focal point of the urban neighborhood, and considered as a prerequisite for the approved density and height. These Staff considers these modifications, coupled with reduced architectural detail and material modification, significantly reduces the proposed architectural interest of the buildings and is contradictory to the concept approved at preliminary plat. 7. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to modify the buildings to be consistent with the elevations, renderings, and characteristics represented at preliminary plat. Staff reminds the Board that consistency with the buildings presented at preliminary plat is also a prerequisite for approving the request height waiver, discussed under dimensional standards above. 8. Additional findings of the Board pertaining to the appearance of the buildings is included under 14.06C(2) below. Staff recommends the Board review that discussion as background for review of this criterion. 9. The basement level plans show a door near the center of the garage, but this door opens into a parking space, rendering it useless. The Board noted the center door as a feature of the preliminary plat plans. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to modify the plans to make this door a feature of the design in support of a strong street presence. #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 9 9 of 26 10. Further, the applicant may not show signage on their plans or renderings. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to remove all signage, sign locations, sign callouts from all submission materials. (iii) Inclusionary units shall be no less energy efficient than market rate units; The Board found at preliminary plat that provision of the CBES certificate will demonstrate compliance with this criterion. The CBES certificate must be provided prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the building. Staff considers this criterion continues to be met. (iv) Inclusionary units may differ from market rate units with regard to both interior amenities and amount of Habitable Area. However, the minimum Habitable Area of inclusionary units shall be 450 square feet for studios, 650 square feet for 1- bedroom units, 900 square feet for 2-bedroom units and 1,200 square feet for three (3) or more bedrooms. If the average (mean) area of the Habitable Area of the market rate units is less than the minimum area required for the Habitable Area of inclusionary units, then the Habitable Area of the inclusionary units shall be no less than 90% of the average (mean) Habitable Area of the market rate units. With the amended preliminary plat to add phases (#SD-21-13), the Board found the applicant must demonstrate compliance with the minimum habitable area listed in this criterion without allowing a reduction for smaller market rate units. Staff has been unable to locate information supporting compliance with this criterion in the applicant’s application materials. 11. Based on measurements performed by Staff, unit sizes are close to or even below the minimum, therefore Staff considers it important for the Board to require the applicant to provide specific numeric values demonstrating compliance with this criterion for each proposed unit type. (v) Inclusionary units developed as part of a housing development of predominantly market rate duplexes and/or multi-family dwellings may be of varied types. Inclusionary units developed as part of a predominantly-single-family housing development may be accommodated in buildings containing up to four (4) dwelling units that have the appearance of single family homes through their scale, massing, and architectural style. At preliminary plat, the Board found this criterion met. Staff reminds the Board that at the time Phase 1 of Hillside was approved, there was no requirement for inclusionary units. (vi) There shall be no indications from common areas that these units are inclusionary units. See discussion above pertaining to exterior appearance. Staff considers this criterion to not be met. (vii) The average (mean) number of bedrooms in the inclusionary units shall be no fewer than the average number of bedrooms in the market rate units. For projects involving 50 or more dwelling units, the applicant shall provide a revised estimate to the Administrative Officer at each interval of 50 dwelling units; the revised estimate shall account for the differences in estimates vs. actuals for the units permitted to date and shall apply to inclusionary units for which the Administrative Officer has not issued a zoning permit. #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 10 10 of 26 With the amended preliminary plat to add phases (#SD-21-13), the Board found the applicant to be required to demonstrate that this criterion is met at the time of final plat application for each building. Since the each of the currently proposed buildings is proposed to contain both inclusionary and market rate units, and each building contains a mix of studio, one bedroom and two bedroom units, Staff considers this criterion requires the applicant to demonstrate compliance with this criterion at the time of zoning permit for the first building and at the time of zoning permit for each subsequent building. 12. Staff considers compliance with this criterion to be at the applicant’s risk. If the applicant later has difficulty matching the bedroom count average established by these buildings, no waiver is available. The applicant would have the option of adding more multi-bedroom inclusionary units in another building to bring the average up should they so choose. The applicant has requested the Board allow them to use any combination of the inclusionary units in order to calculate the mean number of bedrooms per unit. They note that they are only required to construct 51 inclusionary units. However, as discussed above, the applicant has represented to Staff that they wish to construct more than the previously approved total number of units in order to keep the total market rate unit count the same as originally proposed. Such a proposal would increase the required inclusionary unit count. Therefore Staff considers this request to be moot. 13. If the applicant later determines they do not wish to construct a greater number of market rate units than previously proposed, Staff considers they can apply for an amendment. The Board is not obligated to issue a decision that accounts for every possible scenario which may occur. Staff recommends the Board determine whether they concur with this conclusion. (viii) Unfinished space within an Inclusionary Ownership Unit that is not initially constructed as bedroom, but which can be converted to such, may count as a bedroom. No more than one (1) bedroom per inclusionary ownership unit may be counted in this manner. The applicant is not proposing to use this provision. (c) Constructed and made available for occupancy concurrently with market rate units. The applicant shall provide a proposed phasing plan demonstrating concurrent development and occupancy of the market rate units and the inclusionary units. The Development Review Board may attach conditions necessary to assure compliance with this section and may, based on documentation from a financial institution denying financing or on physical site constraints, approve a plan allowing non-concurrent construction of the inclusionary units. At preliminary plat, the applicant proposed to construct all inclusionary units on Lot 12. Board found the applicant must obtain a zoning permit for the building containing the inclusionary units no later than the fourth principal building, the applicant may obtain a zoning permit for the fifth principal building while the inclusionary building is under construction, and the applicant must receive a certificate of occupancy for the building containing the inclusionary units prior to issuance of a zoning permit for the sixth principal building. The Board also found that this condition would be reevaluated if the applicant modifies their proposal to construct all the required inclusionary units in the building on Lot 12. Since to all appearances the applicant is proposing to construct the buildings containing inclusionary units first and second, Staff considers no modification to this finding is required. Staff recommends it remain in force in the event the #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 11 11 of 26 applicant postpones construction of the currently proposed buildings. C) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (1) Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity is available to meet the needs of the project in conformance with applicable State and City requirements, as evidenced by a City water allocation, City wastewater allocation, and/or Vermont Water and Wastewater Permit from the Department of Environmental Conservation. The applicant has received preliminary water allocation for all six (6) phase 2 buildings, and has received preliminary wastewater allocation for the buildings on Lots 10 and 11. The South Burlington Water Department reviewed the provided plans on October 27, 2021 and offers the following comments. The SBWD has reviewed the revised plans for the above referenced project and finds the proposed water lines to the multi family buildings on lots 10 and 11 acceptable. The SBWD reminds the engineer and developer that all fire hydrants must be installed with a spring- loaded hydrant flag approved by the Department, and a 4” Storz fire hydrant pumper nozzle connection. In addition, all gate valve boxes located in a paved or poured area must have one non- adjustable paving riser of a height ranging from one and one-half inches (1-1/2”) to six- inches (6”) as needed to be brought to final grade. All cub boxes located in roadways or sidewalks shall be placed inside a gate valve box top section with cover and brought to final grade with one non-adjustable paving riser per above. Staff recommends the Board incorporate the comments of the South Burlington Water Department as a condition of approval. (2) Sufficient grading and erosion controls will be utilized during construction and after construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties. In making this finding, the DRB may rely on evidence that the project will be covered under the General Permit for Construction issued by the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. The applicant provided erosion and sediment control plans. The project will be subject to a construction permit. The City Stormwater Section reviewed the plans on 11/8/2021, including the erosion and sediment control plan and indicated there were no comments. (3) The project incorporates access, circulation and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unreasonable congestion of adjacent roads. In making this finding the DRB may rely on the findings of a traffic study submitted by the applicant, and the findings of any technical review by City staff or consultants. The Board found at preliminary plat that the applicant must provide an updated traffic study evaluating the design of the proposed intersection of Two Brothers Drive and Kenney Drive. the Director of Public Works reviewed the plans with Planning and Zoning Staff on 10/29/2021. The following are comments from that review. #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 12 12 of 26 • The updated traffic impact study has changed the land use code used for the two-family homes in Phase 1 of Hillside compared to the previously submitted version of the study. The applicant should explain why the change was made. • There should be a crosswalk and pedestrian beacon on the uphill side of the driveways at Lots 14 and 15 on Two Brothers Drive. The exact location should be evaluated by a site design professional and reviewed prior to closing the hearing. • The driveway out of Lot 12 is lower than the adjacent O’Brien Farm Road and may have sight distance issues given the proposed streetscape. The applicant should revisit. 14. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to address these comments before closing the hearing. Based on the provided plans showing the proposed intersection improvements, Staff assumes the applicant is considering those to be part of the proposed roadway construction for the currently proposed phase of the project. Staff has reviewed the traffic study and it appears the applicant is not proposing to install the traffic signal on Kennedy Drive as part of this project because it is not yet warranted (does not meet specific tests) until more homes are constructed. However, the applicant is proposing to construct a recreation path connecting to the existing recreation path on Kennedy Drive. 15. Staff considers the applicant must provide safe crossing across the four (proposed to be five) lanes of Kennedy Drive in conjunction with the proposed recreation path. Staff therefore recommends the Board ask the applicant whether they will install the signal as designed or whether they wish to propose an alternative temporary solution. A signal may be installed before warrants are met. If a temporary solution is proposed, Staff considers it will need departmental review prior to closing the hearing. The applicant has provided a full set of plans for the proposed traffic signal at the intersection of Two Brothers Drive and Kennedy Drive. As of this writing, Staff has not yet had an opportunity to provide a detailed review. Staff recognizes the Board likely has limited interest in the very detailed elements of signal design. Staff recommends the Board include a finding that operational functions of the traffic signal are subject to review and approval of the Director of Public Works prior to issuance of a zoning permit for installation of the signal. 16. Staff will provide comments on the proposed traffic signal at a continued hearing, which will likely include recommendations to be addressed prior to obtaining a zoning permit rather than prior to closing the hearing. Additional comments on the proposed roadways are provided under PUD criterion 8 and 9 below. (4) The project’s design respects and will 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. Wetland impacts were approved as part of the master plan. No changes to the approved impacts are proposed. (5) The project is designed to be visually compatible with the planned development patterns in the area, as specified in the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose of the zoning district(s) in which it is located. For Transect Zone subdivisions, this standard shall apply only to the #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 13 13 of 26 location of lot lines, streets and street types, and natural resources identified in Article XII of these Regulations. Visual compatibility of the proposed development is further discussed in conjunction with Site Plan Review Standards 14.06B and 14.06C. The Board preliminarily found the project consistent with the planned development patterns specified in the Comprehensive Plan and in the purpose of the R-12 zoning district. Staff considers this preliminary finding applies to the overall layout and scale of development; building and site appearance is discussed in detail elsewhere in these comments. (6) Open space areas on the site have been located in such a way as to maximize opportunities for creating contiguous open spaces between adjoining parcels and/or stream buffer areas. For Transect Zone subdivisions, this standard shall apply only to the location of natural resources identified in Article XII of these Regulations and proposed open spaces to be dedicated to the City of South Burlington. The location and area of permanent open spaces was approved at the master plan level but the design of open space was not. At the sketch plan meeting on this phase, the Board had a robust discussion of the programming of on-site open spaces to be included in this area, asking that the applicant provide small useable open spaces for each building. The applicant at preliminary plat provided landscaping sketches showing a proposed open space for each lot consisting of a paved patio area with seating, gas grill and fire pit. Other non-participatory open spaces in the project area include two stormwater management features near Kennedy Drive. The applicants detailed plan for these areas on Lots 10 and 11 is consistent with the concepts submitted at preliminary plat. There is an area proposed north of the building on Lot 11 along O’Brien Farm Road that is labeled “Pocket Park.” This area is accessed via the sidewalk on O’Brien Farm Road, is proposed to be paved with concrete pavers, and has three benches but no significant landscaping. 17. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to describe the use of this area, as it doesn’t seem to serve the building on Lot 11. (7) The layout of a subdivision or PUD has been reviewed by the Fire Chief or his designee to insure that adequate fire protection can be provided, with the standards for approval including, but not be limited to, minimum distance between structures, street width, vehicular access from two directions where possible, looping of water lines, water flow and pressure, and number and location of hydrants. All aspects of fire protection systems shall be designed and installed in accordance with applicable codes in all areas served by municipal water. This standard shall not apply to Transect Zone subdivisions. The Fire Chief reviewed the plans on 10/26/2021 and had no substantial comments. If changes are needed based on more detailed building inspector review, the zoning administrative officer will make a determination of whether it is a field change or requires an amendment. Staff considers this criterion met. (8) Roads, recreation paths, stormwater facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility lines and lighting have been designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. For Transect Zone subdivisions, this standard shall only apply to the location and type of roads, recreation paths, and sidewalks. #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 14 14 of 26 See criterion 9 below for infrastructure comments. See criterion 11 below for comments related to stormwater. The Board deferred findings on lighting and utility lines to final plat. The proposed lighting plan omits sufficient information to determine if the proposed street fixtures meet height limitations of 30-ft and the required quality of materials. Further, it appears that the same fixture produces different light levels. 18. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to provide the missing information and check the photometric computations. The applicant has not provided any lighting in the parking areas or on the buildings. 19. Staff recommends the Board discuss whether any lighting will be needed on the exterior of the buildings, near entrances or dumpsters for instance. If so, such lighting must be shown on the photometric drawings and it must be demonstrated to meet the required physical characteristics. Utility lines are proposed to be underground. Utility cabinets are located within the development lots (as opposed to within the ROW). Screening of utility cabinets is considered under site plan review standards pertaining to landscaping. (9) Roads, utilities, sidewalks, recreation paths, and lighting are designed in a manner that is consistent with City utility and roadway plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. For Transect Zone subdivisions, this standard shall only apply to the location and type of roads, recreation paths, and sidewalks. 15.12 pertains to roadway geometry, cross section, and sidewalks. Unless modifications are approved by the Board in consultation with the Director of Public Works, City standards require at least a 5-foot grass strip between the roadway and the sidewalk (LDR 15.12M(2)), which serves as a location for street trees as well as removed snow. Standard recreation path width is 10-ft and standard sidewalk width is 5-feet. The Board at preliminary plat provided detailed findings on this criterion, requiring multimodal connectivity between O’Brien Farm Road and Kennedy Drive along Two Brothers Drive, and along O’Brien Farm Road, including connectivity for 392 units proposed in this phase of the development, the units constructed in Phase I of the project (the “Hillside” area), residents of the developments outside of the O’Brien project area on Kennedy Drive between Eldridge Street and Kimball Ave, and the future proposal for 415 residential units and up to 1,285,000 sf of commercial space on either side of Old Farm Road. These users would access points west through this development and via Kennedy Drive. The applicant has testified that they believe the City standards result in a suburban neighborhood feel, which is inconsistent with the urban design they are trying to achieve and which the Comprehensive Plan supports. The Board concurred with the applicant’s assertion and approach and therefore at preliminary plat, found that the applicant must revise the streetscape design to propose a roadway cross section and provide supporting testimony demonstrating that the proposal provides a safe urban environment accommodating all users. Such design must balance the following goals. a) an appropriately urban setting, including an activated street b) transition from recreation path and detached homes c) non-vehicular connectivity through the project area, including for people who live between #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 15 15 of 26 Two Brothers Drive and Eldridge Street and people who live on the far side of Kennedy Drive, and those who may live in the future phase of the O’Brien development. d) slow speeds e) roadway maintenance The Board found that the modifications should take place within the approved rights-of-way. 20. The applicant met with the Bike & Ped Committee to review the plans before this application was submitted. Staff has requested confirmation from the Committee that they are satisfied with the plans as submitted. The Committee is meeting on 11/10. Staff anticipates they will have an update at the time of the hearing. The applicant has provided a memo, prepared by Wall Consultant Group and dated August 31, 2021, describing design considerations, alternatives, and recommended elements of the proposed design, many of which were incorporated into the plans. 21. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to present their design and consider whether the established goals (a) through (e) are satisfied. Staff generally considers the goals to be met, with minor recommended changes discussed immediately below. As noted above, the Director of Public Works reviewed the plans with Planning and Zoning Staff on 10/29/2021. The following are additional comments from that review. • The “Transportation Infrastructure Review” prepared by Wall Consultant Group recommends ramps from the recreation path to the road to allow more confident cyclists to access the low volume and slow speed street when adjacent to the multifamily homes. Staff supports this recommendation. • The applicant should be required to provide a distinct sign and pavement marking plan to allow more complete evaluation of the proposal • The applicant should remove perennials from around the street trees and replace with hardscape, as the City does not have the ability to maintain perennial plantings in residential districts. • The applicant should provide details for how the integral color will be created at the colored concrete sections, subject to review and approval of the Department of Public Works prior to installation. • No detail is provided on the Silva Cells demonstrating whether adequate soil area will be provided. • The applicant’s landscaping details provide a concrete foundation for the proposed granite curb. Why is this proposed? In what other projects has it been shown to be necessary or successful? • For the sections including brick pavers, there should be a geotextile fabric between the asphalt and concrete setting bed. • Pavers should be oriented so their long access is parallel to traffic • Where there is a flush junction of concrete and pavers, provide an expansion joint with appropriate treatment • “STOP” controlled intersections should be provided with a line but not the “STOP” legend • Concrete mix shall be anti-spalling • Crosswalks shall not be striped at driveway crossings 22. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to address the joint comments of the Director #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 16 16 of 26 of Public Works and Planning and Zoning Staff prior to closing the hearing. (10) The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s). The Board found this criterion met at preliminary plat. (11) The project’s design incorporates strategies that minimize site disturbance and integrate structures, landscaping, natural hydrologic functions, and other techniques to generate less runoff from developed land and to infiltrate rainfall into underlying soils and groundwater as close as possible to where it hits the ground. For Transect Zone subdivisions, this standard shall apply only to the location of natural resources identified in Article XII of these Regulations. Staff considers that the Project triggers the Stormwater Management Standards of Section 12.03. As noted above, the City Stormwater Section reviewed the project on 11/8/2021 and had no comments. Staff considers this criterion met. D) SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS 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 Board found this criterion met at preliminary plat. 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. See discussion under 14.06C(1) and (2) below. (2) Parking (a) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings. Any side of a building facing a public street shall be considered a front side of a building for the purposes of this subsection. (b) – (c) Not applicable (d) For through lots, parking shall be located to the side of the building(s) or to the front of the building adjacent to the public street with the lowest average daily volume of traffic. The applicant is proposing 53 spaces on Lot 10, 56 spaces on Lot 11, and 34 new on-street parking spaces. The Board found at preliminary plat that the applicant must meet minimum parking requirements as each building is proposed. Parking minimum are addressed in 13.01. 0.75 spaces are required per dwelling unit for studio and one-bedroom units, and 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit for units with two bedrooms and above. In addition, 0.75 spaces are required for every 4 units, as long as no more than one parking spaces is reserved per dwelling unit. The purpose of the additional 0.75 spaces is to accommodate guest parking. Based on a provided table of dwelling units, the applicant is proposing #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 17 17 of 26 70 studio and one bedroom units 52.5 parking spaces required 24 two bedroom units 36 parking spaces required Guest parking for 94 units 17.4 spaces required Total required spaces 106 spaces The applicant has provided 143 parking spaces, which is more than the required minimum. 23. Staff recommends the Board include a condition requiring that no more than one parking space may be reserved per unit. (3) Without restricting the permissible limits of the applicable zoning district, the height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and existing or anticipated adjoining buildings. Requested height waivers are addressed under dimensional standards above. See discussion of compatibility under 14.06C(1) and (2) below. C. Relationship of Structures and Site to Adjoining Area. (1) The Development Review Board shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural characteristics (e.g., rhythm, color, texture, form or detailing), landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of different architectural styles. At preliminary plat, the Board found this criterion met because all buildings were proposed to be of the same architectural style. As illustrated above, the applicant has proposed for the buildings on Lots 10 and 11 to be different architecturally from the other buildings. Given the reduced setbacks and the strong street presence of all buildings in this phase of the master plan, a configuration supported by the Board and by Staff, Staff considers buffering and screening to not be available to create transitions between buildings. Though generally it is possible to create adjoining buildings of different styles, to date the applicant has placed a strong emphasis on consistency between buildings to create a strong neighborhood feel. 24. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to revise the buildings to meet this criterion. (2) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. As noted above pertaining to the architectural design of inclusionary units, Staff considers the Board is entitled to rely on the drawings of the buildings submitted at preliminary plat for evaluation of this criterion. Staff considers a more thorough review of this criterion will be required once the buildings are revised as discussed above. 25. Staff recommends the Board review the below discussion as background for review of the criterion pertaining to the architectural design of inclusionary units. As a refresher, preliminary findings pertaining to the compliance of each lot with this criterion and the criteria of 14.06A and 14.06B follows. All Lots The applicant’s initial submission represented buildings with the same architecture as one another, entry towers at all six buildings, and parking garages along at least one street facing #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 18 18 of 26 façade for each building. During the preliminary plat hearings, the applicant provided supplemental testimony and exhibits to respond to Board feedback on this and the criteria of 14.06A and 14.06B. This testimony indicated the applicant’s approach to creating an attractive and activated street presence for each building by creating an engaging street presence. This was proposed to be done through modifications to the buildings and surrounding streetscape, to include the following. • a “theme and variation” approach to the entry towers, with similar exterior architecture but differing interior treatments visible through the tower windows. • slatted ventilation and decorative inserts to screen street-level garage openings • an entrance into street level common space near the center of the garage where it faces on a street • landscape architectural elements including seating, information kiosks • vegetation to include trees, grasses and planters • complimentary entrances at the main four-way intersection to include short term bicycle parking, flush granite curbing, seat walls, raised planting beds, bench seating, and landscaping • interior common spaces • walkways, including suspended decks and boardwalks along Kennedy Drive • Where parking garages make up the street-level façade, the applicant has proposed a small common room, approximately the size of 1.5 parking spaces, with street-level entry, on each façade. The Board found that if the presented improvements are integrated into the design, the buildings would be complementary throughout and that proposed structures will respond to the terrain and provide a sufficient street presence. As noted above, a number of these elements are missing from the proposed buildings. As currently proposed, Staff considers the architecture and common design features fail to meet this criterion. Lot 10 In addition to the above-mentioned findings on these criteria applicable to all lots, the Board further found the applicant must demonstrate at final plat that the design of the building and landscaping on Lot 10 provides an appropriate transition from the single family and duplex area to the southwest to the multifamily area, and that the street level garage presents a harmonious relationship with the residential character of the neighborhood. 26. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant how the provided design accomplishes this objective, since the area between the property line and the building is proposed to be maintained as lawn. Lot 11 No additional findings pertaining to this criterion’s applicability for Lot 11 were provided by the Board. 14.07 Specific Review Standards In all Zoning Districts and the City Center Form Based Codes District, the following standards shall #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 19 19 of 26 apply: A. Access to Abutting Properties. The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial or collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. The Board found at preliminary plat that there should be a shared curb cut between Lots 11 and 16 (now Lots 11 and 18). Lot 18 is now proposed for stormwater treatment as part of the adjacent O’Brien “Eastview” development. Staff considers shared access to remain important for maintenance of the stormwater treatment system. 27. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to provide a curb break in the O’Brien Farm Road driveway for Lot 11 of minimum width to allow a maintenance vehicle. Staff notes the drainage of the roadway is away from Lot 18 therefore this would not adversely affect stormwater management. B. Utility Services. Electric, telephone and other wire-served utility lines and service connections shall be underground insofar as feasible and subject to state public utilities regulations. Any utility installations remaining above ground shall be located so as to have a harmonious relation to neighboring properties and to the site. Standards of Section 15.13, Utility Services, shall also be met. Utility connections are proposed to be underground throughout this phase. Staff considers this criterion met. C. Disposal of Wastes. All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling, composting, or other requirements, shall be accessible, secure and properly screened with opaque fencing to ensure that trash and debris do not escape the enclosure(s). Small receptacles intended for use by households or the public (i.e., non-dumpster, non-large drum) shall not be required to be fenced or screened. At preliminary plat, for Lots 10 and 11, access to solid waste disposal was either through the garage doors, which do not include dedicated pedestrian facilities, or via a sidewalk from the entry tower to the far corner of the building. The Board required the applicant to improve pedestrian access to the solid waste disposal area at the next stage of review. 28. This has not been addressed for either Lots 10 or 11. Access to the solid waste area is still via either the garage doors, which do not include dedicated pedestrian facilities, or via a full set of stairs accessed from a sidewalk adjacent to the parking lot. The architectural plans show some unused space next to the garage door which could potentially used as a person door. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to address this deficiency. D. Landscaping and Screening Requirements. See Article 13, Section 13.06 Landscaping, Screening, and Street Trees. At preliminary plat, the Board identified the following objectives of the landscaping plan • Landscaping within the developed areas should celebrate the urban environment rather than attempt to screen it. Spaces should be designed to be useable rather than decorative. Staff considers this has been addressed by providing a mix of grass and planted areas. • A densely planted buffer between the street and the buildings would detract from a neighborhood feel and the Board finds the applicant must use landscaping to complement and enhance architecture and layout, rather than to screen or hide. Renderings have not been provided, but Staff considers this appears to have been addressed. #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 20 20 of 26 • There should be a balance between landscaped areas and shaded open areas to allow for small opportunities for outdoor enjoyment. Where not otherwise necessary, the Board finds the applicant should expand useable open space by providing strategically placed shade trees in lieu of dense hedges. Necessity may occur in the case of specific regulatory requirements or restricted access areas like transformers or vaults, or to create a small buffer between open spaces and private residences. Review of specifically required landscaping is provided below. Staff considers this to have been addressed. The applicant estimates building cost to be approximately $15,000,000, resulting in a required minimum landscaping value of approximately $157,500. The applicant has proposed the following elements that they wish to use as credit towards the required minimum budget. Item Cost Staff Recommendation Concrete Pavers, Lots 10 & 11 Streetscape and Lot 11 Pocket Park $47,336.30 for Streetscape $14,775.20 for Pocket Park Include the streetscape elements but exclude the pocket park unless it is redesigned to be more functional, as discussed above. Recommend confirming cost is beyond cost of standard concrete. Tree Plantings $36,375 Include Shrub Plantings $32,401.50 Include Perennial and Decorative Grass Plantings $16,863.50 Include Bike Racks $5,000 Exclude; this is a required element of plan Benches $6,600 in public spaces $4,950 in pocket park Include the public space benches but exclude the pocket park unless it is redesigned to be more functional, as discussed above Installation and Contingency $21,359.20 It is standard to include installed cost of plants but not of hardscape elements. It appears the plantings already represent installed costs. Therefore recommended to exclude. Total $139,576.30 provided ($157,500 required) Total includes only recommended elements 29. Staff recommends the Board review the proposed landscaping budget and determine which of #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 21 21 of 26 the proposed elements to accept as credit towards the required minimum. Staff reminds the Board that some credit may be granted for site improvements other than tree planting as long as the objectives of the landscaping section (13.06) are not reduced. Objectives include: • promoting the health, safety, and welfare of city residents through improved drainage, water supply recharge, flood control, air quality, sun control, shade, and visual relief • a mix of large canopy tree species, • screening between dissimilar uses, • landscape elements that reduce stormwater runoff and promote infiltration • screening of parking areas and utility features • creation of attractive parking areas with emphasis on the privacy and comfort of adjoining properties Staff considers the applicant may be able to obtain credit for elements installed in the area of the pocket park if it is redesigned to be a functional space. 30. Ultimately, Staff considers there are some minor improvements recommended herein which should increase the provided landscaping value above the required minimum, and recommends the Board direct the applicant to update this estimate before closing the hearing but after other elements of the plan are settled. The applicant has requested the Board allow the cost of the proposed street trees, street hardscape features, and street landscaping be applied towards minimum landscaping budgets required for development of other lots. The applicant notes that the elements of the project within the ROW enhance the appearance of the lots. 31. Staff considers there may be some opportunity to allow credit for landscaping features not otherwise required (ie things other than street trees, lighting, rec paths and sidewalks). Staff recommends the Board discuss. Specific comments on parking lot landscaping and screening requirements are discussed immediately below. Section 13.06B of the Land Development Regulations addresses landscaping of parking areas as follows. (1) All off-street parking areas shall be landscaped around the perimeter of the lot with trees, shrubs and other plants. Perimeter planting shall be set back from the curb sufficiently to allow for snow storage. The purpose of perimeter planting shall be to mitigate the view of the parking lot from the public way and from adjacent uses and properties, and to provide shade and canopy for the parking lot. In some situations it may be necessary both for surveillance purposes and for the perception of safety to install the size and type of plants that leave visual access between the parking lot to the public way or other pedestrian areas. Lot 10: The Board noted at preliminary plat that though the surface parking is proposed to be located in an allowable area, this criterion is particularly important for the portion of the lot fronting on Two Brothers Drive. The parking lot is located approximately eight (8) feet below the adjoining roadway. The applicant should take the change in elevation into consideration when considering plans for this buffer. Staff considers the proposed elevation change from Two Brothers drive generally meets this criterion, except at the driveway entrances where landscaping is necessarily limited for sight distance purposes. Lot 11: The Board deferred review of this criterion to final plat. Staff considers this criterion met. #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 22 22 of 26 32. The areas adjacent to the entrances of both lots are designated as snow storage, which defeats the purpose of limiting plantings to allow clear lines of sight. Additional snow storage areas on Lot 11 are in close proximity to stormwater treatment or conveyance practices. Staff recommends the Board discuss with the applicant other alternatives for snow storage or removal. One alternative may be to reconfigure landscaping to leave open areas more desirable for snow storage. Landscaping without low limbs may be appropriate at driveway entrances. (2) In parking areas containing twenty-eight (28) or more contiguous parking spaces and/or in parking lots with more than a single circulation lane, at least ten percent (10%) of the interior of the parking lot shall be landscaped islands planted with trees, shrubs and other plants. Such requirement shall not apply to structured parking or below-ground parking. The Board found at preliminary plat that the applicant must to meet this criterion for each parking lot rather than overall. Two parking lots are proposed, each containing more than 28 parking spaces. The applicant has provided exhibits showing their computation of the parking lot interior landscaping. The computation has been done incorrectly; the requirement is for 10% of the area of the lot (not the area of the spaces) to be landscaped islands. Staff notes this interpretation is the result of a literal reading of the LDR and has been the reading applied by the DRB city-wide for many years. 33. Staff considers this criterion has not been met and recommends the Board require the applicant to address this deficiency before closing the hearing. (3) All interior and perimeter planting shall be protected by curbing unless specifically designed as a collection and treatment area for management of stormwater runoff as per 13.06(B)(5)(c) below. Interior planted islands shall have a minimum dimension of six (6) feet on any one side, and shall have a minimum square footage of sixty (60) square feet. Large islands are encouraged. Staff considers this criterion met. (4) Landscaping Requirements (a) Landscaping shall include a variety of trees, shrubs, grasses and ground covers. All planting shall be species hardy for the region and, if located in areas receiving road runoff or salt spray, shall be salt-tolerant. Staff considers this criterion met. (b) At least one (1) major deciduous shade tree shall be provided within or near the perimeter of each parking area, for every five (5) parking spaces. The trees shall be placed evenly throughout the parking lot to provide shade and reduce glare. Trees shall be placed a minimum of thirty (30) feet apart. Lot 10 contains 29 surface parking spaces, requiring six shade trees. This criterion has been met. Lot 11 contains 32 surface parking spaces, requiring seven shade trees. This criterion has been met. (b) Trees shall have a caliper equal to or greater than two and one-half (2 ½) inches when measured on the tree stem, six (6) inches above the root ball. This criterion has been met. (d) Where more than ten (10) trees are installed, a mix of species is encouraged; the species #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 23 23 of 26 should be grouped or located in a manner that reinforces the design and layout of the parking lot and the site. A mix of species is proposed and species are grouped. Staff considers this criterion met. (e) N/A The City Arborist provided the following additional comments on the landscaping plan on 11/1/2021. • Discourage the planting of perennials/shrubs in the city ROW unless there are plans to contract out maintenance. The city does not have the staff/funding to maintain these plantings • Several areas on the plans that are designated as “Snow Storage” show trees planted in locations that will restrict access, most likely resulting in damage to the trees • Sheet L200 references the use of Silva Cells for the Red Oaks that are to be planted in the sidewalk but I couldn’t find a detailed specification. Deep Root( the manufacturer of Silva Cells) recommends a soil volume of 1000 cubic feet to support the growth of large maturing trees such as Red Oak 34. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to address the comments of the City Arborist prior to closing the hearing. These comments partially overlap comments provided by the Director of Public Works. (5) Planting Islands (a) Curbed planting islands shall be designed and arranged to define major circulation aisles, entrances and exits, provide vegetative focal points, provide shade and canopy, and break up large expanses of asphalt pavement. All islands shall be planted with trees, shrubs, grasses and ground covers. Plant materials judged to be inappropriate by the Development Review Board will not be approved. (b) Curbs of such islands shall be constructed of concrete or stone and shall be designed to facilitate surface drainage and prevent vehicles from overlapping sidewalks and damaging the plants. Sections of drop curb are permitted if their purpose is to allow stormwater runoff from the adjacent parking area to reach stormwater collection and management infrastructure. (c) Islands are strongly encouraged to be graded and planted to serve as collection and treatment areas for stormwater management. It is recommended that sections of drop curb no greater than five feet in length be installed to allow stormwater to flow off the paved parking lot and onto the island for treatment. At the DRB’s discretion, curbless parking areas and planting islands may be allowed where these are specifically designed for stormwater management. However, ends and corners of such areas must be protected with curbing to prevent cars from driving over or parking on planted areas. Except as discussed above pertaining to the amount of landscape islands, Staff considers these criteria to be met. (6) Snow storage areas must be specified and located in an area that minimizes the potential for erosion and contaminated runoff into any adjacent or nearby surface waters. As noted above, snow storage areas on Lots 10 and 11 are in conflict with sight distance, and snow storage areas on Lot 11 are in proximity to stormwater features. #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 24 24 of 26 E. Modification of Standards. Except within the City Center Form Based Code District, where the limitations of a site may cause unusual hardship in complying with any of the standards above and waiver therefrom will not endanger the public health, safety or welfare, the Development Review Board may modify such standards as long as the general objectives of Article 14 and the City's Comprehensive Plan are met. However, in no case shall the DRB permit the location of a new structure less than five (5) feet from any property boundary and in no case shall be the DRB allow land development creating a total site coverage exceeding the allowable limit for the applicable zoning district in the case of new development, or increasing the coverage on sites where the pre-existing condition exceeds the applicable limit. The applicant’s requested waivers, beyond those which were issued at the master plan level, are discussed elsewhere in this document. F. Low Impact Development. The use of low impact site design strategies that minimize site disturbance, and that integrate structures, landscaping, natural hydrologic functions, and various other techniques to minimize runoff from impervious surfaces and to infiltrate precipitation into underlying soils and groundwater as close as is reasonable practicable to where it hits the ground, is required pursuant to the standards contained within Article 12. Stormwater management is addressed above under PUD standard 11. G. Standards for Roadways, Parking and Circulation. Standards of Section 15.12 Standards for Roadways, Parking, and Circulation shall be met. See discussion under PUD criterion 9 above. E) OTHER Bicycle Parking At preliminary plat, the Board found this criterion should be evaluated on a lot by lot basis. Minimum required bicycle spaces are as follows. Lot # of Units SF Commercial Required short term spaces Required Long Term Spaces Required Clothes Lockers 10 47 0 5 47 0 11 47 0 5 47 0 Short Term Bicycle Parking The applicant has proposed a group of five bicycle racks near the entrance to each building. The Board found at preliminary plat that the applicant must demonstrate that the racks support two bicycles each in accordance with the standards of 13.14B(2), and meet the minimum spacing and location requirements of 13.14B(2) and Appendix G, including distribution around principal entrances, at final plat. 35. The applicant has not provided a detail of the bike parking. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to correct this deficiency. Long Term Bike Storage #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 25 25 of 26 The provided architectural plans show bicycle storage in the parking garages, but it is not clear whether these storage areas will meet the minimum required number of spaces. The Board found at preliminary plat that the applicant must provide details on these storage areas as part of the Final Plat, including demonstration of how the required minimum numbers will be provided. 36. This requirement has not been addressed. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to address this deficiency before closing the hearing. Traffic Overlay District The project is located with the traffic overlay district Zone 3. The master plan has a total area of 39.16 acres (39.76 acres pending approval of MP-20-01) and therefore has a traffic budget of 1762 (or 1789) vehicle trips per PM peak hour. The project’s TIS estimates full build of the project will generate 428 trips, revised to 282 trips based on the 2/5/2020 traffic memo. The Board finds this criterion met. Energy Standards All new buildings are subject to the Stretch Energy Code pursuant to Section 3.15: Residential and Commercial Building Energy Standards of the LDRs. Sureties Sureties are addressed in 15.15 of the LDR. The applicant is required to provide surety (bonds, escrow accounts or letters of credit) for three elements of the proposed project: 1. public facilities and improvements 2. street trees 3. site landscaping Surety for public facilities is required to be maintained until work is complete and for two to three years thereafter. Street tree and site landscaping sureties are required to be maintained until three years after the work is complete. The amount of the public facility surety and shall be the full cost of the facilities. The amount of street tree and site landscaping surety shall be $10,000 plus 50% of the amount over $10,000. With final plat approval #SD-17-17, the applicant requested approval for a complicated phasing framework which resulted in the establishment of 38 separate bonds, representing nine infrastructure phases, eight street tree phases, and 21 site landscaping phases. At the time SD-17-17 was approved, the regulations required the applicant to bond for the full amount of street trees and site landscaping. The applicant proposed this framework because they thought having a larger number of smaller bonds would be easier to manage. The Board approved this request. Since that time, the applicant and Staff have found the approved bonding framework difficult to administer. The applicant is proposing a new framework which proposes to provide one public infrastructure letter of credit and one letter of credit for street trees and site landscaping. The value of the letters of credit is proposed to vary depending on what elements of the project are within the required time period (commencing with a zoning permit for the work and expiring two to three years after completion). The applicant is proposing that this framework be applied retroactively to the phases already bonded for. It also appears the applicant is proposing this framework apply to the lots for which final plat applications have not yet been submitted. 37. Staff recommends the Board discuss whether they will allow the applicant to reduce the bonding amount for old phases of the project simply because the regulations have changed. The previously approved phases are not the subject of this application. Since there is no nexus for this change, Staff #SD-21-25 Staff Comments 26 26 of 26 recommends the Board not approve any changes to the surety framework for portions of the master plan that are not involved in this application. 38. Staff recommends the Board discuss whether they will allow the applicant to consolidate street trees and site landscaping. These have always been required as separate sureties. 39. Staff recommends the Board discuss whether they will allow the applicant to establish a letter of credit for phases of the project not yet permitted. Staff considers that if the applicant can get a financial institution to allow a letter of credit with an undetermined amount, there is no reason the City need prohibit using the same letter of credit in the future. 40. Finally, Staff recommends the Board discuss whether they will allow a variable amount surety. If allowed, Staff considers the applicant would be required to obtain approval of the zoning administrator for the amount in the surety prior to each newly issued zoning permit, and again at the time a portion of the surety is requested to be released through a tracking mechanism (presumably a spreadsheet). The applicant has requested to meet with the Zoning Administrator and Director of Public Works to determine if there are any logistical issues with their proposal. If the ZA and DPW Director do not have issues with this proposal, Staff considers it is allowable under the LDR. The applicant has provided a lot of discussion of the terms of sureties. Staff considers the regulations provide for a surety to expire two to three years after Staff approves the work as complete, and if the work is not completed to the satisfaction of Staff, the City has the right to call on the surety to fund completion of the work. Staff considers the LDRs provide appropriate terms as written. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board work with the applicant to address the issues identified herein. Respectfully submitted, Marla Keene, Development Review Planner 50' Wetland Setback Wetland A T y p e I I I 5 0 ' W e t l a nd S e t ba c k Wetland B T y p e I I I 50' WetlandSetbackWetland C Type III Existing Lot 1 Area = 8.9 acres "Lancaster"Area = 5.0 acres "Stonington" Existing Lot 2 Existing Lot 3 Open LandArea = 2.0 acres Exi s t i n g P o n d # 1 Existin g P o n d # 2 Existing P o n d # 3 Lot 6ParkArea = 3.0 ac Lot 9 Area = 1. 9 a c Lot 8Area = 4.6 ac Lot 4Area = 1.1 ac Lot 5Area = 8.83acres Lot 5Area = 9.1 acres Lot 7Area = 2.44 acres 22 Units 22 Units 16 Units 55 Units Lot 10Area = 0.9 ac Revised Lot 14Area = 1.1 ac Revised Lot 13Area = 2.1 ac Revised Lot 15Area = 2.3 ac Revised Lot 17Area = 4.3 ac Lot 16Area = 6.72 ac Revised Lot 11Area = 1.2 ac Revised Lot 12Area = 1.6 ac Revised Lot 18Area = 0.56 ac Note: Lot 12-15 permanent improvements areshown for schematic purposes 10' paved pathLot 10Area = 0.9 ac HILLSIDE @ O'BRIEN FARM OWNER AND APPLICANT: ISSUED FOR PERMIT REVIEW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PROPERTY INFORMATION: C-2 SITE PLAN Old Farm Road and Kennedy Drive, South Burlington, Vermont O'BRIEN BROTHERS1855 WILLISTON ROADSOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 CITY ROADS & LOTS 10-11 164 Main Street, Suite 201 P: (802) 878-0375Colchester, Vermont 05446 email@krebsandlansing.com Revised Lot 14Area = 1.1 ac Revised Lot 12Area = 1.6 ac Revised Lot 13Area = 2.1 ac Revised Lot 15Area = 2.3 ac Revised Lot 17Area = 4.3 ac Revised Lot 16Area = 6.7 ac Revised Lot 11Area = 1.2 ac GravelWetland #1 Gravel Wetland #2 8 Spaces2 New Spaces 6 Spaces (2 new) 8 Spaces 10 Spaces 29 Parking Spaces 32 Parking Spaces Proposed 47 Unit Building24 Garage Spaces Proposed 47 Unit Building24 Garage Spaces New BikeRack New BikeRack Snow Storage SnowStorage SnowStorage ScreenedTrash/ Recycling ScreenedTrash/Recycling Stone retainingwall 8' concrete sidewalk 10' concr e t e s i d e w a l k10' concrete sidewalk8' paved path 5' concrete sidewalk 5' concrete sidewalk5' concrete sidewalk 5' concrete sidewalk5' concrete sidewalkRevised Lot 18Area = 0.56 ac SnowStorage LIMIT OF PROPOSED PHASE Note: Lot 12-15 permanent improvements areshown for schematic purposes Note: Lot 12-15 permanent improvements are shown for schematic purposes Temporary gravel pedestrian pathduring construction Stopbar and stopsign Stop barand stop sign Stop bar andstop sign Stop bar andstop sign Dashed greenstriping atfuture driveway crossing Stop bar and stop sign. Refer tolandscape plans by WagnerHodgson Landscape Architecture for details of specialpaving and brick crosswalks. Refer to landscape plans byWagner Hodgson LandscapeArchitecture for details of specialpaving and brick crosswalks. Refer to plans by Lamoureux &Dickinson for details of turn lanes and signalization. "Bikes Yield to Peds" MUTCDR9-6 sign "Bikes Yield toPeds" MUTCD R9-6 sign "Bikes Yield toPeds" MUTCDR9-6 sign Sidewalkconnection tofuture phase New CBRim 358.2Inv. in 353.25Inv. out 353.15 New CBRim 358.2IInv. out 353.45 NewScreenedTrash/Recylcing New CBRim 367.05Inv. in 362.8Inv. out 362.7 New CBRim 367.5Inv. in 362.6Inv. out 362.5 New CBRim 371.0Inv. in 366.25Inv. out 366.15 New CBRim 370.7Inv. in 365.95Inv. out 365.85 New CBRim 375.1Inv. in 370.35Inv. out 370.25 New CBRim 378.0Inv. in 373.25Inv. out 373.15 New CBRim 378.1IInv. out 373.6 New CBRim 366.25Inv. in 361.8Inv. out 361.7 New CBRim 366.25Inv. in 362.0Inv. out 361.9 New CBRim 367.3Inv. in 361.42Inv. out 361.33Inv. ud 364.3 New CBRim 367.2Inv. out 363.2 New CBRim 368.4Inv. in 362.82Inv. out 362.72 New CBRim 372.5Inv. in 367.75Inv. out 367.65 New CBRim 372.8Inv. out 368.3 New CBRim 372.0Inv. in 367.25Inv. out 367.15 New CBRim 370.0Inv. in 365.25Inv. out 365.15 New CBRim 375.25Inv. in 370.5Inv. out 370.4 New CBRim 375.5Inv. out 371.0 New CBRim 361.25Inv. in 356.4Inv. out 356.3 New streetlight (typ.) New 10"PVC RoofDrain New 10"PVC RoofDrain SnowStorage SnowStorage SnowStorage SnowStorage SnowStorageNew BikeRack NewBikeRack New CBRim 370.9Inv. in 365.9Inv. out 365.8Inv. ud 366.65 New 6" PVC SDR 35sanitary sewer serviceto building. Connectto Phase 1 stub.Coordinate withmechanical plans. New 6" PVC SDR 35sanitary sewer service to building. s=14"/ftmin. Coordinate withmechanical plans. New 12" HDPE s=0.01 New 15" HDPEs=0.068New 1 2 " HD PE s = 0 . 0 1 8 New 15" HDPEs=0.005New 12" HDPEs=0.019New 12" HDPEs=0.014New 15" H DP E s=0.055New 15" HDPE s=0.042 New 15" HDPEs=0.073 New 15" HDPEs=0.083New 15" HDPE s=0.01 New 1 5 " H D P E s = 0 . 1 1 5 New 12" HDPE s= 0 . 012 New 15" H D P E s=0.053 New 1 5 " HDPE s = 0 . 0 4 New 15" HD P E s=0.07New 15" HDPE s=0.005CB#61Rim 362.13Inv. in 357.38Inv. out 357.28Inv. ud 358.13 Infiltration Trench 63Use (1) 30' long x 18"dia. perforated HPDEpipes bedded in stone.Inv. 346.51 New CBRim 374.9Inv. in 370.4Inv. out 370.3 New SMHRim 358.9Inv. in 351.2Inv. out 351.1Contractor shall verify pipe invertprior to ordering manhole New 15" HDPE s=0.052 New 15" HDPEs=0.01New 15" HDPE s=0.01 New CBRim 367.2Inv. out 362.45Inv. ud 363.2 New 15" HDPE s=0.032New CBRim 364.33Inv. in 359.58Inv. out 359.48Inv. ud 360.33 New 15" HDPE s=0.022 New 15" HDPE s=0.026 New CBRim 362.33Inv. out 357.58Inv. ud 358.33 New CBRim 357.7Inv. in 352.95Inv. out 352.85Inv. ud 353.7 Convert CB#58to solid cover Convert CB#55to solid coverCore and bootNew Inv. in351.65 New CBRim 358.4Inv. out 354.4New CBRim 357.7Inv. in 352.95Inv. out 352.85Inv. ud 353.7 New 15" HDPE s=0.033 NewHydrantassembly New 8" x 8" x 8"tee, thrust blockand gate valve. SnowStorage NewScreenedTrash/RecylcingNew 15" HDPE s=0.006Relocate hydrant outof sidewalk. New 6" D.I. Cl 52 fireand 4" D.I. domesticwater service to building.Connect to Phase 1 stub.Coordinate withmechanical plans.4"6"New 6"x4" teewith respectivegate valves New 6" D.I. Cl 52 fire and 4" D.I.domestic water service tobuilding. Connect to Phase 1stub. Cut stub as necessary toinstall tee and valves. Coordinatewith mechanical plans.4"6"New 6"x4" teewith respectivegate valves Sidewalkconnection tofuture phase HILLSIDE @ O'BRIEN FARM OWNER AND APPLICANT: ISSUED FOR PERMIT REVIEW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PROPERTY INFORMATION: C-3 SITE PLAN Old Farm Road and Kennedy Drive, South Burlington, Vermont O'BRIEN BROTHERS1855 WILLISTON ROADSOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 164 Main Street, Suite 201 P: (802) 878-0375Colchester, Vermont 05446 email@krebsandlansing.com Proposed 47 Unit Building24 Garage Spaces Proposed 47 Unit Building24 Garage Spaces CITY ROADS & LOTS 10-11 SEE SHEET C-4 SEE SHEET C-5Revised Lot 18Area = 0.56 ac Note: Lot 12-15 permanent improvements areshown for schematic purposes Note: Lot 12-15 permanent improvements are shown for schematic purposes Newemergencyspillway New End Section Inv. 326.75 New OutletStructure C.See detail.Newstoneberm New End Section Inv. 329.5 New 15" HDPE s=0.07615" HDPE s=0.08915" HDPE s=0.052New 15" HDPE s=0.069 New rip rapdispersal pad Gravel Wetland #1 Cell#155' x 20'Elev. 326.5 Gravel Wetland #2 Cell#2121' x 32'Elev. 331.0 New EndSection Inv. 326.75 New 18" EndSection Inv. 332.0 New rip rapdispersalpad New CBRim 348.0Inv. in 343.0Inv. out 342.9 New CBRim 348.1Inv. in 341.82Inv. out 341.72 New CBRim 352.2Inv. in 347.45Inv. out 347.35 New CBRim 353.5Inv. in 348.75Inv. out 348.65 New CBRim 357.25Inv. in 352.5Inv. out 352.4 New CBRim 361.25Inv. in 356.4Inv. out 356.3 New 10"PVC RoofDrain New 10"PVC RoofDrain New rip rapdispersal pad New EndSection Inv. 332.0Gravel Wetland #2 Cell#1121' x 32'Elev. 331.0 N e w 1 5 " H D P E s = 0 . 0 2 3New 18" HDPEs=0.017N e w 1 8 " H D P E s = 0 . 1 2 New 18" HD P E s=0.037 New 18" HDPE s=0.055 New 15" HDPE s=0.014 New 15" HDPE s=0.045New 15" HDPE s =0 .054 New 18" HD P E CB#63Rim 352.84Inv. in 346.51Inv. out 348.094' deep sump CB#64Rim 353.05Inv. out 346.514' deep sump. CB#65ARim 345.68Inv. in 340.93Inv. out 340.354' deep sump CB#66ARim 346.3Inv. in 340.35Inv. out 341.6Use 4' deep sump CB#65Rim 339.60Inv. out 333.854' deep sump CB#66Rim 339.60Inv. in 334.85Inv. out 333.85(infiltration)Inv. out 335.354' deep sump. CB#67Rim 333.27Inv. in 327.77Inv.ud 329.27Inv. out 329.02Use 4' deep sump. CB#68Rim 333.10Inv. in 328.35Inv. out 327.77Inv. ud 329.104' deep sump. Infiltration Trench 63Use (1) 30' long x 18"dia. perforated HPDEpipes bedded in stone.Inv. 346.51 Infiltration Trench 65 (1)24' long x 18" dia.perforated HPDE pipesbedded in stone. Inv. 333.85 Infiltration Trench 67 Use (1) 35'long x 15" dia. perforated HPDEpipes bedded in stone. See detail.Inv. 327.77 Infiltration Trench 65AUse 1 24' long x 15" dia.perforated HPDE pipebedded in stone.Inv. 340.35 New 18"HDPENew CBRim 338.2Inv. in 333.2Inv. out 333.1 New CBRim 339.4Inv. in 334.4Inv. out 334.3 Dashed greenstriping atdrivewaycrossing HILLSIDE @ O'BRIEN FARM OWNER AND APPLICANT: ISSUED FOR PERMIT REVIEW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PROPERTY INFORMATION: C-4 SITE PLAN Old Farm Road and Kennedy Drive, South Burlington, Vermont O'BRIEN BROTHERS1855 WILLISTON ROADSOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 164 Main Street, Suite 201 P: (802) 878-0375Colchester, Vermont 05446 email@krebsandlansing.com TWO BROTHERS DRIVE SEE SHEET C-3 SEE SHEET C-510' paved pathNote: Lot 12-15 permanent improvements are shown for schematic purposes Note: Lot 12-15 permanent improvements areshown for schematic purposes New CBRim 366.25Inv. in 361.8Inv. out 361.7 New CBRim 366.25Inv. in 362.0Inv. out 361.9 New CBRim 367.3Inv. in 361.42Inv. out 361.33Inv. ud 364.3 New CBRim 372.8Inv. out 368.3 New CBRim 370.0Inv. in 365.25Inv. out 365.15 New CBRim 366.25Inv. in 359.1Inv. out 359.0 New CBRim 366.4Inv. in 361.65Inv. out 361.55 New 10"PVC RoofDrain SnowStorage SnowStorage New CBRim 372.8Inv. in 367.91Inv. out 367.81Inv. ud 368.66 New CBRim 372.9Inv. out 368.15Inv. ud 368.9 New 15 " H D P E s = 0 . 0 2 1 New CBRim 370.9Inv. in 366.15Inv. out 366.05Inv. ud 366.9 New CBRim 370.9Inv. in 365.9Inv. out 365.8Inv. ud 366.65 New 6" D.I. Cl 52water service tobuilding. Connect toPhase 1 stub.Coordinate withmechanical plans. New gatevalve, cap,stub, thrustblock, andwitness for 8"water main. NewHydrantassembly New 8" x 8" x 8"tee, thrust blockand gate valve. New 8" waterstub with cap,trhust block andwitness New 1 5 " HD P E s = 0 . 0 4 New 15" H D P E s=0.07New 15" HDPE s=0.005New 15" H DPE s=0.082 N e w 1 5 " H D P E s = 0 . 0 2 3 New 15"HDPE s=0.01New 15"HDPE s=0.01New CBRim 363.1Inv. out 359.6 New 12" HDPE New 15" HDPEs=0.01New CBRim 367.2Inv. out 362.45Inv. ud 363.2 New 15" HDPE s=0.032New CBRim 364.33Inv. in 359.58Inv. out 359.48Inv. ud 360.33 New 15" HDPE s=0.022 New 15" HDPE s=0.026 NewHydrantassembly New 8" x 8" x 8"tee, thrust blockand gate valve. NewScreenedTrash/Recylcing NewHydrantassembly New CBRim 372.8Inv. in 367.91Inv. out 367.81Inv. ud 368.66 New 15" HDPE s = 0 . 0 2 1 New CBRim 370.9Inv. in 366.15Inv. out 366.05Inv. ud 366.9 New gate valve,cap, stub, thrustblock, andwitness for 8"water main. NewHydrantassembly New 8" Cl 52 D . I . w a t e r l i n e New 8" x 8" x 6"tee, thrust blockand gate valvle. New 8" x 8" x 8"tee, thrust blockand gate valvle. HILLSIDE @ O'BRIEN FARM OWNER AND APPLICANT: ISSUED FOR PERMIT REVIEW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PROPERTY INFORMATION: C-5 SITE PLAN & PROFILE Old Farm Road and Kennedy Drive, South Burlington, Vermont O'BRIEN BROTHERS1855 WILLISTON ROADSOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 O'BRIEN FARM ROAD 164 Main Street, Suite 201 P: (802) 878-0375Colchester, Vermont 05446 email@krebsandlansing.com Revised Lot 11Area = 1.2 ac Revised Lot 18Area = 0.56 ac SEE SHEET C-5 SEE SHEET C-3NEW 10' C O N C R E T E S I D E W A L K Note: Lot 12-15 permanent improvements areshown for schematic purposes P:\2014\14145\dwg\14145-K2 Signal Plan.dwg 8/27/2021 11:58:51 1 : 1 KEY QTY. SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE SPACING MATURE HTAR8Acer rubrum 'Redpointe'RED MAPLE2.5-3" CAL.AS SHOWN40'-70'CO5Celtis occidentalisHACKBERRY2.5-3" CAL.AS SHOWN30'-40'GT6Gleditsia triacanthos inermis 'Shademaster'SHADEMASTER HONEYLOCUST2.5-3" CAL.AS SHOWN45'QR5Quercus rubraRED OAK2.5-3" CAL.AS SHOWN50'-60'UA8Ulmus 'Morton' AccoladeACCOLADE ELM2.5-3" CAL.AS SHOWN50'-60'PS3Prunus sargentii 'Pink Flair'SARGENT CHERRY2"-2.5" CAL.AS SHOWN25'HP3Hydrangea paniculata' Limelight Prime'LIMELIGHT PRIME HYDRANGEA#54' O.C.4'-6'RA10Rhus aromatica 'Gro-Low'GROW LOW SUMAC#34' O.C.6"-18"RR16Rosa rugosaRUGOSA ROSE#54' O.C.4'-6'HH12Hemerocallis sp.DAYLILY VARIETIES#118" O.C.24"-36"HR8Hemerocallis 'Rosy Returns'ROSY RETURNS DAYLILY#115" O.C.24"-36"HN3Hemerocallis 'Night Embers'NIGHT EMBERS DAYLILY#118" O.C.24"-36"P L A N T S C H E D U L ET R E E SS H R U B SO R N A M E N T A L T R E E SP E R E N N I A L S KEY QTY. SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE SPACING MATURE HTAR9Acer rubrum 'Redpointe'RED MAPLE2.5-3" CAL.AS SHOWN40'-70'CO4Celtis occidentalisHACKBERRY2.5-3" CAL.AS SHOWN30'-40'GT5Gleditsia triacanthos inermis 'Shademaster'SHADEMASTER HONEYLOCUST2.5-3" CAL.AS SHOWN45'GTb5Gleditsia triacanthos inermis 'Shademaster'SHADEMASTER HONEYLOCUST3"-3.5" CAL.AS SHOWN45'QR5Quercus rubraRED OAK2.5-3" CAL.AS SHOWN50'-60'UA5Ulmus 'Morton' AccoladeACCOLADE ELM2.5-3" CAL.AS SHOWN50'-60'DL22Diervilla lonicera 'Copper'COPPER DWARF HONEYSUCKLE#34' O.C.2'-3'PF25Potentilla fruticosa 'Abbottswood'ABBOTTSWOOD BUSH CINQUEFOIL#53' O.C.3'RA14Rhus aromatica 'Gro Low'GROW LOW SUMAC#34'' O.C.6" - 18" RR21Rosa rugosaRUGOSA ROSE#54' O.C.4'-6'HH186Hemerocallis 'Happy Returns'HAPPY RETURNS DAYLILY#112" O.C.24"-36"HR122Hemerocallis 'Rosy Returns'ROSY RETURNS DAYLILY#115" O.C.24"-36"HN51Hemerocallis 'Night Embers'NIGHT EMBERS DAYLILY#118" O.C.24"-36"P L A N T S C H E D U L ET R E E SS H R U B SP E R E N N I A L S UP UNDER-BUILDING PARKING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 16' OVERHEAD DOORAMMENITY SPACE STORAGEFOUNDATION SHELF DN UP REF.DWELEV. LOBBY AMMENITY SPACE ADABATH MECH. CHASE VESTIBULE CORRIDOR OPTION #1 2-BEDROOM UNIT[900 sqft] 1-BEDROOM UNIT[672 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[672 sqft] STUDIO UNIT[481 sqft] 1-BEDROOM UNIT[725 sqft] UP UNDER-BUILDING PARKING 123456789101112 16' OVERHEAD DOORAMMENITY SPACE STORAGEFOUNDATION SHELF DN UPREF.DW ELEV. LOBBY AMMENITY SPACE ADABATH MECH. CHASE VESTIBULE CORRIDOR OPTION #1 2-BEDROOM UNIT[900 sqft] 1-BEDROOM UNIT[672 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[672 sqft] STUDIO UNIT[481 sqft] 1-BEDROOM UNIT[725 sqft] STAIR ELEV.FITNESS ELEV. STAIR CAFE PET WASH PARKING TYP LOBBY/WEWORK New CBRim 348.9Inv. in 344.65Inv. out 344.55 New CBRim 349.9Inv. in 344.49Inv. out 344.39 New CB Rim 350.6Inv. in 345.85Inv. out 345.65 New CB Rim 355.2Inv. out 350.45New CBRim 355.4Inv. in 350.15Inv. out 350.05 Inv. out 348.1 Inv. out 348.3 Phase 1 stub with teeand reducer.Coordinate withmechanical plans. Coordinate withmechanical plans.New 15" HDPE New 12" HDPE New 12" HDPE New 1 5 " H D P E New12" New CBRim 363.1Inv. out 359.6 New 12" HDPE TWO BROTHERS DRIVE O'BRIEN FARM ROAD O'BRIEN FARM ROAD TWO BROTHERS DRIVE118(23) DR (2) GT (10) PV (4) RF (6) NS (46) RA (20) PV (3) VD (1) ZS (9) RA (1) ZS (12) POP (137) CA LAWN (10) RA (18) AM (5) MD (12) PV (7) HP (18) SB (5) HP (38) CA (13) RF (4) SP (1) AG LAWN (1) AF (9) SP (2) QR (1) AG LAWN (1) NSV (12) CAN (1) ZS (18) POP (15) FG (12) RR (1) ZS (1) ZS (57) DR (4) GT (9) HS (6) PA (17) SA (6) PA (16) SA (8) HS (1) QR (2) QR (1) NSV (15) RA (3) VD LAWN (6) NS (8) PV (5) RF (19) HS (14) SP (14) DR (1) CK(5) MD LAWN(256) LS (14) SB (17) RF LAWN (26) HS (13) HP (13) RF (16) PV LAWN (11) NS (24) CA (13) RF (18) NS LAWN LAWN P L A Y L A W N PAVILION PICNIC TABLES BENCHES, TYP. POCKET PARK CONCRETE PAVERS (3) BENCHES CONCRETE PAVERS BIKE RACKS (2) BENCHES CONCRETE PAVERS BUILT-IN GRILL PICNIC TABLES CONCRETE PAVERS (2) BENCHES SNOW STORAGE (3) PG (7) RA L A W N SNOW STORAGE SNOW STORAGE SNOW STORAGE SNOW STORAGE (3) AF (1) NSV (3) AF GRILL # DESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 00.00.0000 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE WAGNER HODGSON © WHLA ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 2020 VT 802.864.0010 JOB NO. SCALE: DRAWN BY: DATE: wagnerhodgson.comNY518.567.1791 NO.DESCRIPTION DATE HILLSIDE LOFTS HILLSIDE @ O'BRIEN FARM, SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 21-098 430 Warren Street Hudson, NY 12534 PLOT DATE: 9/24/2021 10:38 AMLANDSCAPE PLAN 1"=20' CO 09.24.2021 L102SCALE OF FEET 20020 40 PROPOSED BENCH PROPOSED BIKE RACK PROPOSED PICNIC TABLES 18" MIN. COMPACTED CRUSHED STONE SUBBASE UNDISTURBED EARTH OR APPROVED FILL MATERIAL COMPACTED TO 95% STD. PROCTOR NEOPRENE MODIFIED ASPHALT ADHESIVE BRICK UNIT PAVER W/ HAND TIGHT SAND/CEMENT JOINTS 34" BITUMINOUS CONCRETE SETTING BED,SEE SPECS FOR MIX 2 12" BASE COURSEBITUMINOUS CONCRETE, TYPE II CONCRETE FOUNDATION FOR CURB 6" COMPACTED GRAVEL FLUSH BARRE GRANITE CURB 1 12" ASPHALTIC CONC. SURFACE COURSE 2 12" ASPHALTIC CONC. BASE COURSE 12" MIN. COMACTEDCRUSHED STONE SUBBASE 18" COMPACTED CRUSHED STONE SUBBASE UNDISTURBED EARTH OR APPROVED FILL COMPACTED TO 95% STD. PROCTOR GEOTEXTILE FABRIC 1/2" EXPANSION JOINT EVERY 20' (OR AS INDICATED ON PLAN) 14" X 1 12" SAW-CUT CONTROL JOINT, AS SHOWN ON PLAN WELDED WIRE MESH 6" CONCRETE PAVEMENT BRICK PAVERS OVER BITUMINOUS CONCRETE BASE 8"8" SECTION SOIL CELLS, TYP. SEE CIVIL DWGS. HORTICULTURAL SOIL UNDISTURBED EARTH OR APPROVED FILL COMPACTED TO 95% STD. PROCTOR CONC. BENCH. EXTEND TO SOIL CELL OF COMPACTED SUBGRADE TREE GRATE, JAMISON 3'X5' BY URBAN ACCESSORIES LANDSCAPE FABRIC PEA GRAVEL 5" THICK CLASS A 4500 PSI CONCRETE W/ INTEGRAL COLOR PER LAYOUT PLANS 18" MIN.JAMISON 3'X5' TREE GRATE BY: URBAN ACCESSORIES 465 E 15TH STEET TACOMA, WA.. 98421 1.877/487.0488 / 1.253.572.1112 PLAN 3'1'-0 3/4" 4'-11 3/4"CONCRETE CURB, TYP. 5" THICK CLASS A 4500 PSI CONCRETE BAND W/ INTEGRAL COLOR 316" SAW-CUT CONTROL JOINT, AS SHOWN ON PLAN CONSTRUCT 1/2" EXPANSION JOINTS EVERY 20' OR AS INDICATED ON PLAN. 5" THICK CLASS A 4500 PSI CONCRETE W/ INTEGRAL COLOR (PROVIDE ANTI-SPALLING COMPOUND) 5" THICK CLASS A 4500 PSI CONCRETE W/ NO INTEGRAL COLOR (PROVIDE ANTI-SPALLING COMPOUND)8'11'1'-8" TYP. BITUMINOUS CONCRETE ROAD SURFACE 1 3/4" = 1'-0" BRICK PAVER CROSSWALK OVER BITUMINOUS CONCRETE # DESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 00.00.0000 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE WAGNER HODGSON © WHLA ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 2020 VT 802.864.0010 JOB NO. SCALE: DRAWN BY: DATE: wagnerhodgson.comNY518.567.1791 NO.DESCRIPTION DATE HILLSIDE @ O'BRIEN FARM SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 980 430 Warren Street Hudson, NY 12534 PLOT DATE: 9/24/2021 9:30 AMLANDSCAPE DETAILS AS SHOWN CO 09.24.2021 L200 2 3/4" = 1'-0" SCORED CONCRETE ROAD PLAZA @ INTERFACE W/ BRICK CROSSWALK 3 1/2" = 1'-0" TREE GRATE W/ SILVA CELLS & BORDERED BY INTEGRAL COLOR CONCRETE PAVEMENT FIRST FLOOR375' -3"FIRST FLOOR TP384' -4 1/8"SECOND FLOOR386' -5 1/4"SECOND FLOOR TP395' -6 3/8"THIRD FLOOR397' -7 1/2"THIRD FLOOR TP406' -8 5/8"FOURTH FLOOR408' -9 3/4"FOURTH FLOOR TP417' -10 7/8"T.O. ROOF CURB421' -11 1/2"T.O. ROOF PARAPET423' -10 1/2"T.O. ROOF DECK @ EDGE420' -7 1/2"1' - 4"2' - 8 5/8"9' - 1 1/8"2' - 1 1/8"9' - 1 1/8"2' - 1 1/8"9' - 1 1/8"2' - 1 1/8"9' - 1 1/8"3' - 3"6" HORIZONTALFIBER CEMENTSIDING (PAINT JASPER STONE)FIBER CEMENT PANELSSIDING (PAINT BLACK)6" CORNERBOARDS(PAINT OFF-WHITE)8" TRIM BOARD(PAINT JASPER STONE)FIBER CEMENT PANELS (PAINT OFF-WHITE)6" HORIZONTAL FIBER CEMENTSIDING (PAINT NAVY)6" HORIZONTAL FIBERCEMENT SIDING (PAINT JASPER STONE)6" SIMULATED WOOD SIDINGFIRST FLOOR375' -3"FIRST FLOOR TP384' -4 1/8"SECOND FLOOR386' -5 1/4"SECOND FLOOR TP395' -6 3/8"LOWER LEVEL363' -9"TOP OF FOUNDATION374' -7 7/8"THIRD FLOOR397' -7 1/2"THIRD FLOOR TP406' -8 5/8"FOURTH FLOOR408' -9 3/4"FOURTH FLOOR TP417' -10 7/8"T.O. ROOF CURB421' -11 1/2"T.O. ROOF PARAPET423' -10 1/2"T.O. ROOF DECK @ EDGE420' -7 1/2"6" HORIZONTAL FIBERCEMENT SIDING (PAINT JASPER STONE)FIBER CEMENT PANEL(PAINT OFF-WHITE)8" TRIM BOARDS(PAINT OFF-WHITE)FIBER CEMENT PANELS(PAINT BLACK)FIBER CEMENT PANELS (PAINT OFF-WHITE)8" TRIM BOARD(PAINT OFF-WHITE)6" CORNERBOARDS(PAINT JASPER STONE)FIBER CEMENT PANELS (PAINT NAVY)STOREFRONT GLASS (BLACK)DH WINDOWS WITH BLACK FRAMES6" HORIZONTAL FIBER CEMENTSIDING (PAINT NAVY)AVERAGE GRADE366' -6"55' - 5 1/2"9' - 1 1/8"9' - 1 1/8"9' - 1 1/8"9' - 1 1/8"2' - 1 1/8"2' - 1 1/8"2' - 1 1/8"SCALE:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT:SHEET TITLE:THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF G4 DESIGN STUDIOS, LLC AND IS NOT TO BE COPIED, REPRODUCED, OR THE CONTENT THEREOF USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STEVE GUILDFOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION1/8" = 1'-0"9/28/2021 1:17:37 PMA-3.1EXTERIORELEVATIONSSUMMIT PROPERTIESLOT 10 -SUMMITG4BH9/24/21SUMMITSOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT1/8" = 1'-0"2SOUTH-EAST ELEVATION1/8" = 1'-0"1NORTH-WEST ELEVATION FIRST FLOOR375' -3"FIRST FLOOR TP384' -4 1/8"SECOND FLOOR386' -5 1/4"SECOND FLOOR TP395' -6 3/8"LOWER LEVEL363' -9"TOP OF FOUNDATION374' -7 7/8"THIRD FLOOR397' -7 1/2"THIRD FLOOR TP406' -8 5/8"FOURTH FLOOR408' -9 3/4"FOURTH FLOOR TP417' -10 7/8"T.O. ROOF CURB421' -11 1/2"T.O. ROOF PARAPET423' -10 1/2"T.O. ROOF DECK @ EDGE420' -7 1/2"1' - 4"2' - 8 5/8"9' - 1 1/8"2' - 1 1/8"9' - 1 1/8"2' - 1 1/8"9' - 1 1/8"2' - 1 1/8"9' - 1 1/8"7 1/8"10' - 10 7/8"11' - 6"3' - 3"FIBER CEMENT PANELS (PAINT BLACK)FIBER CEMENT PANELS (PAINT OFF-WHITE)AVERAGE GRADE366' -6"FIRST FLOOR375' -3"FIRST FLOOR TP384' -4 1/8"SECOND FLOOR386' -5 1/4"SECOND FLOOR TP395' -6 3/8"LOWER LEVEL363' -9"TOP OF FOUNDATION374' -7 7/8"THIRD FLOOR397' -7 1/2"THIRD FLOOR TP406' -8 5/8"FOURTH FLOOR408' -9 3/4"FOURTH FLOOR TP417' -10 7/8"T.O. ROOF CURB421' -11 1/2"T.O. ROOF PARAPET423' -10 1/2"T.O. ROOF DECK @ EDGE420' -7 1/2"FIBER CEMENT PANELS (PAINT OFF-WHITE)FIBER CEMENT PANELS (PAINT BLACK)6" HORIZONTALFIBER CEMENTSIDING (PAINT JASPER STONE)6" CORNERBOARDS(PAINT JASPER STONE)6" CORNERBOARDS(PAINT JASPER STONE)8" TRIM BOARDS(PAINT OFF-WHITE)AVERAGE GRADE366' -6"SCALE:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT:SHEET TITLE:THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF G4 DESIGN STUDIOS, LLC AND IS NOT TO BE COPIED, REPRODUCED, OR THE CONTENT THEREOF USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STEVE GUILDFOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION1/8" = 1'-0"9/28/2021 1:18:39 PMA-3.2EXTERIORELEVATIONSSUMMIT PROPERTIESLOT 10 -SUMMITG4BH9/24/21SUMMITSOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT1/8" = 1'-0"1NORTH-EAST ELEVATION1/8" = 1'-0"2SOUTH-WEST ELEVATION UPUPELEV.54' - 0"48' - 0"54' - 0"30' - 0"48' - 0"24' - 0"54' - 0"63' - 0"UNDER-BUILDING PARKING12345678910111217181920212223BENCHLOBBYMECH./ELEC.16' OVERHEAD DOOR24' - 0"16' - 0"23' - 0"AMMENITY SPACESTORAGESLOPING CEILING UNDERSIDE OF STAIRS16151413[H.C.]18' - 0"24' - 0"18' - 0"BIKE STORAGE156' - 0"UNIT BREAK DOWN:STUDIO =8 UNITS1-BEDROOM =27 UNITS2-BEDROOM =12 UNITSTOTAL = 47 UNITSFOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONSHEET TITLE:THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF G4 DESIGN STUDIOS, LLC AND IS NOT TO BE COPIED, REPRODUCED, OR THE CONTENT THEREOF USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STEVE GUILDSCALE:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT:9/28/2021 1:17:06 PMAs indicatedA-2.1LOWERLEVEL PLANSUMMIT PROPERTIESLOT 10 -SUMMITG4WGI9/24/21SUMMITSOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT3/16" = 1'-0"1LOWER LEVEL PLAN DNUPUPDNREF.DWREF.DWDWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.ELEV.LOBBYAMMENITY SPACEOFFICEADA BATHMECH. CHASEMAILBOXESVESTIBULECORRIDOR2-BEDROOM UNIT[907 sqft]STAIR TOWER1-BEDROOM UNIT[689 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[689 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[676 sqft]STUDIO UNIT[481 sqft]2-BEDROOM UNIT[903 sqft]2-BEDROOM UNIT[900 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[672 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[672 sqft]STUDIO UNIT[481 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[725 sqft]UNIT BREAK DOWN:STUDIO =8 UNITS1-BEDROOM =27 UNITS2-BEDROOM =12 UNITSTOTAL = 47 UNITSFOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONSHEET TITLE:THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF G4 DESIGN STUDIOS, LLC AND IS NOT TO BE COPIED, REPRODUCED, OR THE CONTENT THEREOF USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STEVE GUILDSCALE:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT:9/28/2021 1:17:08 PMAs indicatedA-2.2FIRSTFLOOR PLANSUMMIT PROPERTIESLOT 10 -SUMMITG4WGI9/24/21SUMMITSOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT3/16" = 1'-0"1FIRST FLOOR PLAN UPDNUPDNDWREF.REF.DWREF.DWDWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.ELEV.CORRIDOR1-BEDROOM UNIT[655 sqft]LAUNDRY/STORAGELOBBYSTAIR TOWER1-BEDROOM UNIT[689 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[689 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[676 sqft]STUDIO UNIT[481 sqft]2-BEDROOM UNIT[903 sqft]2-BEDROOM UNIT[900 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[672 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[672 sqft]STUDIO UNIT[481 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[725 sqft]2-BEDROOM UNIT[907 sqft]UNIT BREAK DOWN:STUDIO =8 UNITS1-BEDROOM =27 UNITS2-BEDROOM =12 UNITSTOTAL = 47 UNITSFOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONSHEET TITLE:THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF G4 DESIGN STUDIOS, LLC AND IS NOT TO BE COPIED, REPRODUCED, OR THE CONTENT THEREOF USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STEVE GUILDSCALE:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT:9/28/2021 1:17:11 PMAs indicatedA-2.3SECONDFLOOR PLANSUMMIT PROPERTIESLOT 10 -SUMMITG4WGI9/24/21SUMMITSOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT3/16" = 1'-0"1SECOND FLOOR PLAN DNREF.DWREF.DWDWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.UPUPDNDWREF.ELEV.CORRIDOR1-BEDROOM UNIT[655 sqft]LAUNDRY/STORAGELOBBY1-BEDROOM UNIT[689 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[689 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[676 sqft]STUDIO UNIT[481 sqft]2-BEDROOM UNIT[903 sqft]2-BEDROOM UNIT[900 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[672 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[672 sqft]STUDIO UNIT[481 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[725 sqft]STAIR TOWER2-BEDROOM UNIT[907 sqft]UNIT BREAK DOWN:STUDIO =8 UNITS1-BEDROOM =27 UNITS2-BEDROOM =12 UNITSTOTAL = 47 UNITSFOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONSHEET TITLE:THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF G4 DESIGN STUDIOS, LLC AND IS NOT TO BE COPIED, REPRODUCED, OR THE CONTENT THEREOF USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STEVE GUILDSCALE:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT:9/28/2021 1:17:13 PMAs indicatedA-2.4THIRDFLOOR PLANSUMMIT PROPERTIESLOT 10 -SUMMITG4WGI9/24/21SUMMITSOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT3/16" = 1'-0"1THIRD FLOOR PLAN REF.DWREF.DWDWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DWREF.DNDNDWREF.CORRIDOR1-BEDROOM UNIT[655 sqft]LAUNDRY/STORAGELOBBY1-BEDROOM UNIT[689 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[689 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[676 sqft]STUDIO UNIT[481 sqft]2-BEDROOM UNIT[903 sqft]2-BEDROOM UNIT[900 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[672 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[672 sqft]STUDIO UNIT[481 sqft]1-BEDROOM UNIT[725 sqft]ELEV.STAIR TOWER2-BEDROOM UNIT[907 sqft]UNIT BREAK DOWN:STUDIO =8 UNITS1-BEDROOM =27 UNITS2-BEDROOM =12 UNITSTOTAL = 47 UNITSFOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONSHEET TITLE:THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF G4 DESIGN STUDIOS, LLC AND IS NOT TO BE COPIED, REPRODUCED, OR THE CONTENT THEREOF USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STEVE GUILDSCALE:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT:9/28/2021 1:17:15 PMAs indicatedA-2.5FOURTHFLOOR PLANSUMMIT PROPERTIESLOT 10 -SUMMITG4WGI9/24/21SUMMITSOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT3/16" = 1'-0"1FOURTH FLOOR PLAN FOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONSHEET TITLE:THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF G4 DESIGN STUDIOS, LLC AND IS NOT TO BE COPIED, REPRODUCED, OR THE CONTENT THEREOF USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STEVE GUILDSCALE:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT:9/28/2021 1:17:15 PM3/16" = 1'-0"A-2.6ROOF PLANSUMMIT PROPERTIESLOT 10 -SUMMITG4WGI9/24/21SUMMITSOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT3/16" = 1'-0"1ROOF PLAN DWREF.REF.DWDWREF.DWREF.DWREF.11' - 5"(VARS.)11' - 6"1' - 4"7' - 1"3' - 8"3' - 0"9' - 1"2' - 3"4' - 8"6' - 0"(VARS.)13' - 10"6' - 6"10' - 0"8' - 6"1' - 2"6' - 2 1/2"8' - 6"4' - 8"2' - 1"1' - 4"11' - 4 1/2"16' - 2"6' - 10"6' - 0 1/2"4' - 2"11' - 3"2' - 1"9' - 0 1/2"16' - 5 1/2"18' - 5 1/2"4' - 0"10' - 10"12' - 0"2' - 1"10' - 1"2' - 1"12' - 0"9' - 0"6' - 0"2' - 1"4' - 8"16' - 6 1/2"11' - 2"20' - 0"10' - 2"6' - 6"8' - 10 1/2"1' - 4"12' - 0"17' - 0 1/2"10' - 1"2' - 1"17' - 5 1/2"7' - 8 1/2"3' - 11"4' - 10"4' - 2"12' - 0"SCALE:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT:SHEET TITLE:THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF G4 DESIGN STUDIOS, LLC AND IS NOT TO BE COPIED, REPRODUCED, OR THE CONTENT THEREOF USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STEVE GUILDFOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION1/4" = 1'-0"9/28/2021 1:18:41 PMA-4.1UNIT PLANSSUMMIT PROPERTIESLOT 10 -SUMMITG4WGI9/24/21SUMMITSOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT1/4" = 1'-0"11-BED - A TYPE1/4" = 1'-0"2STUDIO UNIT1/4" = 1'-0"42-BED - A TYPE1/4" = 1'-0"51-BED - B TYPE1/4" = 1'-0"32-BED - B TYPE VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL October 1, 2021 South Burlington Development Review Board C/O Ms. Marla Keene, Development Review Planner City of South Burlington 180 Market Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Final Plat Review: Hillside at O’Brien Farm Lot 10 and Lot 11 of Phase I Master Plan Dear Board Members: This Final Plat application is for the next phase of a previously approved master plan for up to 458 dwelling units and up to 45,000 square feet of office space. This phase consists of two (2) four story multi‐family residential buildings with a total of 94 dwelling units, of which, 15 will be market rate, 46 will be affordable to low‐income families and individuals earning less than 60% of AMI, and 33 will be affordable to those earning less than 30% of AMI. This application is submitted in accordance with Preliminary Plat SD‐20‐16, as amended by SD‐21‐13 (the Preliminary Plat). The Preliminary Plat allows for the submission of this application in phases over a period of six years. While requiring full details be permitted for the common roadways, the Preliminary Plat allows for the phasing of the construction of those features. Further to the above, enclosed for review please find information regarding the proposed road network, pedestrian infrastructure and relevant planting plans, as well as site plan, parking, site access and architectural information pertaining to the two buildings proposed for construction on Lot 10 and Lot 11, for a total of 94 dwelling units of which 79 units are proposed as perpetually affordable located in two multi‐family dwellings (collectively herein “the Project”). The below application narrative is structured in parallel with the Preliminary Plat to facilitate ease of review for the Board and staff. All items referenced are provided in digital format with this application. The Applicant for this project is O’Brien Farm Road, LLC, and Green Mountain Development Group, Inc. O’Brien Farm Road, LLC is providing details on existing master plan and preliminary plat permits, as well as roadway and infrastructure improvements planned. The development on Lot 10 and Lot 11, construction and operation of the buildings proposed will be managed and owned by Green Mountain Development Group, Inc., or its affiliate. For the purpose of this narrative “Applicant,” is used interchangeably referring to both Green Mountain Development Group, LLC as well as O’Brien Farm Road, LLC. Section 1: Zoning District and Dimensional Requirements: 2 1. Lot Size: The lots in the Project have not changed since the Preliminary Plat. The minimum lot size of .9 acres is above the requisite minimum size. All lots are compliant with the zoning regulations and are shown on the Project plat plans provided. 2. Lot Coverage: Lot coverage standards are met as outlined in the lot coverage chart provided with this application. All relevant details can be viewed in the detailed spreadsheet. As outlined in the Preliminary Plat permit, coverages for the involved zoning districts cannot be exceeded. The Project does not exceed any allowed coverage. The below table mirrors the finding in the Preliminary Plat District Max Lot Coverage Provided Lot Coverage Max Building Coverage Provided Building Coverage R12 60% 35.5% 40% 11.1% C1‐LR 70% 2% 40% 0% R1‐PRD 25% 13.9% 15% 13.9% 3. Setbacks: Minimum setbacks for the two proposed buildings on Lot 10 and Lot 11 are 12’. Front yard setbacks are 6’ or more, as allowed by the Preliminary Plat permit. Rear and side setbacks are 10’ or 30’ as required and applicable. Please review the project plans for details as needed. 4. Height: The Preliminary Plat permit granted a height waiver of 55 feet on Lot 10 and 56 feet on Lot 11. The intention being to allow for the construction of four stories over a podium. The Project proposes two four story buildings over a parking podium, in line with what was submitted at Preliminary Plat. The height of the buildings complies with the 55’ and 56’ requirements. Please see the below table for height calculations. Lot # Average Elevation Building Roof Top Elevation Difference/Height 10 368.9 423.9 55’ 11 371.7 427.15 55.45’ Section 2: Inclusionary Zoning Requirements: As outlined in the Land Development Regulations and the Preliminary Plat, the land involved in the Project has various permits in place that allow for the construction of an additional 343 multi‐family rental dwelling units. The Land Development Regulations require at Section 18.01 that 15% of those units be affordable at 80% of Area Median Income (AMI). These 15% of units are called “Inclusionary Units,” in the Land Development Regulations. Therefore, the required number of inclusionary dwellings for the overall Master Plan is 51. The Project proposes 79 perpetually affordable units, of which at least 51 will be considered “inclusionary” as defined in the ordinance. The Project will consist of 94 units of general occupancy housing in two buildings. The Project will serve 3 a mixed‐income population with 16 studio apartments, 54 1‐bedroom apartments and 24 2‐bedroom apartments. Of the 94 units, 15 will be market rate, 46 will be affordable to low‐income families and individuals earning less than 60% of AMI, and 33 will be affordable to those earning less than 30% of AMI. Of the 33 apartments targeted to very‐low‐income residents, 18 will be set‐aside for the homeless or at risk, with service‐enriched housing services provided by COTS. The project proposed will therefore exceed the minimum inclusionary requirements by 28 units, and will exceed the affordability requirements substantially. The current proposal improves upon the discussion at Preliminary Plat by increasing the number of perpetually affordable apartments and including two mixed income buildings instead of just one. As the Board may recall, that discussion centered around building all 51 required inclusionary apartments in one building on Lot 12. This specific proposal was reviewed and approved by the Board. At the time the proposal was made, the federal funding available for the development of affordable housing was uncertain, and a single building represented the most‐likely scenario for a successful project. We believe that project was well designed and in compliance with the regulations as written. Today however, we are pleased the funding for the Project to expand is available, and that O’Brien Brothers, in partnership with Summit Development, is able to propose these additional perpetually affordable units, in multiple buildings integrated into the Hillside development. As outlined below, the inclusionary units proposed meet the requirements of Section 18 of the Zoning Regulations. Please see the below text of the regulation, provided in line with the Preliminary Plat decision: 1. Constructed on site: The Project proposes to construct all inclusionary units on site as required. 2. Integrated into Development: The proposed inclusionary units are located on two lots that are in the center of the proposed development in mixed‐income buildings as described above. The Applicant believes that this criterion is met. 3. Construction Materials: 4 The Project proposes to use stone, glazing and cementitious siding. These materials are identical to those proposed at Preliminary Plat, are in line with industry standards for this style of construction, and are consistent with proposals shown to the Board for this project site since the start of permitting. We believe this criterion is met. 4. Energy Efficiency: All projects in South Burlington are required to be built to the applicable CBES or RBES building code. This project is proposed to meet or exceed that efficiency, as will any market rate project proposals. We believe that this Criterion is met, and will be demonstrated per the filed CBES or RBES certificate, as required. 5. Size of Dwelling Units: As outlined in the architectural drawings provided the minimum size of the units proposed meets or exceeds the minimum size outlined in this provision of the ordinance. Given this, all proposed apartments in the Project meet the requirements of this criterion. 6. Unit Types: The Project proposes multi‐family inclusionary dwellings as required for construction of multi‐family market rate dwellings in similar buildings of similar materials. We believe this criterion is met. 7. Mean Number of Bedrooms: 5 The Project is proposing the construction of 15 market rate dwellings and a total of 16 market rate bedrooms or 1.067 bedrooms per unit. The Project is proposing the construction of 79 perpetually affordable dwellings with a total of 1.08 bedrooms per unit. These numbers are substantially identical and we believe they are in keeping with the spirit of the ordinance. We believe the requirements of this criterion are met for the purpose of this Project. In the context of the overall development the required number of inclusionary dwellings (which must meet the above‐referenced criteria) is 51. We note that we are proposing an additional 28 perpetually affordable dwellings, but that those additional units may not meet all of these criteria. For instance, a higher percentage of the Project is proposed as studio apartments than is the case in the overall PUD. As the remaining lands in the PUD are developed, we would note that any combination of any of the perpetually affordable units for a total of 51 units may be used to calculate compliance with the mean bedroom criteria above. Since the Applicant is only required to build 51 inclusionary units, it could leave out the smallest units proposed from the mean bedroom calculation, resulting in a higher number of bedrooms per unit. Should the applicant do this, the result would not be non‐compliance with the ordinance, but rather a reduction in the number of density bonus units available. The density bonus is discussed further below. 8. Construction Timing for Inclusionary Units: Further to the Preliminary Plat, the Board found that we must obtain a zoning permit for the building containing the inclusionary units “no later than the fourth principal building.” Currently, we expect that the two buildings proposed with a total of 79 perpetually affordable apartments will be the first two zoning permits issued. With that said, Applicant would request that the Board maintain this finding, and allow for other buildings to proceed prior. Should something happen to preclude Summit from commencing construction as planned, other phases of the project (which will be filed on the heels of this permit) should be able to continue to proceed under this existing finding and schedule. 9. Affordable/Inclusionary Density Bonuses: The Applicant is proposing to construct 79 perpetually affordable apartments. This exceeds the inclusionary requirement by 28 dwelling units. As outlined in the ordinance, the construction of the required inclusionary units results in a density bonus of one market rate unit for each inclusionary unit constructed. The 6 total remaining density of the Project lands is 343 dwelling units. The applicant will construct the minimum 51 required inclusionary units as part of this Project, increasing the available density to be 394 dwelling units. In addition, Section 18.01(G) provides for additional bonus density “when an applicant voluntarily includes, in the base zoning density unit maximum for the development, more than the number of inclusionary units required under this Section…the development shall receive in addition to the offset units a density bonus.” The section goes on to indicate that the available density bonus is identical to the offset, one additional dwelling for each additional inclusionary unit. Given this, the Applicant is seeking this additional density be memorialized in this permit, increasing the total density to be 422 multi‐family dwellings, with a remaining density of 328 dwelling units (after the Project proposed is permitted). The Applicant notes that for these additional voluntary affordable units, the number of bedrooms should not impact compliance with Section 18.01(C)(2)(b)(vii) for future market rate developments. The Applicant may reduce the excess inclusionary units (and any density bonus) as needed to remain in compliance with Section 18.01(C)(2)(b)(vii) over the course of permitting the remaining lands, and nothing in this permit should obligate the Applicant to that bedroom ratio should it need to be changed. Section 3: Planned Unit Development Review Criteria 1. Water and Wastewater: The Preliminary Plat included several items for us to address under this section. The enclosed project plans have addressed each item enumerated by the South Burlington Water Department. Those changes are shown in the project plans. We look forward to the review of the water department. 2. Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control: Erosion prevention and sediment control plans are included in the project plans folder for review and comment. We look forward to discussing these plans with the Board. 3. Traffic Management: 7 As requested in the Preliminary Plat, the applicant has updated the Traffic Study. These updates include: a. Updated PM Peak Hour trip generation estimates for the proposed buildings. b. Updated intersection capacity analyses (to verify future levels of service and the proposed intersection configuration). Provided for only the Kimball Avenue intersection in question for design. c. Updated signal warrant analyses. The results of this updated analyses show that the proposed intersection configuration remains the recommendation for maintaining adequate levels of service. The turn lane on Kennedy will be constructed with this project along with the crosswalks at Kennedy Drive. A flashing beacon will be installed for pedestrian protection until such time as the signalization is warranted. Plans for the full signalization are provided in this application. All designs accommodate that eventual signalization that will be required/warranted as noted in the traffic impact analysis. That signal will be bonded and installed when warranted in subsequent phases of the Project. 4. Wetland Impacts: As outlined in the Preliminary Plat, “wetland impacts were approved as part of the master plan.” No changes are proposed to the wetland impacts previously approved. 5. Visual Compatibility with Planned Development Patterns: This criterion was discussed extensively at Preliminary Plat and a finding by the Board stated “The Board preliminarily finds the project consistent with the planned development patterns specified in the Comprehensive Plan and in the purpose of the R‐12 zoning district.” The proposal now before the board at final plat is consistent in design and quality with those previously shown. The overall look and feel of the buildings are in keeping with what has been discussed in this location throughout the permitting process for the Master Plan and the previous plat hearings. In even greater furtherance of the goals of the comprehensive plan, the proposal now before the board goes beyond previous approvals and representations in delivering affordable housing to the City. This is an integral part of the comprehensive plan goals, and solidifies this Project’s compliance with this criterion. 6. Open Space Areas: 8 As noted in the preliminary plat a robust discussion on open space has occurred at the Board for this project. This productive discussion resulted in the submission of landscape concept sketches at Preliminary Plat. Those concept sketches were well received by the Board and have provided the foundation for the proposals in the Project. Specifically, the concept sketches shown for Lot 10 and Lot 11 are as follows: Lot 10 Concept Sketch Lot 11 Concept Sketch: 9 As you can see, the Project proposals closely mirror the concept sketches proposed. The amenity areas are located in the same spot on each lot and are providing similar features. The project has also located an additional “pocket park,” adjacent to O’Brien Farm Road on lot 11. Given this, we believe this criterion is met and that what is proposed mirrors what was previously reviewed and accepted by the Board. 7. Fire Chief Review: This criterion was not reviewed at Final Plat. Our team has worked to present a plan that meets the criteria of the South Burlington Fire Department. We look forward to their review and feedback. 8. Project Rec Paths, Roads, Stormwater, Utility Lines and Lighting: 10 Infrastructure comments are discussed at item 9 below. Stormwater at item 11 below. With regard to site lighting, photometric plans showing lighting proposed are provided in the packet. The proposed street light type/fixture is provided in the exhibit folder for review. All street lights are proposed to be mounted on 14’ poles. No lighting is proposed in parking areas, only the street lights shown on the project plans are proposed. 9. Project Roads and Infrastructure: The Preliminary Plat hearings discussed pedestrian and bicycle connectivity as well as streetscape, green belts and plantings extensively. These productive discussions led to the below findings: The Applicant has engaged with its project team and also added a specialist in road network and pedestrian connectivity from WCG Engineering to the team in order to propose a solution that achieves all five goals outlined above. The key characteristics of the site and the proposals provided are outlined in a report from Corey Mack at WCG engineering which is included with this application as an exhibit. Signage and design details are illustrated in the project plans. 11 The Applicant is providing a shared use connection to Kennedy Drive and through O’Brien Farm Road to the eventual future connection with Old Farm Road. The shared use path materials and width vary as shown on the plan and in line with the recommendations of the memo from Corey Mack. Colored concrete and landscape elements are used as visual cues in furtherance of the objective of creating a safe and urban feeling shared space. These proposals have been reviewed by the bike and pedestrian committee who passed a motion in support of the plans as designed. 10. Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives: At a preliminary level the Board found that the Project meets the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Given that the Project now proposes more affordable housing than previously discussed, an important goal of the City, and that the other Project components are in line with previous applications and representations, we believe this criterion is satisfied and so it is not discussed in detail in this application. 11. Stormwater and Construction Disturbance: The assistant stormwater superintendent reviewed our project plans and provided twelve numbered comments. We have addressed those comments in the attached updated plans. We look forward to a follow up review of the updated drawings. Section 4 Site Plan Review Requirements: 1. Parking Layout: As discussed in the Preliminary Plat, the required parking spaces are .75/dwelling unit for studios and one‐bedroom apartments and 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit for two bedroom and above. There are also .75 spaces required for every four units for guest parking. Given these requirements the total parking required and provided is outlined in the below chart. 12 Total in Project Spaces Required Total Spaces Studio 16 0.75 12 One Bedroom 54 0.75 41 Two Bedroom 24 1.5 36 Guest Parking 94 (Total Units *.75).25 18 Total Parking Required 106 Total Provided 107 2. Building Height: Building heights are in line with the waivers requested and granted at Preliminary Plat as outlined above. No further discussion is provided as we believe this criterion was discussed and is met. 3. Common Materials and Architecture: At the Preliminary Plat the Applicant had proposed six buildings of similar architectural style. Subsequently, the Applicant received Board approval for a phased filing of final plat, in part to allow for each building to develop more fully and be submitted over time (not all at once in one format). In line with this permit amendment, the current Project presents only two of six buildings. These buildings while different than the architecture originally proposed, represent a very similar architectural form with common materials, brick, cementitious siding making up the majority of the facades. The buildings are of similar size (four stories over podium), though slightly smaller than the concepts shown at Preliminary Plat. We are very pleased with the overall feel of the architecture provided, how it engages with the street at the parking lot level and at the four corners, and how it interacts with the extensive landscaping and streetscaping proposed. We look forward to discussing the proposed architecture with the Board. For some reference, we have included conceptual renderings of the next phase of development in this project planned for Lot 13 and Lot 15. This is to allow the Board to see how the different styles and common materials work together to create a sense of place for residents. 4. Harmony of Structures and Terrain: 13 Feedback from Preliminary Plat on this criterion had two main components. Overall comments applicable to all lots, and specific feedback applicable to Lot 10 and Lot 11. Each is addressed below. a. Overall Feedback: As outlined in the Preliminary Plat, the applicant is dedicated to creating an active streetscape. Items discussed at Preliminary Plat and presented here for review include: i. Decorative treatment of garage openings. ii. Two entrances to the street from the parking levels. iii. Landscape architectural elements, planters, benches, trees and urban planting plans (a pocket park was added at the street side). iv. Complimentary entrances at the four‐way intersection. v. Decorative treatment of four‐way paving including brick, granite curbs and specialty concrete for a sense of place. vi. Bike parking and plaza entry features. Applicant believes that this Project proposes the majority of features discussed at Preliminary Plat and a detailed landscape plan that is engaging and successful in creating a very attractive development. b. Lot 10 Feedback: Site specific feedback for Lot 10 focused on the transition from the single family and duplex homes to the larger format buildings. We believe that the landscaping provided accommodates this transition successfully, including by placing a sitting area, walking trail/pedestrian easement and hedge along the border. We also shrank the size of the building proposed moving it further from the border with the smaller scale residential area. We believe the Project proposes a development in line with past representations with details shown as to exactly how this transition we be affected and that this criterion is met. c. Lot 11 Feedback: No issues were raised with the placement or format of Lot 11 at Preliminary Plat. The Project now proposes a very similar alignment. Given this and the above we believe that the requirements of this criterion are met. 5. Access to Abutting Properties: Access to abutting properties is solidified within the Master Plan and PUD. No additional access is required on Lot 10 or Lot 11, proposed for development herein. 6. Utility Location: 14 All utilities are proposed underground. All utility boxes and locations are shown on the Project plans. 7. Disposal of Waste: Dumpster locations are shown on the Project Plans adjacent to the parking garage entrances inside fenced enclosures. These enclosures feature easy access from street‐side doors, the garage entrance, and the parking lot door via a staircase proposed. Enclosures fully surround the waste disposal areas as required with a solid fence. We believe this requirement is met. 8. Landscaping and Screening: a. Landscape Budget Requirements Lot 10 and Lot 11: The landscape budget requirements for the two lots proposed for development are summarized in the table below. Project Estimated Cost 15,000,000 Landscape Budget Required Percent of Cost First $250,000 3% $7,500 Second $250,000 2% $5,000 Additional 1% $150,000 Total Landscape Budget $162,500 A proposed landscape budget is provided as an exhibit to this application. As shown on the budget proposed, the Applicant will spend the minimum required landscape budget on a combination plantings, hardscape and amenity installations designed to create a sense of place and beneficial outdoor environment for residents of the building. While not all elements in the landscape budget are plants, we believe that the site is well landscaped and that the plaza, pocket parks, outdoor amenity and seating areas are all part of the overall landscape architecture culminating in a beautifully landscaped site that embraces its urban environment, as directed in the Preliminary Plat. A landscape letter of credit or bonding agreement will be executed to secure the above referenced landscape budget at the time of construction. This agreement will provide for the landscaping located on Lot 10 and Lot 11 only. Separate agreements outlined below will secure the site landscaping and street trees/infrastructure. b. Landscape Requirements for Street and Pedestrian Installations: 15 In addition to the landscape plans provided by the Applicant for Lot 10 and Lot 11, the plan set also includes complete landscape plans for the common roadways, as required by the Preliminary Plat. A complete budget for these plantings is also included in the project exhibits. As shown in the plans, the Applicant is proposing street improvements that go beyond the requirements of the regulations. Special paving features, colored concrete, brick crosswalks and flush granite curb, are all proposed. Additionally, entry features (stone walls and planting beds) are proposed. Together with the street trees and adjacent lot development, the Applicant believes that these features will use landscape to create an identity and sense of place for this project. All of the elements of the streetscape combine to achieve this. As you will see, the budget for the proposed streetscaping is extensive, totaling approximately $292,000. The installation far exceeds the required minimums for only street trees. Given this, we would ask that the Board find affirmatively that the Applicant may apply landscape budgets required at future site plan approvals to this expenditure with the approval of the Board at future meetings. This is not to say we will, or the Board must, but rather to leave open that opportunity for the Board at future plat reviews to use any excess landscape dollars to pay for these streetscape improvements which (though in the ROW and not on the lots) nonetheless enhance the lots through landscaping. c. Required Landscape and Infrastructure Bonding: Both infrastructure and Landscape bonding will be required by the Project. Final Plat SD‐17‐17 which was issued in 2017 by the Board included several bonding requirements. The bonding values and amounts approved in that permit are altered by the updated project plans because the underlying plans have changed and the budgets for items not yet commenced are different. New estimates for the phases where the plans have changed are provided in the Project exhibits. Previous estimates for ongoing phases still hold true and the work is underway. Over the past four years, the Applicant and the City have struggled to implement and track the complicated phasing plan that was developed after SD‐17‐17. Attached to this application as an exhibit titled “Current Letters of Credit and Three‐Party Agreements,” the Board will find an outline of the thirty‐three separate letters of credit and three‐party agreements in place for Hillside. That outline is included here so you can see the letters of credit. 16 Infrastructure Phase Agreed Amount Amount Filed File Date Phase 1a 240,222.00$ 240,222.00$ 9/18/2017 Phase 1b 398,429.90$ 398,429.90$ 3/26/2018 Phase 2 518,326.60$ 518,326.60$ 3/26/2018 Phase 3 677,402.62$ 677,402.62$ 12/10/2018 Phase 4 604,376.31$ 312,920.08$ 11/3/2020 Phase 5 662,569.79$ 377,668.21$ 11/3/2020 Phase 6 597,718.26$ ‐$ Not Filed Phase 7 163,739.82$ ‐$ Not Filed Phase 8 104,901.76$ ‐$ Not Filed Phase 9 40,080.35$ ‐$ Not Filed Totals 4,007,767.41$ 2,524,969.41$ Street Trees Phase Agreed Amount Amount Filed File Date Phase 1a 10,430.00$ 10,430.00$ 10/31/2017 Phase 1b 20,115.00$ 20,115.00$ 1/31/2018 Phase 2 17,135.00$ 17,135.00$ 3/15/2018 Phase 3 30,545.00$ 30,545.00$ 12/10/2018 Phase 4 18,625.00$ 18,625.00$ 11/3/2020 Phase 5 22,350.00$ 22,350.00$ 11/3/2020 Phase 6 13,410.00$ Phase 7 7,450.00$ Phase 8 7,450.00$ 7,450.00$ 11/3/2020 Totals 147,510.00$ 126,650.00$ Required Landscaping Phase Agreed Amount Filed File Date Phase 1 23,935.09$ 23,935.09$ 10/31/2017 Phase 2 17,096.49$ 17,096.49$ 5/2/2018 Phase 3 24,129.12$ 24,192.12$ 9/19/2018 Phase 4 24,129.12$ 24,192.12$ 7/25/2018 Phase 5 15,551.87$ 15,551.87$ 2/27/2019 Phase 6 15,551.87$ 15,551.87$ 2/27/2019 Phase 7 24,294.96$ 24,294.96$ 4/9/2021 Phase 8 24,294.96$ 24,294.96$ 4/9/2021 Phase 9 19,783.85$ 19,783.85$ 5/24/2021 Phase 10 19,783.85$ 19,783.85$ 5/24/2021 Phase 11 12,309.08$ 7/1/2021 Phase 12 10,869.36$ 7/1/2021 Phase 13 13,514.61$ 13,514.61$ 5/24/2021 Phase 14 13,514.61$ 13,514.61$ 5/24/2021 Phase 15 13,514.61$ 13,514.61$ 5/24/2021 Phase 16 13,670.44$ 13,670.44$ 2/27/2019 Phase 17 13,670.44$ 13,670.44$ 2/27/2019 Phase 18 18,227.25$ 18,227.25$ 4/12/2019 Phase 19 9,113.63$ 9,113.63$ 4/12/2018 Phase 20 2,564.07$ 2,564.07$ 11/3/2020 Phase 21 8,072.20$ Totals 337,591.49$ 306,466.84$ 17 This application requests that the board approve a new and streamlined framework. Reducing the thirty‐three existing letters of credit to only two. This framework would greatly reduce the paperwork involved in administration of the project, and would be a benefit to staff and the Applicant. The newly proposed framework is outlined in the below chart. Description Value of Bond Public Infrastructure $ 1,457,052.07 Required Landscaping and Street Trees $ 301,820.20 In large part this reorganization is entirely within the framework of the regulations. It is simply replacing lots of small letters of credit with larger ones. A spreadsheet provided in the Exhibits outlines how the existing bonds are rolled into these two numbers and can be used for tracking purposes in partial releases of bonds as work is completed. Creating two letters of credit and one singular spreadsheet that will track all of these sureties. i. New Findings of Fact: At the time SD‐17‐17 issued, the required landscape bonding for a project was 100% of the estimated cost. It was for this reason that the applicant needed to create so many small phases in the original permit. Allowing Applicant to complete infrastructure, reduce those letters of credit, and recycle that capacity in the form of landscape bonds, due to limits in bonding capacity. Since that time, the City has amended the regulations so that the requirement is now only 50% of the projected cost. The applicant has provided a new table attached at the Project exhibits titled “Proposed Overall Project Bonding.” This table makes use of the existing and past budgets for ongoing work at Hillside, and incorporates the new budgets for the roads, trees, streetscape and street trees proposed in this application (new numbers are colored blue, and historical numbers are not colored).1 The table then uses the current landscape bonding requirements against the existing and proposed values, to determine a single landscape bond amount that is representative of all parts of the project at the current LDR requirement. The table does the same with the infrastructure. Using a combination of the original bonded amounts and the new proposed budgets, the table outlines each of the outstanding letters of credit for infrastructure, the balance remaining, and then combines all of those notes into one single total. The applicant requests that the Board approve this new outline and total such that the Applicant in coordination with the Director of Public Works and the Administrative officer can close all existing letters of credits and escrow accounts and open two new accounts, in the amounts outlined at the “Proposed Overall Project Bonding,” table. As any of the sub‐ 1 Please note this table only deals with the overall master plan and street networks. It does not address the specific improvements proposed on Lot 10 and Lot 11, which will be bonded by Summit Development at the commencement of construction on those lots in new and independent agreements. 18 phases outlined are deemed complete or released in full, the allocated portions outlined in the table would simply be released by the city over time diminishing the two letters of credit to $0.00. ii. Waivers Required: The use of a single letter of credit for this large project means that the letters of credit will need to be in place for some time. It would not be unreasonable to suggest that some of the letters of credit will be in place for more than six years. The regulations appear to force forfeiture of bond amounts if all work is not completed after six years, as outlined at Section 15.15(A)3: It is expected that construction of the six buildings on this site will span at least the next six years, and City takeover of the streets prior to that completion is unlikely. The Applicant raises this language only to suggest the board clarify in its findings that the bonding may be in place for longer than six years without forfeiture, unless there is a period of more than six years where no work on the project has been underway. Secondly, the Applicant would request that the Board approve a process for a phased release of the Landscaping Bonds proposed (if that Board approval is necessary). Currently the Applicant is bonding for trees that have been in place since 2018, and which are healthy and vibrant. Because other homes in the project are not planted, the landscaping is technically not “complete.” The standard 3‐party agreement for the landscaping letters of credit makes clear: “Developer shall replace or repair any defective or improper work or materials which may be identified as such…within three years after completion of the improvements.” The improvements are defined by the full plans and plantings included in the letter of credit. This is why there are currently 22 phases of required landscaping. So Phase I can be completed and released prior to Phase 22. The issue is that with a project this large some plantings will be installed for 6 or more years and others will be brand new if you must wait until all is complete for the 3‐year warranty period to begin. This could result in 6–8‐year‐old trees still being secured by bonding that has an annual cost to the Applicant. Contrary to the intent of a three‐year surety. It is unclear to the Applicant if this completion requirement is regulatory, or simply just the template agreement the city uses. Section 13.06(G)(H) states: 19 Section 15.15(B)(3) states: As written the ordinance is requiring all plantings to be in before any CO can be issued, or any bond released and is then saying the bond may be extended if required work is not completed. It is unclear if the requirement for completion of all parts is contemplated here. The Applicant believes that the most efficient way to handle the release of landscape bonding is to conduct an annual inspection at the end of each planting season, to document the plantings in place, and to record the amount of bonding that will be released at the expiration of the three‐year warranty period upon reinspection and confirmed vibrancy of those plantings. These annual inspections would be able to use the project plan sets to track what is installed, and Applicant would be required to submit an annual report documenting such for the City’s records. This process is not foreign and is effectively what is done for infrastructure in large part. The Applicant would propose to meet with Staff and the Director of Public works to refine this proposal for the review of the Board and to provide any waivers necessary for this proposal or an alternative to be viable. The Applicant would be happy to work with the city attorney to develop a suitable amended three‐party agreement that would contemplate this arrangement of partial release based on site inspections. The Applicant looks forward to discussing this proposal with the Board. d. Off‐Street Parking Perimeter Plantings: 20 The landscape plans provided outline the compliant perimeter plantings plans for the proposed off‐ street parking located on Lot 10 and Lot 11. We look forward to the Boards review and feedback on this criterion. e. Parking Lot Island Plantings: We have calculated the area of the parking lot and the area of the proposed islands and this criterion is met. Highlight sheets showing the calculations are provided in the Project exhibits. f. Interior Curbing: Interior and perimeter plantings are protected by curbing as required and as shown on the Project plans. g. General Landscape Requirements: The Applicant has engaged a professional landscape architecture firm and provided landscaping plans in conformance with the above criterion as well as the advice issued by the Board in the Preliminary Plat. Our Project team will be prepared to discuss any particular questions on the proposed landscape plan at our hearing. We believe the plan exceeds the requirements of the regulations and provides a robust landscape environment. 9. Snow Storage: 21 Snow storage areas are located and designated on the Project Plans. 10. Project Lighting: The Project is proposing 14’ tall street lights as shown on the project plans along Two Brothers Drive and O’Brien Farm Road. The make and model of the street lights is approved by the department of public works. This fixture meets the requirements outlined above. The applicant believes these lights will provide sufficient lighting for safe access, without flooding the neighboring area with light unnecessarily. A lighting plan showing the impacts of the street lights is provided in the Project exhibits. No pole lights are proposed in parking areas. 11. Bike Parking: 22 a. Short Term: The regulations require one short term space for every ten residential dwelling units. This equates to five spaces on Lot 10 and Lot 11. Compliant U style short term bike parking spaces are provided and shown on the Project plans. b. Long Term Bike Parking: The regulations require one long term bike parking space per unit. The Project is proposing to meet this requirement through bike storage facilities located in the garage level of each building on Lots 10 and 11 as depicted on the attached project plans. Section 5: Requirements for Submission Per Appendix E of Zoning Regulations The zoning regulations include an extensive list of required elements for submission of final plat. For clarity and to ensure completeness of this application. That list is provided below with notes confirming the element is submitted and where in the project materials the information can be located. # Item Description Comment/Location in Submission 1 Completed application form. Executed and saved with exhibits on electronic media 2 One full size copy one 11x17 copy and one digital copy of plans Paper copy excluded as digital submission is now accepted. Digital submission provided via Dropbox 3 List of the owners of record of abutting properties. Provided in exhibits folder of electronic submission. 4 Name and address of the owner of record Provided on Application 5 Name and address of the applicant Provided on Application 6 Name and address of engineer Provided on Application 7 Name and address of architect Provided on Application 8 Name and address of landscape architect. Provided on Application and Landscape Drawings 9 Plan preparation dates Provided on Plans 10 Plan revision dates Provided on Plans and in Plan File Names as Applicable 11 True North Arrow and scale. Preferred scale not more than on hundred feet to the inch. Provided on plans 12 Narrative Description of project. Provided in digital format 13 Narrative Demonstration of compliance with applicable review standards Provided in digital format 14 Narrative list of submission elements. Provided in digital format 15 Narrative list of changes made from previous submittals. Provided in narrative 16 List of waivers requested. Details on why the request and authority to grant. Provided in narrative 17 Any other data the administrative officer or development review board shall require. Provided upon request 18 Location map showing relation of subject property to surrounding areas. Included in project plans provided electronically 23 19 Boundaries and area of existing subject property. Included in project plans provided electronically 20 Proposed property lines Included in project plans provided electronically 21 Boundary lines of all zoning districts, transects and overlay districts. Included in project plans provided electronically 22 City official map designations Included in project plans provided electronically 23 Lots proposed are numbered. Included in project plans provided electronically 24 Location of existing restrictions on land, easements and covenants. Included in project plans provided electronically 25 Permanent reference monuments Included in project plans provided electronically 26 Copies of proposed deeds, deed restrictions covenants, agreements and other documents showing the manner in which open space areas are to be dedicated reserved and maintained. Not applicable, all project open space areas were solidified in previous plat hearings. 27 A complete survey of the subdivision prepared by a licensed land surveyor Included in project plans provided electronically 28 Lot area in square feet and acres. Provided in coverage chart attached in exhibit subfolder of electronic submission 29 Lot coverage calculations including building and overall. Provided in coverage chart attached in exhibit subfolder of electronic submission 30 Front yard coverage. Not applicable as no commercial use is proposed 31 Point by Point Lighting Plan and cut sheets for all outdoor lighting within the site. Provided in exhibits folder of electronic submission. 32 Location and layout of any off‐street parking or loading areas. Included in project plans provided electronically 33 Location and layout of any traffic circulation areas. Included in project plans provided electronically 34 Location and layout of any pedestrian walkways. Included in project plans provided electronically 35 Location and layout of fire lanes. Included in project plans provided electronically 36 The extent/amount of cut and fill for all disturbed areas including before and after profiles and cross sections of typical development areas, parking lots and roads. See Sheet C10. Lot 10 has a 3750 cubic yard cut. Lot 11 has a 8450 cubic yard cut. 37 Erosion prevention and sediment control plans. Included in project plans provided electronically 38 Location of any outdoor equipment storage Included in project plans provided electronically 39 Location of any outdoor materials storage Included in project plans provided electronically 24 40 Location of any solid waste related facilities dumpsters, recycle bins. Included in project plans provided electronically 41 Estimate of all earthwork including quantity of material to be imported or removed from the site. Project total cut of approximately 12,200 cubic yards. 42 Location of existing structures on the site. Included in project plans provided electronically 43 Plan showing all site conditions to remain. Included in project plans provided electronically 44 Plan showing existing water courses and buffers. NA. None in development area. 45 Plan showing wetlands and buffers. Included in project plans provided electronically 46 Base flood elevations if located in special flood hazard area. NA. 47 Plan showing current wooded areas. NA. No wooded areas in project 48 Plan showing existing ledge outcrops. NA. No ledge in project 49 Plan showing other natural features, if any. NA. 50 Plan showing existing and proposed open space. Included in project plans provided electronically 51 The location of open space to be dedicated to the City. NA. Project proposes no additional land dedicated to City. 52 The location of open space to be retained by the Applicant. Included in project plans provided electronically 53 Existing and proposed contours at maximum interval of 2'. Included in project plans provided electronically 54 Detailed specifications and locations of planting, landscaping, screening and or buffering Included in project landscape plans submitted electronically 55 A written plan to protect vegetation during and after construction. NA. Site is already disturbed. Construction area contains only conservation mix grass planted to temporarily stabilize prior to this project 56 Detailed landscaping plan, specification of material, costs and phasing plan including vegetation to remain. Landscape plans provided electronically. Landscape budget provided electronically in exhibits folder 57 Types of new plant materials identified by common name, botanical name, size of all new plant materials by height and/or diameter. All plants identified on landscape drawings provided 58 Detailed erosion control plan demonstrating compliance with regulations. EPSC Plans included in electronically submitted plan set 59 Existing and proposed structures. Included in project plans provided electronically 25 60 Detailed Elevation, Floor Plan and section of proposed buildings. Provided in architectural plans included in exhibits folder of electronic submission 61 Elevations to demonstrate compliance with Building Envelope Standards. Provided in architectural plans included in exhibits folder of electronic submission 62 Elevations of buildings proposed as part of a planned unit development. Provided in architectural plans included in exhibits folder of electronic submission 63 Location of proposed roads. Included in project plans provided electronically 64 Width of proposed roads. Included in project plans provided electronically 65 Location of sidewalks and recreation paths. Included in project plans provided electronically 66 Plans showing location of existing and proposed street pavements. Included in project plans provided electronically 67 Plans showing proposed elevations along center lines of all streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks. Included in project plans provided electronically 68 Plans showing location of existing and proposed street pavements. Included in project plans provided electronically 69 Plans showing elevation of manholes and catch basins and culverts. Included in project plans provided electronically 70 Plans sowing the location size and invert elevations of planned sewer and storm drains. Included in project plans provided electronically 71 Plans sowing fire hydrants, water, gas, electricity and other utilities. Included in project plans provided electronically 72 Location of existing septic systems. NA. None in development area. 73 Location of existing wells. NA. None in development area. 74 Existing and proposed water usage. See Preliminary Water Allocation Granted and Submitted in Exhibits 75 Existing and proposed wastewater usage. See Granted Preliminary Sewer Allocation in Exhibits 76 Location and design of utilities. Included in project plans provided electronically 77 Location and details of all improvements and utilities, including location of utility poles and cabinets. Included in project plans provided electronically 78 All details and locations of the stormwater management system. Included in project plans provided electronically 79 Construction drawings for all required improvements. Included in project plans provided electronically 26 80 The length of all straight lines, the deflection angles, radii, length of curves and central angles of all curves, tangent distances and tangent bearings for each street. Included in project plans provided electronically 81 All means of vehicular access and egress to and from the site. Included in project plans provided electronically 82 Plans showing pedestrian circulation. Included in project plans provided electronically 83 Analysis of traffic impacts. Traffic Impact Analysis update included in exhibits folder submitted electronically 84 Proposed stormwater management system including location and supporting design data. Included in project plans provided electronically 85 Copies of all computations as a basis for the design capacity. Included in project plans provided electronically 86 Detailed plans, designs, and finished grades of retaining walls, steps, raps, paving, site improvements, fences, bridges, culverts and drainage structures. Included in project plans provided electronically We appreciate the boards review of our Project and look forward to discussing the details with you in person in the near term. Thank you. Sincerely, Andrew Gill, Director of Development Enclosures O'Brien Brothers and Summit Development Final Plat Application Last Update: 10/15/2021 Complete List of Exhibits Provided Digitally Exhibit 01 Narrative for Application Exhibit 02 Application Form For City Exhibit 03 Updated Traffic Study Exhibit 04 Updated Traffic Study Appendices Exhibit 06 Photometric Plans for Project Area Exhibit 07 Street Light Cut Sheet Exhibit 08 Street Type and Pedestrian Connectivity Memorandum from WCG Engineering Exhibit 09 Concept Rendering of Proposed Next Phase of Development Exhibit 10 Abutter List Updated Via 2020 Tax Information Exhibit 11 Coverage Chart with Lot Size and Areas Exhibit 12 Prelim Water Allocation Exhibit 13 Prelim Sewer Allocation Exhibit 14 Lot 10 Landscape Island Calculations Exhibit 15 Lot 11 Landscape Island Calculations Exhibit 16 Landscape Plans for Common Roadways and Intersections Exhibit 17 Landscape Budget for Common Roadway and Street Trees Exhibit 18 Traffic Improvement Plan for Kennedy Drive Two Brothers Traffic Light Exhibit 19 Complete Civil Plans Exhibit 20 Landscape Plans for Lot 10 and Lot 11 Exhibit 21 Landscape Budget for Lot 10 and Lot 11 Exhibit 22 Architecture Plans Exhibit 23 Current Letters of Credit and Three Party Agreements Exhibit 24 Phase 6 and Phase 7 Infrastructure Estimate Exhibit 25 Proposed Overall Project Bonding Table Exhibit 26 SBWD Comment Memo from Krebs and Lansing Lamoureux & Dickinson Page 1 Consulting Engineers, Inc. TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Project: O’Brien Home Farm - Hillside PUD Lots 10 & 11 Date: August 30, 2021 From: Roger Dickinson, PE, PTOE Subject: Updated Traffic Impact Assessment Introduction This technical memorandum updates the original Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA)1 for Phase 1 of the proposed O’Brien Home Farm planned unit development, now known as “Hillside” (the Project). This update specifically examines the following items: C The Project’s estimated trip generation based on changes made since the original TIA together with the proposed development on Lots 10 & 11. C Future traffic congestion conditions at the new Kennedy Dr/Two Brothers Dr intersection C An assessment of the warrants for signalization to identify when the proposed traffic signal should be installed at the new Kennedy Dr/Two Brothers Dr intersection. C The Project’s estimated City and Act 145 transportation impact fees. Construction of the Project has been underway for several years now, generally proceeding in the easterly direction from Hinesburg Rd along O’Brien Farm Rd2 and Two Brothers Drive on Lots 5-9. Approximately 75 of the 115 approved single and duplex residential units have sold to date, with the remainder anticipated to be sold by the end of 2022. Access to the constructed units is presently to/from Hinesburg Rd via O’Brien Farm Rd and to/from Kennedy Dr via Eldredge St. The next lots proposed for development are Lots 10 & 11. Two multi-family buildings housing 47 units each, for a total of 94 additional residential units on these two lots. The development of Lots 10 & 11 also includes extending Two Brothers Dr and constructing its new intersection with Kennedy Dr; opening a third access route to the Project. The entire Hillside planned unit development will ultimately include a total of 115 single and duplex residential units on Lots 5-9, and 416 multi-family residential units (apartments) plus 3,500 sf of general office space on Lots 10-15.3 1 O’Brien Home Farm PUD - Phase 1, Traffic Impact Assessment, Lamoureux & Dickinson, August 8, 2016 2 O’Brien Farm Rd now includes the westerly segment of what was formerly Eldredge St between Hinesburg Rd and Two Brothers Dr. 3 Please note that the 416 apartments includes a proposed bonus density for the excess inclusionary units provided. While this bonus density is not yet confirmed, it is requested in the current application. Lamoureux & Dickinson Page 2 Consulting Engineers, Inc. Project-Generated Trips The additional new trip generation of this Project was estimated using trip generation data published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)3, 4 for the proposed land-use categories. With this Project being constructed in discrete construction phases, the trip generation has been estimated for each phase. Table 1 shows the estimated peak hour vehicular trip generation from the original TIA. Table 2 shows the updated estimated peak hour vehicular trip generation, incorporating the project revisions made since the original TIA. Table 2 also updates the estimated peak hour vehicular trip generation using the current edition of Trip Generation. Table 1 - Project Trip Generation (Original TIA)4 (vehicle trip ends per hour) Phase Proposed Land-Use ITE Land-Use Category AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Lots 5-9 59 single family residential units 58 duplex (condominium) units Subtotal 210 230 11 7 18 33 31 64 44 38 82 44 29 73 26 14 40 70 43 113 Lots 10-15 300 apartment units 55,000 sf commercial/office Subtotal 220 varies 30 112 142 121 22 143 151 134 285 119 32 151 64 100 164 183 132 315 Total 160 207 367 224 204 428 Table 2- Project Trip Generation (Updated)5 (vehicle trip ends per hour) Phase Proposed Land-Use ITE Land-Use Category AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Lots 5-9 71 single family residential units 44 duplex (low-rise multi-family) units Subtotal 210 220 13 5 18 40 17 57 53 22 75 46 18 64 27 10 37 73 28 101 Lots 10-15 416 mid-rise multi-family units 3,500 sf general office Subtotal 221 710 36 3 39 102 1 103 138 4 142 106 1 107 68 4 72 174 5 179 Total 57 160 217 171 109 280 4 Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 9th Edition 5 Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 10th Edition Lamoureux & Dickinson Page 3 Consulting Engineers, Inc. The peak hour trips for Lots 10 and 11 are included in peak hour trips for the 416 mid-rise multi-family residential units shown in Table 2 above. Because the ITE peak hour trip generation equations in the residential land-use categories are not linear, the peak hour trips for only Lots 10 and 11 are best calculated by pro-rating the above trips based on the number of mid-rise multi-family units. Table 3, on the following page, shows the estimated peak hour trips for Lots 10 and 11. Table 3- Lots 10 & 11 Peak Hour Trip Generation (vehicle trip ends per hour) Phase Proposed Land-Use AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Lots 10 & 11 94 mid-rise multi-family units 8 23 31 24 15 39 Using the same project trip directional patterns which were used in the original TIA results in the peak hour project-generated turning movements at the Kennedy Dr/Two Brothers Dr intersection shown in Figure 1. Detailed trip generation and directional distribution calculations are enclosed in Appendix A. Note: Appendices are included under separate cover. Figure 1 - New Hillside-Generated Peak Hour Trips AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Kennedy Dr 3   0 Kennedy Dr Kennedy Dr 2  0 Kennedy Dr261473 43    78 37 N 54 25 N Two Brothers Dr  Two Brothers Dr   No-Build Traffic Volumes The original TIA for this Project anticipated that it would be constructed during the 2017-2020 time period, and incorporated the standard five-year projection from completion of construction, to year 2025, in order to examine potential traffic impacts. This update anticipates that construction will now be completed by 2025, and projects future no-build traffic volumes out to the year 2030. Peak hour intersection turning movement volumes were obtained from more recent traffic counts performed on Kennedy Dr by the Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans). These include a turning movement (TM) count at the Kennedy Dr/Hinesburg Rd intersection on July 2-3, 2018 and an automatic traffic recorder (ATR) count at Station D223 (located between Hinesburg Rd and Kimball Ave) during the week of July 13-19, 2018. Hourly traffic data from continuous count station (CTC) D099, located on I-189 in South Burlington, was examined to calculate a design hour volume (DHV) adjustment factor for the pm peak hour on July 2, Lamoureux & Dickinson Page 4 Consulting Engineers, Inc. 2018. Normally, the DHV adjustment factor would be applied to the peak hour volumes observed during the TM count at the Kennedy Dr/Hinesburg Rd intersection. The resulting adjustment factor equaled 1.043, and would have increased the pm peak hour traffic volume on Kennedy Dr east of Hinesburg Rd to only 1,243 vehicles per hour (vph). In comparison, the observed maximum peak hour observed in the 2018 ATR count at Station D223 was 1,492 vph (Wednesday, 5-6 pm). This latter volume slightly exceeds the projected 2025 No-Build DHV in the original TIA for this Project, and appears to be a more accurate estimate of the 2018 DHV. The observed peak hour volumes were further adjusted to account for background traffic growth using historical traffic growth rates and projections obtained from VTrans.6 From that, a 3.7% background growth rate was also applied to adjust from years 2018 to 2030. Detailed DHV calculations are enclosed in Appendix B. Figures 2 and 3, below, respectively present the resulting estimated 2030 No-Build and Build peak hour turning movement volumes at the new Kennedy Dr/Two Brothers Dr intersection. With Hillside’s reduced peak hour trip generation, future turning movements entering and exiting the Two Brothers Drive are similarly reduced. Figure 2 - 2030 No-Build Peak Hour Volumes AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Kennedy Dr 772   587 Kennedy Dr Kennedy Dr 698  849 Kennedy Dr000 0    0 0 N 0 0 N Two Brothers Dr  Two Brothers Dr   Figure 3 - 2030 Build Peak Hour Volumes AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Kennedy Dr 775   587 Kennedy Dr Kennedy Dr 700  849 Kennedy Dr26 1473 43    78 37 N 54 25 N Two Brothers Dr  Two Brothers Dr   Traffic Congestion Traffic congestion conditions are identified by “levels of service”, commonly referred to as “LOS”. The ranges are A to F; where A represents essentially free flow (no congestion), C represents average congestion, and F represents severe congestion. At signalized intersections, the LOS is determined by 6 Continuous Traffic Counter Report Based on 2020 Traffic Data, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 2021 Lamoureux & Dickinson Page 5 Consulting Engineers, Inc. the overall delay experienced by all turning and through movements. At unsignalized intersections, the LOS is determined by the minor-street approach having the lowest LOS. The level of service criteria for intersections is shown in Table 4. Table 4 - Level of Service/Delay Criteria7 LOS Average Delay (sec/veh) LOS Average Delay (sec/veh) Signalized Unsignalized Signalized Unsignalized A B C ≤10 ≤20 ≤35 ≤10 ≤15 ≤25 D E F ≤55 ≤80 >80 ≤35 ≤50 >50 In Vermont, LOS C represents the desired design standard for roadways and signalized intersections.8 At two-way stop controlled (unsignalized) intersections having greater than 100 vph approach volume on a single-lane side street approach or greater than 150 vph approach volume on a two-lane side street approach, the VTrans level of service policy establishes LOS D as the desired design standard on the minor street approach(s). There is no level of service standard for unsignalized intersections not meeting the above side street volume thresholds. Reduced levels of service are acceptable in densely settled areas where volume/capacity ratios remain below 1.0 and/or the improvements required to achieve LOS C would create adverse environmental and cultural impacts. In addition, Section 15.12.F of the City of South Burlington’s Land Development Regulations require that signalized intersections in the vicinity of a development have an overall level of service D or better, with through movements on the major roadways also experiencing level of service D or better at full build- out. Two Brothers Dr will be extended to Kennedy Dr and the new Kennedy Dr/Two Brothers Dr intersection will be constructed concurrently with the development of Lots 10 and 11. The intersection’s initial construction includes installing exclusive left- and right-turn lanes exiting Two Brothers Dr and an exclusive left-turn lane on Kennedy Dr to separate left-turning traffic entering this Project from westbound through traffic. This new intersection will also initially operate as an unsignalized intersection using two-way stop control until such time as the traffic volumes exiting Two Brothers Dr satisfy one or more of the MUTCD9 warrants for signalization. Ultimately, however, it is anticipated that the proposed future development of the O’Brien Home Farm will warrant the installation of a traffic signal. Plans showing this new intersection (including for a traffic signal) are submitted under separate cover. It is noted that with two approach lanes exiting Two Brothers Dr, future Hillside peak hour volumes exiting Two Brothers Dr will be less than the 150 vph minor street approach volume threshold in VTrans’ level of service policy. Intersection capacity analyses were nonetheless performed to determine future levels of service during year 2030 “Build” scenarios under both unsignalized and signalized control. 7 Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 6th Edition 8 Highway Design “Level of Service” Policy, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 31, 2007 9 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Federal Highway Administration, 2009 Lamoureux & Dickinson Page 6 Consulting Engineers, Inc. Table 5 presents the results of those analyses. Detailed capacity analysis results are enclosed in Appendix C. Table 5 - Kennedy Dr/Two Brothers Dr Intersection Capacity Analyses Results - 2030 Build Approach / Lane Group AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Delay V/C Max Q LOS Delay V/C Max Q Unsignalized Two Brothers Dr NB LT Two Brothers Dr NB RT Kennedy Dr WB LT E B A 35.6 11.5 9.6 0.40 0.06 0.02 48’ 5' 3' E B A 41.6 11.2 9.6 0.36 0.04 0.05 40' 3' 5' Signalized Kennedy Dr EB TH/RT Kennedy Dr WB LT Kennedy Dr WB TH Two Brothers Dr NB LT Two Brothers Dr NB RT OVERALL A D A D C A 4.6 42.9 1.8 42.2 35.5 6.6 0.31 0.19 0.21 0.52 0.19 185' 28' 71’ 90' 25' A D A D C A 5.1 42.3 2.0 41.1 33.6 6.0 0.31 0.37 0.29 0.39 0.11 180' 59’ 100’ 69' 20' The results of the intersection capacity analyses show that vehicles exiting Two Brothers Dr will initially experience long delays during peak periods under two-way stop-control as Hillside development progresses. Ultimately, however, future traffic congestion conditions on Two Brothers Dr will improve to LOS D once the proposed traffic signal is installed. Kennedy Dr through traffic levels of service will remain at LOS A. Signal Warrant Examination Full operation of the new traffic signal at the Kennedy Dr/Two Brothers Dr intersection should not commence until future traffic volumes exiting Two Brothers Dr satisfy either the MUTCD’s four-hour or peak hour volume warrants. This will be driven primarily by left-turn movement volumes exiting Two Brothers Dr (see below), and will require periodic traffic monitoring as construction of Hillside Lots 10-15 phase and O’Brien Brothers’ proposed Eastview development advance. There are several volume-related warrants for signalization, each having different time periods; 8 hours, 4 hour and 1 hour. This examination will examine only the latter two; Warrants #2 - Four-Hour Volume and #3 - Peak-Hour Volume. These two warrants are examined graphically using curves from the MUTCD; which are shown in Figures 4C-2 and 4C-4 on the following pages. These curves require two volumes; the first being the total two-way volume of traffic approaching the intersection on the major street (Kennedy Dr) and the volume of traffic approaching the intersection on the higher-volume minor street. At this intersection, Two Brothers Dr is the only minor street and its approach volumes would be the turning movements exiting onto Kennedy Dr. Lamoureux & Dickinson Page 7 Consulting Engineers, Inc. The volumes shown in Table 6 were used to examine the four-hour and peak-hour warrants. The Kennedy Drive volumes shown in Table 6 were obtained from the 2018 automatic traffic count at Station D223 (adjusted to the year 2025). Two Brothers Drive volumes were estimated using ITE hourly trip generation data for residential land-uses. Table 6 - Kennedy Dr/Two Brothers Dr 2025 Weekday Volumes & Signal Warrant Examination Hour Kennedy Dr Two-Way Volumes* Two Brothers Dr Approach Volumes* Signal Warrants Satisfied? (Y/N) LT Exit RT Exit Total Warrant 2 Four Hour Warrant 3 Peak Hour 8-9 am 1,242 79 37 116 Y Y 9-10 am 1,069 53 25 78 N** N 10-11 am 1,068 41 19 60 N N 11-12 pm 1,173 41 19 60 N N 12-1 pm 1,282 36 17 53 N N 1-2 pm 1,209 35 16 51 N N 2-3 pm 1,122 41 19 60 N N 3-4 pm 1,225 44 21 65 N N 4-5 pm 1,352 48 23 71 N N 5-6 pm 1,395 53 25 78 N** N * vehicles per hour ** close to satisfying As can be seen in Figures 4C-2 and 4C-4 on the following page, the Kennedy Dr peak period volumes are such that the minimum minor-street approach thresholds (on the far right of the graphs) apply during those periods. The applicable curve for this intersection in each graph is the upper “2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES” curve. The updated weekday peak hour traffic projections indicate that the projected morning peak hour volumes will satisfy Warrant 3 - Peak Hour Volume. Warrant 3 was also checked for a partial-build scenario wherein 345 out of the 416 proposed mid-rise multi-family units (apartments) are constructed.10 That analysis estimated the morning peak hour volume exiting Two Brothers Dr to be 103 vph; just crossing the 100 vph threshold to satisfy Warrant 3 during the morning peak hour. Warrant 2 - Four Hour Volume is also met during the morning peak hour, but requires four hours to be satisfied. As can be seen in Table 6, though, there are two additional hours which will be close to meeting this warrant as Hillside development approaches completion. It can be reasonably expected that O’Brien Home Farm’s future Eastview development, located adjacent to and interconnected with Hillside, will cause Warrant 2 to be fully satisfied. 10 Including 251 apartments in the next Hillside development phase following Lots 10-11. Lamoureux & Dickinson Page 8 Consulting Engineers, Inc. Lamoureux & Dickinson Page 9 Consulting Engineers, Inc. Multi-Modal Facilities Two Brothers Dr will include a new 10 ft wide shared use path on its west side and a 5 ft wide sidewalk on its east side. These facilities will link the existing sidewalk on the south side of Kennedy Dr with other internal Project sidewalks and paths. The existing shared use path on the north side of Kennedy Dr will also be accessed by installing a new marked crosswalk crossing Kennedy Dr at the Kennedy Dr/Two Brothers Dr intersection. With Kennedy Dr being a wide four-lane highway having moderate (40-45 mph) vehicle speeds and high traffic volumes, pedestrians will likely find it difficult to safely cross Kennedy Dr during peak periods at the Two Brothers Dr intersection. It is proposed, therefore, that the initial construction of this intersection include the installation of a rectangular rapid flashing beacon (RRFB) until such time as the traffic signal is warranted and installed. The above pedestrian and bicycle facilities on Two Brothers Dr will also enable ready access to existing nearby Kennedy Dr bus stops. Transportation Impact Fees The City of South Burlington’s Impact Fee Ordinance assesses a road improvement impact fee on new development to help fund designated highway and intersection improvements throughout South Burlington (as identified in the City’s Impact Fee Ordinance). For single family dwellings and multi-family dwellings, the base fees equal $1,010 per unit and $670 per unit, respectively. For non-residential development, the base fee equals $1,000 per pm peak hour vehicle trip end. Using Hillside’s proposed development in each of those categories, the City’s base road improvement impact fee is estimated to equal $379,910. The City of South Burlington also assesses a recreation impact fee on new residential development; a large majority of which is to help fund the construction of designated sidewalks, recreation paths, bicycle lanes and other pedestrian improvement projects throughout South Burlington. For structures containing three or fewer residential units, the base fee equals $1,686 per unit. For structures containing four or more units, the base fee equals $1,180 per unit. Using Hillside’s proposed development in each of those categories, the City’s base recreation impact fee is estimated to equal $684,770. VTrans also assesses a statewide transportation impact fee (Act 145 Impact Fee) on new development projects. The amount of this impact fee was initially presented in a letter from this office dated May 26, 2017 to Christopher Clow, PE, of VTrans. Those calculations were updated using the same methodology that was used in the foregoing letter, but with the reduced pm peak hour trip generation outlined in Table 2. The results are presented in Table 7. Detailed calculations are enclosed in Appendix D. Lamoureux & Dickinson Page 10 Consulting Engineers, Inc. Table 7 - Act 145 Transportation Impact Fee Summary Highway Improvement Project PM Peak Hour Trips Impact Fee/Trip Capital Project Impact Fee Champlain Parkway 4 $2,069 $8,276 Burlington Roundabout 8 $1,217 $9,736 VT 2A & James Brown Dr 6 $189 $1,134 VT 2A & Industrial Ave/Mountain View Rd 11 $252 $2,772 US 2 & Trader Lane 6 $210 $1,260 I-89 Exit 12 8 $243 $1,994 Subtotal $25,122 15% Travel Demand Management Credit - extensive sidewalks, bike paths, new Hinesburg Rd crosswalk with RRFB, new Kennedy Dr crosswalk with RRFB or pedestrian signals -$3,768 Total Act 145 Impact Fee $21,354 The above Act 145 Impact Fee represents a reduction from the $27,749 total fee which is referenced in Hillside’s Act 250 permit.11 Inasmuch as a portion of that fee has already been paid, Table 8 presents the remaining amount to be paid. Table 8 - Adjusted Act 145 Transportation Impact Fee Development Phase # Units PM Peak Hour Trips Act 145 Impact Fee Proposed Full Build 531 280 $21,354 The updated Act 145 Impact Fee equals $76.26 per pm peak hour trip end. Lots 5-9 Updated Impact Fee Paid To Date Balance 115 113 $8,617 $7,325 $1,292 Lots 10-11 94 39 $2,974 Future Phases (Lots 12-15) 322 128 $9,763 Conclusions & Recommendations From the foregoing analyses, we conclude that acceptable future traffic congestion conditions will be maintained with the development of Lots 10-11 and the proposed remaining units of this Project. In addition, we recommend that a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) be installed at the new Kennedy Dr/Two Brothers Dr intersection as part of the initial construction of that intersection, until such time as the traffic signal and its pedestrian signals are warranted and installed. 11 Land-Use Permit 4C1106-3, Findings of Fact #81-83 Date: August 31, 2021 To: Andrew Gill, Director of Development, O’Brien Brothers From: Corey Mack, PE Subject: Hillside PUD at O’Brien Farm: Transportation Infrastructure Review WCG has reviewed the proposed transportation network around lots 12, 13, and 17 of the Hillside PUD at O’Brien Farm in South Burlington, VT. This memorandum reviews the March 6, 2020 site plan and transportation network, identifies potential conflicts in the design, and recommends conceptual modifications to maximize the safety of people walking, biking, driving, and otherwise traveling through the proposed development. Background The Hillside Planned Unit Development (PUD) at O’Brien Farm is a phased development with Phase 1 under construction and partially occupied. The overall PUD has been permitted most recently under South Burlington land use permit SD-20-40 and Act 250 permit 4C1106-4. The site plan from March 6, 2020 is illustrated in Figure 1. Lots 12, 13, and 17 are served by two Town Highways: O’Brien Farm Road (OFR), and Two Brothers Drive (TBD). A traffic impact assessment (TIA) for the development was prepared by Lamoureux & Dickenson, dated June 16, 2020. The TIA did not evaluate internal traffic volumes within the development. While the estimated average annual daily traffic (AADT) and design hour volume (DHV) along OFR and TBD is not known, vehicle traffic circulating along these roads is expected to primarily serve the local development traffic. With low traffic speeds, stop controlled intersections, and indirect routes, these roadways are not expected to provide a time saving short cut route or serve background (non-development) traffic. The City of South Burlington has identified both OFR and TBD as bicycle boulevard routes, with the intention to provide off-road bicycle infrastructure along both routes. The design presented in Figure 1, dated March 6, 2020, continues the existing 8-foot wide bituminous asphalt shared use path along O’Brien Farm Road along the proposed higher density, mixed use lots 12, 13 and 17. The shared use path is widened to 10-feet adjacent to on-street parallel parking. While not depicted in the plans, the City has identified a similarly designed bituminous asphalt shared use path facility as preferable on the northeast side of Two Brothers Drive. Hillside PUD at O’Brien Farm: Transportation Infrastructure Review 2 Figure 1: Hillside Phase 2 site plan and detail, dated March 6, 2020 Hillside PUD at O’Brien Farm: Transportation Infrastructure Review 3 Identified Potential Concerns Upon review of the current design of the bituminous asphalt shared use path, two potential concerns have been identified. Figure 2: Identified potential conflicts 1. High conflict mixing zones. The two-way shared use path is intended to serve both people walking and people riding bicycles. In the area surrounding lots 12, 13, and 17, the adjacent land use and streetside activity is different than other sections along OFR or TBD. The shared use path is adjacent to parallel on-street parking, building entrances, and mingling plazas. Through-bicyclists and the growing number of electric assist bicycles are expected to be traveling at a relatively high speed. These higher- speed cyclists will be in conflict with people loading and unloading cars, crossing the path, and accessing and enjoying the buildings and streetscape. 2. Poor definition through commercial drives. The wide expanses of asphalt across the commercial drives poorly define the shared-use walking / bicycling nature of the path with the crossing traffic. There does not appear to be any texture or color treatments to indicate vehicle / pedestrian / cyclist crossing conflicts. Hillside PUD at O’Brien Farm: Transportation Infrastructure Review 4 Figure 3: Conceptual cross section of March 6, 2020 proposed bituminous asphalt shared use path Potential solutions may include a combination of: • Change of surface material of shared use path. By placing a different material, the contrast in texture, color, and joints may cue bicyclists to the different, higher density and more urban land use. This option could be combined with ramps and appropriate markings and sigs in advance of Lots 12, 13, and 17 to allow through- and more confident cyclists onto the low volume and slow speed street. • In addition, provide a buffer zone for pedestrian loading and unloading into the parallel parking aisle. This buffer zone will allow people to load and unload into vehicles without cluttering or blocking the through path. The buffer zone should be marked or contrasting to identify it separately from the shared-use path. The zone may also be used for street furnishings or landscaping, such as streetlights, benches, trash / recycling / compost collection bins, or other appropriate furnishings. Figure 4: Conceptual cross section of O'Brien Farm Road with contrasting shared use path and parallel parking loading zone buffer with on-road shared lanes, within the existing right-of-way Hillside PUD at O’Brien Farm: Transportation Infrastructure Review 5 WCG considered alternatives that provide separate raised dedicated two-way bicycle lanes (cycle track) in addition to pedestrian sidewalk. These alternatives would also require distinct surface treatments to indicate walking / directional cycling, and loading zones at adjacent parallel parking. The additional width required for the two-way bicycle lanes could come from parking aisle for no change to the overall hardscape width. Since the right-of-way for the street system has been dedicated, two-way protected bicycle lanes would require removal of one or both lanes of on street parallel parking. It is our professional opinion that on-street parking is an important feature in the Hillside neighborhood for this roadway classification. Removal of the parallel parking lane is not preferable to the overall character of the street: • The parked vehicles in the parallel parking lane provides texture to the street, creating a more active streetscape and providing visual cues to motorists to slow down. • The parallel parking lane provides on-street support for residential and commercial parking demands, allowing more frequent turn-over parking demand to avoid internal parking lot circulation. Recommended Modifications to the March 6, 2020 Design The alternative surface treatment described on page 4 is recommended with the following features: 1. In advance of the parallel parking aisle on the northwest side of O’Brien Farm Road, recommend the surface material transition from bituminous asphalt concrete to a preferred 10-foot (minimum 8-foot) wide Portland cement concrete (PCC) sidewalk material in a traditional grey color with broom finish, with a consistent and visible control joint pattern. 2. Adjacent to the parallel parking aisle, recommend placing a minimum 3-foot wide pedestrian loading buffer zone. Buffer zone should be a contrasting color, preferably integral to the material (e.g. colored concrete). Buffer zone should be integrated with street lighting and landscaping, if possible; landscaping should be appropriate for the location and not encourage root heaving. Separately poured concrete surfaces should be doweled into the broom finished concrete to ensure uniform settling. 3. Recommend the PCC shared use path surface includes regularly spaced contrasting colored bands (same color and material as the pedestrian buffer zone), doweled into the traditional broom finished panels; the contrasting color and surface roughness will provide additional queues to wheeled travelers of the pedestrian / cycling mixing zone. 4. Recommend the preferred 10-foot width (minimum 8-foot width) of the concrete walk with contrasting bands are consistently applied along the length of the walk adjacent to Lots 12, 13, and 17; and along Two Brothers Drive in front of the plaza entrance to Lot 12. Hillside PUD at O’Brien Farm: Transportation Infrastructure Review 6 5. Consider providing ramps and appropriate markings to allow higher speed and through bicycles to transition to / from roadway prior to PCC banded walkway section. Design Precedent Review There are several installations of concrete shared use paths in the area, including in South Burlington City Center and the UVM / UVM-MC campus. Figure 5: Examples of concrete shared use paths, including along Market Street, South Burlington (left) and Colchester Avenue, Burlington (right) Hillside PUD at O’Brien Farm: Transportation Infrastructure Review 7 Figure 6: Concrete shared use path along the north side (left) and south side (right) of Market Street in City Center, South Burlington; note diagonal scoring The recommended concrete shared use paths are consistent with local off-road shared use path design precedents and national standards. If ramps are provided to encourage higher speed cyclists to bike on the road in shared lanes, the ramps should be integrated with appropriate markings and infrastructure to safely merge the bicycles into the traffic stream. O'Brien FarmsSouth Burlington, VTJune 11, 2021 | MR2003.01The drawings presented are illustrative of character and design intent only, and are subject to change based upon final design considerations (i.e. applicable codes, structural, and MEP design requirements, unit plan / floor plan changes, etc.) ©2020 BSB Design, Inc.Architect: BSB Design -Location : 1616 Camden Road, Suite 250, Charlotte, NC 28203 Lofts @ O'Brien Farm Estimate of Probable Construction Costs 9/23/2021 Item Quantity Unit Unit Cost Unit Total Sub-total PAVEMENT & STEPS Concrete Pavers @ Building 10 Streetscape 834 SF $25.30 $21,100.20 Concrete Pavers @ Building 11 Streetscape 1,037 SF $25.30 $26,236.10 Concrete Pavers @ Building 11 Pocket Park 584 SF $25.30 $14,775.20 $62,111.50 Paving Subtotal PLANTING Picea glauca; 6-7'3 EA $615.00 $1,845.00 Acer freemanii 'Autumn Blaze'7 EA $1,340.00 $9,380.00 Cladrastis kentukea; 2.5-3" Cal.1 EA $1,340.00 $1,340.00 Gleditsia tiacanthos; 2.5-3" Cal.6 EA $1,340.00 $8,040.00 Nyssa sylvatica; 2.5-3" Cal.3 EA $1,340.00 $4,020.00 Quecus rubra; 2.5-3" Cal.5 EA $1,120.00 $5,600.00 Zelkova serrata; 2.5-3" Cal.5 EA $1,230.00 $6,150.00 5 Gal. Shrubs 94 EA $110.00 $10,340.00 3 Gal. Shrubs 96 EA $95.00 $9,120.00 2 Gal. Shrubs 181 EA $71.50 $12,941.50 2 Gal. Ornamental Grasses 265 EA $27.50 $7,287.50 1 Gal. Ornamental Grasses 62 EA $24.00 $1,488.00 1 Gal. Perennials 145 EA $24.00 $3,480.00 1 Qt. Perennials 256 EA $18.00 $4,608.00 Planting Subtotal $85,640.00 MISC. Bike Rack Hoop 10 EA $500.00 $5,000.00 Benches @ public spaces/pocket park 7 EA $1,650.00 $11,550.00 Misc. Subtotal $16,550.00 INSTALLATION AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT Installation (General contractor requirements/O&P)$13,144.12 Contingency (5%)$8,215.08 Subtotal $21,359.20 TOTAL $185,660.70 NOTE: Estimate does not include the following Retaining walls Benches @ pavilion play lawn Seeding, pavillion and picnic tables PROJECT TOTAL $185,660.70 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON BUDGET FOR LANDSCAPE $167,500.00 Wagner Hodgson Landscape Architecture 1 9/23/2021 STREETSCAPE - HILLSIDE @ O'BRIEN FARM Estimate of Probable Construction Costs 09.23.2021 Item Quantity Unit Unit Cost Unit Total Sub-total PAVEMENT & STEPS CIP Concrete Paving - Vehicular @ Entry and Central Square 1,756 SF $12.00 $21,072.00 Colored concrete paving @ sidewalks/Rec Path 1,752 SF $17.50 $30,660.00 Brick Crosswalk 1,337 SF $33.00 $44,121.00 Flush Granite Curb 233 LF $50.00 $11,650.00 $107,503.00 Paving Subtotal WALLS & STONEWORK Dry-laid field stone entry wall 131 FF $65.00 $8,515.00 Stonework Subtotal $8,515.00 PLANTING Prunus sargentii; 2-2.5" Cal.3 EA $990.00 $2,970.00 Acer rubrum; 2.5-3" Cal.18 EA $1,340.00 $24,120.00 Celtis occidentalis; 2.5-3" Cal.8 EA $1,120.00 $8,960.00 Gleditsia triacanthos inermis 'Shademaster'; 2.5-3" Cal.10 EA $1,340.00 $13,400.00 Gleditsia triacanthos inermis 'Shademaster'; 3-3.5" Cal.5 EA $1,650.00 $8,250.00 Quercus rubra; 2.5-3" Cal.12 EA $1,230.00 $14,760.00 Ulmus 'Morton' Accolade; 2.5-3" Cal.15 EA $1,230.00 $18,450.00 5 Gal. Shrubs 66 EA $110.00 $7,260.00 3 Gal. Shrubs 46 EA $95.00 $4,370.00 1 Gal. Perennials 382 EA $24.00 $9,168.00 Planting Subtotal $111,708.00 MISC. Silva Cells 3,200 CF $17.00 $54,400.00 Planting Soil CY $60.00 $0.00 Iron Tree Grate (Urban Assessories)3'x5'4 EA $2,500.00 $10,000.00 Misc. Subtotal $64,400.00 Subtotal $292,126.00 TOTAL $292,126.00 Wagner Hodgson Landscape Architecture 1 9/23/2021 SL2SL2SL4SL4SL4SL2SL2SL2SL2SL4SL40.00.00.00.00.00.10.51.32.90.90.30.10.60.11.63.80.61.1 1.0 1.5 2.5 2.90.7 1.1 1.8 2.4 2.90.5 1.1 2.1 3.0 3.40.1 0.3 1.0 2.2 3.2 2.50.0 0.1 0.2 0.63.8 3.0 1.20.0 0.0 0.1 0.14.1 2.6 1.0 0.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.02.8 1.6 0.6 0.20.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.01.1 0.7 0.3 0.10.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.00.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.01.3 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.10.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.02.9 1.9 1.1 0.6 0.30.0 0.0 0.0 0.03.0 3.0 1.7 0.90.0 0.0 0.0 0.01.4 1.9 1.6 1.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.8 1.1 0.9 0.60.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.3 0.5 0.6 0.50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.1 0.1 0.3 0.30.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.1 0.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.1 0.1 0.4 0.7 1.20.0 0.0 0.00.2 0.4 0.71.42.3 3.40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.3 0.6 0.91.52.1 2.00.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.3 0.5 0.81.11.3 0.8 0.4 0.1 0.00.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.10.4 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.00.8 0.6 0.30.3 0.2 0.1 0.02.21.40.90.1 0.0 0.0 0.02.6 1.60.0 0.0 0.0 0.02.7 2.1 1.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.01.2 1.6 1.30.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.4 0.7 0.9 0.70.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.2 0.4 0.50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.20.0 0.1 0.2 0.20.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.80.0 0.0 0.0 0.10.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 1.8 2.90.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.2 0.4 0.8 1.3 2.1 2.4 1.80.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.00.3 0.5 0.7 1.0 1.4 1.2 0.70.5 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.00.4 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.51.5 1.1 0.8 0.5 0.20.4 0.33.5 2.2 1.5 1.1 0.54.0 2.8 1.9 2.1 1.42.7 2.8 1.9 2.5 3.41.9 2.5 4.22.80.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.00.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.1 0.10.0 0.00.20.0 0.0 0.00.40.0 0.0 0.00.80.0 0.0 0.01.40.8 0.70.0 0.0 0.12.31.6 1.20.0 0.1 0.12.7 3.2 2.00.1 0.1 0.22.8 1.40.1 0.22.90.1 0.1 0.22.60.1 0.2 0.21.70.1 0.2 0.30.90.2 0.2 0.30.7 0.50.2 0.3 0.30.4 0.20.2 0.30.2 0.10.2 0.2 0.30.10.1 0.2 0.30.10.1 0.2 0.30.10.1 0.2 0.30.10.1 0.2 0.40.1 0.10.2 0.30.1 0.1 0.10.1 0.2 0.50.1 0.10.2 0.4 0.90.10.3 0.6 1.70.20.5 1.3 3.00.40.9 1.9 1.70.3 0.4 0.8 1.91.2 2.0 3.70.4 0.6 1.3 2.81.1 1.80.5 0.7 1.20.3 0.5 0.71.00.2 0.3 0.5 0.74.20.2 0.3 0.43.20.1 0.1 0.2 0.34.4 2.20.0 0.1 0.13.4 3.5 2.4 1.60.0 0.0 0.02.7 2.3 1.70.80.0 0.0 0.03.2 2.4 1.60.40.0 0.0 0.02.9 3.5 3.6 2.70.20.0 0.0 0.01.5 2.8 4.0 4.30.10.0 0.0 0.00.20.5 1.0 2.4 4.20.1 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.2 0.3 0.4 0.8 1.6 2.40.1 0.10.0 0.0 0.00.2 0.20.6 1.0 1.90.1 0.00.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.10.6 1.0 1.70.00.00.1 0.1 0.10.00.6 0.7 1.10.00.00.1 0.1 0.10.0 0.00.4 0.4 0.70.00.00.2 0.2 0.20.0 0.00.2 0.3 0.40.0 0.00.4 0.4 0.50.0 0.00.1 0.2 0.30.0 0.00.8 0.70.00.1 0.1 0.20.0 0.01.1 1.2 1.80.10.0 0.1 0.10.01.0 1.3 1.50.10.0 0.0 0.10.00.6 1.1 2.00.3 0.20.0 0.0 0.00.00.6 1.60.4 0.30.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.00.3 0.90.5 0.30.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.2 0.50.5 0.40.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.1 0.2 0.50.50.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.1 0.1 0.30.6 0.40.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.1 0.10.5 0.40.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.00.5 0.40.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.00.40.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.30.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.00.20.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.20.0 0.0 0.00.10.0 0.00.10.0 0.0 0.00.2 0.20.0 0.0 0.00.10.0 0.0 0.00.4 0.50.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.00.9 1.10.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.01.5 2.00.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.02.8 2.70.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.02.9 2.30.0 0.00.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.12.8 2.30.00.0 0.1 0.1 0.21.9 1.40.00.1 0.1 0.1 0.20.8 0.40.00.1 0.2 0.20.00.1 0.2 0.20.10.0 0.00.1 0.2 0.2 0.30.00.2 0.2 0.20.10.1 0.2 0.2 0.30.00.3 0.40.10.2 0.2 0.2 0.30.0 0.00.6 0.6 1.00.20.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.30.0 0.01.0 1.40.30.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.20.0 0.01.2 1.40.50.1 0.1 0.1 0.10.0 0.00.9 1.3 1.50.50.1 0.1 0.1 0.10.0 0.00.8 1.80.60.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.4 0.90.50.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.2 0.4 1.00.60.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.1 0.2 0.40.50.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.1 0.20.50.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.0 0.10.40.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.10.40.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.10.0 0.0 0.00.4 0.30.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.2 0.20.0 0.0 0.00.30.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.50.0 0.0 0.00.3 0.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.01.0 1.30.0 0.0 0.00.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.02.1 2.80.0 0.0 0.00.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.02.6 1.60.0 0.0 0.00.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.03.00.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.12.1 1.50.1 0.10.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.1 0.10.9 0.50.1 0.10.00.1 0.1 0.2 0.30.30.1 0.20.00.1 0.2 0.2 0.30.2 0.30.0 0.00.2 0.2 0.3 0.30.3 0.50.0 0.00.2 0.2 0.3 0.40.5 0.80.0 0.00.2 0.3 0.30.9 1.30.1 0.00.2 0.2 0.3 0.31.0 1.70.1 0.10.2 0.2 0.2 0.20.8 1.70.2 0.10.1 0.1 0.1 0.10.5 1.2 2.80.10.1 0.10.7 1.70.20.40.71.22.02.12.01.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.10.1 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.1 0.30.4 0.40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.1 0.2 0.4 0.81.9 1.2 0.80.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.3 0.5 1.0 1.81.4 1.2 0.50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.4 0.8 1.4 2.72.0 0.4 0.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.10.5 0.9 1.60.5 0.1 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.10.4 0.6 0.9 1.20.1 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.10.4 0.6 0.8 0.70.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.10.4 0.7 0.8 0.40.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.11.1 1.0 0.30.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.12.2 1.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.12.4 0.8 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.6 1.1 1.9 1.8 1.3 0.9 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.32.4 4.2 2.1 0.8 0.3 0.4 1.5 1.6 4.1 2.7 1.7 0.9 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.63.3 2.4 1.40.8 2.9 4.3 3.0 2.4 1.7 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.41.22.6 3.2 2.0 0.6 0.1 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.14.41.5 0.3 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.12.1 0.7 0.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.7 0.4 0.2 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.40.1 0.1 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.33.50.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.2 0.53.50.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.10.10.1 0.1 0.2 0.41.30.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.30.40.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.10.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.61.60.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.10.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.31.10.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.10.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.10.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.50.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.10.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.40.8 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.02.9 1.3 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.01.10.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.40.90.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.10.30.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.40.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.10.10.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.51.90.90.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.10.00.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.12.00.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.70.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.10.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.5 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.02.41.41.0 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.00.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.02.2 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.10.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.20.50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.10.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.51.50.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.20.40.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.43.40.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.10.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.13.30.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.10.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.01.6 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.3 1.0 1.83.80.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.1 0.4 0.8 1.3 1.83.70.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.30.5 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.0Luminaire ScheduleQtyLabelArrangementLumensInput WattsLLFBUG RatingDescription6SL2SINGLE5904540.850B1-U0-G1LUMEC MPTR-55W32LED4K-G3-LE2-VOLT-BKTX/RA61F-14-BKTX5SL4SINGLE5968540.850B1-U0-G2LUMEC MPTR-55W32LED4K-G3-LE4-VOLT-BKTX/RA61F-14-BKTXCalculation SummaryLabelGrid HeightAvgMaxMinAvg/MinMax/MinPAVED00.684.20.0N.A.N.A.SIDEWALKS00.404.40.0N.A.N.A.UNPAVED00.074.40.0N.A.N.A.JOB NAME: HILLSIDE APARTMENTSAPEX LIGHTING SOLUTIONSWORKPLANE/CALC PLANE: AT FINISH GRADEMOUNTING HEIGHT: SEE LUMINAIRE SCHEDULEAPPS: LEDSALES: CRwww.apexlightingsolutions.comSCALE : DATE:DRAWN BY:SHEET:SL-1B1"=30’-0"HILLSIDE APARTMENTSSome differences between measured values and calculated results may occur due toNOTE TO REVIEWER:Total Light Loss Factor (LLF) applied at time of design is determined by applyingthe Lamp Lumen Depreciation (LLD) from current lamp manufacturer's catalog,a Luminaire Dirt Depreciation Factor (LDD) based on IES recommended values anda Ballast Factor (BF) from current ballast specification sheets. Application of anincorrect Light Loss Factor (LLF) will result in forecasts of performance thatwill not accurately depict actual results.input data, differences will occur between measured values and calculated values.the lighting calculations. If the real environment conditions do not match thedimensions, reflectances, furniture and architectural elements significantly affectvariations. Input data used to generate the attached calculations such as roommeasurement techniques and field conditions such as voltage and temperaturetolerances in calculation methods, testing procedures, component performance,* LLF Determined Using Current Published Lamp DataFor proper comparison of photometric layouts, it is essential that you insist alldesigners use correct Light Loss Factors.GENERAL DISCLAIMER:Calculations have been performed according to IES standards and good practiceDRAWING TITLE:PROJECT TITLE:SITE LIGHTINGPHOTOMETRIC CALCULATION9/16/21FILE NAME: SL-1B HILLSIDE APARTMENTS 09-16-2021 LED.dwgLEDtelephone 860.632.8766 METROSCAPE ON RA61 (Reference=L51790-1) SPEC20161111_131501_10361_0 11-11-2016 Page 1 / 6 Qty 1 Luminaire MPTR-35W32LED4K-T-LE3-VOLT-BKTX Description of Components: Finial: Decorative cast 356 aluminum, mechanically assembled. Hood: Made of die cast A360.1 Aluminum alloy 0.100 (2.5mm) minimum thickness, mechanically assembled to the cast aluminum heat sink. Guard: In a round shape with 4 arms and a built-in mechanical ring, this guard is a one piece die cast A360 Aluminum alloy 0.100 (2.5mm) minimum thickness, mechanically assembled to the fitter. Access-Mechanism: A die cast A360.1 Aluminum alloy 0.100 (2.5mm) minimum thickness technical ring with latch and hinge. Light Engine: LEDgine composed of 4 main components: Heat Sink / LED Module / Optical System / Driver Electrical components are RoHS compliant. Maximum ambient operating temperature up to 40C(104F) degrees. Heat Sink: Made of cast aluminum optimising the LEDs efficiency and life. Product does not use any cooling device with moving parts (only passive cooling device). Lens: Made of soda-lime tempered glass lens, mechanically assembled and sealed onto the ring of the access mechanism. LED Module: LED type Philips Lumileds LUXEON T. Composed of 32 high-performance white LEDs. Color temperature as per ANSI/NEMA bin Neutral White, 4000 Kelvin nominal (3985K +/- 275K or 3710K to 4260K), CRI 70 Min. 75 Typical. Optical System: (LE3), IES type III (asymmetrical). Composed of high-performance optical polymer refractor lenses to EPA: 1.962 sq ft / weight: 31.08 lb (14.1 kg) Note: 3D image may not represent color or option selected. Logos above include link, click to access. METROSCAPE ON RA61 (Reference=L51790-1) SPEC20161111_131501_10361_0 11-11-2016 Page 2 / 6 achieve desired distribution optimized to get maximum spacing, target lumens and a superior lighting uniformity. System is rated IP66. Performance shall be tested per LM-63, LM-79 and TM-15 (IESNA) certifying its photometric performance. Street side indicated.Dark Sky compliant with 0% uplight and U0 per IESNA TM-15. Driver: High power factor of 90% minimum. Electronic driver, operating range 50/60 Hz. Auto-adjusting universal voltage input from 120 to 277 VAC rated for both application line to line or line to neutral, Class I, THD of 20% max. Maximum ambient operating temperature from -40F(-40C) to 130F(55C) degrees.Assembled on a unitized removable tray with Tyco quick disconnect plug resisting to 221F(105C) degrees. Driver comes with dimming compatible 0-10 volts. The current supplying the LEDs will be reduced by the driver if the driver experiences internal overheating as a protection to the LEDs and the electrical components. Output is protected from short circuits, voltage overload and current overload. Automatic recovery after correction. Standard built-in driver surge protection of 2.5kV (min). Surge Protector: Surge protector tested in accordance with ANSI/IEEE C62.45 per ANSI/IEEE C62.41.2 Scenario I Category C High Exposure 10kV/10kA waveforms for Line-Ground, Line-Neutral and Neutral-Ground, and in accordance with U.S. DOE (Department of Energy) MSSLC (Municipal Solid-State Street Lighting Consortium) model specification for LED roadway luminaires electrical immunity requirements for High Test Level 10kV / 10kA. Fitter: Made of die cast A360.1 Aluminum alloy 0.100 (2.5mm) minimum thickness, the fitter is complete with a watertight access door giving access to the driver rated IP66, and a terminal block that accepts (#2 max.) wires from the primary circuit. Comes with an easy self adjusting system with two (2) set screws 3/8 16 UNC for ease of maintenance and installation. Fits on a 4"(102mm) outside diameter by 4"(102mm) long tenon. METROSCAPE ON RA61 (Reference=L51790-1) SPEC20161111_131501_10361_0 11-11-2016 Page 3 / 6 Description of Components: Pole Shaft: Shall be made from a 4" (102mm) round extruded 6061-T6 aluminum tubing, having a 0.125" (3.2mm) wall thickness, welded to the pole base. Joint Cover: Two-piece round joint cover made from cast 356 aluminum, mechanically fastened with stainless steel screws. Pole Base: Shall be made from a 8 5/8" (219mm) round extruded 6061-T6 aluminum tubing base having a 0.148" (4.8mm) wall thickness, welded to both the bottom and top of the anchor plate. Maintenance Opening: The pole shall have a 4 1/2" x 10" (114mm x 254mm) maintenance opening centered 25 1/4" (641mm) from the bottom of the anchor plate, complete with a weatherproof embossed aluminum cover and a copper ground lug. Base Cover: Two piece round base cover made from cast 356 aluminum, mechanically fastened with stainless steel screws. Note: A tenon will be provided when the luminaire or bracket does not fit directly on pole shaft. Tenon not shown on the drawing. IMPORTANT: Philips Lumec strongly recommends the installation of the complete lighting assembly with all of its accessories upon the anchoring of the pole. This will ensure that the structural integrity of the product is maintained throughout its lifetime. Pole Weight: 29 lbs (13.2 kg) Qty 1 Pole RA61F-12-BKTX Comes with 4 steel anchor bolts, 3/4" X 17" + 3" J Type Bolts, 8 nuts and 8 washers. Important: Do not obstruct space between anchor plate and concrete base. -Bolt Circle: 12 1/2" (318mm) - Material: Cast Aluminum - NOTE: Bolt Circle Allowed: 11" to 13" 279mm to 330mm Base & Bolts Information Anchor Plate Free opening METROSCAPE ON RA61 (Reference=L51790-1) SPEC20161111_131501_10361_0 11-11-2016 Page 4 / 6 Description of Components: Wiring: The connection of the luminaire is done using a terminal block connector 600V, 85A for use with bare son (#2 max.) wires from the primary circuit, located inside the fitter. Hardware: All exposed screws shall be complete with Ceramic primer-seal basecoat to reduce seizing of the parts and offers a high resistance to corrosion. All seals and sealing devices are made and/or lined with EPDM and/or silicone and/or rubber. Finish: Color to be black textured RAL9005TX (BKTX) and in accordance with the AAMA 2603 standard. Application of polyester powder coat paint (4 mils/100 microns) with ± 1 mils/24 microns of tolerance. The Thermosetting resins provides a discoloration resistant finish in accordance with the ASTM D2244 standard, as well as luster retention in keeping with the ASTM D523 standard and humidity proof in accordance with the ASTM D2247 standard. The surface treatment achieves a minimum of 2000 hours for salt spray resistant finish in accordance with testing performed and per ASTM B117 standard. Note: IMPORTANT: All missing details must be clearly specified on the return of these approval drawings. Thank you for your cooperation. VOLTAGE:_______ LED products manufacturing standard: The electronic components sensitive to electrostatic discharge (ESD) such as light emitting diodes (LEDs) are assembled in compliance with IEC61340-5-1 and ANSI/ESD S20.20 standards so as to eliminate ESD events that could decrease the useful life of the product. Quality Control: The manufacturer must provide a written confirmation of its ISO 9001-2008 and ISO 14001-2004 International Quality Standards Certification. Vibration Resistance: The MPTR meets the ANSI C136.31, American National Standard for Roadway Luminaire Vibration specifications for Bridge/overpass applications. (Tested for 3G over 100 000 cycles) Aluminum poles are not recommended in high vibration environments such as bridge, overpass, top of building, airport, train station, etc. Web site information details: Click on any specific information details you need: Paint finish / Warranties / Installation pictures / ISO 9001-2008 Certification / ISO 14001-2004 Certification / cULus Certification / CSA Pole Certification Miscellaneous METROSCAPE ON RA61 (Reference=L51790-1) SPEC20161111_131501_10361_0 11-11-2016 Page 5 / 6 METROSCAPE ON RA61 (Reference=L51790-1) SPEC20161111_131501_10361_0 11-11-2016 Page 6 / 6