HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 07_SD-21-41_1302 1340 1350 Spear St_Spear Meadow_FP1
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
SD-21-41_1340 Spear_Spear Meadows_FP_2022-02-02
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
Report preparation date: January 21, 2022
Plans received: December 8, 2021
1302, 1340 & 1350 Spear Street
Preliminary and Final Plat Application #SD-21-41
Meeting date: February 2, 2022
Owner/Applicant
Spear Meadows, Inc., 1350 Spear, LLC and Gary N. Farrell
1350 Spear Street
South Burlington, VT 05403
Engineer
Lamoureux & Dickinson
14 Morse Drive
Essex Junction, VT 05452
Property Information
Tax Parcel 1640-01302, 1640-01340, 1640-01350
SEQ – NR
25.93 acres
Location Map
2
PROJECT DESCRPTION
Preliminary and final plat application #SD-21-41 of The Snyder Group, Inc. to amend a previously
approved plan for a planned unit development on 25.93 acres consisting of 18 single family dwellings,
ten (10) 2-family dwellings, three (3) 3-unit multi-family dwellings, and an existing single-family home.
The amendment consists of eliminating an approved left turn lane on Spear Street, modifying approved
landscaping along Spear Street, and minor modifications to water, sewer and drainage pipes, 1302, 1340
& 1350 Spear Street.
PERMIT HISTORY
The Board approved final plat application #SD-17-14 for the project. This decision was appealed to the
Environmental Court for matters pertaining to transferred of development rights and to Halcyon Lane.
The decision of the Environmental division was appealed to the Vermont Supreme Court for matters
pertaining to transferred development rights. Both the Environmental Court and Supreme Court appeals
are concluded. Both of the court decisions upheld the DRB’s decision therefore #SD-17-14 stands as
written. None of the issues that were the subject of the appeals are proposed in this application to be
modified.
COMMENTS
Development Review Planner Marla Keene and Director of Planning and Zoning Paul Conner (“Staff”) have
reviewed the plans submitted on 12/8/2021 and offer the following comments. Based on the relatively
minor nature of the proposed amendments, only those elements of the plan that are proposed to be
modified are being evaluated. Numbered items for the Board’s attention are in red.
Project elements which are proposed to be changed include the following.
1. Remove southbound turn lane on Spear Street onto Elm Street. The relevant finding of #SD-17-
14 states “As part of the preliminary plat application, the applicant submitted a Traffic Impact
Study. The application materials predict the project will generate 52 P.M. Peak Hour trip ends. A
condition of preliminary approval required the addition of a left turn lane on Spear Street
southbound. The project meets this condition with the addition of the required left turn lane on
Sheet 16 of the plans.
Under the “Stowe Club Highlands” test, applicants may request a new finding on a determination
that was already made if the circumstances surrounding that finding have changed. Such a
request is subject to a warned public hearing. This request is discussed under 15.A.14 below.
2. Remove landscaped berms and cedar hedge on Lot 48. Decision #SD-17-14 does not include a
specific finding pertaining to the landscaped berms and hedge on Lot 48. This request is discussed
under 13.04C below.
3. Add landscaping for utility pedestals and vaults. Decision #SD-17-14 does not include a specific
finding pertaining to the landscaping of utilities, though the LDR to which it was subject includes
that requirement. This request is discussed under 13.04C below.
3
4. Minor changes to subsurface components of the water distribution system, and to hydrant
locations, have been made at the request of the South Burlington Water Department. This
request is discussed under 15.A.18B below.
5. Minor changes to the sewer pump station and location of the underground sewer made have
been made at the request of the South Burlington Department of Public Works and Water
Quality departments. This request is discussed under 15.A.18B below.
6. Natural gas, electric and telecommunication systems layouts have been shown. The LDR
requires these elements be shown for review of compatibility with City standards. This request is
discussed under 15.A.18E below.
7. A footing drain has been rerouted. This request is discussed under 13.05F below.
A) DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS
No changes are proposed to the dimensional standards.
B) SUBDIVISION STANDARDS
15.A.11 General Standards
C. Development Context. The applicant must demonstrate that the subdivision conforms to the
planned pattern of subdivision and development in the area, as defined by district purpose statements
and standards, or as specified for a type of Planned Unit Development (PUD) under Article 15.C. In
addition to meeting required zoning district, transect zone, or PUD standards:
(1) Overlay Districts – No changes to compliance with overlay district standards are proposed.
(2) Multiple Districts – The project is located entirely within the SEQ-NR zoning district
(3) Compliance with Other Regulations – This criterion requires that subdivisions, building lots,
dwelling units, supporting facilities and infrastructure comply with other relevant standards
of the LDR and other City ordinances and standards in effect. Compliance with other
relevant standards is considered herein.
(4) Conformance with an Approved Master Plan. The applicant must demonstrate that the
subdivision conforms, as applicable, to a Master Plan approved by the DRB under Article
15.B, including the approved development plan, management plan, buildout budgets, and
phasing schedule. – No changes are proposed which affect compliance with any of the
findings or conditions of master plan #MP-16-02 for the subject property.
15.A.14 Street Network
D.Functional Capacity and Transit Oriented Development. The nearest signalized intersection or those
intersections specified by the DRB shall have an overall level of service “D” or better, at the peak street
hour, including the anticipated impact of the fully developed proposed PUD or subdivision. In addition,
the level of service of each through movement on the major roadway shall have a level of service “D”
or better at full buildout.
4
The applicant is proposing to not install a southbound left turn lane on Spear Street onto Elm Street.
They provided an analysis demonstrating that it is not warranted, included in the packet for the Board.
This analysis indicates that the level of service at the Spear Street/Elm Street intersection will remain
above level of service “D” for all involved movements without the turn lane.
The director of Public Works reviewed the updated traffic analysis on December 27, 2021 and requested
minor modifications, which the applicant incorporated into their revised analysis provided on December
29, 2021. The Director of Public Works on December 30, 2021 stated via email to staff that they “agree
with the conclusion that a southbound left turn lane on Spear Street at this project’s entrance is not
warranted.”
E. Access and Circulation. The applicant must demonstrate that the street network is arranged to meet
applicable access management, traffic, and pedestrian circulation standards under these Regulations,
including criteria for site plans under Article 14, Transect Zone Subdivisions under Article 8, or a type of
Planned Unit Development under Article 15.C; and, for state highways, VTrans Access Management
Program Guidelines in effect at the time of application. Unless otherwise specified under these
Regulations, the street network, including the location and arrangement of streets, must be designed
to:
(1) Provide a minimum of two (2) entrances or access points from an arterial or collector
street to a subdivision with more than fifty (50) dwelling units on four (4) or more lots or
within four (4) or more principal buildings, unless otherwise approved by the DRB in
consultation with the City Engineer and Director of Planning & Zoning.
(2) Separate subdivision entrances by a minimum distance of four hundred (400) feet on
either side of a public street, as necessary to ensure safe access and traffic movement into
and out of the subdivision. Subdivision entrances on opposite sides of a public street may
be allowed by the DRB if substantially aligned with each other. Signalized subdivision
entrances must be separated from existing, signalized highway intersections (as measured
between the near edges of the driveway and the intersection) based on street traffic
volumes:
Table 15-1: Signalized Intersection Spacing
Projected Peak Hour Volume
(VPH per access lane)
Distance
(Feet)
Below 450 300
450-550 350
551-650 400
651-750 450
751 and greater 500
(3) Provide for street intersections as close to ninety (90) degrees as physically possible.
(4) Incorporate offset “T” intersections and other traffic calming measures as necessary to
reduce through traffic and traffic speeds within residential and mixed use neighborhoods
and to establish terminal views. Street jogs with centerline offsets of less than two
hundred (200) feet on local streets are not allowed unless specifically approved by the
DRB, in consultation with the Fire Chief and City Engineer, for purposes of traffic calming.
5
No changes to Criteria (1) through (4) are proposed.
(5) Provide deceleration, acceleration and turn stacking lanes as necessary to meet specified
Level of Service (LOS) standards under (3) above.
As noted above, the LOS standards are met without a turn lane.
(6) Design intersections and other access points to City specifications to include curb radii
necessary to accommodate anticipated vehicle types and speeds while also minimizing
pedestrian crossing distances.
(7) Provide for safe access to abutting properties for motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians,
including safe sight distances, access separation distances, and accommodations for high-
accident locations.
(8) Align access points with existing intersections or curb cuts and consolidate existing access
points or curb cuts within the subdivision, to the extent physically and functionally
feasible.
(9) Minimize vehicular access points (curb cuts) to abutting properties and building lots along
pedestrian-oriented street frontage; and provide, where physically feasible, shared
vehicular access to frontage and other abutting building lots via rear alleys, side streets,
service lanes, shared driveways, or rear cross connections between adjoining parcels.
No changes to Criteria (5) through (9) are proposed.
1. Staff recommends the Board accept the conclusion of the Director of Public Works and
approve the removal of the southbound left turn lane from Spear Street from the plans.
15.A.18 Infrastructure, Utilities, and Services
B. Potable Water Supply and Wastewater Systems.
(1) – (3) No changes affecting compliance with these criteria are proposed.
(2) Proposed mains, distribution lines and connections to the City’s water distribution and
wastewater systems, and associated equipment and appurtenances, must be designed to City
specifications by a Vermont registered engineer, and are subject to review and approval by the
Public Works Department.
The Director of Public Works reviewed the proposed water and wastewater modifications on
December 27, 2021 and stated acceptance thereof.
(3) Utility corridors and easements must be shown on subdivision plans and plats submitted with
the application. Water and sewer mains must be located within the limits of public rights-of-
way or, with approval of the DRB and the Department of Public Works:
(a) within other property owned by the City; or
(b) within a restrictive, perpetual utility easement granted to the City which is of sufficient
width to allow Department access for maintenance and repair work.
The applicant has relocated the sewer line to be within the ROW, consistent with this criterion.
(4) – (6) No changes affecting compliance with these criteria are proposed.
6
E. Utilities and Services.
(1) - No changes affecting compliance with this criterion are proposed.
(2) Utilities must be located within street rights-of-way, or within permanent utility access and
maintenance easements identified on subdivision plans and plats.
2. Lighting, electrical and telecommunication lines are located just outside of the right of way. No
easements are provided. Staff recommends the Board direct the applicant to modify these
utilities to be located within the ROW, unless it is not possible to do so. If it is not possible, Staff
recommends the Board require the applicant to provide permanent access and maintenance
easements for these utilities.
(3) New electric, natural gas, telephone, internet, cable television, and outdoor lighting
systems must be installed underground, unless prevented by ledge or other physical
constraints that make burying utility lines impractical.
This criterion is met.
C) SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS
13.04 Landscaping, Screening, and Street Trees
C. Screening or buffering. The Development Review Board will require landscaping, fencing, land
shaping and/or screening along property boundaries (lot lines) whenever it determines that a) two
adjacent sites are dissimilar and should be screened or buffered from each other, or b) a property’s
appearance should be improved, which property is covered excessively with pavement or structures or
is otherwise insufficiently landscaped, or c) a commercial, industrial, and multi-family use abuts a
residential district or institutional use, or (d) a parking or loading area is adjacent to or visible from a
public street.
3. The Board must determine whether the area of the proposed landscaping modification (removing
berm and cedar hedge from Lot 48 along Spear Street) is dissimilar from adjoining properties and thus
should be screened or buffered from them. The lot in question is zoned SEQ-NR, the same as the lots
to the north, south and east, and therefore Staff considers the lots are not sufficiently dissimilar to
require screening under this criterion. The lots on the far side of Spear Street, to the west of Lot 48,
are zoned R1. The project is approved for 1.2 units per acre, while the R1 zoning district has an
allowable residential density of 1 unit per acre. Staff considers therefore that the lot is not sufficiently
dissimilar from the lots on the far side of Spear Street to require screening or buffering under this
criterion. However, if the Board determines otherwise, Staff has included the remaining screening
criteria for the Board’s use.
(1) There shall be sufficient landscaping, walls, or fencing of sufficient height (minimum of three
(3) feet) and opacity to effectively screen the parking or loading area year-round from adjacent
public streets.
(2) Screening of a parking or loading shall be provided where headlights from vehicles on site
may be visible and project parallel to a public street.
7
(3) There shall be sufficient landscaping, walls, or fencing of sufficient height and opacity to
effectively screen outdoor storage areas, refuse, recycling, and compost collection (excluding on-
site composting) areas.
Staff considers criterion 1 – 3 applicable to parking and loading areas for commercial, industrial and
multi-family use and not applicable to this application.
(4) The landscaping shall be designed to minimize erosion and stormwater runoff, and to
protect neighboring residential properties from the view of uses and parking areas on the site. The
landscaping shall be of such type, height, and spacing, as in the judgment of the Development
Review Board, will effectively screen the activities on the lot from the view of persons standing on
adjoining properties. The plan and specifications for such planting shall be filed with the approved
plan for the use of the lot.
If the Board finds the proposed uses need to be screened, this criterion may apply.
The landscaping plan approved in #SD-17-14 is below. Lot 48 is right of Elm Street and contains an
existing home to be retained. There is a duplex home proposed left of Elm Street. Staff calls the
Boards attention to the previously approved landscaping on the duplex lot.
Landscaping Plan approved in #SD-17-14
The currently proposed modified landscaping plan is as follows.
8
Requested Modifications to Landscaping Plan
4. Staff considers the currently proposed landscaping would result in a consistent appearance
between the involved lots from the far side of Spear Street, and a not dissimilar appearance to
the existing lots in the R1 on the west side of Spear Street, and recommends the Board approve
the requested landscaping modification. The applicant may be able to provide some history on
why they believe the planted berm was originally proposed.
(5) Modifications. Where the existing topography and/or landscaping provides adequate
screening or would render the normally required screening inadequate, the Development Review
Board may modify the planting and/or buffer requirements by, respectively, decreasing or
increasing the requirements.
The grade at the base of the existing home is 2-ft above the grade on Spear Street. The grade on the
west side of Spear Street begins to decrease as you move west. The Board may wish to consider this
criterion in their review.
(6) , (7) – Not applicable
G. Landscaping Standards.
(1) The Development Review Board shall require compliance with any Tree Ordinance or
Landscaping Design Standards enacted by the City of South Burlington, subsequent to the effective
date of these regulations.
(2) Overall, there shall be a mix of large canopy tree species within each landscaping plan.
(3) Landscaping Budget Requirements.
Staff considers no changes to compliance with these criteria are proposed.
9
13.05 Stormwater Management
F. Design Requirements – Impacts to Municipal System [add!] Stormwater runoff from sites meeting
the requirements of Section 13.05(D), or sites that are exempt from Section 13.05(D), may discharge to
the municipal stormwater system, or a stormwater system within a proposed future municipal right-of-
way, provided that the stormwater system has adequate capacity to convey the twenty-five year storm
event from the contributing drainage area. All applicants shall meet the following standards if it is
determined that their project may have impacts to municipal stormwater system:
(1) New drainage structures connected to the municipal stormwater system, or a stormwater system
within a proposed future municipal right-of-way, shall comply with the following standards:
(a) New drainage structures should be located within the street right-of-way
(b) All drainage structures must be designed to safely pass the twenty-five year, twenty-four
hour (4.0 inch) rain event (rainfall amounts to be determined using NOAA, Atlas 14 data
and a type II rainfall distribution);
(c) Drainage pipes must have a minimum diameter of 15” and be connected to drainage
structures using booted connections.
(d) Concrete risers, not brick and mortar, must be used to achieve the necessary drainage
structure elevation.
No changes affecting compliance with criteria (a) through (d) are proposed.
(e) House footing drains shall only be connected to drainage facilities located in the street
right-of-way when a suitable location to daylight the footing drain cannot be found.
5. The applicant is proposing to reroute the existing footing drain for Lot 48 from daylighting
near the property line of Lot 50 to connect into a catch basin proposed as part of this
development. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to demonstrate why the
existing daylight location is not suitable.
On December 27, 2021, the Director of Public Works offered the following comment on the
proposed footing drain.
The connection listed in #3 below of Lot 48’s footing drain to CB #3A is approved but it
must contain a backflow prevention valve and must be listed as private all the way up to
its connection point with CB #3A. The City will not own, maintain or bear any liability for
private drains that are connected to public infrastructure. This line will not be conveyed
to the City as infrastructure to be publicly-owned in the future. Please have the applicant
clearly state these details on their plans and also have this fact captured in any decisions
or official approvals by the DRB.
If the Board allows the proposed modification, Staff recommends they incorporate the
comments of the Director of Public Works as conditions of approval.
(f) Footing drains must not be connected to road underdrain.
This criterion is met.
(g) Any footing drains connected to drainage facilities in the street right-of-way shall be
provided with a backflow preventer.
10
It does not appear the applicant has proposed a backflow preventer. Staff considers this can
be incorporated as a condition of approval.
(h) Driveway culverts must have a minimum diameter of 18” and 12” of cover above them.
No change affecting compliance with this criterion is proposed.
13.12 Utility Cabinets and Similar Structures
B. Specific Standards for Utility Cabinets and Similar Structures.
(1) The facility shall serve the City of South Burlington and/or immediately adjacent
communities.
(2) The minimum required lot for a public utility cabinet, substation, or communication relay
station on its own parcel may be reduced from the zoning district requirements, at the
discretion of the Development Review Board. In the event that the facility shall be erected
on property not owned by the utility, the Development Review Board shall require that the
facility be located unobtrusively.
(3) If the parcel containing the facility is landlocked, there shall be a recorded easement or
permission granting access to the utility or owner of the facility.
No changes affecting compliance with criteria (1) through (3) are proposed.
(4) There shall be sufficient landscaping or fencing of sufficient height and opacity to screen
effectively the facility year-round from streets and abutting unaffiliated properties.
The applicant has provided a detail providing screening from the street while leaving the home-
facing sides of the utility cabinets open for maintenance. See Sheet 8. Staff considers this criterion
met.
(5) The location of the facility shall be shown on all relevant site plans.
(6) Utility cabinets and similar structures shall be located a minimum of five (5) feet from all
existing or planned public roads or rights-of-way.
No changes affecting compliance with criteria (5) or (6) are proposed.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Board discuss the project with the applicant and close the hearing.