Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAO-22-01 - Supplemental - 0410 Golf Course Road (6)May 2, 2022 Re: Appeal of ZP-22-071 Dear South Burlington Planning Board, I am appealing permit ZP-22-071 issued to 410 Golf Course Road due to the fact that the site exceeded the limits stated in Article 14, Section F of the Land Development Regulations, which require approval of the Development Review Board. Article 14, Section F • Alteration of Existing Grade (1) Approval Required. The removal from land or the placing on land of fill, gravel, sand, loam, topsoil, or other similar material in an amount equal to or greater than twenty (20) cubic yards, except when incidental to or in connection with the construction of a structure on the same lot, shall require the approval of the Development Review Board. The Development Review Board may grant such approval where such modification is requested in connection with the approval of a site plan, planned unit development or subdivision plat. • Note: A partial estimate of the material removed & replaced can be obtained from calculating the area of boulders that were removed from underneath the previous deck (210 sq ft x 6ft tall) totaling 46.67 cubic yards that was removed and then replaced with a like amount of compacted gravel aggregate. However, this calculation does not include any fill used to construct the deck extension measuring approximately 68 sq. ft x 6ft tall, any material used to raise the grade at the northern property line, or any material used to raise the remainder of the yard by approximately 1-2 ft. By including these additional areas the total amount of yardage added to the property would increase by a substantial margin. Secondarily, we are requesting an enforcement action against the Crestas due to a discrepancy with the proposed contour of the land shown on the site plan and the resulting contour of the land. This is illustrated below where the land elevation shown on the site plan clearly shows an elevation of 451 ft at the center of the wooden deck, 450 ft at the far edge of the wooden deck and a reduction to 449 ft just past that point. This is not the case per Reference Photo 4. An additional enforcement action should also occur at the property line, where fill was added, replacing a former 4’ swail where runoff previously drained. The added 4.5 ft slope of compacted fill is now funneling runoff from the Cresta’s property onto our property. We request the former 4’ wide swail be reinstated by providing a 4’ setback from any new landscaping work. (See Reference Photos 1-4 and Photo 6, where the former swail area is shown at the fence location. We also believe the Crestas may have raised the elevation underneath the new wooden deck per Reference Photos 7 & 8 showing the deck initially located three steps below the home’s doorway height and now residing just two steps below the doorway height. If this is the case, the elevation around the deck should be lowered to match the former elevation. Finally, we are requesting an enforcement action to alleviate the view obstruction, by adding a 4 ft setback (mentioned previously) and reducing the degree of slope along the property line to an industry accepted 3:1 ratio. Proposed grading elevations in Permit ZP-22-071: Actual grading does not “step down” per the permit: By not following the step down in elevation shown in the site plan, and extending the compacted area to the edge of the property line, this has created a “ledge” of compacted aggregate, with a steep 42 degree slope landing directly on the property line that has caused runoff to pool on our property and material from the slope to fall on our land. (See Reference Photos 1, 2 & 3) 451 450 449 Local experts confirmed our concerns about runoff, erosion, the inability of vegetation to grow over gravel on a steep grade, the raised area blocking southerly views from our property, and the scale and proximity of the impacted area not matching the neighborhood aesthetic. (See Statements 1 & 2) On 11/17/21, Dalila Hall visited our property at 6 Park Road and documented “Extensive regrading work” and additional unpermitted exterior work at the neighboring property, 410 Golf Course Road. (See excerpt below and full letter to follow). Dalila immediately issued an order to cease all exterior work, except for the permitted addition. However, despite this order, the property owners completed construction of the exterior wooden deck, concrete stairway and additional grading of the yard, none of which were permitted at the time. It is my intent to prove that the grading which occurred at 410 Golf Course Road does not meet the terms of permit ZP-22-071 and poses a threat to our property at 6 Park Road due to the steepness of the grade and lack of a drainage area. Experts confirmed that both of these issues do not conform to acceptable landscaping standards. It is our request that all items posing a threat or otherwise impinging on our property rights, be removed. Notes: • The added material along our property line ranges from 2.5 feet at the side of the deck to approximately 5 feet at the area where the cement staircase is located. Beyond the staircase, the added grade reduces from 5 feet to around 2 feet across the entire yard. • Immediately after the fill was brought in and placed along our entire property line, I noticed the swail area on our property becoming very soggy & occasionally flooded after heavy rains. This has persisted to this day - even after the Cresta’s indicated they modified their drainage system. • Prior to the lot being re-graded, 410 Golf Course Road had a 4’ swail located on the property line adjacent to our 4’ swail, where each of our properties were able to distribute runoff. With the elimination of the swail at 410 Golf Course Road, rainwater from that property now drains directly onto 6 Park Road. We are requesting the Crestas remove all unpermitted fill and all fill causing potential impacts to 6 Park Road based on the Review Board’s authority under Article 14, Section F. Thank you, Robert and Paula Cooper 6 Park Road South Burlington, VT 05403 802-735-3536 Slope calculations (Industry Standard): 1. 2:1 (run/rise) - This is the steepest incline capable of supporting plants, and is doubly tough on labor and irrigation. Sometimes these slopes will require retaining walls due to the great amount of siltation they produce. 2. 3:1 (run/rise) - This is the steepest incline allowed for a lawn due to the limitations of lawn mowers. It is often the maximum allowed by city or county codes. 3. 4:1+ (run/rise) - This is a more ideal slope which can be easily planted, and irrigation water is more likely to soak in. https://www.landscapingnetwork.com/hillsides/erosion-control.html Slope calculations (410 Golf Course Road): 1. At side of wooden deck: 4 ft run / 3.5 ft rise = 1.14:1 @41 degrees (Well below industry limits, considered incapable of supporting plants) 2. At cement stairway: 5 ft. run / 4.5 ft. rise / = 1.11:1 @ 42 degrees (Well below industry limits, considered incapable of supporting plants) Reference Photo 1: Reference Photo 2: Reference Photo 3: Reference Photo 4: Reference Photo 5: Reference Photo 6: Reference Photo 7: Original deck 3 steps below interior floor level Reference Photo 8: New deck only 2 steps below interior floor level Reference Photo 9: Reference Photo 10: November 17, 2021 Tracey & Fernando Cresta 410 Golf Course Road So. Burlington, VT 05401 VIA EMAIL Re: Zoning Violation – Unpermitted Work – 410 Golf Course Road Dear Ms. & Mr. Cresta: It has come to my attention that the work occurring at 410 Golf Course Road is far more extensive than originally depicted on the zoning permit application that was issued as #ZP-21-056 on March 8, 2021. That permit was issued to create a 4’ x 17’ addition, add a bathroom on the lower level, remodel the screen porch to become conditioned space, remodel a kitchen, master bath and basement laundry room. I visited the site today and observed that there has been extensive regrading work in the back and side yard, along with the addition of a terraced patio. There was also new siding being installed. To date, no permits have been issued for this work. We did receive a permit application for deck stairs on November 11, 2021, but before I can issue additional permits for this property, I need to understand the full extent of the work that has already occurred. It would be helpful to have a detailed list of the work already undertaken (interior and exterior), along with associated plans and costs. With respect to the alteration of existing grade in the back and side yard, it will be helpful to know how much crushed stone (cubic yards) was brought in to create the terraced patio. The exterior plans should show the base condition of the site before the work was undertaken and then show all the improvements, include details for all retaining walls. Any photos of the “before” condition will also be helpful. Please provide the requested information within seven (7) days from the date of this later. After I am able to review the full project, I can then best advise on next steps which may entail the need for review by the Development Review Board. I strongly advise that all work cease on the project, except those actions necessary to prevent erosion and to “button up” the site. If you have questions, you can email me at dhall@southburlingtonvt.gov or by phone at (802) 846- 4115. Sincerely, Dalila Hall Administrative Officer Below, please find statements from two highly tenured and respected landscape designers in Chittenden County who offer their assessment of any impacts from the recent grade alteration and offer possible remediation options: 1. Ashley Robinson President, Vermont Nursery and Landscape Association PO Box 28 Charlotte, VT 05445 802-922-1924 2. Charlie Proutt, ASLA Distinctive Landscaping, Horsford Gardens and Nursery 2111 Greenbush Road Charlotte, VT 05445 802-425-2877 2022 South Burlington LDR References LDR, Article 17, P. 322 (In reference to driveway construction) P. 322 - 17.02 Zoning Permits A. Zoning Permit Required. No land development may be commenced within the area affected by these regulations without a zoning permit issued by the Administrative Officer. No zoning permit may be issued by the Administrative Officer except in conformance with these regulations and the provisions of the Vermont Planning and Development Act. Any applicant for a zoning permit shall provide the Administrative Officer with any and all information the Administrative Officer deems necessary to ascertain compliance with these zoning regulations. Such permit shall not be effective until the time for appeal has expired, or such appeal has been adjudicated, in accordance with the Vermont Planning and development Act. LDR, Article 9, P. 140 (4) Use of Berms. Earthen Berms. An earthen berm may be required to increase the effectiveness of a landscaped buffer. The landscaping plan shall show the contours of the proposed berm and one or more cross-sections detailing its construction. The required buffer width may be reduced by the height of the berm, up to a number of feet that shall not exceed 25% of the required width, as provided in Table 9-2A. (a) Berms shall not exceed six feet (6’) in height. (b) No berm shall have a slope greater than 3:1, except where a retaining wall is used in accordance with these Regulations. LDR, Article 14, P. 231 B. 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. (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. LDR, Article 14, P. 235 F. Alteration of Existing Grade (1) Approval Required. The removal from land or the placing on land of fill, gravel, sand, loam, topsoil, or other similar material in an amount equal to or greater than twenty (20) cubic yards, except when incidental to or in connection with the construction of a structure on the same lot, shall require the approval of the Development Review Board. The Development Review Board may grant such approval where such modification is requested in connection with the approval of a site plan, planned unit development or subdivision plat. LDR, Article 16, P. 321 E. Side Slopes. Side slopes in embankments and on roadside drainage ditches shall descend one (1) foot vertically for at least each two (2) feet horizontally (2 on 1).