HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP-22-019 - Supplemental - 0055 Green Mountain Drive (22)1
Marla Keene
From:David Marshall <dmarshall@cea-vt.com>
Sent:Tuesday, May 17, 2022 7:04 AM
To:Marla Keene
Cc:Dexter Mahaffey; droy@wiemannlamphere.com; Andrew Furtsch; Kelley DesRoches; Alex
Aftuck
Subject:EXTERNAL: SP-22-019 and CU-22-03 of Vermont Commons School
This message has originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.
Hi Marla-
We are in receipt of the Staff report for the Conditional Use and Site Plan application for the Vermont
Commons School at 75/55 Green Mountain Drive. In preparation for the hearing before the
Development Review Board on the 17th, we will be presenting the following supplemental testimony
to the Board regarding the highlighted staff comments. A portion of the regulatory requirements
from the Staff report is used as a preamble to the proposed supplemental testimony.
15.A.14 (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 of “D” or better at full buildout. In addition to this criterion,
conditional use criterion require demonstration that the proposed educational use will have no undue
adverse effect on traffic on roads and highways in the vicinity. The applicant stated in their cover
letter that they do not intend to expand the school at this time and there will be no additional traffic
due to the conversion of 55 Green Mountain Drive to an educational use. As the Board is aware, a
change in use is not for a specific tenant but remains allowable if either the tenant changes or
operation of the current tenant changes. The application is for an additional 12,000 sf of educational
use, which is supported by architectural plans showing a gymnasium, classrooms, and office
space. The property will not require additional local permitting if the applicant later decides to
reallocate interior spaces within the umbrella of educational use.
1. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to provide a calculation of the proposed vehicle trips
ends of the educational use, and discuss whether to require the applicant to evaluate the LOS at the
nearest signalized intersections. Based on a rough analysis using square footage, Staff estimates the
previously-approved office use generated 21 trips and the educational use may generate between 55 and
108 trips. Based solely on observations at peak hour, Staff anticipates that the nearest signalized
intersections, those of Green Mountain Drive at Shelburne Road and IDX Drive at Shelburne Road, operate
2
at LOS C. Whether the LOS at the nearest signalized intersections will be impacted by the proposed
change in use will depend on the additional trip generation by the use. We understand that a Conditional
Use approval runs with the land but we also understand that the Site Plan approval for the property can
control the activities in a manner that addresses specific concerns. The applicant is not proposing an
increase in the previously permitted student or staff levels on the parent property. There is no
proposed increase in the total staff and student levels when the operations on the two properties are
combined As such, there will be no additional traffic generation not already authorized to be mitigated
and a traffic study should not be required. Even if a traffic allocation for the school use was required
for the 55 Green Mountain Drive property, it would appear the PM Peak hour for schools is less than
that associated with the previous office use on the property. A possible condition for the 55 Green
Mountain Drive property would be to limit it to no more vehicle trip ends than the previously permitted
use on the property.
13.03 Bicycle Parking and Storage. For existing buildings, the applicant is only required to comply with short
term bicycle parking requirements. Educational uses require 1 space for each 20 students of planned
capacity. The applicant’s website indicates 108 students are enrolled for 2021.
2. Staff recommends the Board discuss whether to apply this criterion to each individual site (keeping in mind
no additional local permitting would be required if the applicant later converts 55 Green Mountain Drive to
classroom space) or whether to apply this criterion to 55 Green Mountain Drive and 75 Green Mountain
Drive taken together. The provided plans do not show any existing bicycle racks at 55 Green Mountain
Drive. The approved plans for 75 Green Mountain Drive indicate one inverted-U bicycle rack, providing
space for two bicycles. Currently all of the student lockers are located at 75 Green Mountain Drive and
will continue to be so moving forward. This is the first place students go when arriving at the
building. Therefore, the applicant will provide a compliant bicycle rack installation at the 75 Green
Mountain Drive (North) building. The location will be the same as the existing movable bicycle rack
serving the use.
13.04 Landscaping, Screening & Street Trees 13.04I Landscape Maintenance. Maintenance and
responsibility. All planting shown on an approved site plan shall be maintained by the property owner in a
vigorous growing condition throughout the duration of the use. Plants not so maintained shall be replaced
with new plants at the beginning of the next immediately following growing season. Trees with a caliper of
less than 5” may be replaced on an inch-by-inch basis with trees of the same genus of at least 2” caliper
each. No permit shall be required
for such replacements provided they conform to the approved site plan. Replacement of trees with a caliper
of greater than 5” shall require an amendment to the site plan.
The most recently approved site plan for the property that pertains to the affected portion of the site
approved four (4) Bradford pear trees and eight (8) creeping juniper bushes between the parking area and the
property line. If the landscaping had been allowed to mature as required, the previously approved vegetation
would be well established at this time. There is no evidence of the property having obtained a permit to
modify the approved landscaping. The provided site plan indicates the presence of two unidentified trees,
3
four locust trees, two cedar trees and one crab (presumably crab apple) tree between the parking area and
the street. The applicant is proposing to remove the crab apple tree. It is indicated as having a 3-inch caliper.
3. Staff recommends the Board do one of the following.
Allow the existing landscaping to be considered an acceptable substitution for the previously required
landscaping as an after-the-fact approval, including the proposed removal of the crab apple tree. If the
Board selects this approach, Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to identify the
unidentified trees on the plan to allow future enforcement of this criterion. This option is acceptable to
the applicant and as part of the documentation of the existing tree species in this area will also
commit to the planting of a replacement 3” crab apple tree in the area.
Require the applicant to demonstrate the existing landscaping has at least the same value as the
previously-approved landscaping, based on the present costs of the existing and previously approved
landscaping. If the existing landscaping does not meet or exceed the previously required landscaping
value, require the applicant to provide supplemental landscaping to make up the deficit.
Require the applicant to comply with the previously approved landscaping plan
Best Regards
David S. Marshall, P.E.
Civil Engineering Associates, Inc.
10 Mansfield View Lane
South Burlington, VT 05403
P 802-864-2323 x310 F 864-2271