Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 06_SP-22-039_370 Shelburne Rd_Hauke_optCITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SP-22-039_370 Shelburne Rd_Hauke_SC_2022-12-06.docx DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: November 30, 2022 Plans received: October 19, 2022 370 Shelburne Road Site Plan Application #SP-22-039 Meeting date: December 6, 2022 Owner/Applicant Hauke Building Supply/David Hauke 1127 North Avenue, Suite 42 Burlington, VT 05408 Engineer O’Leary – Burke Civil Associates, PLC 13 Corporate Drive Essex Junction, VT 05452 Property Information Tax Parcel 1540-00370 Commercial 1-Residential 15 Zoning District, Traffic Overlay Zoning District (Zone 3), Transit Overlay Zoning District, Urban Design Overlay District (Secondary Node) Location Map #SP-22-039 2 PROJECT DESCRPTION Site plan application #SP-22-039 of David Hauke to amend a previously approved site plan for a 21,420 sq. ft. mixed use building. The amendment consists of constructing a 3,550 sf third story addition, which will be combined with 4,600 sf of existing building and used as six (6) residential units, with 16,605 sf commercial space to remain, 370 Shelburne Road. CONTEXT This small mall building has been in existence for several decades. The one significant change in the past 20 years was the construction of a cross-lot driveway connection to the Hickok and Boardman building to the north, located in Burlington, in 2010/2011, which is discussed below. COMMENTS Development Review Planner Marla Keene and Planning Director Paul Conner (“Planning Staff”) have reviewed the plans submitted on 10/19/2022 and offer the following comments. Comments for the Board’s attention are indicated in red. A) ZONING DISTRICT & DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Commercial 1-Residential 15 Zoning District Required Existing Proposed Min. Lot Size 40,000 sf 65,962 sf 65,962 sf Max. Building Coverage 40% 30% 30% # Max. Overall Coverage 70% 83.7% 83.5% Min. Front Setback (Urban Design Overlay District) 20 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. # Max Front Setback Coverage 30% 73.3% 72.7% Min. Side Setback 10 ft. < 4 ft. < 4 ft. (no change) Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. N/A N/A * Building Height (flat roof) 5 stories 22 ft. 34 ft.  Meets requirement # Pre-existing non conformity proposed to be reduced * Does not meet requirement, see below. 1. The applicant has not correctly calculated height. They have instead provided heights for the building in three sections: 18’ height on the west (unclear if this is measured correctly), 13’ height in the center, and 22’ existing and 34’ proposed on the west. Staff considers the provided information is useful in review of 3.06I below but nonetheless recommends the Board require the applicant to provide a correct calculation prior to closing the hearing. Height should be calculated based on the average grade at the outer perimeter of the building, and the difference between that and the proposed height of the flat roof at the building addition. #SP-22-039 3 Commercial 1-Residential 15 Zoning District The purpose of the Commercial 1 Zoning District is to encourage the location of higher density residential, retail, office and vertically mixed uses in a manner that serves as or enhances a compact central business area. Other uses that would benefit from nearby access to a central business area, including clustered residential development and small industrial employers may be permitted. Warehouses, major industrial employers, and incompatible industrial uses shall not be permitted. Urban design supporting a transition for these areas from a suburban environment to compact centers is encouraged. 3.07 Height of Structures B. Stories (2) In the C1-R12, C1-R15, and C1-Auto districts: a) No building shall be more than 1 story taller than the shortest building on an adjacent lot in the R4 District. However, for each 75’ of separation from said building in the R4, the proposal building may increase in height by 1 story, up to the allowable maximum height. b) First story floor-to-floor height shall not exceed 20 feet. Upper stories shall not exceed 14 feet in floor-to-floor height. Staff considers these criteria met. The building is proposed to be 3-stories high, and the adjacent building is 2 stories high. Story height is under the required maximums. 10.01 Traffic Overlay District This property is located in Traffic Overlay District Zone 3 which is established to regulate uses based on traffic generated. The parcel has one driveway within Zone 3 and one driveway which is out of the Traffic Overlay District. LDR 10.01E states that if a parcel has one driveway in one and another driveway in another zone, the zone which is more restrictive shall apply to the entire property. 10.01G calculates the peak hour trip generation limits per 40,000 sf of land area. G. Peak Hour Trip Generation Limits per 40,000 SF of land area: The maximum permitted peak hour volume per 40,000 square feet of land area in any zone shall be as set forth in Table 10-1 below. Table 10-1 Maximum Peak Hour Trip Ends per 40,000 SF Zone Max. number of peak hour trip ends per 40,000 SF of land area 1 15 2A 20 2B 25 2C 30 3 45 #SP-22-039 4 The above allowable traffic generation rates assume a mix of right-turn and left-turn movements in and out of the site driveways. If a site is located along an arterial with a raised median thus preventing all left turns, the traffic budget for that site shall be increased by 15%. This Traffic Budget credit of 15% can only be taken when all site access points off the adjacent arterial(s) are for right-turns-in and right-turns-out only. The maximum allowable trip generation is 45 trips per 40,000 sf, or 75 trips. The previously approved trip generation (SP-00-56) was 81.23 trips. The applicant has indicated that the existing trip generation is 108 trips, and they are proposing 3 additional trips. Though it is the City’s practice to “true up” additional existing trips without requiring mitigation if the calculation methodology changes without a change in use, since the applicant is proposing to add trips, they must provide mitigation from the baseline to the total new proposed number of trips, or mitigation for 36 trips. Mitigation can consist of the following. • Change or reduction in number and location of curb cuts • Creation of cross-lot connections • Elimination of left turns across an arterial • Reduction in curb cut width • Relocation of access points farther from high-volume intersections • Improvements on overall traffic and levels of service at proximate intersections • Other criteria the DRB finds relevant The applicant has not proposed mitigation. In SP-10-04, the applicant obtained approval to reconstruct the curb cut on Shelburne road and the vehicular connection to the abutting property to the north. Improvements also included installation of a crosswalk across Shelburne Road at the north side of the intersection, including concrete, a pedestrian signal, and striping. No credit was taken at that time, because no additional trips were proposed. However, Staff considers the Board may retroactively allow credit for the cross-lot connection and intersection improvements. The methodology for trip credit for cross-lot connection is described in LDR appendix B, and is equal to half of the internal capture that could be expected between two connected properties. Staff considers it is unlikely that the internal capture would be 72 trips (half of 72 is 36), and therefore the cross-lot connection would not provide sufficient mitigation. Staff has spoken with the Applicant’s engineer who has indicated that their estimate of 108 trips is based solely on the standard ITE values for the uses. Staff has suggested that the applicant may wish to “sharpen their pencil” on the existing and proposed trip generation to determine if the amount of trips needed to be mitigated is accurate. Any non-standard trip evaluation would require technical review, but combined with the potential trip credit above may allow the project to move forward. 2. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to describe their proposed approach to address the trip generation issue. #SP-22-039 5 10.05D Urban Design Overlay District Standards While a portion of the property does fall within the boundaries of the Urban Design Overlay District, the proposed addition is outside of the urban design overlay district and therefore these criteria do not apply. B) SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS 14.06 General Review Standards (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) The Development Review Board may approve parking between a public street and one or more buildings if the Board finds that one or more of the following criteria are met. The Board shall approve only the minimum necessary to overcome the conditions below. (c) Parking area width. Surface parking areas and affiliated drive aisles located to the side of buildings shall not exceed the width of building(s), Civic Spaces, and Site Amenities along any street frontage. This may be calculated separately or cumulatively for corner lots. Parking approved pursuant to 14.07(B)(2)(b) shall be exempt from this subsection. (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. Where a lot abuts an Interstate or its interchanges, parking shall be located to the side of the building(s) or to the front adjacent to the Interstate. Parking areas adjacent to the Interstate shall be screened with sufficient landscaping to screen the parking from view of the Interstate. Existing parking is located to the front of the building relative to Shelburne Road. The applicant is proposing to add one additional parking spot to the side of the building relative to Proctor Ave, but otherwise no changes to parking are proposed. Staff considers there is insufficient nexus to require the applicant to modify the existing non-conforming parking. (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. As noted under dimensional standards above, the existing building encroaches into the allowable minimum setbacks. The proposed addition is on the east side of the building, where the building is clad in brick. The proposal is to add a story at the east end of the building above the existing two story portion, and add a porch area where there is an existing loading dock. LDR 3.06I enumerates specific requirements for setbacks and buffer strips adjacent to residential district boundaries. Staff has inserted these criteria here as they expand upon and inform the above criterion of 14.06A. 3.06I. Setback and Buffer Strip Adjacent to Residential District Boundaries. (1) Setback to residential zoning districts. Any new, reconstructed, or expanded principal building located wholly or primarily in a non-residential zoning district shall retain a setback of not less #SP-22-039 6 than sixty-five (65) feet from all adjacent residential zoning districts, unless applicable lots are part of a Master Plan or Planned Unit Development. This property is adjacent to the R4 zoning district therefore this criterion applies. The existing zoning district boundary is somewhat within the current parcel. Staff has assumed for the purposes of the discussion of 3.06I that the Board is willing to adjust the location of the district boundary to the property line, as allowed under LDR 3.03C Split Lots, resulting in the subject property being wholly within the C1-R15 zoning district. The existing building setback is less than four (4) feet from the property line. (2) Buffer strip. A buffer strip not less than fifteen (15) feet wide within the sixty-five (65) foot setback in subsection (a) shall be installed and landscaped with dense evergreens, fencing, and/or other plantings as a screen. New external light fixtures shall not ordinarily be permitted within the fifteen (15) foot wide buffer area. The applicant is proposing to increase the height of the building, and add a large walkway and partially covered porch. The portion of the building proposed to increase in height is located approximately 30-ft from the property line. The walkway is, at its nearest point, proposed to be approximately 7-ft from the property line. One accessible parking space is proposed between the building and the property line. The applicant has proposed to use the remainder of the space between the proposed building and the property line as the required amenity area for residential uses. (3) The Development Review Board may permit new or expanded nonresidential uses, structures and/or parking areas, and new external light fixtures, within the setback and/or buffer as set forth in (1) or (2) above, and may approve a modification of the width of the required setback and/or landscaped buffer as set forth in (1) above. In doing so the DRB shall find that the proposed lighting, landscaping and/or fencing to be provided adjacent to the boundary of the residential district will provide equivalent screening of the noise, light and visual impacts of the new non-residential use to that which would be provided by the standard setback and buffer requirements in (1) above. However in no case may the required side or rear setback be reduced below the standard requirement for the zoning district in which the non-residential use is located. This criterion specifically refers to non-residential uses, structures, and/or parking areas within the 65 or 15 ft buffer to residential zoning districts. However, the required setbacks in (1) and (2) above refer to buildings within a non-residential zoning district, not to the uses thereof. Staff considers the required setbacks apply to the structure, regardless of the use, and recommends the Board consider that criterion (3) modifies criterion (1) and (2) as they apply to structures in a non-residential zoning district. 3. Staff recommends the Board require demonstration that the proposed combination of a multi-family residential use and the location of a site amenity adjacent to the residential zoning district provides equivalent screening to that which would be provided by a 65-ft buffer (or 15-ft densely vegetated buffer) between a residential zoning district and a three-story non-residential use. In other words, if the structure met the 65-ft buffer (or 15-ft densely vegetated buffer) and were a three-story non- residential use, would the impact be the same as the proposed impact of a three story multifamily residential use 4-ft from the property line? Staff considers a factors in this determination, in addition to the setback and use, is the height and proximity of the adjoining single family residential home. #SP-22-039 7 Staff reminds the Board that their authority to grant a waiver is limited to dimensional criteria not achievable due to physical site limitations or other legal or development constraints. Criteria for granting a waiver are as follows. (i) The requirement is not necessary to ensure public health, safety and welfare; (ii) The proposal modification is demonstrated to better meet the purposes of this Section, the applicable zoning district, and the Comprehensive Plan; and, (iii) The modification or waiver is the minimum necessary to afford relief and represents the least deviation from the standards and requirements of these Regulations. 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. The existing building is brick. The applicant is proposing to construct the proposed addition in fiber cement lap siding, with an architectural feature between the existing brick and proposed addition. The applicant is proposing to add windows facing Proctor Ave, and a porch facing Shelburne Street, though the porch will be set back behind the existing building and may not be visible from Shelburne Street. Staff considers the proposed architecture and landscaping to improve compliance with this criterion, though the criterion of 3.06I regarding buffers still applies. (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. The structure is proposed to be one story higher than the existing detached single family home to the east. Staff considers the proposed modifications to have a harmonious relationship with the existing three-story residential building to the south. Staff considers this criterion to be met. (3) To accomplish (1) and (2), the DRB shall consider: (a) Pattern and Rhythm. Update or maintain or extend the overall pattern of development defined by the planned or existing street grid, block configurations, position and orientation of principal buildings, prevalence of attached or detached building types. (b) Architectural Features. Respond to recurring or representative architectural features that define neighborhood character, without adhering to a particular architectural style. (c) Privacy. Limit impacts and intrusions to privacy on adjoining properties, including side and back yard areas through context sensitive design. See discussion above. C. Site Amenity Requirement (1) Sites are required to include a specific minimum area for appropriate Site Amenities. This section does not apply to projects within the City Center FBC District (which are governed by Section 8.08). (2) Applicability. Applications for the following shall be required to provide Site Amenities: #SP-22-039 8 (a) Any non-residential development over 5,000 SF. (b) Additions or expansions exceeding 5,000 SF for existing non-residential structures. (c) Any residential development, including conversion of non-residential structures to residential use. (3) The required area shall be: (a) For Non-Residential development, a minimum of 6% of non-residential building gross floor area. (b) For Residential development, determined by number of units as: (i) For fewer than 10 units, 100 square feet per unit; (ii) For 10 to 19 units, 85 square feet per unit; or (iii) For 20 or more units, 60 square feet per unit. The applicant must provide 600 sf of site amenity for the proposed six residential units. The applicant has proposed an approximately 1,800 sf area which consists of a covered outdoor space, a walkway and elevated patio, and a vegetated ground level seating area. The applicant has not made a proposal for which site amenity space type they are proposing. Based on the size, the only potentially applicable open space type is a snippet/parklet. This open space type has the requirement of being highly vegetated. The ground level seating area portion of the open space is approximately 600 sf. Staff considers this criterion met. However, the Board should be aware that this open space is located in the required 65 ft (15 ft if highly vegetated) residential buffer. If the Board requires modification of the buffer, this criterion should be reevaluated. 14.07 Specific Review Standards In all Zoning Districts and the City Center Form Based Codes District, the following standards shall apply: A. Environmental Protection Standards. All proposed development shall be subject to the applicable requirements of Article 12, Environmental Protection Standards. None of the resources identified in Article 12 exist on the site. B. Site Design Features. All proposed development shall comply with standards for the placement of buildings, parking and loading areas, landscaping and screening, open space, stormwater, lighting, and other applicable standards related to site design pursuant to these Land Development Regulations. These standards are contained in Article 13 and are discussed below. C. Access and Circulation. All proposed development shall comply with site access and circulation standards of Section 15.A.14. Much of 15.A.14 pertains to the construction of streets, which are not applicable to this application. The applicable sections of 15.A.14 follow. #SP-22-039 9 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. As noted above, the proposed use adds three trips. Staff considers the small number of additional trips to not warrant a traffic study of adjacent intersections. 15.A.14(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 9, 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)-(6) not applicable (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. 4. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to describe how residents of the proposed units will travel between their parking spaces and their front doors. It appears their front doors are accessed via the south side of the building, while the parking is on the north. Staff considers the elements of this criterion pertaining to sight distance, access separation distances and accommodations for high-accident locations to be met. (8) Align access point with existing intersections or curb cuts and consolidate existing access points or curb cuts within the subdivision, to the extent physically and functionally feasible. The applicant is not proposing to change the access points. Staff considers this criterion met. (9) Minimize vehicular access point (curb cuts) to abutting properties and building lots along pedestrian oriented street frontage; and provide, where 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. The applicant is not proposing to change the access points. Staff considers this criterion met. D. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) [reserved] #SP-22-039 10 E. Building Form. Development within the City Center Form Based Code District, the Urban Design Overlay District, and other districts with supplemental building form standards shall adhere to the standards contained therein. This criterion does not apply as no overlay or related districts apply to the location of the proposed units. F. Streetscape Improvements. A proposed new construction or extension/expansion of an existing structure exceeding the thresholds listed in either (a) Section 14.09(B) or (b) Section 8.11(D) within the City Center Form Based Code, or Section 3.15(D) in all other zoning districts, shall be required to upgrade adjacent sidewalks, greenbelts, and related street furniture (trees, benches, etc.) to the standards contained within the applicable Street Type and Building Envelope Standard. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to limit requirements for additional upgrades as necessary to meet the requirements of these Regulations. Staff considers no improvements to Proctor Ave to be needed. G. 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. There is already an existing cross-lot connection to the adjoining commercial lot. Staff considers this criterion met. Staff notes the Fire Marshal has indicated the applicant has not yet coordinated with the South Burlington Fire Department. Staff recommends the Board require demonstration of approval by the Fire Marshall’s office prior to obtaining a zoning permit. H. 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.A.18, Infrastructure, Utilities, and Services, shall also be met. The City of South Burlington Water District reviewed the proposed plans on 11/19/2022 and offers following comment. The SBWD requires a new domestic water service connection for this building given it’s change in use and demands. The new domestic service may be tapped from the existing fire sprinkler line into the building, with a separate domestic service and outside shut off, or a new tap on the Proctor Avenue water main can be installed. Either way, the existing water service shall be shut off and abandoned at the water main. The building owner or engineer should contact the SBWD to discuss this requirement if there are any questions. 5. Staff recommends that the DRB require the applicant to obtain water and wastewater allocation and modify the plans to address the comments of the South Burlington Water Department prior to issuance of a zoning permit. I. 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 #SP-22-039 11 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 (ie, non-dumpster, non-large drum) shall not be required to be fenced or screened. No changes to existing dumpsters are proposed. Dumpsters must remain enclosed. C) SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS 13.02 Off Street Parking and Loading The applicant must provide 6 parking spaces for the 6 residential units. Staff considers this criterion met. 13.03 Bicycle Parking and Storage. The applicant is proposing a tenant storage area. For the proposed mix of 16,605 sf commercial space and 6 residential units, the applicant must provide uses, the applicant must provide five (5) short term bicycle parking spaces. The applicant has indicated a location of the bike rack on the plans, but has stated in the narrative it is not an allowable type and must be replaced. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to modify the plans to provide an acceptable type and number of bicycle racks prior to issuance of a zoning permit. 13.04 Landscaping, Screening & Street Trees 13.04G requires minimum landscaping based on the value of new structures, while 13.04H requires that previously approved landscaping be maintained for the duration of the use. The applicant is proposing a building addition, and proposing to remove existing landscaping, therefore portions of the landscaping standards apply. The most-recently approved site plan that establishes the required landscaping to be retained was from 2014. Based on a comparison between that plan and the currently proposed landscaping plans, much of the previously required landscaping has been removed. Based on the way the applicant has prepared their landscaping cost estimate, it appears they have attempted to provide replacement for the improperly removed trees and shrubs, but there is no accounting of the removed trees and shrubs, and the proposed plantings consist almost entirely of perennials located in a different area from the previously required plantings, therefore Staff considers modifications must be made to the landscaping plan prior to approval. 6. For the replacement landscaping, Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to do the following: • prepare a list (or plan) and current value of previously approved landscaping that is not present on the site or proposed to be removed. The applicant has stated the value of plantings on the 2000 plan not in existence to be $6,110, but no supporting information has been provided. • propose landscaping in the general locations of the previously approved landscaping, consisting predominantly of trees and shrubs, with a value equal to the current value of the previously approved landscaping either not present or proposed to be removed. #SP-22-039 12 The applicant estimates the building cost to be $1,900,000, requiring $26,500 in new trees and shrubs. In total, the applicant has proposed $12,664 in trees and shrubs, and an additional $19,950 in perennials. This includes the applicant’s proposed replacement landscaping. Of the proposed landscaping value, $15,708 is proposed in the vicinity of the addition, while the remainder is proposed to be located around the site. Staff considers the vicinity of the addition to be well landscaped. However, were the proposed residential units a stand-alone site, it would not meet lot coverage requirements, therefore Staff considers it appropriate to require additional landscaping around the property to make up the required minimum landscaping budget. Site landscaping not in proximity to the proposed residential units consist of 5 ginkgo trees, 18 hydrangea shrubs, and 1 lilac shrub, and a large number of perennials. As the Board is aware, there are a number of landscaping standards pertaining to landscaping of parking lots, including the requirement for one shade tree per five parking spaces, 10% of parking areas consisting of interior landscaping islands, curbing to protect parking lot landscaping, and a minimum shade tree size of 2.5 inches. Additional landscaping standards not specific to parking lots require screening or buffering between dissimilar sites, of parking areas, of outdoor storage, and of utility cabinets. Front yards along collector streets are required to be landscaped, and a mix of large canopy tree species is required throughout. 7. Though the applicant is not proposing to modify the existing parking lot, Staff considers the Board should require the applicant to propose a higher proportion of trees and shrubs to meet the minimum budget, consistent with the standards summarized in the paragraph above. Staff specifically recommends replacement landscaping be required to consist of trees and shrubs, as that is what has been improperly removed or proposed to be removed. The landscaping budget is summarized below. Required Minimum Landscaping $26,500 Applicant’s estimate of required replacement landscaping + $6,110 Trees and shrubs proposed - $12,664 Additional available budget, proposed by the applicant to consist of perennials = $19,946 The City Arborist reviewed the plans on 11/22/2022 and offers the following comments. • Planting Details and Specs should be included in the plan • Species of street trees on Proctor Ave are not specified 8. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to provide the required elements for City Arborist review prior to closing the hearing. Finally, 13.04B(7) requires designation of snow storage areas for parking lots. (7) 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. #SP-22-039 13 9. Snow storage is not shown. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to indicate the boundaries of the snow storage area and provide snow storage not coincident with stormwater treatment or conveyance practices. 13.05 Stormwater Management Stormwater standards apply when one-half acre or more of impervious surface exists or is proposed to exist, and where 5,000 sf of impervious is created or reconstructed. Less than 5,000 sf is proposed to be disturbed therefore stormwater management standards do not apply. Nonetheless, the City Stormwater Section reviewed the provided plans on 11/28/2022 and offers the following comments. 1. This project is located in the Engelsby Brook watershed. This watershed is listed as stormwater impaired by the State of Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). Please note that the Engelsby Brook is now classified as a warm water stream. 2. The project proposes to convert an existing commercial space on the second floor of a building located at 370 Shelburne Rd to residential use, as well as add a third floor to the building. This project will also include general site improvements. As the project does not proposed greater than 5,000 SF of new impervious and redevelopment, the project is not subject to the stormwater management requirements listed in Section 13.05 of the LDRs. 3. The applicant should provide a detailed EPSC plan, indicating location of inlet protection, designated construction entrance(s), as well as locations of silt fencing. The applicant is recommended to provide inlet protection on the catch basin to the north of the proposed sidewalk, as well as on the catch basin to the north of the Shelburne Rd access where planting is proposed. 10. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to provide an EPSC plan subject to review and approval of the City Stormwater Section. 13.07 Exterior Lighting Lighting requirements are summarized as follows. (1) Fixtures must be downcast and shielded (2) Illumination must be evenly distributed (3) Fixtures must be placed to minimize lighting from becoming a nuisance (4) Poles shall be rustproof metal, cast iron, fiberglass, finished wood or similar structural material, with a decorative surface or finish (5) Poles & building mounted fixtures may be no higher than 30-ft (6) Poles must be located in safe locations The applicant’s provided plans do not show any exterior lighting exists on the site. Building elevations indicate a new overhead light fixture at the proposed addition, but details are not provided nor is it shown on the plans. Existing light fixtures must be brought into compliance with downcast and shielded requirements if they are not already. #SP-22-039 14 11. Staff recommends the DRB require the applicant to show where light fixtures are proposed, and require a lighting cut sheet. Depending on light fixture location, a photometric drawing may also be required. 13.11 Fences The applicant has not included any additional fences in this Site Plan, so this section does not apply. Staff notes that if the DRB decides to require fencing as part of additional screening from abutting properties, review under this section will be required. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board work with the applicant to address the issues identified herein. Respectfully submitted, Marla Keene, Development Review Planner Hauke Building Supply 370 Shelburne Rd Apartments - Zoning Assessment Date: 8/15/22 This assessment is based on the Land Development Regulations, adopted by City Council February 7, 2022. The primary applicable components to this site are as follows: ARTICLE 3 GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.02 – Official Map, Overlay District Maps, and Other Maps Section 3.06 – Existing and Planned Rights-of-Way; Setbacks; and Buffers Section 3.07 – Height of Structures Section 3.09 – Multiple Structures and Uses Section 3.15 – Nonconformities Section 3.18 – Residential and Commercial Building Energy Standards ARTICLE 5 COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS Section 5.01 Commercial 1 – C1 Section 5.08 Supplemental Standards for Commercial Districts ARTICLE 13 SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS Section 13.02 – Off-Street Parking and Loading Section 13.03 – Bicycle Parking & Storage Section 13.04 – Landscaping, Screening, and Street Trees Section 13.05 – Stormwater Management Section 13.07 – Exterior Lighting Section 3.02: OFFICIAL MAP, OVERLAY DISTRICT MAPS, and OTHER MAPS: COMMERCIAL (C1-R15) PROJECT SITE: Commercial (C1-R15) ADJACENT LOT, North: N/A (Burlington) ADJACENT LOT, East: Residential (R4) ADJACENT LOT, West (Across Shelburne Rd): N/A (Burlington) ADJACENT LOTS, South (across Proctor Ave): Commercial (C1-R15) and Residential (R4) Section 3.06: EXISTING and PLANNED RIGHTS-of-WAY; SETBACKS; and BUFFERS Item I: SETBACK AND BUFFER STRIP ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT BOUNDARIES (1) Setback to residential zoning district (R4): Any new, reconstructed, or expanded principal building located wholly or primarily in a non-residential zoning district shall retain a setback of not less than sixty-five (65) feet from all adjacent residential zoning districts, unless applicable lots are part of a Master Plan or Planned Unit Development. – This project does not propose any increases to the existing building footprint, but the existing footprint does not provide a 65 ft setback from adjacent residential property to the east. 1 of 32 HAUKE – 370 SHELBURNE RD – ZONING ASSESSMENT 2 (2) Buffer Strip: A buffer strip not less than fifteen (15) feet wide within the sixty-five (65) foot setback [noted above] shall be installed and landscaped with dense evergreens, fencing, and/or other plantings as a screen. New external light fixtures shall not ordinarily be permitted within the fifteen (15) foot wide buffer area. – The existing conditions do not allow for a 15 foot buffer, but this project proposes dense plantings along the property line to provide as much screening as possible. (3) The Development Review Board may approve a modification of the width of the required setback and/or landscaped buffer. – This project will require DRB approval. Section 3.07: HEIGHT OF STRUCTURES Item A: GENERAL PROVISIONS: DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS, per TABLE C-2 (see Section 5.01 below) Item B: STORIES (a) No building shall be more than 1 story taller than the shortest building on an adjacent lot in the R4 district. However, for each 75’ of separation from said building in the R4, the proposed building may increase in height by 1 story, up to the allowable maximum height. - The proposed three-story building is 2 stories taller than the shortest building (single story) on an adjacent lot, as allowed by the 75’ of separation. (b) First story floor-to-floor height shall not exceed 20 feet. Upper stories shall not exceed 14 feet in floor- to-floor height. - The existing floor to floor heights meet the requirements. The proposed addition will also meet these requirements. Section 3.09: MULTIPLE STRUCTURES and USES Item A: GENERAL PROVISIONS There shall be only one principal building or structure on a lot and only one use per lot, except as otherwise provided in this Section. Item B: UMBRELLA APPROVAL for MULTIPLE USES The Administrative office or Development Review Board may approve teo (2) or more separate uses in a single principal building or structure in conjunction with a site plan, PUD or conditional use approval, provided all of the proposed uses are permitted or duly approved conditional uses in the underlying zoning district and all other applicable standards are met. – This project will require approval for both commercial and residential uses in one principal structure. Section 3.15: NONCONFORMITIES Item B: CONTINUANCE AND RESTRICTIONS (1) Any lawful structure or any lawful use of any structure or land existing at the time of the enactment of these regulations may be continued, although such structure or use does not conform with the provisions of these regulations, provided the conditions in this Section 3.15 are met. (2) n/a 2 of 32 HAUKE – 370 SHELBURNE RD – ZONING ASSESSMENT 3 (3) A nonconforming structure that is devoted to a conforming use may be reconstructed, structurally altered, restored or repaired, in whole or in part, with the provision that the degree of nonconformance shall not be increased. (4) A nonconforming structure, or part thereof, shall be maintained, repaired, or restored to a safe condition as required by the Administrative Officer. (5) A nonconforming structure shall not have its degree of nonconformance increased. The existing structure does not conform to the required setback at the adjacent Residential (R4) boundary. This project proposes to reconstruct/alter a portion of the existing building and add a third floor. The existing nonconformity will not be increased. Item D: ALTERATIONS TO NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES (1) … any nonconforming structure may be altered, including additions to the structure, provided such alteration does not exceed in aggregate cost… twenty-five percent (25%) for industrial and commercial property of the current assessed value as determined by the City Assessor… (2) In the event an addition or an expansion to a nonconforming structure is proposed, the addition or expansion itself must conform with the provisions of these regulations (e.g., dimensional requirements such as setbacks, coverage, etc.). Item E: ALTERATIONS TO FACADES AND EXTERIOR FINISHES ON NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES Alterations to facades and exterior finishes shall not be subject to the twenty-five percent (25%)… limitations described above. The proposed addition complies with these regulations. Section 3.18: RESIDENTIAL and COMMERCIAL BUILDING ENERGY STANDARDS Item B: RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ENERGY STANDARS (RBES) Residential buildings… shall comply with the Stretch Code… Such buildings for which the RBES Certificate certifying compliance with the Stretch Code is not recorded in the South Burlington Land Records shall be deemed land development without a zoning permit in violation of these Regulations. The proposed building will meet the Stretch Code requirement of the 2020 RBES. Section 5.01: COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS TABLE C-2 DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS LAND USE: Multi-Family dwelling, among others. MINIMUM LOT SIZE (max. residential density in dwelling units per acre): 2,900 SF/unit MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: Buildings only – 40%; Buildings, parking and all other impervious surfaces – 70% STANDARD SETBACKS (feet): Front – 30; Side Yard(s) – 10; Rear – 30 MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT: 5 total stories (superseded by Section 3.07 Item B(a) above) 3 of 32 HAUKE – 370 SHELBURNE RD – ZONING ASSESSMENT 4 Section 5.08: SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS FOR ALL COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS – these don’t seem to be included in the newest version of the regulations, unsure if they still apply. Item A: Development according to commercial district regulations and multifamily development at the residential density specified for the applicable district shall be subject to site plan review, as set forth in Article 14, the purpose of which shall be to encourage innovation of design and layout, encourage more efficient use of land for commercial development, promote mixed-use development and shared parking opportunities, reduce stormwater runoff and maximize infiltration, provide coordinated access to and from commercial developments via public roadways, and maintain service levels on public roadways with a minimum of publicly financed roadway improvements. Item B: Multiple structures, multiple uses within structures, and multiple uses on a subject site may be allowed, if the Development Review Board determines that the subject site has sufficient frontage, lot size, and lot depth. Area requirements and frontage needs may be met by the consolidation of contiguous lots under separate ownership. Construction of a new public street may serve as the minimum frontage needs. Where multiple structures are proposed, maximum lot coverage shall be the normal maximum for the applicable district. Item D: COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES Commercial properties that abut residential districts shall provide a screen or buffer along the abutting line in accordance with Section 3.06(I) of these Regulations [see above]. Section 13.02: OFF STREET PARKING and LOADING TABLE 13-1 PARKING REQUIREMENTS Multi-Family Dwelling (2+ bedroom units): 1.5 spaces per DU plus 0.75 space for every 4 units for all other DUs. This project has (4) two-bedroom units, and (2) 1-bedroom units. 7 Parking spaces required. Existing commercial parking lot will serve the apartment units. One ADA parking space will be provided within the project area. The existing curb cut off Proctor Ave will remain unchanged. TABLE 13-2 PARKING LOT DIMENSIONS – n/a The existing driveway will be reserved for (1) ADA parking space, and will be sized per the ADA guidelines. Section 13.03: BICYCLE PARKING and STORAGE TABLE 13-3 BICYCLE PARKING REQUIREMENTS Residential building with more than 3 units = 1 short term space for every 10 units, minimum 4; 1 long term space for every unit The project will provide 4 short term bicycle parking spaces, and 1 long term storage space per unit (6 apartment units). Short term bicycle parking provided must be one of the styles accepted in Appendix G (below). 4 of 32 HAUKE – 370 SHELBURNE RD – ZONING ASSESSMENT 5 APPENDIX G Acceptable Types: Inverted U, Post & Ring, Bike Lockers, Vertical, Two-Tier Not Acceptable: Wave, Schoolyard, Coathanger, Wheelwell, Bollard, Spiral, Swing Arm Secured Item B: SHORT TERM BICYCLE PARKING Where pre-approved bicycle racks exist on the site at the time of application, they may be permitted to remain and count towards the minimum requirements of this Section provided: - Securely anchored to the ground and on a hard, stabilized surface of at least six feet in length and a width sufficient to satisfy the remainder of these regulations - Easily accessible from the street or multi-use path and protected from motor vehicles - The bike frame can be attached in at least one place and the bike is supported to stay upright - The rack is not constructed of wood - Each space on a rack where a bicycle frame can be attached in at least one place and supported to stay upright shall be considered a bicycle parking space - If parking is on the end or outside of a rack, the parking space must be clear of obstructions in compliance with Appendix G (above) and not obstruct passageways The existing ‘Wave’ style short term bike racks are sufficient in number but will need to be replaced to comply with Appendix G. Otherwise, additional short term bicycle parking to be provided within the project area. Item C: LONG TERM BICYCLE STORAGE Any new residential building with more than 3 units is required to provide bicycle storage. - Secure storage in bicycle locker, bicycle storage room, or private enclosure outside of the private residence that protects entire bicycle, including components and accessories against theft and weather. - Garages which are private to each unit may count towards parking requirements. The proposed building provides each unit with a secure, private tenant storage room. Section 13.04: LANDCAPING, SCREENING and STREET TREES Item A: PURPOSE Landscaping and screening shall be required for all uses subject to site plan and planned unit development review. Item B: LANDSCAPING of PARKING AREAS Except for parking spaces accessory to a one-family or two-family dwelling, all off-street parking areas subject to review by the Development Review Board, shall be curbed and landscaped with appropriate trees, shrubs, and other plants including ground covers, as approved by the Development Review Board. Since the project area only contains one parking space, the assumption is that it falls under the one- or two- family designation, in terms of the intent. Item 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 5 of 32 HAUKE – 370 SHELBURNE RD – ZONING ASSESSMENT 6 buffered from each other… This project is on a Zoning District Boundary and requires a landscape buffer (see Section 3.06 above). (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 [lot]. (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. (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. (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. Item D: FRONT YARDS OF MULTI-FAMILY USES …the required front yard and/or the frontage along designated arterial and collector streets… shall be suitably landscaped and maintained in good appearance. Landscape elements that reduce stormwater runoff and promote stormwater infiltration are encouraged. The Development Review Board shall require the applicant to meet the provisions of sections 13.04(F) and (G) [below]. Item E: SITE RESTORATION Grading or seeding shall be required to restore the condition of any portion of a site that is disturbed during construction. Item F: LANDSCAPING PLAN Landscaping plans shall be prepared by a landscape architect, master gardener, nursery professional, arborist, professional landscape designer, or other landscape professional. Item 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. The Development Review Board shall require minimum planting costs for all site plans, as shown in Table 13-4 below… The costs below are cumulative. TABLE 13-4 Total Building Construction or Building Improvement Cost vs % of Total Construction/Improvement Cost $0 - $250,000 = 3% Next $250,000 = 2% Additional over $500,000 = 1% The proposed landscaping is estimated at $24,443. See the attached Landscaping_Cost Estimate.pdf, prepared by the Landscape Architect for the breakdown. 6 of 32 HAUKE – 370 SHELBURNE RD – ZONING ASSESSMENT 7 Section 13.05: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Item B: APPLICABILITY (1) These regulations will apply to all development within the City of South Burlington where one-half acre or more of impervious surface area exists or is proposed to exist on an applicant’s lot or parcel. (2) If the combination of new impervious surface area created and the redevelopment or substantial reconstruction of existing impervious surfaces is less than 5,000 SF then the application is exempt from requirements in this Section 13.05. This project reduces the impervious surface area, and the reconstruction of existing impervious surfaces is less than 5,000 SF (total outdoor disturbance is 1,700 SF). This project is exempt from this section. Water Design Demand: Two 1-bedroom units @ 140 gpd/unit = 280 gpd Four 2-bedroom units @ 280 gpd/unit – 1,120 gpd Total: 1,400 gpd Wastewater Design Demand: Two 1-bedroom units @ 140 gpd/unit = 280 gpd Four 2-bedroom units @ 210 gpd/unit = 840 gpd Total: 1,120 gpd Section 13.07: EXTERIOR LIGHTING All exterior lighting for all uses in all districts except for one-family and two-family uses shall be of such a type and location and shall have such shielding as will direct the light downward and will prevent the source of light from being visible from any adjacent residential property or street. The proposed building will have ceiling mounted lights at entry canopies. End. 7 of 32 1 Hauke Building Supply 370 Shelburne Rd Apartments ZONING NARRATIVE Date: 8/15/22 (a) PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is the corner parcel of Shelburne Road and Proctor Ave, right on the South Burlington / Burlington line. It is in the Commercial C1-R15 zoning district and abuts the Residential R-4 zoning district to the east. The proposed scope of this project is isolated to the southeast corner of the parcel, with minor improvements at the north end of the site. The existing conditions on the rest of the parcel are to remain. The existing building contains 21,755 sf of commercial (retail) space. The first floor is 16,605 sf, with small second floor space (5,150 sf) at the southeast corner. The second floor space is accessed both by the parking lot to the north, and by the driveway to the south, off of Proctor Ave. The proposed project area is limited to the existing second floor commercial space. This space will be renovated into (6) residential multi-family apartments. In addition to the new use, the project proposes an added third story over the existing second floor space, for a total of 8,150 sf of residential space. The existing building footprint will not change. The existing driveway and curb cut will be reduced. This portion of the site will provide one handicap parking space, designated for the ADA accessible unit. All other units will utilize the existing parking lot. There is an existing interior stair connecting the parking lot (north side) to the existing second floor space. This stair will be maintained for use by the residents. There are some minor site improvements to this northern entry. The additional space gained on the south side, by the reduction of the driveway, will be utilized to provide common outdoor space for the residents. There will be a stair and ADA ramp up to a raised walkway. This walkway connects the common elements: building entries, laundry facility, bike storage, mailboxes, and an indoor/outdoor lounge space. This indoor/outdoor space will be carved out of the existing loading dock area. The remaining open space on this portion of the site will be seeded and planted to provide a lawn area, with a variety of new plantings. The challenge on this site is the zoning district boundary (east property line). The existing building does not provide the required 65-foot setback from the R-4 district, or the 15-foot planted buffer strip, as required by Section 3.06. We are asking for DRB approval of a vibrant residential use, where there was previously a commercial loading dock and large expanses of blank brick walls. Given the limited available space, this project creates valuable outdoor space for residents, while providing a visually pleasing planted green space between the adjacent property. (b) DEMONSTRATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE REVIEW STANDARDS (See attached “Zoning Assessment”) (c) LIST OF SUBMISSION ELEMENTS - Project Narrative (this document, 2 pages) - Zoning Assessment (7 pages) - List of Abutting Property Owners (1 page) - Landscaping cost estimate (2 pages) 8 of 32 HAUKE – 370 SHELBURNE RD – ZONING NARRATIVE 2 - Completed Site Plan Review application form (4 pages) - PDF drawing set (14 pages) (d) LIST OF ANY CHANGES MADE TO PLANS FROM PREVIOUS SUBMITTALS - Site Plan produced by a licensed civil engineer - Landscape Plan produced by a landscape architect - Illustrative Landscape Plan produced by a landscape architect - Cost estimate for landscaping provided by a landscape architect 9 of 32 Eight Linden Lane Essex Junction, Vermont, 05452 PH/FAX 802-878-2778 C 802-578-9591 mike@mclasla.com MEMBER American Society of Landscape Architects October 5, 2022 David Hauke Hauke Building Supply 1127 North Ave., “Ste. 42 Burlington, Vermont 05408 Re; Plant Material Cost Estimate for 370 Shelburne Road Residences Estimated South Burlington Landscape Budget based on Construction Cost—$26, 600 Proposed Trees and Shrubs (Sheets L-1 & L-2) Key Quan Scientific name Size Unit Cost Semi-total BMGM 3 Buxus microphylla ‘Green Mountain’ 18-24” 150 375 BMWG 1 Buxus microphylla ‘Winter Gem’ 18-24” 150 125 Ck 1 Cornus kousa 2-2.5” 753 753 HpG 3 Hydrangea paniculate ‘Grand’ (tree form) 7 gal. 372 372 MagA 2 Magnolia x Ann 5-6’ 354 708 MaL 2 Malus x Lollipop 2-2.5” 650 1,300 MaS 8 Malus x Sargentii 2-2.5” 650 5,200 SmP 1 Syringa meyeri ‘Paliban’ (tree form) 10 gal. 465 465 ToDS 1 Thuja occidentalis ‘DeGroot’s Spire) 5-6’ 350 350 Total Trees and Shrubs $9,648 Michael Lawrence Associates Landscape Architects / Site Planning Consultants 10 of 32 Proposed Perennials (Sheets L-1 & L-2) Key Quan Scientific name Size Unit Cost Semi-total CKF 11 Calamagrostis ‘Karl Foerster’ 1 gal. 50 550 Ep 10 Echinacea purpureum 1 gal. 50 500 HeHR 12 Hemerocallis ‘Happy Returns 1 gal. 50 600 Hl 5 Hosta Lanceolata 1 gal. 50 250 HoRS 12 Hosta ‘Royal Standard’ 1 gal. 50 600 Is 6 Iris siberica 1 gal. 50 300 Ls 4 Leucanthemum x superbum 1 gal. 50 200 PpD 14 Phlox paniculate ‘David’ 1 gal. 50 700 Rh 3 Rudbeckia hirta ‘Goldsturm’ 1 gal. 50 150 Ss 3 Sedum stonecrop ‘Autumn Joy’ 1 gal. 50 150 Total Perennials $4,000 Proposed Evergreen Groundcover (Sheets L-1 & L-2) Key Quan Scientific name Size Unit Cost Semi-total Pt 515 Pachysandra terminalis flats 4.00 2,060 Total Evergreen Groundcover $2,060 Total Planings (Sheet L-1 & L-2) $15,708 11 of 32 Additonal Proposed Trees and Shrubs (Sheet L-3) Key Quan Scientific name Size Unit Cost Semi-total GiST 1 Gingko biloba ‘Sky Tower 2.5-3 1,000 1,000 HyA 18 Hydrangea arborescens ‘Annabelle’ 3 gal. 62 1,116 Syl 1 Syringa reticulata ‘Ivory Silk’ 2.5-3 in. 900 900 Total AdditionalTrees and Shrubs $3,016 Additonal Proposed Grasses and Perennials (Sheet L-3_ Key Quan Scientific name Size Unit Cost Semi-total MsA 21 Miscanthus sinensis ‘Adagio’ 3 gal. 70 1,470 MsG 21 Miscanthus sinensis ‘Gracillimus’ 3 gal. 70 1,470 MsM 21 Miscanthus ‘Morning Light’ 3 gal. 70 1,470 MsS 21 Miscanthus sinensis ‘Silberfeder’ 3 gal. 70 1,470 CaA 21 Calamagrostis x acutifolia ‘Avalanche’ 3 gal. 70 1,470 CaE 21 Calamagrostis x acutifolia ‘Eldorado’ 3 gal. 70 1,470 CaK 21 Calamagrostis x acutifolia ‘Karl Foerster’ 3 gal. 70 1,470 Ecp 24 Echinacea purpurea 1 gal. 50 1,200 Pes 24 Perovskia striplicifolia 1 gal. 50 1,200 Ruh 24 Rudbeckia hirta 1 gal. 50 1,200 Total Additional Grasses and Perennials $13,890 Total Additional Plantings (Sheet L-3) $16,906 Summary South Burlington Construction % Requirement $ 26,600 Value of planting on 2000 plan not in existence $ 6,110 Total $32,710 Value of proposed planting (sheets L-1 & L-2) $ 15,708 Value of proposed planting (sheet L-3) $ 16,906 Total $32,614 12 of 32 x 206' x 206.6' x 206.8' x 210.7' x 210.7' x 206.5' x 206.6' x 196.5'x 196.5' x 196.2'x 196.4' PROJECT BOUNDARY ABUTTER PROPERTY LINE EXISTING CONTOUR VERMONT GRID NORTH VERMONTGRID NORTH Location Plan ZONING INFORMATION Proctor Ave Shelburne RdFlynn Ave EXISTING WATER LINE EXISTING SEWER LINE EXISTING GAS LINE OVERHEAD ELECTRIC LINE SETBACKS EXISTING STORM DRAIN Burlington LEGEND SHELBURNE ROAD / ROUTE 7South Burlington PROCTOR AVE 370 Shelburne Road 1.51 acres Proposed Addition 5,400 SF Bike Rack Assumed Water Service CITY LIMITS CIVIL ASSOCIATES, PLC O'LEARY-BURKE 13 CORPORATE DR. ESSEX JCT., VT PHONE: 878-9990 FAX: 878-9989 E-MAIL: obca@olearyburke.com 10/17/22 2022-47-S1 2022-47 BWC OBCA 1 OBCA PWK 1"=20' City Pump Station Access Easement Access Easement to "Hickok & Boardman Place" CITY OF BURLINGTON CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Existing Box Elders and Fence to Remain Site Plan 370 Shelburne Road South Burlington, VT Proposed Sidewalk Proposed Patio and Landscaping for new Residential Entrance Proposed Patio and Landscaping Proposed Street Trees 388 Shelburne Road, LLC n/f David Taft n/f 13-15 Proctor Ave, LLC n/f George Rotelli n/f Kathryn Rose Trust n/f Eric Farrell n/f Elizabeth Lund Home Inc n/f CDB Property, LLC n/f Existing Dumpster with Enclosure Lower CB Rim 0.25' and Use Drop Inlet Protection (See Inlet Detail) Construction Fence Please refer to Landscaping Plans for Proposed Plantings New Curb Bollard (typ.) Bollard (typ.) 6" Butternut Trees 4-6" Apple Trees 4" Oak Trees 4" Elm Trees 13 of 32 CIVIL ASSOCIATES, PLC O'LEARY-BURKE 13 CORPORATE DR. ESSEX JCT., VT PHONE: 878-9990 FAX: 878-9989 E-MAIL: obca@olearyburke.com BWC OBCA 2 OBCA PWK 1"=20'Construction Details 370 Shelburne Road South Burlington, VT 10/17/22 2022-47 2022-47-S1 14 of 32 15 of 32 16 of 32 17 of 32 18 of 32 19 of 32 CANOPY OVER COMMON ENTRY AT FIRST FLOOR (SEE SITE & LANDSCAPE PLANS) HC PARKING EXISTING EXIT FROM FIRST FLOOR COMMERCIAL SPACE REDUCE EXISTING CURB CUT - SEED NEW GRASS AREA (SEE CIVIL & LANDSCAPE PLANS) WOOD FRAMED STAIR & ADA RAMP CONC BOLLARDS WOOD DECK CANOPY ROOF OVER ENTRY PROPOSED PORCHES AT NEW THIRD FLOOR PAVE DRIVEWAY (SEE CIVIL) PROPERTY LINE EXTEND SIDEWALK WHERE PAVEMENT IS REMOVED (SEE SITE PLAN) PROPOSED PLANTINGS (SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN) SEED NEW GRASS AREA (SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN) PROPOSED PLANTINGS (SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN) EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN (SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN) MEMBRANE ROOFING - SLOPE TO INTERNAL DRAIN 5' - 0" 9' - 0" 14' - 0"18' - 0"30' - 0"24' - 0"EXISTING PARKING TO BE UTILIZED FOR APARTMENTS (SEE SITE PLAN) EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN (SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN) EXISTING MEMBRANE ROOFING EXISTING MEMBRANE ROOFING EXISTING STORAGE SHED PROPOSED STREET TREES (SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN) 1' 5'10' 20' 40' SCALE: 1/6" = 1' -0" 80' UNIT BREAKDOWN (1) 1-BEDROOM FLAT -780 SF (ACCESSIBLE) (1) 1-BEDROOM FLAT -730 SF (2) 2-BEDROOM FLATS -1,300 SF (2) 2-BEDROOM TOWNHOUSES -1,175 SF 6 TOTAL UNITS 7 CARMICHAEL STREET, SUITE 102 ESSEX JUNCTION, VT 05452 802.879.5153 802.872.2764 SCOTTPARTNERS.COM P: F: 370 SHELBURNE RD BUILDING ROOF PLAN 08/15/22 A1 20 of 32 UP UP HC PARKING SPACE COMMON LAUNDRY TENANT STORAGE COMMON ENTRY MAIL STAIR TO PARKING 1-BEDROOM FLAT 730 SF 1-BEDROOM FLAT 780 SF (ACCESSIBLE) ENTRY TO 2-BEDROOM FLAT 2-BEDROOM TOWNHOUSE 1,175 SF TOTAL 2-BEDROOM TOWNHOUSE 1,175 SF TOTAL ENTRY TO 2-BEDROOM FLAT ADA RAMP UPEL = -4' - 6" EL = 0' EL = -2' - 0"ADA RAMP UPPROCTOR AVENUE COMMON COVERED OUTDOOR SPACE UP DN ENTRY ENTRYINSULATE EXISTING BRICK WALLS ON THE INTERIOR COMMON GREEN SPACE 2-BEDROOM FLAT 1,125 SF TOTAL 2-BEDROOM TOWNHOUSE 1,175 SF TOTAL 2-BEDROOM TOWNHOUSE 1,175 SF TOTAL 2-BEDROOM FLAT 1,300 SF TOTALPORCH PORCHPORCHPORCHCANOPY ROOF OVER ENTRY EXISTING MEMBRANE ROOF EXISTING MEMBRANE ROOFCANOPY ROOF OVER ENTRY SLAB ON GRADE ABOVEENTRY TO APARTMENTS FROM PARKING LOT EXIT TO STREET LEVEL EXISTING FIRST FLOOR COMMERCIAL SPACE -NO WORK EXISTING STAIRS TO REMAIN EXISTING STOR. -NO WORK 1' 5'10' 20' 40' SCALE: 1/6" = 1' -0" 80'7 CARMICHAEL STREET, SUITE 102 ESSEX JUNCTION, VT 05452 802.879.5153 802.872.2764 SCOTTPARTNERS.COM P: F: 370 SHELBURNE RD BUILDING PLANS 08/15/22 A2 FIRST FLOOR THIRD FLOORSECOND FLOOR 21 of 32 FIRST FLOOR 0' -0" SECOND FLOOR 14' -6" THIRD FLOOR 26' -1 1/2" BOLLARDS AT END OF PARKING SPACE NEW WOOD FRAMED DECK, STAIRS & ADA RAMP WIDEN EXISTING OPENING AT INDOOR/OUTDOOR SPACE EXISTINGCANOPY ROOF AT ENTRYCOVERED PORCHES AT THIRD FLOOR ADDITIONAVG GRADE PLANE 5' -0 1/2" NEW WINDOWS IN EXISTING BRICK WALL, TYP. FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING COMPOSITE TRIM THROUGHOUT (BORAL OR EQ) PLANTINGS -SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN STREET TREES -SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN FIRST FLOOR 0' -0" SECOND FLOOR 14' -6" THIRD FLOOR 26' -1 1/2" EXISTING EXISTINGNEW OPENING AT INDOOR/OUTOOR SPACE W/ RAILING NEW WOOD FRAMED DECK, STAIRS & ADA RAMP CANOPY OVER ENTRY PLANTINGS -SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN REMOVE EXISTING LOUVERS AND INFILL THE OPENING NEW WINDOW IN EXISTING OPENING ADDITIONNEW WINDOWS IN EXISTING BRICK, TYP. AVG GRADE PLANE 5' -0 1/2" CEILING MOUNTED CANOPY LIGHT FIXTURE CEILING MOUNTED LIGHT FIXTURES AT INDOOR / OUTDOOR SPACE 1' 5'10' 20' 40' SCALE: 1/6" = 1' -0" 80'7 CARMICHAEL STREET, SUITE 102 ESSEX JUNCTION, VT 05452 802.879.5153 802.872.2764 SCOTTPARTNERS.COM P: F: 370 SHELBURNE RD ELEVATIONS 08/15/22 A3 SOUTH (PROCTOR AVE) ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION 22 of 32 FIRST FLOOR 0' -0" SECOND FLOOR 14' -6" THIRD FLOOR 26' -1 1/2"EXISTINGNEW WINDOWS IN EXISTING BRICK WALL NEW DOOR IN EXISTING BRICK WALL (ENTRY TO SHARED STAIR UP TO 2ND FLOOR) NEW WINDOW IN EXISTING OPENING DRYER VENTS ADDITIONAVG GRADE PLANE 5' -0 1/2" COVERED PORCHES AT THIRD FLOOR PLANTINGS -SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN BOLLARDS CANOPY OVER COMMON ENTRY W/ CEILING MOUNTED LIGHT FIXTURE FIRST FLOOR 0' -0" SECOND FLOOR 14' -6" THIRD FLOOR 26' -1 1/2" EXISTING COMMERCIAL SPACE -NO WORK COVERED PORCHES AT THIRD FLOOR NEW WINDOW IN EXISTING BRICK WALL, TYP.EXISTINGADDITIONAVG GRADE PLANE 5' -0 1/2" CEILING MOUNTED CANOPY LIGHT FIXTURE, TYP. 1' 5'10' 20' 40' SCALE: 1/6" = 1' -0" 80'7 CARMICHAEL STREET, SUITE 102 ESSEX JUNCTION, VT 05452 802.879.5153 802.872.2764 SCOTTPARTNERS.COM P: F: 370 SHELBURNE RD ELEVATIONS 08/15/22 A4 SOUTH (PROCTOR AVE) ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION 23 of 32 7 CARMICHAEL STREET, SUITE 102 ESSEX JUNCTION, VT 05452 802.879.5153 802.872.2764 SCOTTPARTNERS.COM P: F: 370 SHELBURNE RD PERSPECTIVE VIEW 08/15/22 A5 VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST CORNER (PROCTOR AVE) 24 of 32 7 CARMICHAEL STREET, SUITE 102 ESSEX JUNCTION, VT 05452 802.879.5153 802.872.2764 SCOTTPARTNERS.COM P: F: 370 SHELBURNE RD PERSPECTIVE VIEW 08/15/22 A6 VIEW FROM SOUTHWEST CORNER (PROCTOR AVE) 25 of 32 7 CARMICHAEL STREET, SUITE 102 ESSEX JUNCTION, VT 05452 802.879.5153 802.872.2764 SCOTTPARTNERS.COM P: F: 370 SHELBURNE RD PERSPECTIVE VIEW 08/15/22 A7 VIEW FROM NORTH (PARKING LOT) 26 of 32 7 CARMICHAEL STREET, SUITE 102 ESSEX JUNCTION, VT 05452 802.879.5153 802.872.2764 SCOTTPARTNERS.COM P: F: 370 SHELBURNE RD EXISTING CONDITIONS PHOTOS 08/15/22 A8 27 of 32 7 CARMICHAEL STREET, SUITE 102 ESSEX JUNCTION, VT 05452 802.879.5153 802.872.2764 SCOTTPARTNERS.COM P: F: 370 SHELBURNE RD EXISTING CONDITIONS PHOTOS 08/15/22 A9 28 of 32 29 of 32 30 of 32 31 of 32 32 of 32