HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 06_SP-22-039_370 Shelburne Rd_Hauke
180 Market Street, South Burlington, Vermont 05403 | 802-846-4106 | www.southburlingtonvt.gov
TO: South Burlington Development Review Board
FROM: Marla Keene, Development Review Planner
SUBJECT: #SP-22-039 370 Shelburne Road Site Plan Application
DATE: February 22, 2023 Development Review Board meeting
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
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
The Board opened the hearing on this application on December 6, 2022 and reviewed the project again
on January 18, 2023. The Board continued the hearing to allow the applicant time to revise the
proposed landscaping, specifically that west of the existing building.
The applicant provided revised materials on February 10. Staff considers the Board’s comments have
been addressed and has prepared a draft decision. Revised plans are attached.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board discuss the project with the applicant and close the hearing.
Respectfully submitted,
Marla Keene, P.E.
Development Review Planner
#SP-22-039
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
DAVID HAUKE
370 SHELBURNE ROAD
SITE PLAN APPLICATION #SP-22-039
FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION
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.
The Development Review Board held public hearings on December 6, 2022, January 18, 2023, and
February 22, 2023 . The applicant was represented by David Hauke, Jess Gasek, Bryan Currier, and Mike
Lawrence.
Based on testimony provided at the above-mentioned public hearing and the plans and supporting
materials contained in the document file for this application, the Development Review Board finds,
concludes, and decides the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. This project consists of 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.
2. The Project is located in the Commercial 1-Residential 15 (C1-R15) Zoning District. It is also located
in the Transit Overlay District, Traffic Overlay District and the Urban Design Overlay District
3. 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.
4. The owner of the subject property is Hauke Building Supply.
5. The application was received on October 19, 2022.
6. The plans submitted consist of the following:
Sheet
No.
Description Prepared By Last Revised Date
2 Construction Details O’Leary-Burke Civil Assoc. 10/17/2022
A1 Building Roof Plan Scott & Partners 08/15/2022
A2 Building Plans Scott & Partners 08/15/2022
A8 & A9 Existing Conditions Photos Scott & Partners 08/15/2022
L-1 Landscape Plan-Overall Michael Lawrence Assoc. 01/31/2023
L-2 Landscape Plan-Detail Michael Lawrence Assoc. 08/05/2022
L-3 Landscape Plan-Value Added
Planting
Michael Lawrence 02/09/2023
#SP-22-039
SH-1 Site Plan O’Leary-Burke Civil Assoc. 01/04/2023
A5 Elevations (South and East) Scott & Partners 12/22/2022
A6 Elevations (North and West) Scott & Partners 12/22/2022
A7 Perspective View Scott & Partners 12/22/2022
A12 Sun Study-Summer Scott & Partners 12/22/2022
A13 Sun Study-Winter Scott & Partners 12/22/2022
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./ 2
stories
34 ft./3
stories
Meets requirement
# Pre-existing non conformity proposed to be reduced
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.
#SP-22-039
The Board finds 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
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 based on a ITE land use code of
“specialty retail center,” which code no longer exists. 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. The applicant has indicated that the existing trip generation based on the ITE land use code for
“strip plaza retail” (LUC 822) is 134 trips per PM peak hour. The Board concurs with this choice of land
use code. With the proposed reduction to 16,605 sf “strip plaza retail,” the trip generation is reduced to
112 trips for retail and 3 trips for six units of “single family attached housing” (LUC 215)1, or 115
proposed trips, less than “trued up” generation from the previous approval. Therefore, no additional
mitigation is needed.
1 The Board concurs with this choice of land use code. Alternative codes are only applicable for unit counts well
out of the range of the proposed unit count. The South Burlington Impact Fee ordinance calculates 0.67 trips per
unit for a multi-family building, which would result in a similar traffic generation for the proposed homes.
#SP-22-039
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.
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. The Board finds 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.
The existing building encroaches into the allowable minimum setbacks, though the proposed addition is
outside of the standard setback. The proposed addition is near the east side of the building, where the
building is clad in brick. The proposal is to add a story near the east end of the building above the existing
two story portion (though not within the setback), 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.
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
than sixty-five (65) feet from all adjacent residential zoning districts, unless applicable lots are
part of a Master Plan or Planned Unit Development.
#SP-22-039
This property is adjacent to the R4 zoning district therefore this criterion applies. The existing
zoning district boundary is somewhat within the current parcel. Pursuant to 3.03A(3), the Board
finds the zoning district boundary to approximately follow the platted lot line and therefore
shall be construed to follow such lot lines, 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.
In summary, there is required to be a 15-ft densely vegetated buffer and a 65-ft setback between
buildings within non-residential zoning districts and a residential zoning district, unless the Board
modifies the width of the required buffer and/or setback. The Board may only modify the
required buffer and/or setback if the Board finds “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”
What is interesting here is that though the buffer and setback is required for all principal
structures within non-residential zoning districts adjacent to residential zoning districts, the
modification refers to non-residential uses. The applicant is proposing a residential use, while the
existing use is non-residential. The Board considers the change in use from non-residential to
residential to be a factor in favor of granting the requested modification.
The applicant has proposed to locate their required site amenity within the required vegetated
buffer. The site amenity consists of a mixture of dense plantings, lawn, and seating.
The applicant provided a robust evaluation of the impacts of the proposed building addition on
the existing adjacent single family home, including measurement of the elevation and window sill
elevation of the adjoining home relative to the project, renderings of the project in relationship
to the existing home, and a sun/shade study under both summer and winter sun conditions. The
#SP-22-039
Board supports of the change from non-residential loading dock use to residential use as an
improvement to the existing non-conforming buffer and setback and modifies the buffer to that
which is provided, including the proposed landscaping and plaza area.
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. The Board finds 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. The Board finds the proposed modifications to have a harmonious relationship with the
existing three-story residential building to the south. The Board finds 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:
(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:
#SP-22-039
(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. 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. This open space is located in the modified residential buffer discussed
under 3.06I above. The Board finds this criterion met.
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.
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 reduces three trips. The Board finds a traffic study of
adjacent intersections is not warranted.
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,
#SP-22-039
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.
The Board finds the elements of this criterion pertaining to sight distance, access
separation distances and accommodations for high-accident locations to be met.
From their parking spaces, residents will go through the building from the parking area,
back outside, and then re-enter the building to access their units.
Site Plan Review Standard 14.07F requires streetscape improvements where the
adjoining street does not meet the applicable Street Type. Proctor Ave has a 50-ft ROW
width, making it a neighborhood street, which is required to have a sidewalk on one
side, a 5-ft greenbelt (planted with street trees) on both sides, two lanes of vehicular
traffic, and between 20 and 26’ of pavement depending on whether on-street parking is
provided. Proctor Ave meets the required cross section therefore no streetscape
improvements are needed.
The Board asked the applicant to evaluate whether there could be a sidewalk either on
the subject property or in the public ROW along Proctor Ave without reducing the
greenbelt on Proctor Ave to less than the required 5-feet.
The applicant provided the following supplemental narrative regarding a sidewalk.
Regarding the pedestrian connection on the south side of the 370 property along
Proctor Ave. There are gas and power services on this end of the building, so we
want to keep a new sidewalk at least 18” off the edge of the building. If we
construct the sidewalk at 4 feet wide and propose it as private, it will encroach into
the ROW by approximately a foot, see attached SH 1 – Site Plan. We have discussed
the idea with the City Director of Public Works who believe an easement could be
granted by the City to construct the walk within the ROW but keep it private. We
would also be amendable to constructing a 3-foot-wide sidewalk to keep the path
clear of the ROW. Please keep in mind, the new residents have access to the north
side of the building through the stairwell network inside the building and a sidewalk
is already on the south side of Proctor Ave.
The Board approves a 3-ft sidewalk in this location and finds the applicant shall modify
the plans to replace the shown 4-ft sidewalk with a 3-ft sidewalk entirely within the
applicant’s property.
(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. The Board finds this
criterion met.
#SP-22-039
(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. The Board finds this
criterion met.
D. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) [reserved]
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.
The Board finds 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. The Board
finds this criterion met.
The Fire Marshal has indicated the applicant has not yet coordinated with the South Burlington
Fire Department. The Board finds the applicant must demonstrate 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
#SP-22-039
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.
The Board finds the applicant must 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
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.
SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS
13.02 Off Street Parking and Loading
The applicant must provide 6 parking spaces for the 6 residential units. The Board finds 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 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. The Board finds the applicant must 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
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
The applicant has revised the plans to address these comments.
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 these portions of the
landscaping standards apply.
The most-recently approved site plan that establishes the required landscaping to be retained was from
2014. The applicant has performed a comparison between that plan and the currently present
landscaping and has provided a list and an estimate of the plant value of the missing plantings from the
approved plan. Generally speaking, there are a number of previously approved shrubs missing from
around the west façade of the building, and two trees which were removed when a sewer pump station
was installed. The applicant testified that the missing shrubs were likely removed due to poor growing
conditions, and they have selected replacement plantings that they believe will be successful.
#SP-22-039
The applicant is also required to provide $26,600 in new plantings based on the value of the proposed
building addition. The applicant has not broken out the proposed replacement plantings and the
plantings required for the proposed building value separately.
The applicant has proposed perennial grasses along the western front yard, shrubs along the northern
side of the building, five (5) small trees and a number of shrubs along the west façade of the building,
three trees with groundcover near the renovated northern entrance, and a number of trees, shrubs,
perennials and ground cover in the required site amenity. They have also proposed street trees along
Proctor Ave, which, as mentioned above, are required under 14.07F.
The Board’s practice in modifying a previously approved landscaping plan has been to prioritize
plantings that have the same effect as the previously approved plantings.
The Board finds 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 the Board
finds it appropriate to require additional landscaping around the property to make up the improperly
removed plantings.
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.
Accordingly, the Board directed the applicant to propose a higher proportion of trees and shrubs,
particularly in the front yard facing Shelburne Street, to meet the minimum budget, consistent with the
standards summarized in the paragraph above, and because trees and shrubs are what has been
improperly removed.
Taking into consideration the effect of the proposed plantings compared to the effect of the previously
approved plantings, the Board finds that that the proposed landscaping along the west of the building to
have the same effect as the previously approved plan, and finds the landscaping to be adequate.
The applicant’s proposed plantings are as follows.
Trees and shrubs proposed, site amenity $4,076
Groundcover and perennials, site amenity $4,868
Street trees $5,200
Additional site trees, shrubs, and perennials $1,564
Additional trees, grasses and perennials along
Shelburne Street and west of Building $17,373
Total Proposed Planting Value $33,081
Required Minimum Landscaping $26,500
Applicant’s estimate of required replacement
landscaping (plant value only) $6,110
Finally, 13.04B(7) requires designation of snow storage areas for parking lots.
#SP-22-039
(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.
Snow storage areas are shown. Snow storage may not occur in the provided site amenity and may
be required to be hauled off site should insufficient snow storage be available. Snow storage may
not be 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.
The Board finds the applicant must provide an EPSC plan subject to review and approval of the City
Stormwater Section prior to issuance of a zoning permit.
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
Proposed lighting fixtures are underneath the overhanging canopies. The Board finds existing light
fixtures must be brought into compliance with downcast and shielded requirements if they are not
already prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the new use.
#SP-22-039
DECISION
Motion by __, seconded by __, to approve Site Plan application #SP-22-039 of David Hauke subject to
the following conditions:
1. All previous approvals and stipulations will remain in full effect except as amended herein.
2. This project must be completed as shown on the plan submitted by the applicant and on file in the
South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning.
3. Prior to obtaining a zoning permit, the plans shall be revised to show the changes below and shall
require approval of the Administrative Officer. A digital (PDF) copy of the approved revised plans
shall be submitted to the Administrative Officer prior to issuance of the zoning permit. Plan sheets
shall be saved as individual files named to include the plan sheet number and latest revision date.
a. replace the shown 4-ft sidewalk with a 3-ft sidewalk entirely within the applicant’s
property.
b. Address the comments of the South Burlington Water Department, subject to the
directors approval
c. modify the plans to provide an acceptable type and number of bicycle racks
4. The applicant must obtain the zoning permit within six (6) months from the date of this decision or
this approval expires and is null and void. The applicant may submit a request for an extension to
obtain a zoning permit under the terms outlined in Section 17.04 of the LDR’s, but the request must
be submitted prior to the expiration of this approval.
5. Prior to issuance of a zoning permit, the applicant must receive final water and wastewater allocation.
6. The applicant must provide an EPSC plan subject to review and approval of the City Stormwater
Section prior to issuance of a zoning permit.
7. The applicant must demonstrate approval by the Fire Marshall’s office prior to obtaining a zoning
permit.
8. Prior to issuance of a zoning permit, the applicant must post a landscaping bond for the approved
$33,081 in plantings in accordance with the methodology in LDR 15.15B ($21,540.50). This bond
shall remain in full effect for three (3) years to assure that the landscaping has taken root and has a
good chance of survival.
9. Snow storage may not occur in the provided site amenity and may be required to be hauled off site
should insufficient snow storage be available. Snow storage may not be coincident with stormwater
treatment or conveyance practices.
10. The applicant shall regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance infrastructure.
11. The proposed project must adhere to standards for erosion control as set forth in Section 16.03 of
the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. In addition, the grading plan must meet the
standards set forth in Section 16.04 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations.
12. Bicycle racks must meet the minimum requirements of 13.14 and Appendix G.
#SP-22-039
13. A digital PDF version of the full set of approved final plans must be delivered to the Administrative
Officer before issuance of a zoning permit.
14. The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months pursuant to Section 17.04 of the
Land Development Regulations or this approval is null and void.
15. The applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy from the Administrative Officer prior to use of
the project.
16. The applicant must receive final water and wastewater allocation prior to issuance of a zoning permit.
17. All exterior lighting must be installed or shielded in such a manner as to conceal light sources and
reflector surfaces from view beyond the perimeter of the area to be illuminated.
18. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services,
and service modifications must be underground.
19. Any change to the site plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Development Review
Board or the Administrative Officer.
Mark Behr Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Frank Kochman Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
John Stern Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Quinn Mann Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Dawn Philibert Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Stephanie Wyman Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Motion carried by a vote of _ - _ - _.
Signed this ____ day of February, 2023, by
_____________________________________
Dawn Philibert, Chair
Please note: An appeal of this decision may be taken by filing, within 30 days of the date of this
decision, a notice of appeal and the required fee by certified mail to the Superior Court, Environmental
Division. See V.R.E.C.P. 5(b). A copy of the notice of appeal must also be mailed to the City of South
Burlington Planning and Zoning Department at 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, VT 05403. See
V.R.E.C.P. 5(b) (4)(A). Please contact the Environmental Division at 802-828-1660 or
http://vermontjudiciary.org/GTC/environmental/default.aspx for more information on filing
requirements, deadlines, fees and mailing address.
The applicant or permittee retains the obligation to identify, apply for, and obtain relevant state
permits for this project. Call 802.477.2241 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist.
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 (10 LF +/-)
Bollard (typ.)
Bollard (typ.)
6" Butternut Trees
4-6" Apple Trees
4" Oak Trees
4" Elm Trees
Proposed
Private 4 Foot
Wide Sidewalk
Added Sidewalk on South Side of the Building and Revised Landscaping around Municipal Pump Station BWC1-4-23
Remove Existing
Pavement and Stone
up to Building
Snow
Storage
Snow
Storage
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
February 10, 2023
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
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 Plantings (Sheet L-1 & L-2) $15,708
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
EfCG 60 Euonymus fortune ‘Canadale Gold’ 3 gal. 75 4,500
PiaN 2 Picea abies ‘Nidiformis’ 6 gal. 120 240
PipM 2 Picea pungens ‘Montgomery’ 6 gal. 240 480
WfEL 43 Weigela florida ‘Electric Love’ 2 gal. 62.50 2,687
WfFW 17 Weigela florida ‘Fine Wine’ 3 gal. 75 1,275
WfSW 13 Weigela florida ‘Spilled Wine’ 3 gal. 75 975
Total Additional Trees and Shrubs (Sheet L-3) $13,173
Additonal Proposed Grasses (Sheet L-3)
Key Quan Scientific name Size Unit Cost Semi-total
MsA 12 Miscanthus sinensis ‘Adagio’ 1 gal. 50 600
MsG 12 Miscanthus sinensis ‘Gracillimus’ 1 gal. 50 600
MsM 13 Miscanthus ‘Morning Light’ 1 gal. 50 650
MsS 10 Miscanthus sinensis ‘Silberfeder’ 1 gal. 50 600
CaA 11 Calamagrostis x acutifolia ‘Avalanche’ 1 gal. 50 550
CaE 12 Calamagrostis x acutifolia ‘Eldorado’ 1 gal. 50 600
CaK 13 Calamagrostis x acutifolia ‘Karl Foerster’ 1 gal. 50 600
Total Proposed Grasses (Sheet L-3) $ 4,200
Total Additional Plantings (Sheet L-3) $17,373
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) $ 17,373
Total $33,081