Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-23-02 - Supplemental - 1200 Dorset Street (18) #SD-23-02 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD-23-02_1200 Dorset St_1200 Dorset St LLC_SK_2023_02_07 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: February 1, 2023 Application received: January 5, 2023 1200 Dorset Street – 1200 Dorset, LLC Sketch Plan Application #SD-23-02 Meeting Date: February 22, 2023 Owner Highland Development Company, LLC 63 Kristie Lane Jericho, VT 05465 Applicant 1200 Dorset, LLC 63 Kristie Lane Jericho, VT 05465 Property Information Tax Parcels 0570-01200 Southeast Quadrant-Neighborhood Residential Zoning District, Parcel size: 1.29 acres Engineer Civil Engineering Associates 10 Mansfield View Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 Location Map #SD-23-02 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Sketch plan application #SD-23-02 of Casey Douglass to subdivide an existing 1.29 acre lot developed with a single family home and barn, located within an existing 5.52 acre planned unit development, into two lots of 0.69 acres (Lot 6A) and 0.60 acres (Lot 6B) for the purpose of demolishing the existing single family home and barn and constructing a new single family dwelling on each lot, 1200 Dorset St. PERMIT HISTORY The property is located within the 5.52 acre Foulsham Hollow Planned Unit Development, also known as the Heald Subdivsion, which was approved in late 2001 with application #SD-01-59. The decision at that time was very brief, and generally approved the plans as presented, with minor waivers to reduce the required lot frontage. There is no longer a required minimum lot frontage in this zoning district. It also included a condition that the existing home at 1200 Dorset Street be reconfigured to have its driveway access of Foulsham Hollow Road, a condition which does not appear to have been yet addressed. The City is in possession of an irrevocable offer of dedication for the roadway but has not accepted the roadway. This sketch plan review is the first step in seeking approval for subdivision without Planned Unit Development approval. Though the subject property is located within an existing PUD, no changes the approved PUD are proposed, and at this stage of review, Staff considers there are no elements of the application that are outside of the authority of the Board to review as a subdivision. COMMENTS Development Review Planner Marla Keene and Director of Planning and Zoning Paul Conner, hereafter referred to as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted by the applicant and offer the following comments. As this is a Sketch Plan review, only criteria relevant for review at this stage are addressed. Numbered items for the Board’s attention are in red. The application is subject to zoning district and dimensional standards, subdivision standards, the general regulations of Article 3 and the supplemental regulations of Article 13. A) ZONING DISTRICT AND DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS Dimensional standards include a minimum lot size of 9,500 sf for a single family home, 20% building coverage and 40% lot coverage, and 20 ft, 10 ft, and 30 ft front, side, and rear setbacks, respectively. As through-lots, the proposed lots will have a front lot line on each of Foulsham Hollow Road and Dorset Street, and no rear lot lines. B) GENERAL SUBDIVISION STANDARDS This application will be considered a major subdivision because the lots to be subdivided are more than two times the minimum lot area for the district. 15.A.11 General Standards A. Development Suitability. The applicant must demonstrate that the land to be subdivided is physically suited for its intended use and the proposed density or intensity of development, and that the proposed subdivision will not result in undue adverse impacts to public health and safety, environmental resources as identified and regulated under Article 12, neighboring properties and uses, or public facilities and infrastructure located on or within the vicinity of the land to be subdivided. #SD-23-02 (1) Physical Site Constraints. Land that is physically unsuited for development, including land that is characterized by periodic flooding, poor drainage, shallow soils, landslides, environmental site contamination or other known physical hazards or constraints, must not be subdivided for development unless the applicant can demonstrate that such limitations can be overcome, remediated, or mitigated as necessary to allow for subsequent development. The subject property has an area of very steep slopes. Steep slopes are a resource regulated in Article 12. However, the City Council is considering an amendment to modify the regulation of steep slopes to exempt permitted manmade steep slopes from regulation as a natural resource. Staff recommends the applicant track the status of this proposed amendment and not submit for preliminary plat approval until such time as it is warned. (3) Buildable Area Calculations. The allowed number of building lots or dwelling units within the subdivision shall be calculated based on the Buildable Area of the parcel or tract to be subdivided except as otherwise specified for a Transect Zone Subdivision under Article 8, a Planned Unit Development under Article 15.C; and as provided for the transfer of development rights under Article 19, or affordable housing offsets, bonuses, or incentives under Article 18. The project is located in the SEQ-NR zoning district, which has an inherent density of 1.2 units per acre, which may be increased to 1.8 units per acre with the transfer of development rights or through the use of inclusionary zoning. The 1.29 acre lot has an inherent density of 1.55 units, which may be increased to 2.32 units through the use of transferred development rights or inclusionary housing. The applicant has indicated their intention to purchase development rights. The applicant therefore must demonstrate a purchase agreement for 1 transfer development right, or 0.83 acres, prior to final plat approval, and must record the purchase and use of the transferred development right prior to issuance of a zoning permit for a second home on the subdivided land. The LDRs prohibit transfer of less than one full development right, or 0.83 acres. Transfer development rights are discussed in LDR Article 19. 15.A.16 Blocks and Lots A. Purpose. The layout and configuration of blocks and building lots in relation to the street network establishes the overall pattern of development, including the creation or extension of walkable, pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods and mixed use developments. As such, the configuration of blocks and building lots represent a fundamental component of subdivision design. Accordingly, the applicant must demonstrate that the proposed subdivision incorporates: (3) Block faces and building lots that, where feasible, are oriented to maximize solar access and gain; (4) Regularly shaped building lots that front on, and minimize lot frontage or width along abutting streets; Staff has included these elements of the Blocks and Lots purpose statement as a guide to the Board in their discussion of the specific standards outlined below. C. Lots. All lots must be laid out to logically relate to topography and their intended use or purpose. Building lots must be laid out within existing and planned street and block configurations, in such a way that they can be developed in full compliance with their intended use and these Regulations. Unless otherwise specified under these Regulations as applicable to the subdivision: (7) Unless otherwise specified under these Regulations, building lots must have sufficient developable area to accommodate proposed building types, associated yard or other required open space areas, site drainage, utilities, or other improvements required under these Regulations, including site plan standards under Article 14. #SD-23-02 Staff considers the applicant has demonstrated that these lots are buildable, though Lot 6A will require an access easement over Lot 6B. (8) A building lot generally must be rectangular in shape, with side lot lines that are perpendicular or radial to the abutting street, and rear lot lines that parallel the street, except as necessary to accommodate existing rights-of-way or other physical site constraints (see Figure 2-1, Lots, Yards and Lot Lines). Irregular or oddly shaped building lots, including flag and through lots, are prohibited, except for: (a) A flag lot, with a minimum of fifteen (15) feet of frontage on the abutting street, as necessary to accommodate a back-lot subdivision and infill development within an existing subdivision, block pattern, or development; (b) A triangular or trapezoidal building lot defined by abutting streets that otherwise has sufficient street frontage and lot area to meet minimum lot requirements; or (c) A through lot with frontage on two parallel or intersecting streets that cannot be further subdivided under minimum lot requirements, provided that front setback requirements can be met on both streets. Staff considers the proposed lot lines to be laid out to best meet these requirements given the existing street rights-of-way. (9) Building lots should be oriented and configured to minimize lot width (frontage) along the street. The preferred building lot width to depth ratio is 1:2; however, a ratio of 1:1 to 1:5 may be allowed as necessary to accommodate physical site constraints, stormwater drainage, or rear lot access and parking. Lot 6B does not meet the required lot ratio of 1:1. However, it is not possible to subdivide the lot into the maximum of two lots and still meet the required ratio, therefore Staff recommends the Board consider waiving this dimensional standard as permitted under 15.A.01B(3) due to physical site limitations. (10) Building lots must be configured to avoid or, where necessary, minimize rear lot lines that abut side lot lines. Unless otherwise specified under these Regulations, corner lots must be configured to meet lot frontage and front setback or build-to-zone requirements on all abutting streets. Lot 6B is a corner lot and is proposed to meet setback requirements. Lot 6A is not a corner lot. Its northern property line is a side lot line, and abuts what will also be a side lot line if the proposed development at 1170 & 1180 Dorset Street proceeds to final plat as preliminarily approved in application #SD-22-03. 15.A.17 Mix of Dwelling Unit Types A. Mix of Dwelling Unit Types and Architectural Features. A mix of dwelling unit types (i.e. cottage, single family, two-family, small multi-family, townhouse, etc. etc.) and mix of architectural features and styles must be provided within neighborhoods and developments. These must be mixed within blocks, along the street and within neighborhoods rather than compartmentalized into sections of near- identical unit types. An applicant for a subdivision shall submit a plan demonstrating how this mix will be achieved for the Development Review Board’s consideration at the preliminary plat stage. Where a Planned Unit Development approved under Article 15C establishes standards for a mix of dwelling unit or building types, those standards shall supersede these herein. #SD-23-02 The proposed subdivision is for two homes. The existing homes on Foulsham Hollow Road are generally the same architectural style. Given the small number of homes proposed, Staff considers no specific restriction on dwelling unit types or architectural features beyond those specified in 13.17 Residential Design for New Homes to be appropriate for this subdivision. 15.A.18 Infrastructure, Utilities, and Services B. Potable Water Supply and Wastewater Systems. The project is served by a private wastewater pump station that is approved to remain private. Staff considers the applicant should demonstrate adequate capacity in the existing pump station, or a plan to make the necessary upgrades, as part of the next application for the property. The property is also located above the maximum elevation at which adequate water pressure can be supplied. Staff recommends the Board work with the Director of Public Works and South Burlington Water Department Director prior to the next application for the property to ensure that water pressure will be adequate for the proposed homes. C. Fire Protection. The subdivision must be laid out to ensure that adequate fire protection can be provided in accordance with City specifications. (a) Subdivision layout and design must also comply with applicable City and state public safety and fire codes in effect at the time of application, including standards for minimum separation distances between structures, street width, water flow and pressure, fire hydrant installation, sprinkler systems, and emergency vehicle access. (b) Fire hydrants connected to the municipal water system must be located and designed to meet City specifications, as recommended by the Department of Public Works and City Fire Marshal. For a subdivision that is not connected to the municipal system, the DRB may require the subdivider to install hydrants, fire ponds or other measures necessary to provide adequate fire protection, as recommended by the Fire Marshall. The Fire Chief reviewed the plans on January 17, 2023 and offers the following comments. If the property driveways are more than 150 feet in length off the public way - Foulsham Hollow Rd, then a residential fire sprinkler system would be required to be installed to protect the property. D. Stormwater Facilities. The applicant must demonstrate that stormwater management system serving the subdivision has been designed to meet City standards and specifications under Article 13 of these regulations and the South Burlington Ordinance Regulating the use of Public and Private Sanitary Sewerage and Stormwater Systems. The City Stormwater Department reviewed the plans on January 27, 2023 and offers the following comments. The total proposed impervious within the development area appears to be less than ½ acre. As such, there is no stormwater treatment required by the City under our Land Development Regulations. If the amount of proposed impervious equals or exceeds ½ acre as the project progresses, the project will be required to meet the standards laid out in section 13.05 of the City’s Land Development Regulations. G. Renewable Energy Facilities. The applicant must demonstrate that, to the extent physically feasible, reasonable, and as appropriate to its development context, the subdivision has been designed to incorporate best practices that maintain access to and use of renewable energy resources, e.g., to #SD-23-02 include one or more of the following as indicated on subdivision plans and plats: (1) Street and building lots that are oriented to maximize solar access and gain, for passive solar construction or rooftop solar installations. (2) Parking lots or structures that are designed and constructed to accommodate electric vehicle infrastructure, including charging stations and solar canopies or rooftop solar installations. (3) One or more suitable open areas (“solar lots”) within the subdivision that are specifically designated for a ground-mounted community or neighborhood solar installation. (4) Solar access easements, as necessary to maintain solar access across adjoining building lots or properties. (5) Covenants, deed restrictions or other legal mechanisms that require “solar-ready” construction within the subdivision. Staff considers that the available options for lot layout are relatively limited and the proposed lot configuration does not adversely affect the ability of the homes to maximize solar access and gain. 15.A.19 Required Improvements A. General Standards. All required improvements must be designed and installed in accordance with the design standards, development requirements, specifications and procedures set forth in these Regulations and other applicable City regulations and standards. Typical plans and sections are attached to these Regulations. Installation and design standards apply to both public and privately owned required improvements. Proposed privately owned streets and other improvements shall be marked as such on the final plat. The Director of Public Works reviewed the plans on January 30, 2023 and offers the following comments. • Do we have as-built information for the prior portions of the Foulsham hollow project? The force main configuration is unclear to me (where they arrive from and where they leave the property and connect to the publicly owned wastewater system). It is also unclear where existing gravity lines are located. • At this time, it is my understanding that all roads and utilities serving the Foulsham Hollow development are privately owned. The City has an irrevocable offer for the roadway itself but the utilities are specifically excluded. In order for the road to become public we’d need record drawings to move that process forward. It is our understanding that some residents would like to have this process completed, but I don’t believe they have any authority over the road at this time. • I support the elimination of a curb cut on Dorset Street to serve this property. Staff recommends the Board direct the applicant to coordinate with the Department of Public Works and provide the requested information pertaining to the sewer force main prior to the next application for the property. 13.17 Residential Design for New Homes C. Standards (1) Building Orientation. Residential buildings must be oriented to the street, to an approved civic space, or to a courtyard. Primary entries for single family and multi-family buildings must face the street, civic space, or courtyard. Secondary building entries may open onto garages and/or parking #SD-23-02 areas. Buildings should be oriented to maximize living space and windows to the south, east and west. Residential buildings should orient their rooflines to maximize solar gain potential, to the extent possible within the context of the overall standards of the regulations. Staff recommends the Board review the proposed placement of both buildings. 1. The building on Lot 6B is proposed to face the cul-de-sac portion of Foulsham Hollow Road. Staff considers it could alternatively face the straight portion of Foulsham Hollow or face Dorset Street. Staff recommends the Board discuss what configuration would result in the best compliance with the street orientation purposes in multiple sections of the LDR. Two such sections follow. 15.A.14B(2) Street Orientation. The street layout should be oriented to maximize solar access and gain on abutting building lots and block faces while remaining consistent with the existing and planned pattern of development and local topography and completing connections as required by this Article. Longer streets and block faces should either be aligned east-west or north-south, within 20 degrees of true east or true north, in relation to anticipated building lot and building roof orientation. 15.A.18G Renewable Energy Facilities. The applicant must demonstrate that, to the extent physically feasible, reasonable, and as appropriate to its development context, the subdivision has been designed to incorporate best practices that maintain access to and use of renewable energy resources, e.g., to include one or more of the following as indicated on subdivision plans and plats: (1) Street and building lots that are oriented to maximize solar access and gain, for passive solar construction or rooftop solar installations. Of further relevance is the third sentence of this standard, pertaining to maximizing living space and windows to the south, east and west. 2. Lot 6A is shown as being somewhat diagonal to the street. Staff recommends the Board discuss whether they consider this proposed configuration to be an acceptable approximation of fronting on the street. Staff considers a home whose front more closely paralleled the street would be possible. (2) Building Façades. Building facades are encouraged to employ a theme and variation approach. Buildings should include common elements to appear unified, but façades should be varied from one building to the next to avoid monotony. Front porches, stoops, and balconies that create semi- private space and are oriented to the street are encouraged. Residential buildings with rear facades that orient towards a public recreation path should employ rear porches, balconies, or other features to enhance their architectural detail. Staff recommends the Board direct the applicant to provide sample elevations demonstrating compliance with this criterion at the next stage of review, accompanied by a statement of what elements of the sample elevations the applicant is willing to commit to to ensure compliance with this criterion. (3) Placement of Garages and Parking. For garages with a vehicle entrance that faces a front lot line, the face of the garage that includes the vehicle entrance must be set back a minimum of eight feet (8’) behind the front façade of a single or two-family dwelling. For buildings containing three or more dwelling units, the requirements of Section 14.06A shall apply. (a) The DRB or Administrative Officer may waive this provision for garages with vehicle entries facing a side lot line, provided that (i) the garage is visually integrated into the single or two- family dwelling; and (ii) the face of the garage that is oriented to the street is no more than eight feet (8’) in front of the front façade of the house. (b) Rear alleys are encouraged for small lot single-family houses, duplexes and townhouses. #SD-23-02 The provided conceptual layouts appear to meet these criteria. Staff recommends the Board direct the applicant to demonstrate this with the sample elevations at the next stage of review. (4) Garages as percentage of front façade. Front-facing garages that are part of a principal building shall not exceed 40% of the linear width of the building’s front façade. The provided conceptual layouts appear to meet these criteria. Staff recommends the Board direct the applicant to demonstrate this with the sample elevations at the next stage of review. 15.A.05 Sketch Plan Review - Classification Under LDR 15.A.05 regarding Sketch Plan Review, the Board must determine whether the project will require master plan review under Article 15.B or review as a PUD under article 15.C. Based on the above analysis, Staff considers the project to be a simple subdivision and not require master plan or PUD review. Staff recommends the Board discuss whether they agree with this recommendation. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board discuss the project with the applicant and conclude the meeting. Respectfully submitted, Marla Keene, Development Review Planner