Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 07_Minutes DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SPECIAL MEETING 11 APRIL 2023 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a special meeting on Tuesday, 11 April 2023, at 7:00 p.m. in the Auditorium, City Hall, 180 Market Street, and via Go to Meeting interactive technology. MEMBERS PRESENT: D. Philibert, Chair; M. Behr, J. Stern, F. Kochman, Q. Mann, J. Moscatelli ALSO PRESENT: M. Keene, Development Review Planner; M. Gillies, Planner; A. Klugo, C. Gendron, T. Barritt, J. Hodgson, C. Silvey 1. Instructions on exiting the building in case of an emergency: Ms. Philibert provided instructions on emergency exit from the building. 2. Additions, deletions, or changes in order of agenda items: No changes were made to the agenda. 3. Comments and questions from the public not related to the Agenda: No issues were raised. 4. Announcements: There were no announcements. 5. Site Plan Application #SP-22-056 of Beta Technologies, Inc., to amend a previously approved plan for a 344,000 sq. ft. manufacturing and office building. The amendment consists of adding 261 parking spaces, 154 daVinci Drive: Ms. Keene explained that this item should have been heard on 4 April, but there was no quorum for the item. The Board agreed to have a special meeting, if allowable. The legal department wants to be sure that the public has a chance to weigh in, so the application will be reviewed at this meeting, but it will not be closed for the sole purpose of taking public comment. It should be closed at the 18 April meeting, following which the DRB will issue a decision. Mr. Klugo thanked the Board for this meeting and said it means a lot to the Beta project. Staff comments were then addressed as follows: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SPECIAL MEETING 11 APRIL 2023 PAGE 2 #1. Regarding whether there should be a cross-lots connection. Mr. Klugo distributed an exhibit to members and noted there are two responses to this request, the first a technical response, the second a practical response. The technical response related to LDR 13.02f which exempts an industrial application from the cross-lot requirement. Mr. Klugo read the regulation and stressed that this is an industrial use which should exempt it from the regulation. Mr. Klugo then addressed the practical response. He said that when you overlay a possible cross-lot connection, the difference between the 2 accesses must be a minimum of 200 feet. He noted that some parking space is planned to happen for the child care center, and a cross- connection would cut that in half, which they do not think is advisable. If they were to move the connection back, the grading would be steeper, and there are also utility requirements. This would also require a reworking of the Master Plan. It is unclear how they could implement a cross-connection. Mr. Gillies acknowledged that one of the uses is industrial, but Staff wanted the Board to see that there are other uses on the lot. The language does allow for an easement, and staff asks whether that should be in place. Mr. Klugo said the parcel becomes undevelopable with an easement. Mr. Kochman said as he reads the regulations, Beta is exempt from the cross-connection. Other members agreed. #2. Mr. Klugo said they have responded to the comments of the Fire Department, and that is resolved. #3. Mr. Klugo confirmed that the landscaped islands are curbed. #4. Regarding landscaping of the islands, Mr. Klugo said the silva cells are in place, and the plants have an opportunity to survive. The great lawn is part of Phase 2 of the project. #5. Regarding snow storage, Mr. Klugo said the snow storage areas are at least 10 feet from trees. There is an agreement with the Airport to move snow off the site. Mr. Klugo then showed the identified snow storage areas on the plan. #6. Staff asked the Board to review the landscape plan to see if there is adequate screening. Mr. Klugo showed an image as to how landscaping will provide screening. This does not create any safety issues. He stressed that nothing has changed from the previous application. Members were OK with the screening. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SPECIAL MEETING 11 APRIL 2023 PAGE 3 Public comment was then solicited. There was no public comment. Mr. Behr then moved to continue SP-22-056 until 18 April to allow for public comment, if any. Mr. Kochman seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 6. Minutes of 22 February and 7 March 2023: Ms. Mann moved to approve the Minutes of 22 February and 7 March 2023 as written. Mr. Stern seconded. Motion passed 5-0 with Mr. Moscatelli abstaining. 7. Other Business: No other business was presented. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 7:38 p.m. These minutes were approved by the Board on ____. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 6 JUNE 2023 DRAFT MINUTES The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 6 June 2023, at 7:00 p.m. in the Auditorium, City Hall, 180 Market Street, and via Go to Meeting interactive technology. MEMBERS PRESENT: D. Philibert, Chair; M. Behr, Q. Mann, S. Wyman, J. Moscatelli ALSO PRESENT: M. Keene, Development Review Planner; M. Gillies, Development Review Planner I; G. Bourne, J. Nick, G. Rabideau, A. Spencer, R. Bourne, K. Mejia, L. Thayer, F. Von Tukevich, A. Dery, M. Hall, A. Spencer, Irene. 1. Instructions on exiting the building in case of an emergency: Ms. Philibert provided instructions on emergency exit from the building. 2. Additions, deletions, or changes in order of agenda items: Ms. Keene asked to add a brief discussion of new zoning amendments to Other Business. 3. Comments and questions from the public not related to the Agenda: No issues were raised. 4. Announcements: There were no announcements. 5. Continued Preliminary and Final Plat Application #SD-23-05 of Gary Bourne to create a General Planned Unit Development by re-subdividing three existing lots into 3 new lots of 0.18 acres (Lot 1), 0.14 acres (Lot 2), and 1.06 acres (Lot 3), and constructing a 3,350 sq. ft. financial institution on Lot 1, a 6,480 sq. ft. mixed commercial and residential building on Lot 2, and a 3-story, 27-unit multi-family building on Lot 3, 760 Shelburne Road: Ms. Thayer said they have made changes related to comments received from the Board. They also would like to speak to the Inclusionary Zoning piece. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 6 JUNE 2023 PAGE 2 Ms. Philibert asked to see the new elevations related to the financial institution. Ms. Mejia said the applicant agreed to a portion of the building being raised to comply with the 2-story requirement. They will actually be raising the height of the whole building, and there will be windows in the raised portion. She showed the new elevations. Mr. Behr asked if the window-glass is clear or opaque. Ms. Mejia said it is opaque. Mr. Behr said the windows look like “transom windows.” He felt they should be clear and taller. Mr. Bourne said there are structural materials behind those windows. He noted there is a street light in front of those windows, so they will always be lit. He added that this is similar to a building down the street (T-Mobile). Staff comments were then addressed as follows: #1. The applicant was asked to clarify the front coverage. Ms. Thayer said Lot 2 (Shelburne Road) is 4% and Lot 3 (Shelburne Road frontage) is 44% and (Swift Street frontage) is 37%. Ms. Keene noted that coverage is limited to 30%. #2. Regarding the appearance of 2 stories: Mr. Moscatelli said it didn’t appear to him look like a 2-story building. Ms. Philibert asked what it would take to make it look like 2 stories. Ms. Thayer said they have gone through a lot to be approved. This is not the standard building type, and they need to know what is specifically needed to make it appear to be 2 stories. Ms. Mejia added that it is hard to get changes through the Chase people if the changes are not in their prototype. She added that there has been a lot of “pushback.” Ms. Philibert noted the Chase building in Williston. Ms. Mejia said that was a re-used existing building. Mr. Behr reminded the applicant that the Board is not approving a Chase Bank. They are approving a building on the corner of Swift/Spear, and they are already stretching the regulations to allow the “appearance” of 2 stories. He added that a lot comes down to the materials. He felt the applicant could make that section a full 2-story element and bring light to the center of that space. Mr. Bourne said they passed on the Board’s comments to Chase and pushed them to comply. They actually got more than they had asked for. Mr. Behr said he would not have favored raising the whole building up but would keep the “brown section” lower. It now looks like a tall one-story building. Mr. Bourne felt they can have Chase salvage this, possibly with a different kind of glazing. #3. Staff questioned whether transparent glazing would increase the overall compliance. Ms. Keene noted that transparency applies only to primary and secondary facades. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 6 JUNE 2023 PAGE 3 #4. Regarding improving the layout in front of the residential building, Ms. Thayer noted that Board had said the pergola was too suburban, so they removed it. They widened the entrance to the north façade and added benches. They also added a sculptural element (from a New England artist) which connects the whole site. She showed a photo of the curved benches they will use. It will all be well landscaped. She showed a portion of the plan with the landscaping indicated. Mr. Behr liked the layout and the flow. Mr. Moscatelli said it now looks more like the front of a building. #5. Regarding compliance with site amenities, Ms. Thayer said Phase 1 will include 396 sq. ft. of open space. $51,500 in landscaping is required and they are providing $51,700. The final coating of the pavement will take place in Phase 3. Regarding Inclusionary Zoning, Mr. Hall noted there is a legal memorandum in the file. It is their contention that there is a conflict in the Ordinance. The regulations allow one added market rate unit for one affordable unit, but they are receiving no bonus. They are also being told they need more inclusionary units. He stressed that they cannot build 7 inclusionary units. Mr. Hall stressed that this is a very serious issue and felt the Board was “cutting off its nose to spite its face.” Ms. Keene said the Board decided on the interpretation. She agreed it was “not great.” The Inclusionary units have to be included in the base density, then you get the bonus on top of that. Mr. Hall said this is a mistake in the ordinance that leads to a pernicious result. It will come up again and again. In this project, the city will lose 7 units of housing including Inclusionary units. Ms. Keene said it is up to the Board to make the decision. #7. Regarding the drive-through ATM, Ms. Thayer said they have no further comments and hope the Board will agree it is waivable. #8. Regarding the open space requirement, the applicant was asked which amenity category they are providing. Ms. Thayer said they are providing the “snippet park” which fits well here. It will have a sculptural element. #9. Regarding Public Works comments, Ms. Thayer said they will work with DPW. Ms. Keene said staff heard from DPW that their comments have been addressed by the applicant. #10. Ms. Thayer said they will comply with Water Department comments. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 6 JUNE 2023 PAGE 4 #11. Ms. Thayer said information for long-term bike storage has been provided. #12. Ms. Thayer said they are OK with the bike rack. #13. With regard to Stormwater Section comments, Ms. Thayer said they will add a drain (she showed where) to catch water from the swale. #14. Regarding exterior lighting, Ms. Thayer indicated the parking lot lights which will replace the existing ones. Mr. Bourne said this will provide light for neighbors as well. Public comment was then solicited. There was no public comment. Ms. Philibert then moved to continue SD-23-05 to 18 July 2023. Mr. Behr seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 6. Final Plat Application #SD-23-07 of 600 Spear FJT, LLC, for a planned unit development on an existing 8.66 acre lot developed with 7,000 sq. ft. storage building and single family home. The planned unit development consists of one 6.10 acre lot containing 32 dwelling units in 4-family buildings, a 1.80 acre lot containing the storage building and existing single family home proposed to be converted to a duplex, and a third lot containing proposed city streets, 600 Spear Street: Ms. Thayer showed the existing storage building which will now be painted red to look more like a barn. Mr. Von Turkevich said they are trying to address the city’s concerns and want that building to stand alone. He then showed a proposed overview with the layout of the site and the red storage building. The building will have a new roof, and they will eliminate a door on the east side of the building. That will be converted to a window. The south side of the building will have work space for tenants, and the west side will be retained for the real estate business (lawn equipment, etc.). Mr. Behr said this is what he’s been looking for. He felt the building was now a great amenity for the rest of the project and respects the history of the site. Ms. Philibert agreed. Staff comments were then addressed as follows: #1. Mr. Von Turkevich confirmed that the use of the building has been continuous. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 6 JUNE 2023 PAGE 5 #2. Regarding easement confirmation, Mr. Von Turkevich said they do have UVM’s cooperation and support. UVM will be providing needed easements. #3. The applicant agreed to remove one snow storage area. #4. Regarding “spot grades,” Ms. Thayer said this relates to crossings over driveways. They will need to use both “at grade” and “tip down” techniques for this project. #5. Regarding the timeline for the crossing of Spear Street, Mr. Von Turkevich said they would like to do that after Phase 1 when they have had some revenue. It would be completed prior to phase 2. Ms. Thayer confirmed that the street lights are to DPW standards. Public comment was then solicited. There was no public comment. Mr. Behr moved to close SD-23-07. Mr. Moscatelli seconded. Motion passed 5-0. Mr. Von Turkevich commented that staff and the DRB are great to work with. 7. Minutes of 2 May 2023: Ms. Mann moved to approve the Minutes of 2 May 2023 as written. Ms. Philibert seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 8. Other Business: Ms. Keene advised that there are new LDR amendment which are not related to applications yet heard by the board. They were adopted on 15 May and will affect 2 applications not yet heard. The first removes human-made slopes from the regulations and exempts work to stabilize an area. It also reduces the 100-foot wetland buffer to 50 feet on lots less than half an acre. The second amendment requires that solar ready systems be constructed on 40% of a roof for commercial buildings and residential buildings of 4 stories or more. Mr. Behr asked whether solar is exempt from height limits. Ms. Keene said if they are connected to the grid, they are exempt; if not, she didn’t know but will seek that analysis. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 8:30 p.m. These minutes were approved by the Board on _____________________________