Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCU-23-01 - Supplemental - 0011 White Place (11) 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: #CU-23-01 11 White Place DATE: September 6, 2023 Development Review Board meeting PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional use application #CU-23-01 of Cosentino and Manning to construct a two story addition to an existing single family home. The addition is proposed to be set back 3 ft from the side lot line, 11 White Place. COMMENTS The Board reviewed this application on July 18, 2023. The Board continued the hearing for the purpose of allowing the applicant to address Board feedback, particularly on the proposed lot coverage. The applicant provided supplemental plans pertaining to the discussion on July 18, but no accompanying narrative. Staff has accordingly interpreted the revised plans to the best of their ability and highlighted outstanding items for the Board’s review. Numbered items for the Board’s attention are in red. A) ZONING DISTRICT AND DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS The major issue pertaining to dimensional requirements is that the maximum allowable lot coverage is 50% for properties between 5,000 and 7,500 sf, and the subject property was reported on July 18 to be 5,000 sf. Maximum lot coverage for properties less than 5,000 sf is 60%. The Board directed the applicant to obtain a survey in order to confirm that the lot size is in fact 5,000 sf and to comply with the submission requirements of 3.06J(4). The applicant’s survey is inconclusive, as they only surveyed three of the four property corners. However, the applicant’s revised proposed conditions plan reports a lot size of 5,010 sf, which is clearly over 5,000 sf therefore Staff has applied the 50% lot coverage limit. 56% lot coverage was proposed on July 18; the applicant has now revised the lot coverage to less than 50% based on a total lot size of 5,010 sf and the applicant’s reported lot coverage of 2,490 sf. The calculation includes a newly proposed roof over the proposed basement stair on the west side of the building and excludes the proposed ramp on the front of the building. 3.06(J) EXCEPTIONS TO SETBACK AND LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS FOR LOTS EXISITNG PRIOR TO FEBRUARY 28, 1973 (1) Side and Rear Setbacks. A structure may encroach into the required side or rear setback up to a distance equal to 50% of the side or rear setback requirement of the district. In no event, 2 however, shall a structure have a side setback of less than five (5) feet unless approved by the Development Review Board in accordance with subsection (3) below. This provision reduces the side setback to 5-ft and the rear setback to 15 ft. The Board may approve additional encroachment in subsection (3) below. On July 18, the Board concluded discussion of the proposed east side encroachment to 3-ft. As noted above, the applicant is now proposing a cover over the side stair, which encroaches into the west side yard to a distance of 3’-11 ¼”. The remainder of the discussion under 3.06(J) applies to the west side encroachment only. (3) Additional Encroachment Subject to DRB Approval. Encroachment of a structure into a required setback beyond the limitations set forth in (1) and (2) above may be approved by the Development Review Board subject to the provisions of Article 14, Conditional Uses, but in no event shall a structure be less than three (3) feet from a side or rear property line or less than five (5) feet from a front property line. Review of conditional use criteria is provided under 14.10. Additional applicable criteria follow immediately below. No such additional encroachment shall be approved unless the Development Review Board finds that the proposed encroachment will not have an undue adverse effect on: a. views of adjoining and/or nearby properties or principal buildings located thereon; b. access to sunlight of adjoining and/or nearby properties; The applicant has provided elevation drawings of the proposed modified structure. Below is a street view image of the existing structure. The proposed one story encroachment is on the left side of the image, while the proposed external stair encroachment is on the right side of the image. This criterion only applies to the proposed encroachment and not to the proposed addition outside the side yard encroachment. The existing building is approximately 9’-2” from the adjoining property line to the west. The home on the adjoining lot is located approximately 7’-10” from that property line. The external stair and roof will therefore be located approximately 11’-9” from the adjoining building and be a maximum of 7’-8” high. Staff considers given the proposed height of the roof, the encroachment will not have an undue adverse effect on (a) or (b) above. 3 c. adequate on-site parking; and Staff considers the west encroachment to have no effect on adequacy of on-site parking. d. safety of adjoining and/or nearby property. Given that the side encroachment will result in structures that are more than 10-ft apart, and 10-ft is the minimum for fire safety, Staff considers the proposed west encroachment does not impact safety of adjoining properties. (4) Processing of a Request. Any request under subsections (1) - (3) above to expand an existing structure, or place a new structure, to within less than ten (10) feet of any property line shall include the submission of survey data prepared by a licensed surveyor showing the location of affected property lines, existing and/or proposed structures, and any other information deemed necessary by the Administrative Officer. The applicant has provided an existing conditions plan prepared by an engineering firm which includes the following notes: 1. This is a Site Plan and not a boundary survey 2. Property lines are approximate and based on monumentation found in the field. Staff also notes that the proposed structures appear to have been added to the existing conditions plan after the fact, potentially by the project architect, based on the fact that the submitted drawing is entitled “Existing Conditions Plan” yet it contains the proposed building linework. 1. Given that the proposed east encroachment is the absolute minimum allowed by the LDR (3-ft), Staff recommends the Board consider whether an actual boundary should be required. Staff considers such a property boundary survey can be a condition of approval. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board discuss the remaining issues with the applicant and close the hearing.