Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCU-23-01 - Decision - 0011 White Place#CU-23-01 - 1 - CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING MARYSE COSENTINO & RYAN MANNING CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION #CU-23-01 FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION 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. The Development Review Board held a public hearing on July 18 and September 6, 2023. The applicant was represented by Maryse Cosentino, Ryan Manning, and Missa Aloisi. Based on the plans and materials contained in the document file for this application, the Board finds, concludes, and decides the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Maryse Cosentino and Ryan Manning, hereinafter referred to as the applicant, are seeking conditional use approval 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. 2. The owners of record of the subject property are Maryse Cosentino and Ryan Manning. 3. The subject property is located within the Residential 4 zoning district. The property may be reviewed under 3.06J, which allows exceptions to setback and lot coverage requirements for lots used for single family residential and existing prior to February 28, 1974. The Board may approve a side yard setback of 3 ft with conditional use review. 4. This project is subject to review under the LDRs covering the R4 zoning district and Section 14.10 conditional uses. 5. The plans submitted are as follows: Sheet No. Title Prepared By: Last Revised Date: S1 Existing Conditions Plan Summit Engineering, Inc 8/7/2023 A.01 Site Plan – Existing Hinge Architecture 8/23/2023 A.02 Site Plan – New Hinge Architecture 8/23/2023 A.20 Elevations Hinge Architecture 8/23/2023 A.21 Elevations Hinge Architecture 8/23/2023 6. The project consists of removing the existing garage and deck, constructing a one story addition on the east and a two-story addition to the west and rear, adding a front porch, adding an outdoor stair on the west, and reconfiguring and enlarging the rear deck and patio. 7. The building includes an existing ramp for the disabled which is proposed to be reconstructed in a different configuration. Ramps for the disabled are exempt from calculation of setbacks. #CU-23-01 - 2 - Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements: R4 Zoning District1 Required Existing Proposed @ Min. Lot Size 9,500 SF 5,000 SF No change  Max. Building Coverage 30 % 20% 30%  Max. Overall Coverage 50 % 26% 50% @ Min. Front Setback 30 ft. 24 ft. 24 ft.  Min. Front Setback, Porch 10 ft. N/A +/- 16 ft. # Min. Side Setback 5 ft. +/- 1.25 ft. 3 ft.  Min. Rear Setback 15 ft. +/- 42.3 ft. +/- 37 ft  Max Height, pitched roof 28 ft. 24.75 ft 24.75 ft √ Zoning Compliance @ Existing nonconforming # Exception granted; see discussion below. 1. The “required” values in this table have been modified to reflect the additional coverage and reduced setbacks allowed under 3.06J and discussed below. 2. In the R4 district, an open porch or deck that is less than 12-feet deep and no wider than the building face to which it is attached may have a minimum setback of 10 feet, and steps no greater than 5-feet wide may encroach a further 5-feet into the front setback. The applicant is proposing access steps but they are farther than 5-ft from the front lot line. 3.06(J) EXCEPTIONS TO SETBACK AND LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS FOR LOTS EXISITNG PRIOR TO FEBRUARY 28, 1973 The following exceptions to setbacks and lot coverages shall be permitted for lots or dwelling units that meet the following criteria: the lot or dwelling unit was in existence prior to February 28, 1974, and the existing or proposed principal use on the lot is a single-family dwelling or a two-family dwelling. In addition to the modifications allowed by right for this lot and described above in the notes to the table of dimensional standards, an applicant may request additional encroachment approval of the DRB. (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, 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. The applicant is proposing a side yard setback of 3 ft on the east side and a side yard setback of 3’-11 ¼” on the west side, therefore subsection (3) applies. (2) Front Setbacks. A structure may encroach into a required front setback up to the average distance to the building line of the principal structures on adjacent lots on the same street frontage. In no event, however, shall a structure have a front setback of less #CU-23-01 - 3 - than five (5) feet unless approved by the Development Review Board in accordance with subsection (3) below. The applicant has provided a diagram of front setbacks on adjacent lots on page 5 of their application narrative. However, the diagram measures front setback incorrectly by using steps and porches, not the building line. A review of historic permits for 9 White Place indicate that the porch is 10 ft x 14 ft. Using the applicant’s provided measurement of the porch setback, Staff calculates the building is set back 24.75 ft from the front lot line. Similarly, a recently approved conditional use permit for 13 White Place indicates the approved front setback is 22.5 ft from the front lot line. Therefore the average front setback of adjacent lots is 23.63 ft. The applicant is proposing a front setback of 24 ft. The Board finds the proposed front setback encroachment to be allowable under this provision. (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. On the east side of the building, the applicant is proposing to replace the existing garage which is set back approximately 1.33 ft from the side lot line and construct a one-story addition which will be set back 3 ft from the side lot line. The applicant is proposing to add an external staircase to the west side of the building, which will be set back 3’-11 ¼” from the side lot line. Review of conditional use criteria is provided under 14.10. Additional applicable criteria follow immediately below. (4) 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. The proposed one story encroachment is on the left side of building relative to White Place, while the proposed external stair encroachment is on the right side. This criteria only applies to the proposed encroachment and not to the proposed addition outside the side yard encroachment. Since the reconstruction on the east will be the same height as the portion of the structure to remain, the Board finds that impacts on views and access to sunlight on the west (the one story encroachment) will be minimal. 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. The Board finds given the proposed height of the roof, the encroachment will not have an undue adverse effect on (a) or (b) above. #CU-23-01 - 4 - (c) adequate on-site parking; and The portion of the building to be removed is a one-car garage. It is proposed to be replaced with a multi-purpose room akin to a large mudroom; it will not accommodate a car. The remaining driveway will be approximately 28 feet long and 9 feet wide at its narrowest point. The Board finds the setback encroachment to have no effect on adequacy of on-site parking. (d) safety of adjoining and/or nearby property. The Board finds the proposed expansion does not impact safety of adjoining properties. (5) 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. Further, 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. The Board finds the plan prepared by Summit Engineering shall be revised to be a stamped boundary survey showing the location of affected property lines, existing and/or proposed structures, and be consistent in all material respects with the Site Plan provided at the hearing. (6) Lot Coverage. For lots that are five thousand (5,000) square feet or greater in size, but less than seven thousand five hundred (7,500) square feet, lot coverage may exceed the maximum allowed for the district up to a maximum of thirty percent (30%) for buildings and fifty percent (50%) for total lot coverage. For lots that are less than five thousand (5,000) square feet in size, lot coverage may exceed the maximum allowed for the district up to a maximum of forty percent (40%) for buildings and sixty percent (60%) for total lot coverage. These coverages are reflected in the above dimensional table for this 5,010 sf lot. The project includes a 100 sf ramp for the disabled. The Board finds the ramp to be excluded from calculation of lot coverage under section 3.17 Reasonable Accommodation to Ensure Reasonable Access to Housing. The Board finds that 100 sf of the approved lot coverage is only permitted because it consists of a ramp for the disabled, and that portion of coverage shall not be permitted to be converted to another use. #CU-23-01 - 5 - 3.06K. Front Setback for Front Decks and Porches in the R4 District In the R4 District, an open porch or deck that shall not exceed the width of the building face to which the porch or deck is attached and that shall not have a depth greater than 12 feet as measured from the building face, shall have a minimum front setback of 10 feet. Access steps not greater than 5 feet in width may project no more than 5 feet in front of the porch or deck, but in no case shall be located closer than 5 feet from the front property line. An enclosed porch, or an open porch or deck exceeding 12 feet in depth, shall be considered part of the principal building and subject to standard front setbacks. The porch encroaches into the 30-ft front setback and is set back approximately 16.1 ft from the front lot line. The porch is no wider than the width of the building face to which it is attached. The upper landing for the ramp, which is uncovered, is flush with the porch and to the side of the front of the building. The Board finds the upper landing for the porch to not constitute part of the porch. The applicant is proposing 5-ft wide access steps. They project less than 5-ft in front of the porch. CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA Pursuant to Section 3.06J(3) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations (Additional Encroachment Subject to DRB Approval), the proposed structure shall be reviewed as a conditional use and shall meet the following standards of Section 14.10(E): 14.10(E) General Review Standards. The Development Review Board shall review the proposed conditional use for compliance with all applicable standards as contained in these regulations. The proposed conditional use shall not result in an undue adverse effect on any of the following: (1) The capacity of existing or planned community facilities. The Board finds this project will have no adverse effect upon community facilities. (2) The character of the area affected, as defined by the purpose or purposes of the zoning district within which the project is located, and specifically stated policies and standards of the municipal plan. The “specifically stated policies and standards of the municipal plan” is statutory language which refers to the LDR and Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the R4 district is “to encourage residential use at moderate densities that are compatible with existing neighborhoods and undeveloped land adjacent to those neighborhoods.” This property is located in an area with predominantly like-sized lots, with the lot immediately across the street being larger than the average. The proposed building expansion on this lot is comparable to adjacent homes. Nearby homes are a mixture of one and two stories. Most but not all have single car garages. The property is located in an area characterized in the Comprehensive Plan as lower intensity, principally residential. Relevant excerpts from the Comprehensive Plan are as follows. Lower intensity, principally residential. Fostering a strong sense of neighborhood, these areas are primarily residential in use, with number of units and size of buildings to be among the lowest in the City. Open spaces are accessible and thoughtfully arranged as community gathering places, and roadways should be largely limited to local traffic with low volumes. While residential dwellings need not be all detached, #CU-23-01 - 6 - the general character and appearance is that of a single family neighborhood. Building heights reflect this character. Small lots and small buildings are encouraged. Commercial uses are limited to those serving a small or local population. More intense commercial or industrial uses should be avoided. Southwest Quadrant Objective 54. Promote higher-density, mixed use development and redevelopment along Shelburne Road and foster effective transitions to adjacent residential areas. Objective 4. Support the retention of existing and construction of new affordable and moderate-income housing, emphasizing both smaller single family homes and apartments, to meet demand within the regional housing market. Objective 5. Build and reinforce diverse, walkable neighborhoods that offer a good quality of life by designing and locating new and renovated housing in a context- sensitive manner that will facilitate development of a high-density, City Center, mixed used transit corridors, and compact residential neighborhoods. The application must not result in an undue adverse effect on the character as defined by the purpose statement of the regulations and specific policies of the Comprehensive Plan; it does not necessarily have to match the remainder of the neighborhood. The Board finds this criterion met. (3) Traffic on roads and highways in the vicinity. The Board finds this project will have no adverse effect on traffic on roads and highways in the vicinity. (4) Bylaws and ordinances then in effect. Consistency with the land development regulations is described in this document. The Board finds the project consistent with other applicable bylaws. (5) Utilization of renewable energy resources. This project will not affect renewable energy resources. DECISION Motioned by Dawn Philibert, seconded by Frank Kochman, to approve conditional use application #CU-23-01, subject to the following conditions: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations shall remain in full effect except as amended herein. 2. This project shall be completed as shown on the plan submitted by the applicant and on file in the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning as conditioned herein. 3. Prior to issuance of a Zoning Permit, the plans must be revised to show the changes below and shall require approval of the Administrative Officer. a. Provide a stamped boundary survey prepared by a licensed surveyor showing the location of affected property lines, existing and/or proposed structures, consistent in all material respects with the Site Plan provided at the hearing. 4. 100 sf of the approved lot coverage is only permitted because it consists of a ramp for the disabled, and that portion of coverage shall not be permitted to be converted to another use. #CU-23-01 - 7 - 5. A digital PDF version of the full set of approved final plans as amended must be delivered to the Administrative Officer prior to issuance of a Zoning Permit. 6. The zoning permit must be obtained within six (6) months of this decision with the option for requesting a one (1) year extension as allowed in LDR 17.04. 7. 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 Quin Mann Yea Nay Abstain Not Present John Moscatelli 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 5-0-1. Signed this ____ day of September 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.