HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP-23-036 - Decision - 0024 Berard Drive#SP-23-036
- 1 -
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
ENGINEERS CONSTRUCTION, INC. – 24 BERARD DR
SITE PLAN APPLICATION #SP-23-036
FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION
Site plan application #SP-23-036 of Engineers Construction, Inc., for after-the-fact approval for a
contractor’s yard and alteration of grade. The project consists of authorizing the continued use
of a contractor’s yard to place fill materials, 24 Berard Drive.
The Development Review Board held a public hearing on September 19 and November 21, 2023.
Ken Pidgeon and Jesse Carswell represented the applicant.
Based on testimony provided at the above-mentioned public hearings 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. The applicant is seeking after-the-fact approval for a contractor’s yard and alteration of
grade. The project consists of authorizing the continued use of a contractor’s yard to place
fill materials, 24 Berard Drive.
2. The owner of record of the subject property is K&S Properties, LLC.
3. The subject property is located in the Mixed Industrial & Commercial Zoning District.
4. The application was received on 8/11/2023.
5. The plans submitted consist of:
Sheet No. & Title Prepared by Plan Last Revised on:
SK-1 Overall Plan w/ 1962
ortho photo
Krebs & Lansing 8/15/2023
SK-3 New Access Drive Plan Krebs & Lansing 11/07/2023
EC-1.0 Erosion and Sediment
Control Plan
Krebs & Lansing 1/25/2023
C-1.0 Overall Plan Krebs & Lansing 11/07/2023
C-1.1 Ex. Conditions Plan Krebs & Lansing 11/07/2023
C-1.2 Site Plan Krebs & Lansing 11/07/2023
6. The applicant has submitted this application in order to continue using the site to place
construction fill.
7. The property is immediately adjacent to a warehouse building and an electrical substation,
with a variety of smaller uses including auto repair, dog grooming, and gymnastics across
the street. Visibility onto the site from the public right of way is largely screened by at least
50-ft of existing vegetation. The site contains a number of natural resources, including river
corridor, 100-year floodplain, class II wetland and wetland buffer, habitat block, and steep
slopes.
#SP-23-036
- 2 -
8. The property received approval on March 23, 1998 to place construction fill on this parcel
for a period of 10 years. That permit has since expired but the applicant has continued to
place construction fill. That approval included very limited information and did not speak to
site access or layout.
9. In 2004, the property was issued subdivision approval to add a small amount of frontage on
Berard Drive at the southern end of the property.
A) ZONING DISTRICT & DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Setbacks, Coverages & Lot Dimensions
There are no existing or proposed structures on the property, therefore building coverage and
setback requirements are not applicable.
Airport Zoning District Required Existing Proposed
√ Min. Lot Size 40,000 sf 7.68 ac No change
√ Max. Overall Coverage 70 % 27.4%1 5.60%
√ Max. Front Setback Coverage 30% Unknown No change
√ Zoning Compliance
1. The applicant reported an existing lot coverage of 4.74%. However, based on
measurement of areas the applicant indicated as gravel (which is considered towards
lot coverage regardless of imperviousness under the Land Development Regulations),
existing coverage is approximately 27.4%. Based on the Board’s finding, below, that
the applicant must topsoil and seed the final surface once fill is complete, the Board
accepts the applicant’s estimate of final proposed impervious coverage.
B) SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS
14.06 General Review Standards
A. Relationship of Proposed Structures to the Site.
(1) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site,
from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement,
and adequate parking areas.
The applicant’s narrative states describes the use as “the storage, recycling, and disposal of
materials for ECI’s constructions projects, as well as storage of construction equipment.” The
applicant describes estimated traffic as 44 vehicle trips per day, with six (6) PM peak hour trips.
The trips consist predominantly of dump trucks with two employee vehicles. Necessarily, since
construction equipment is proposed to be stored, trips will also include large articulated trucks
with flat beds.
Planting is discussed below. Due to the nature of the site as a location for placement of excess
material to be wasted, the location of parking areas will change over time.
(2) Parking
There are no parking spaces proposed.
#SP-23-036
- 3 -
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.
(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 Board finds these criteria to be not applicable.
14.07 Specific Review Standards
A. Environmental Protection Standards. All proposed development shall be subject to the
applicable requirements of Article 12, Environmental Protection Standards.
Standards of Article 12 are discussed below. Applicable standards include 12.03 Steep Slopes,
12.04 Habitat Block Overlay, 12.06 Wetland Protection Standards and Review Procedures, 12.07
River Corridor Overlay District, and 12.08 Floodplain Overlay District.
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.
The purpose of this application is to provide disposal of construction materials as well as storage
of construction equipment. The standards mentioned in this criterion are included 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.
The site has two access points on Berard Drive, one at the north off the cul-de-sac and a second
at the southern end of the public street frontage. The southern access point has an extremely
limited sight distance of approximately 40-ft. Like most local public roads, the speed limit on
Berard Drive is 25 mph and on-street parking is permitted on either side. The southern access
point was developed for the adjoining property but merged with the subject property in 2004
when a subdivision took place to convey land from the southern property to the subject
property. The plans and decision associated with that approval do not address what is approved
to happen with the transferred access point, though a plan associated with the sketch plan of
that 2004 subdivision implies that it was proposed to no longer used by the adjoining lot.
The applicant has an existing equipment storage area near the southern end of the frontage on
Berard Drive that is currently accessed via the southern entrance.
The Board directed the applicant to provide a design that modified the southern entrance to
create a safe configuration. The applicant reports the new entrance has a sight distance of +/-
250 ft and would result in clearing approximately 45 ft of existing vegetation along Berard Drive,
resulting in 1,600 sf of clearing. The existing southern access drive is proposed to be closed by
restoring the vertical curb and removing the gravel within the right of way. The existing
equipment storage area, and remaining access to the equipment storage area, are proposed to
be retained.
#SP-23-036
- 4 -
The plan submitted by the applicant entitled “New Access Drive Plan,” dated 11/7/2023, depicts
the entrance movement of a 53-foot articulated vehicle, a representation of which is shown on
the plan. The truck is depicted as not crossing the center line of Berard Drive when it enters the
site at 7.2 mph, or a crawl speed. The applicant has proposed to widen the entrance radius to
30-ft on both north and south sides of the driveway. The Board approves the proposed location,
but finds that since Berard Drive is a dead end street and there are unlikely to be turns to or
from the north, the entrance radius on the north side of the driveway shall be reduced to 25-ft
to reduce impervious coverage and retain trees.
The Deputy Director of Capital Projects reviewed the revised plans for traffic safety on
11/14/2023 and expressed agreement with the proposal, and noted the applicant will need a
road opening permit from the Department of Public Works prior to commencing work within
the right of way.
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.
Building form standards do not apply to this zoning district.
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 3.11(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.
No modifications to a structure are proposed.
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.
It appears by placing boulders along the adjoining property lines the applicant will be removing
access to the adjoining lot. The primary access to the adjoining lot is from a more southerly
segment of Berard Drive, as can be seen on sheet C-1.0 Overall Plan. Given the type of vehicles
that use the subject property, and the removal of the southern access point, the Board finds no
cross-lot connections to be necessary.
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.
There is an existing overhead power line crossing but not serving the site that is not proposed to
be affected by this application. The Board finds this criterion not applicable.
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
#SP-23-036
- 5 -
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.
There is no dumpster on site for landfill waste.
14.11 Site Plan and Conditional Use Review: Specific Uses and Standards
F. Alteration of Existing Grade
(1) Approval Required. The removal from land or the placing on land of fill, gravel, sand,
loam, topsoil, or other similar material in an amount equal to or greater than twenty (20)
cubic yards, except when incidental to or in connection with the construction of a structure
on the same lot, shall require the approval of the Development Review Board. The
Development Review Board may grant such approval where such modification is
requested in connection with the approval of a site plan, planned unit development or
subdivision plat. This section does not apply to the removal of earth products in
connection with a resource extraction operation (see Section 14.11(G), Earth Products.)
(2 ) Standards and Conditions for Approval.
(a) The Development Review Board shall review a request under this Section for
compliance with the standards contained in this Section 14.11(F) and Section 3.07,
Height of Structures of these regulations. An application under this section shall
include the submittal of a site plan, planned unit development or subdivision plat
application showing the area to be filled or removed, and the existing grade and
proposed grade created by removal or addition of material.
In lieu of providing a proposed grade, the applicant has provided the following note on
the plan:
Proposed +/- 3.5 acre area for continued fill placement on site, the proposed limits
extending to the northern and wester [sic] property line setbacks. Proposed finished
grade to match the elevation of the “upper” southern portion of the site and elevation
of Berard Drive, creating an open flat area with 2:1 side slopes along its eastern limits.
The Board finds the proposed language to be a little unclear and finds the applicant
must substitute the following instead of the second sentence:
Proposed finished grade to be lower than or match the existing elevation at the
property line setback, creating an open flat area with 2:1 side slopes along its
eastern limits.
(b) The Development Review Board, in granting approval may impose any conditions it
deems necessary, including, but not limited to, the following:
(i) Duration or phasing of the permit for any length of time.
The Board finds the permit shall be valid for 10 years or until the proposed grade
meets the conditions described above, whichever comes first.
(ii) Submission of an acceptable plan for the rehabilitation of the site at the
conclusion of the operations, including grading, seeding and planting, fencing,
drainage, and other appropriate measures.
The Board finds the rehabilitation plan shall consist of topsoil and seeding over the
#SP-23-036
- 6 -
portion of the site not covered with riprap unless an amendment is approved prior to
expiration of this approval.
(iii) Provision of a suitable bond or other security in accordance with Section 17.15
adequate to assure compliance with the provisions of these Regulations.
The Board does not consider a bond necessary for site restoration.
(iv) Determination of what shall constitute pre-construction grade under Section
3.07, Height of Structures.
The proposed final condition will create an essentially level site. The Board finds the
applicant may not use the site for any other use, including those that require
computation of pre-construction grade, without a site plan amendment.
C) ARTICLE 12: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION STANDARDS
The site contains a number of natural resources, including river corridor, 100-year floodplain,
class II wetland and wetland buffer, habitat block, and steep slopes.
This section is organized to review each applicable natural resource, and then return to
standards applicable to all natural resource impacts.
12.03 Steep Slopes
Steep slopes are defined as those between 15 and 25%. Very steep slopes are those over 25%.
Human-made slopes that are previously permitted by the City are exempt from the definition of
steep slopes. The site has large areas of slopes over 25% that are clearly human-made. While
any slopes constructed since 2008 (the expiration of the previous approval) are technically not
previously permitted by the City, the Board finds all human-made steep slopes on this property
are exempted since it is somewhat infeasible to differentiate those constructed prior to 2008
and those constructed since that time.
In addition to the human-made steep slopes, there appears to be one area of natural steep
slopes at the toe of the human-made slope proximate to the Winooski River.
E. Standards.
(1) Very Steep Slope Standards. Development other than Restricted Infrastructure
Encroachment is prohibited on very steep slopes.
(2) Steep Slope Standards.
The toe of the human-made slopes near the Winooski River is generally between 15 and
25%. The applicant is not proposing any new work in this area.
(a) All development must be designed to avoid undue adverse effects on steep slopes
which may include, but are not limited to, undue clearing of vegetation, excavation,
and/or filling.
(b) All recommendations of the slope stability analysis submitted with the
application shall be required by the DRB or Administrative Officer.
The Board finds these criteria to be not applicable.
12.04 Habitat Block Overlay District
#SP-23-036
- 7 -
The project contains a small area of habitat block on the western side of the site, approximately
800 sf of which is impacted by an existing stone spillway and the existing sediment pond.
D. Modification of Habitat Block.
An applicant may request approval from the Development Review Board to modify a
Habitat Block in any of the following manners. An applicant may select any one of the
three modification options below. A development application may not include more than
one option for any application.
(1) Minor Habitat Block Boundary Adjustment. An applicant may apply to modify the
boundary of a Habitat Block by up to fifty (50) feet in any direction to account for site-
specific conditions, upon written request by the applicant as part of the requisite
application. Any proposed reduction in Habitat Block area must be offset with an
equal addition elsewhere within the same subject parcel or Planned Unit
Development. The land to be protected through the modification of the Habitat Block
boundary must be contiguous to the Habitat Block. In no case shall the Development
Review Board approve a net reduction of the area of a Habitat Block.
The applicant is proposing to modify the boundary of the habitat block to allow the
existing stone spillway and sediment pond to persist. The maximum width of the
adjustment is 13 ft. They are proposing to designate a new 800 sf area just south of the
area to be removed. The Board finds this criterion met. The Board further finds that
the sediment pond and stone spillway may only be enlarged to the west, to prevent
future encroachment into the habitat block.
(2) Small On-Site Habitat Block Exchange.
The applicant is not proposing this type of exchange.
(3) Larger Area Habitat Block Exchange.
The applicant is not proposing this type of exchange.
12.06 Wetland Protection Standards
The property contains a riparian Class II wetland along the Winooski River. In this industrial
zoning district, it is subject to a 50-ft buffer. Existing impacts include the location of concrete
barriers at the toe of slope, and the presence of the existing stone spillway downstream of the
existing settling pond.
D. Standards for Wetlands Protection.
(4) Pre-existing gardens, landscaped areas/lawns, structures and impervious surfaces.
(a) Gardens, landscaped areas/lawns, structures, and impervious surfaces located
within a wetlands buffer that were legally in existence as of the effective date of these
regulations shall be considered non-conforming development. Non-conforming
development within a wetlands buffer may not be expanded.
Based on the applicant’s testimony that removing the concrete barriers would require a
greater impact to the wetland, than allowing them to remain, the Board finds the
concrete barriers may remain even though they are no longer serving a purpose. The
#SP-23-036
- 8 -
Board finds the sediment pond and stone spillway may not be expanded within the
wetland buffer.
12.07 River Corridor Overlay District
There is a small area of existing impacted river corridor. There is no proposed expansion to the
river corridor impacts. The Board therefore finds these criteria not applicable. No additional
vegetation clearing is permitted.
12.08 Floodplain Overlay District (FP)
The site contains 100-year floodplain for the Winooski River. A portion of the mapped
floodplain is in the area proposed to be filled, highlighted in yellow in the below screen shot.
The project also proposes impacts to the 500-year floodplain, not shown on the map submitted
by the applicant. This area surrounds the impacted 100-year floodplain, and is shown in light
purple on the below GIS map excerpt.
#SP-23-036
- 9 -
D. Administration.
(1) Floodplain Review. All development in the City of South Burlington located within
the Floodplain Overlay District shall be subject to Floodplain Review. The
Floodplain Overlay District overlays other existing zoning districts. All other
requirements of the underlying district shall apply in addition to the provisions
herein, unless otherwise indicated. The Floodplain Overlay District is composed of
two areas:
(a) Floodplain Overlay District Zones A, AE, and A1-30. The boundaries of these
Zones include those areas of special flood hazard designated in and on the
most current flood insurance studies and maps published by the Department
of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, National
Flood Insurance Program and mapped as Zones A, AE, or A1-30.
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 5007C0256D shows this site contains an area
of Zone A.
(b) Floodplain Overlay District Zones 0.2% B1 and B2. The boundaries of these
Zones include those areas of special flood hazard designated in and on the
most current flood insurance studies and maps published by the Department
of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, National
Flood Insurance Program, and as depicted on the Natural Resources Map as
Zone 0.2% B1 and Zone 0.2% B2. Floodplain Overlay District Zone 0.2% B1 is
composed of areas of the 500-year floodplain that are already substantially
developed and where additional opportunities for infill development is
appropriate. Floodplain Overlay District Zone 0.2% B2 is composed of areas of
the 500-year floodplain that are not developed and where future development
is not appropriate.
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 5007C0256D shows this site contains an area
of Zone 0.2%.
(2) Interpretation. The information presented on any maps, or contained in any
studies, adopted by reference, is presumed accurate. However, if uncertainty
exists regarding the Floodplain Overlay District boundary, the following procedure
shall be followed:
(a) If uncertainty exists with respect to the boundaries of the Floodplain Overlay
District Zones A, AE, and A1-30 the location of the boundary shall be
determined by the Administrative Officer. If the applicant disagrees with the
determination made by the Administrative Officer, a Letter of Map
Amendment from FEMA shall constitute proof that the property is not located
within the Special Flood Hazard Area.
The Administrative Officer reviewed the flood insurance study and FIRM
associate with this location and determined the base flood elevation in this
location is between 204 and 205. Extrapolating the survey contours, it appears
the impacted area was once within the base flood elevation. However, since
the area has since been filled, the Administrative Officer finds the impacted area
of flood plain to be incorrectly mapped and the base flood elevation is now at
the toe of slope. Therefore no impacts to Zone A are proposed.
#SP-23-036
- 10 -
(b) If uncertainty exists with respect to the boundaries of the Floodplain Overlay
District Zones 0.2% B1 and B2 the location of the boundary shall be
determined by the Administrative Officer. If the applicant disagrees with the
determination made by the Administrative Officer, the applicant may appeal
the determination in accordance with Article 17.
The Administrative Officer reviewed the flood insurance study and FIRM
associated with this location and determined the 0.2% chance annual flood in
this location is between 207.7 and 209. Similarly to the base flood elevation,
since the area has been filled, the Administrative Officer finds the impacted area
of floodplain to be incorrectly mapped and the 0.2% flood elevation to be
approximately 3 – 4 feet up the rock-stabilized slope from the toe. Therefore no
impacts to Zone 0.2% are proposed.
D) SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS
3.02G Official Map: The Official Map of the City of South Burlington is adopted pursuant to
subsection 3 of section 4401, Title 24 VSA Chapter 117, as amended, filed in the office of the
City Clerk, and incorporated herein by reference.
State statute 24 VSA 4412 governs use of the Official Map.
§ 4421. Official map
A municipality may adopt an official map that identifies future municipal utility and
facility improvements, such as road or recreational path rights-of-way, parkland, utility
rights-of-way, and other public improvements, in order to provide the opportunity for the
community to acquire land identified for public improvements prior to development for
other use and to identify the locations of required public facilities for new subdivisions and
other development under review by the municipality.
(5) Development review for properties with mapped public facilities. Any application for
subdivision or other development review that involves property on which the official map
shows a public facility shall demonstrate that the mapped public facility will be
accommodated by the proposed subdivision or development in accordance with the
municipality’s bylaws. Failure to accommodate the mapped public facility or obtain a minor
change in the official map shall result in the denial of the development or subdivision. The
legislative body shall have 120 days from the date of the denial of the permit to institute
proceedings to acquire that land or interest in land, and if these proceedings are not started
within that time, the appropriate municipal panel shall review the application without
regard to the proposed public facilities.
The property includes a planned public park and open space. Of note, the subject parcel of this
application is separated by another narrow parcel from the Winooski River, and portions of both
are included on the Official Map. This area appears to have been adopted in 2003 as one of many
official map changes. This area was created for the purposes of creating / preserving open spaces
along the Winooski Gorge and Winooski River. Given the topography, it is likely any public access
features in this area would be limited to a trail or trails.
Staff spoke with the Winooski Valley Parks District (owner of the nearby Winooski Gorge park
along Lime Kiln Road) and understands that the area in question is generally steep and wooded.
#SP-23-036
- 11 -
As shown on the applicant’s plans, a large riparian wetland traverses the entirety of a portion of
parcel #0200-0028, which separates the subject property from the Winooski River. The Winooski
Valley Parks District and the City of South Burlington remain interested in creating open spaces
along the Winooski Gorge and Winooski River, but are unlikely to create any developed trail
network until such time as safe access is available through several contiguous parcels comprising
the official map feature in this location.
The applicant’s proposal to accommodate the planned public park and open space is as follows.
In order to preserve this area shown on the Official Map, the Project proposes to restrict the
use of this area to include only placement of fill, stormwater treatment and access to
stormwater treatment.
To allow for possible future use of a trail through this area, the Project proposes an Easement
Area to benefit the City of South Burlington between the existing concrete barriers and the
eastern property line of the Project parcel, or a Boundary Line Adjustment between the Project
parcel and abutting parcel adjacent to the Winooski River. An Irrevocable Offer of Dedication
for this area of land would be made to the City of South Burlington to be conveyed at some
future time once the City has secured access to the land. The proposed Easement Area or
Boundary Line Adjustment is shown on C-1.0 Overall Plan, and C-1.2 Site Plan.
The Board finds the applicant’s proposal to comply with the requirement to accommodate the
official map feature. The Board finds the applicant cannot use the land of the official map
feature for anything other than fill, stormwater access, and stormwater treatment. The land
between the subject property line and the concrete barriers placed at the toe of slope when the
property was first permitted for fill must be reserved either via easement and irrevocable offer,
or boundary line adjustment, within one year of this approval.
13.03 Bicycle Parking and Storage
Bicycle parking for non-residential usage is based on square footage of buildings. Since there are
no buildings on the property, the Board finds this criterion to be not applicable.
13.04 Landscaping, Screening, and Street Trees.
C. Screening or Buffering.
The Development Review Board will require landscaping, fencing, land shaping and/or
screening along property boundaries (lot lines) whenever it determines that a) two
adjacent sites are dissimilar and should be screened or buffered from each other, or b) a
property’s appearance should be improved, which property is covered excessively with
pavement or structures or is otherwise insufficiently landscaped, or c) a commercial,
industrial, and multi-family use abuts a residential district or institutional use, or (d) a
parking or loading area is adjacent to or visible from a public street.
The applicant is proposing to retain a 30-ft vegetated buffer between the site and the public
street. There is no existing or proposed buffer between the site and the warehouse site to
the south. Based on the use of the property as a fill site, the Board finds no screening to be
necessary in this location.
D. Front Yards of Non-Residential and Multi-Family Uses.
In the case of non-residential and multi-family uses, the required front yard and/or the
frontage along designated arterial and collector streets (see Article 3, Section 3.06 for this
#SP-23-036
- 12 -
list) shall be suitably landscaped and maintained in good appearance. Landscape
elements that reduce stormwater runoff and promote stormwater infiltration are
encouraged. The Development Review Board shall require the applicant to meet the
provisions of sections 13.04(F) and (G).
The Board finds this criterion met.
13.05 Stormwater Management
South Burlington stormwater management standards are applicable to developed properties
involving more than ½ acre of impervious surfaces. This type of use, consisting of ongoing
construction rather than a developed property, is not contemplated in the LDR. The use instead
is similar to the State’s Multisector General Permit (“MSGP”) program regulating industrial
activities. The MSGP requires stormwater management akin to erosion prevention and
sediment control. Accordingly, the City Stormwater Section provided the following comments
on the project’s erosion prevention and sediment control.
The existing catch basin in the center of the site shall be equipped with inlet protection until
such time as it is capped to allow ongoing fill of the property.
The existing sediment pond shall be cleaned and enlarged on an as-needed basis to capture
and treat flows prior to discharge.
In conjunction with the conditions imposed above pertaining to alteration of grade, the Board
finds that the site shall be topsoiled and seeded once final grade is met, and once final grade is
met shall no longer be permitted to be used as a contractor yard. If the applicant desires to
continue use as a contractors’ yard, a portion of the site will be considered impervious and will
require stormwater treatment pursuant to the LDR, and site plan amendment will be required.
13.06 Airport Approach Cones
All applications for development within the Airport Approach Cones, as shown on the Overlay
Districts Map, involving new or expanded buildings or structures shall provide documentation
that either a Notice to the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) is not required, or an application
for a Determination of No Hazard has been submitted to the FAA. Where an application for
Determination of No Hazard has been submitted, no zoning permit for construction shall be
issued without demonstration of receipt of an issued Determination.
The project is located in an Airport Approach Cone but no buildings or structures are proposed.
The applicant has received a Determination of No Hazard from the FAA.
13.07 Exterior Lighting
No exterior lighting is proposed.
13.08 Outside Storage and Display
A. Outdoor Storage. Outdoor storage of goods, materials, vehicles for other than daily use,
and equipment shall be subject to the following provisions:
#SP-23-036
- 13 -
(1) Any outdoor storage shall be appurtenant to the primary use of the property and shall be
allowed only in nonresidential districts and upon approval of the DRB in conjunction with a
site plan, conditional use and/or PUD application.
The Board considers the primary use of the property to be a place to waste excess materials
and the secondary use to be contractors’ yard, though the LDR does not have a defined use
for “waste excess materials” or similar. Therefore the Board finds outdoor storage associated
with the contractors’ yard is appurtenant as required by this criterion. Prior to any change in
the use of the site, including to primarily a contractor’s yard, the applicant shall apply for
amendment to the DRB or Administrative Officer as allowable under the LDR applicable at
that time.
(2) The Development Review Board may require that outdoor storage areas in connection with
commercial or industrial uses be enclosed and/or screened where the storage area may
comprise an attractive nuisance, where the proposed use of the storage areas present
opportunities for theft, or where the Board finds that said storage areas are in view of
residentially-zoned parcels.
In addition to the screening from the public road discussed under 13.04, the applicant is
proposing to install boulders “or equivalent” along the north and south property lines,
presumably to prevent encroachment into adjoining properties. The Board finds the
applicant shall modify the plan to say “install boulders along common property line.”
DECISION
Motion by Frank Kochman, seconded by John Moscatelli, to approve site plan application #SP-
23-036 of Engineers Construction, Inc., 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. Reduce the entrance radius on the north side of the proposed driveway to 25-ft
to reduce impervious coverage and retain trees.
b. Replace the second sentence of the note pertaining to the 3.5 acre area on
sheet C-1.2 with the following: “Proposed finished grade to be lower than or
match the existing elevation at the property line setback, creating an open flat
area with 2:1 side slopes along its eastern limits.”
c. Modify plan C-1.2 to say “install boulders along common property line.”
4. The permit shall be valid for 10 years or until the proposed grade meets the conditions
described on Sheet C-1.2, whichever comes first.
5. Prior to any change in the use of the site, including to primarily a contractor’s yard, the
applicant shall apply for amendment to the DRB or Administrative Officer as allowable
under the LDR applicable at that time.
#SP-23-036
- 14 -
6. The site shall be rehabilitated by installation of topsoil and seeding over the portion of
the site not covered with riprap unless an amendment is approved prior to expiration of
this approval.
7. Once final grade is met, the site shall no longer be permitted to be used as a contractor
yard. If the applicant desires to continue use as a contractors’ yard, a portion of the site
will be considered impervious and will require stormwater treatment pursuant to the
LDR, and site plan amendment will be required.
8. The applicant may not use the site for any other use, including those that require
computation of pre-construction grade, without a site plan amendment.
9. The sediment pond and stone spillway may only be enlarged to the west, to prevent
future encroachment into the habitat block. Further, the sediment pond and stone
spillway may not be expanded within the wetland buffer.
10. The applicant cannot use the land of the official map feature for anything other than fill,
stormwater access, and stormwater treatment.
11. The land between the subject property line and the concrete barriers placed at the toe
of slope when the property was first permitted for fill must be reserved either via
easement and accompanying irrevocable offer, or boundary line adjustment, within one
year of this approval.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. The applicant must regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance
infrastructure.
15. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines,
services, and service modifications must be underground.
16. The proposed project must adhere to standards for erosion control as set forth in
Section 16.03 and the grading standards set forth in Section 16.04 of the South
Burlington Land Development Regulations.
17. The applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy from the Administrative Officer
upon completion of the modifications approved herein and prior to occupancy and/or
use of the approved modifications.
18. Any change to the site plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Development
Review Board or the Administrative Officer as allowed by the Land Development
Regulations.
John Moscatelli Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Mark Behr Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Frank Kochman Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Quin Mann Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
#SP-23-036
- 15 -
Dawn Philibert Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Stephanie Wyman Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Charles Johnston Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Motion carried by a vote of 5 - 0 - 0.
Signed this ____ day of December, 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 180 Market 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.