Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-24-03 - Supplemental - 0500 Old Farm Road (2) VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL December 20, 2023 South Burlington Planning and Zoning City of South Burlington 180 Market Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: O’Brien Eastview Planned Unit Development Final Plat South Burlington Development Review Board: O’Brien Eastview, LLC (“Applicant,”) received Final Plat Permit SD-22-10A, on January 19, 2023 (the “Permit”) to create a planned unit development of six existing parcels totaling approximately 102.5 acres, to become 155 single family, duplex and three-family dwellings, and a range of development lots (the “Project”). Since that issuance, the Applicant has received full State permits, and commenced construction on the initial phases authorized by the Permit. Currently, new homes are under construction on Leo Lane with occupancy planned for late this year, and the Applicant is about to break ground on the next phase of the development, on the eastern portion of Old Farm Road. Filing for initial permits for this development as far back as 2019, the Project has been through years of review with the Development Review Board (the “Board”) and many of the current members participated fully in that review. As you may recall, for the entirety of the review process, including in the issued Preliminary Plat decision, the Project contained 3-story, street facing duplexes on O’Brien Farm Road extension. The architecture, look and feel of these homes was carefully reviewed by the Board, and the Board was comfortable with all aspects of the planned development. However, at our final hearing, many years into the process, it was determined that the Board’s waiver authority under the regulations then-in-effect, would not allow for a waiver of the maximum number of stories. For this reason, the Applicant removed the planned homes from the Project, and discussed with the Board that it would return on amendment to re-permit these, to avoid further delays in commencing construction, and to take advantage of new regulations which would allow such waiver. With this in mind, the Applicant now submits this permit amendment request. For convenience, we also waited several months after commencing the Project, to ensure any other clean up items required could be consolidated for the Board. Included at this time in this amendment request, please find the following requests for amendment which are discussed in detail in the below narrative: I. Re-Submission of 3-story street-facing duplex structure on O’Brien Farm Road Extension II. Addition of Grid-Scale Battery Storage Area III. Clarification of Phasing Plan Requirements 2 IV. Addition of Cottage Housing Units on Daniel Drive; Parking Space Increase V. Barn Parking Area Modification, Addition of EV Charging VI. Minor modifications in line with Act 250 I. Re-submission of 3-story street-facing duplex structure on O’Brien Farm Road Extension Throughout the review process for the project, indeed, even at the last hearing, the Project contained seven duplex homes located on the south side of O’Brien Farm Road extension, which are shown at Exhibit 132. These homes were discussed extensively during the preliminary plat process as well as the final plat process. Elevation drawings for these homes are part of the record at Exhibit 23 and Exhibit 24 of the Project. Both elevations are provided again with this application. As a condition of approval for the Project, it was requested that these homes be removed from the plan, as it was determined by the Board at the final hearing that the waiver authority in the LDR which was the governing review authority for the Project, did not provide the latitude to issue a height waiver in the R1 district. Rather than work to redesign the unit type, it was generally agreed that the new regulations (now in effect and in effect for this application), would allow for such a waiver, and since the units were so well suited for this location, that it would make sense to approach the Board about a waiver as an amendment, and to incorporate the units back into the plan after the fact. The waiver authority now provided to the Board is broad. It is outlined specifically in Section 15 of the regulations. This request, we believe, will be reviewed under Section 15.C.07 General PUD. Further to Section 15.C.07C, this general standard is specifically available for: “amendments to existing PUDs reviewed and approved under the LDRs in effect until November 10, 2021, the final subdivision approval for which has not expired, regardless of zoning district.” Given this applicability, the specific waiver standard that applies is outlined at Section 15.C.07B. This section states, generally, that the DRB may provide relief from dimensional standards to: “encourage innovation in design and layout and efficient use of land that is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.” More specifically, the regulation focuses on well-planned, -sited, and designed development projects, and references several criteria for such projects. The Project has already been found by the Development Review Board to have many of these characteristics. a. The Project is clearly responsive to the goals and objectives of the city comprehensive plan and the Board has found such in its Permit findings. b. The Project is creating affordable housing, both for-sale and for rent through its inclusionary requirements which are part of approvals. Four affordable homes are currently under construction and under purchase contract. c. The Project is a mixed-use PUD which provides housing, goods, services, and employment opportunities. d. The Project is making extensive improvements to the sidewalk and recreation path systems in the area. e. The Project is clearly of a density to support walkable residential and mixed-use style development. f. Interestingly, the specific waiver request herein, is tailored toward helping the Project to meet the final test spelled out in this section, and that test is to: “Foster context- 3 sensitive transitions among and between neighborhoods, commercial areas, mixed use areas, civic spaces, and natural resource areas. The area of the project where the three-story duplex homes is proposed is at the very edge of the R1 district, where the R1 district abuts the C1-LR, specifically, an area where the Permit authorizes 4-story buildings to be constructed, and a much denser mixed-use environment. The idea of the proposed duplex townhomes is that their height enables them to affect a more logical and easy transition. Without the waiver, the only home that could be built in this transition would be something that was a single story above- grade, with a garage below, because these homes are being built into a hillside. This is the exact reason these homes were added to the plan, after feedback from Staff that this area needed a more substantial transition between housing types. The look and feel of the housing are attached at Exhibit 43, page 12. This visual will also provide some idea of the grade change in the site in this area. Lastly, for marketing purposes, our team assembled a digital rendering of the entire Hillside Project. This is attached at Exhibit 222 and includes conceptual renderings for C1-LR areas based on the approved development context from the Permit, which is a new Exhibit and the next exhibit # available for this project. As you can see in the screenshot below, these townhomes (highlighted with a red dot) provide for a logical and attractive transition to the adjacent conceptual developments. As discussed at the final hearing for the Project, this transitional townhome product is very important to the Project. We were certainly uneasy about removing the product from the plans and proceeding, but at the time we needed to move forward and begin construction. We appreciate the Board following through on this amendment and enabling these homes to be put back into the project. Now more than ever, these homes are needed to offer lower price-point floor plans to the market. 3-story product is the least expensive per square foot to build, and these homes will be one of the lowest price homes available in the neighborhood. 4 II. Grid Scale Battery Storage The Applicant has committed to the construction of 155 homes permitted in the Project that will not use any fossil fuel infrastructure. Instead of building new pipelines, the applicant proactively and without any mandate, is building fully electric homes that will run on clean electricity for their daily operation. All homes will be provided with roof-top solar, using the roofs created in the project to generate clean energy that supports resiliency and backup power for the homes in the face of climate change. Tesla battery back-up power will be installed in each home, ensuring that during outages residents remain with power, heat, and connectivity. Each home also includes an electric vehicle charger, as well as a smart electrical panel, which is designed to manage electrical loads for the home, ensuring that all systems function without issue for the homeowners. The homes are all enrolled-in and will receive Department of Energy Zero Energy Ready Home certifications, a stringent national certification, Energy Star certifications, as well as exceeding all local energy codes. Homes are expected to have HERs scores in the mid-20’s or lower. For reference, the RBES Stretch code requires a HERs score of 54. This is the first of its kind neighborhood in Vermont. The chair of the South Burlington City Council, Helen Riehle said at the Project groundbreaking ceremony: “These 155 homes will contribute in a very real way towards South Burlington meeting our climate action plan and housing goals.” She went on to say that the Project’s “foresight and courage leads the way for others to follow suit and dispel the notions of the nay-sayers that it ‘won’t work’…. In conclusion, let me emphasize again that South Burlington embraces this project as confirmation that the dual goals of addressing housing needs and climate change can be symbiotic. We are so proud that this first of its kind project in the state is happening here.” As Chair Riehle referenced this will be the first carbon-free microgrid community in the state of Vermont and one of the first in the country. It is a model for providing much needed housing in an environmentally responsible manner. To achieve the innovative, first of its kind neighborhood, the Project partnered with Green Mountain Power. This partnership is important for several reasons, including Green Mountain Power’s expertise with battery storage as well as in the design for all-electric homes that function seamlessly for customers. The Project team coordinated for many months designing not only the homes, but also the in-ground electrical infrastructure necessary to supply the homes and create a resilient neighborhood. Part of being climate resilient requires layers of resiliency, and in conversations with Green Mountain Power, it is clear that to provide complete resiliency to the neighborhood and homeowners in prolonged outages, and to provide maximum benefit from the roof-top solar, a battery bank to enable a community scale microgrid needs to be located in the Project. The battery storage required is tried and tested technology and is actively deployed in existing GMP projects. This project consists of two battery banks that will be located inside a fenced enclosure that will be fully screened from view and landscaped extensively. The Project team has spent months trying to identify the appropriate location for the battery storage equipment and enclosure. There were several criteria included in analyzing locations, most importantly, proximity to the distribution mainline system equipment that will island the microgrid, as well as easy truck access, safety setbacks, and aesthetic screening. The Project plans have been amended to add this enclosure on Lot 18, adjacent to Old Farm Road. This is the only location that the Project team identified for the batteries that meets the site 5 criteria and that does not have a detrimental impact on the neighborhood layout. The site has clear access to Phase 3 power lines that will be installed on Old Farm Road. It is fully screened from the view of existing and proposed homes and is far enough from all the homes that there should be no impact to existing or future residents. To facilitate this battery storage installation and microgrid, this amendment requests a change to the Project plans to create a lot where the batteries and enclosure may be built, owned, and maintained by Green Mountain Power for the benefit of the community and all its customers.1 Specifically, the proposed amendment will reduce the size of Lot 18, a planned open space area, from 1.15 acres to 0.98 acres, creating a 0.17-acre lot for the battery storage microgrid. The lot being created is directly adjacent to Old Farm Road and is in a steep area of the Lot 18 where scrubby trees and ledge outcroppings currently exist. In Project plans approved in the Permit, this area of Lot 18 was not used for any recreational purpose. It was proposed to be planted with conservation mix, was not graded flat, and was largely un-used space. The proposed addition of the battery storage enclosure does not reduce the proposed size of the open play area on Lot 18. To illustrate what is proposed, the Project has provided a number of items for the Board to review. First, we have amended our project plans to include the new Lot 59. We have amended our landscape plans to include extensive landscaping surrounding the lot. We have also provided digital renderings of the planned battery storage installation from several viewpoints in the project. The renderings of the planned area are attached at Exhibit 223. There are two views provided looking east across the Lot 18 playfield. One from the northern side of the field and one from the southern side. Also provided is a view heading north and south on the Old Farm Road sidewalk. As you can see from these views, an enclosure is planned around the battery facilities, with landscaping screening the fence. We recognize that this area had been planned to be deeded to the City as a potential park. However, the purpose of this new use is to enable the development of fully resilient, fossil fuel free neighborhood, and this battery facility is an integral part of making that neighborhood a reality. This supports both the City’s climate initiatives and the Project’s environmental commitments to have this land used for a microgrid battery facility. It does require this small amount of land and we have minimized any potential impacts. Visual impacts have been fully screened, and open space impacts represent a loss of 0.17 acres of 34.68 acres provided in the project. This is a reduction of 0.49% which is not material in terms of the ability of residents in this area to enjoy planned park spaces. The beneficial outcome is the continued development of the Project without the use of any fossil fuels which is not certain if the battery building can’t be built. In addition to clean resiliency for the community, GMP will also use all benefits of this microgrid to lower power supply costs for all customers by putting the energy back on the grid during high use times. This microgrid component and enclosure to house it, are a key part of this community. III. Clarification of Phasing Plan Requirements As the Board knows, the Permit contains a detailed phasing plan that also provides for triggers by which certain infrastructure milestones must be met, or zoning permit issuance for home construction can be delayed. It is not clear to the Applicant whether the Permit provides for seasonality in its phasing requirements. In completing the construction of the very first phase of the Project, we ran into some issues with the planned completion of Lot 18 open space. The Board may recall that this open space is required to be completed prior to the issuance of the 30th zoning permit for residential homes. 1 Please note a separate lot may not be fully necessary, but this may provide the easiest path forward in terms of maintenance, ownership, rights to access, etc., and that is why we have proposed it in this fashion. 6 We broke ground on the development in May, and we worked feverishly all summer simply to try and complete Leo Lane, constant rain this summer made even that nearly impossible, and the project was only able to pave Leo Lane in November. Despite delays to infrastructure sales have been good, and we expect that we will be issued our 30th zoning permit in spring 2024. For this reason, and because the grading and construction of a park cannot be done in winter, we had to pivot this October/November to try and seed a play field. The grass has not been established prior to winter, and likely will not be usable by the 30th zoning permit issuance. While in the end we were able to get Lot 18 progressed far enough to be considered complete by December, the issue raised our awareness of potential problems with seasonality conflicting with much larger infrastructure requirements. Our team is only able to complete so much work in a given year and that work is impacted by weather as well as other factors such as the ability to open up new phases (we are limited as to how much ground can be disturbed for stormwater, we are also limited by bonding capacity as we need to provide the city with 110% of the cost of all phases open, and we simply do not have the bonding in place to open multiple phases simultaneously). In short, we cannot open and complete multiple large phases simultaneously and comply with our permits. The point here is that we foresee situations where we may not be able to start work on required elements far enough in advance to complete the work prior to winter, and that zoning permits may be delayed due to us not completing work that we can’t reasonably do until it warms up. Another great example is that we are prohibited on any water main work from 11/15-4/15 of any year. If, for example, Old Farm Road’s relocation requires a water line move, we will be specifically barred from working on it all winter long and could see zoning permits held up despite the fact that we can’t do the work under city rules. There are easily conceivable scenarios where the infrastructure team cannot start phases early enough (because we have to work in order, one phase at a time), and seasonal work restrictions then limit us on being able to do the work required. For this reason, we are asking the Board to amend our permit and make clear that the administrative officer may provide relief from the requirements of the phasing plan to adjust for seasonality and seasonal work requirements. We are not proposing specific language here, but suggest that the zoning administrator could work with the Project team to set a reasonable deadline by which work must be complete, provided weather or other permit restrictions, have delayed or made impossible certain infrastructure work. We are not trying to shirk responsibility, and we suggest that this can be in the Zoning Administrators discretion. However, we would like to have this option so that we may work proactively with the City and avoid any issues. For our part, we are happy to keep an open dialog on these matters, and to provide advance notice to the Zoning Administrator of potential issues. However, we believe that there are enough moving parts here to justify some flexibility, and appreciate the Board’s consideration. IV. Additional Cottage Housing and Cottage Parking: The Applicant is requesting approval to modify the housing layout surrounding the Daniel Drive cottage cluster, to contain five additional cottage homes, and to remove two proposed larger homes that were fronting/accessed from Daniel Drive. The updated configuration allows for the new cottage homes to share the already planned alley, and the addition of five cottage units to the Project hardly results in any additional coverage, as the two larger homes removed were only slightly less area. The reason for this change is to enables the neighborhood to provide additional lower priced homes to a much-needed segment of the current housing market. The Applicant is proposing this change to 7 address market needs, which due to higher interest rates and inflation, are very much looking for smaller, lower priced housing. We believe the addition of these units within the existing development framework is a simple and elegant solution to deliver more housing, that is more affordable to the market. We have amended the site landscape plan in this area accordingly and added significantly more landscaping. We have also added a fence along the neighboring property. The homes proposed are the same cottage that is proposed elsewhere in the Project, previously approved, however these homes will be walkout homes on their front-porch side. We have provided an emended elevation for review at Exhibit 224. We have added windows to the lower level, a door, etc. With regard to inclusionary housing, this change does not increase the required number of inclusionary homes, as it is a net increase of 3 units, which brings the total to 158. The total was previously rounded to 16, from 155. With regard to the landscape minimums, the Project is already exceeding the landscape minimum by hundreds of thousands of dollars, these homes are beautifully landscaped, pushing the project further above our previous exceedance of the requirement, and therefore no further analysis has been provided as the change does not reduce the landscape budget. The Applicant is happy to discuss any changes to the planned landscaping the board thinks may be advantageous, however there is no relevant issue with regard to required expenditures. The last change to the cottage home layouts impacts both the Daniel Drive cottages, as well as the cottage cluster on Leo Lane, which is now under construction. Our previous plans, in an oversite, did not show parking adjacent to the planned garage structures. The attached updated plans show a single parking space next to each single car garage, providing two dedicated parking spaces per home. In our short time marketing these homes since the project began, we have found that a single parking space is not acceptable to our customers. While it may be more acceptable for smaller cottages, our cottage home has three bedrooms, with the possibility of a fourth bedroom in the basement space. Given the affordability crisis in the housing market, we are expecting and seeing more families interested in this smaller product type. Modern families all have two vehicles. And while it is marketable to require their third vehicle to make use of on-street parking, we are not able to market these homes successfully without two dedicated spaces. Additionally, as the market is shifting to electric vehicles, it is important that each home has spaces adjacent to their EV charging stations, otherwise owners would need to shuffle vehicles from street parking spaces to recharge them. I trust the Board can see how this is a lot to ask of a customer and is fundamentally challenging to market. Given the above, the plans have been changed to show two parking spaces, which all fit nicely in the plans. Coverage has also been updated without issue. V. Barn Parking Area Modification and Addition of EV Charging The Applicant is proposing to pave the barn parking area, rather than using a porous gravel system. This is being proposed for ease of maintenance and durability for this scenic park space which we feel is going to get a lot of use from the public. While the porous paving was an interesting concept, we feel the long-term maintenance will be problematic, and that is could result in more ice or snow build up in winter months. This is concerning as a skating rink is planned in this location, inviting the public at that time. Further, we feel the annual maintenance cost of this parking area is a burden to the HOA, who will be maintaining this area (even though it will be open to the public). For all of these reasons we have elected to change the surface to pavement. All necessary stormwater modifications have been reviewed, and capacity has been tested. We have ample capacity in the planned system for this change. 8 Because electric vehicles are a big part of our future, and in partnership with Green Mountain Power, the Applicant is also proposing to install two electric vehicle chargers on the barn lot parking area for use by the public who come to visit the park. A rendering of these chargers is provided at Exhibit 225. Enclosed updated landscape and site plans show necessary infrastructure and planting changes to enable these chargers. We believe the impact here is minimal, and that this change represents a positive change for the park space that is future-minded. VI. Minor Modifications in Line with Act 250 Lastly, the Applicant has made very subtle modifications to some of the planned walking trails in the open space areas of the Project. There has been no loss of trails or connectivity, however, Act 250 required some increased buffers around what they considered sensitive environmental areas. Given this, we jogged some of the trails accordingly in our Act 250 permit hearings so those permits would be issued. This Application amends the trail location such that City and Act 250 permits will match. This is a simple minor clean-up item from the State permit process, which we do not believe results in any appreciable change to the Project. While the areas of the changes may not even be evident in looking at the plans, we have amended them subtly, and so are pointing it out in the narrative for clarity. We are happy to review these changes in more detail if necessary. We appreciate the Board’s time and attention to these requests for minor amendments to our Project. I hope you all have a happy new year and will look forward to seeing you and discussing the above in January. Sincerely, Andrew Gill, Director of Development Enclosures