Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-24-03 - Supplemental - 0500 Old Farm Road (15)1 Marla Keene From:Adam Matth Sent:Friday, January 26, 2024 8:07 AM To:Marla Keene Subject:RE: SD-24-03 500 Old Farm Rd (O'Brien Eastview) - technical review Marla, Thanks for the email with more clarificaƟon, much appreciated. With the changes to this recent plan for Lot 18, yes I am concerned with regards to the reducƟon of this area and the change in grading as that can impact what the iniƟal plans were for that space when it comes to the acƟve recreaƟonal element. Thanks! Adam MaƩh Director of RecreaƟon and Parks South Burlington RecreaƟon and Parks 180 Market Street, South Burlington, VT 05403 Phone: 802-556-3670 From: Marla Keene <mkeene@southburlingtonvt.gov> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2024 4:32 PM To: Adam Matth <amatth@southburlingtonvt.gov> Subject: RE: SD-24-03 500 Old Farm Rd (O'Brien Eastview) - technical review Thanks Adam. I think there is some confusion about the ask. The current proposal is ONLY to change the “soccer field.” The remainder of the approval, as it pertains to recreation spaces, is unchanged. Before I get into the specific ask, some background. The Board’s decision included the following recommendations for City acceptance of the various spaces. This list was developed in conjunction with Tom, Adam and Holly. LocaƟon Applicant Proposal Board Finding Lot 18 Open Space public ownership The City will consider accepƟng ownership of this parcel one year aŌer substanƟal compleƟon as long as it meets City standards. Lot 19 Natural Play Area public ownership The City will consider accepƟng ownership of this parcel one year aŌer substanƟal compleƟon as long as it meets City standards. 2 Lot 47 Dog Park, Play Area & Open Space Public Ownership The City will consider accepƟng ownership of this parcel upon substanƟal compleƟon of all components and as long as it meets City standards. Workout Loop on Lots 44, 46, 48 Public access and maintenance agreement The City will consider accepƟng an easement for the trail one year aŌer substanƟal compleƟon. Barn and Community Space Public access and maintenance agreement Same as proposed When the Board includes a recommendation like this, it is because the Board cannot dictate City ownership, that is a Council decision. However, Council historically has looked to it’s Planning Commission and DRB for recommendations on what to accept, so I would expect them to follow the Board’s recommendation. Regarding your comments on Lot 18, it was decided as part of SD-22-10 that it, as you say, would remain open with flexible use. Their requested amendment is to reduce the size of the area and add a battery storage (see sheet C-2). Doing a side by side comparison, it also looks like they’re now proposing to add a fill in that area and reduce the useable area by virtue of the proposed grading. The Board’s only authority in this matter is to review elements of the project proposed for amendment, or elements aƯected by elements proposed for amendment. To use a totally diƯerent example, if someone were proposing to change the upper stories of a multi-use building to residential, the Board might appropriately direct them to revise the required on-site open space so that it is more appropriate for a building of the newly proposed uses. But they wouldn’t be able to say, for instance, that the site driveway needed to change, because that’s not an element of the project aƯected by the proposed change. I imagine you would be concerned about the reduction in area and the change in grading, but I don’t want to put words in your mouth. Do you have any comments on the specific elements of the project that are proposed to change? For convenience I’ve attached the old and new C-2 plans. Marla Keene, PE Development Review Planner City of South Burlington (802) 846-4106 From: Adam Matth <amatth@southburlingtonvt.gov> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2024 1:52 PM To: Marla Keene <mkeene@southburlingtonvt.gov> Subject: RE: SD-24-03 500 Old Farm Rd (O'Brien Eastview) - technical review Marla, Thanks for the heads up on this and I circled in with Holly and she shared some input with her comments below, which are sƟll the same iniƟal thoughts that she had with the park itself as nothing has drasƟcally changed from what she had previously seen. 1) From a recreation perspective, there is a wide variety of planned elements for a host of generations and varied interests and abilities. Ensuring that there is designed accessibility into all the play structures and specific park elements is essential- so I might ask specifics about that. 3 2) There has been a long discussion about which pieces of this will be private/HOA elements and which the developer desires to turn over to the city for broader city use, ownership and maintenance. I don’t see anything indicating that so might want to clarify. If there are elements of park land, open space, recreational amenities that DPW is willing to accept and maintain then Adam Cate would need to review and approve those. I know there were questions about materials on the exercise pathway and some “natural” staircases that were noted in the last iteration that were of some concern. 3) I advocated ( if these are to be city assets) that there be parking spots at the head of the exercise trail, playground and dog park. 4) If there is no intent to have the city take ownership and maintain these, the plan is great from a recreational perspective. My concern has only been one of equity and that if there were not accommodations made to not only allow but encourage others to utilize the city owned resources then it should remain with the HOA. I think about the issue we have with the pickleball courts a Szymanksi and the fact that there is a wide user group that desires use, but limited access which then leads to safety issues of cars, kids and pedestrians. 5) The only other thing that I recall being a discussion point was an open field that the developer was describing as a “soccer field”. This was something that was going to remain open but be mowed with flexible allowable use. If HOA owned, fine. If not and intended for City use, there should be a discussion about what that would look like as I see that being a stumbling block. Neighbors might not welcome the greater community doing a pick up game of soccer there, especially if there isnt parking along the road to accommodate that. I think about the Bay Crest neighborhood and how irate people get when someone wants to run a youth soccer practice in that space when Vet is unavailable or wet and there are cars lined up along the road and noise levels for neighbors that were never considered. There is always bit of a push and pull when homes abut park land ( think Red Rocks) where someone feels the park is an extension of their home and they want to keep “outsiders” out. Hope this helps, seems like these were all parts of previous conversaƟons. Thanks! Adam MaƩh Director of RecreaƟon and Parks South Burlington RecreaƟon and Parks 180 Market Street, South Burlington, VT 05403 Phone: 802-556-3670 From: Marla Keene <mkeene@southburlingtonvt.gov> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2024 11:40 AM To: Terry Francis <tfrancis@southburlingtonvt.gov>; Ed Spooner <espooner@southburlingtonvt.gov>; Holly Rees <hrees@southburlingtonvt.gov>; Adam Matth <amatth@southburlingtonvt.gov>; Paul Conner <pconner@southburlingtonvt.gov>; Tom DiPietro <tdipietro@southburlingtonvt.gov>; Marisa Rorabaugh <MRorabaugh@southburlingtonvt.gov> Subject: SD-24-03 500 Old Farm Rd (O'Brien Eastview) - technical review Hi Team, We have received a sketch plan application to amend the approval for the first 155 unit phase of O’Brien Eastview. The amendment consists of five changes detailed in their (way too long) cover letter. By amending their previous PUD, they’re subject to the regulations CURRENTLY in effect. This is the first step of the review, which will be followed by 4 likely combined preliminary and final plat for the same changes. You will have additional opportunity to comment at the next stage of review, and I will share with the more specialized technical reviewers at that time as well. Project description: Sketch plan applicaƟon #SD-24-03 of O’Brien Eastview LLC to amend a previously approved plan for a planned unit development of 155 homes in single family, duplex, and three-family dwellings on eleven (11) lots totaling 23.9 acres, twenty-four (24) commercial development lots totaling 39.8 acres, and 25.2 acres of undeveloped or recreaƟonal open spaces. The amendment consists of adding a 0.17 acre baƩery storage microgrid in an area previously approved for open space, adding 14 units in two-family homes, replacing two large single-family homes with five detached coƩage style units, and other minor amendments, 500 Old Farm Road. Please provide your comments by Friday 1/26 for incorporation into the report. Direct link to project folder: SD-24-03_500 Old Farm Rd_OBrien Eastview_SK_2024-02-06 Keep in mind you can always navigate to this folder from the Development Review sharepoint site. The five changes are as follows 1. 14 homes in two-family dwellings. These homes were taken out at the last minute in SD-22-10 because they couldn’t meet height requirements. Under the current rules the Board has a different waiver authority. See sheet C-6 and C-6.1. 2. Replace 2 large single family homes with cottage homes accessed via an already APPROVED driveway. These are on Sheet C-10 3. Add battery storage grid in place of approved open space on Lot 18. See sheet C-2. This open space was intended for the City to consider accepting ownership one year after substantial completion. 4. Flexibility in phase completion requirements – they are concerned weather conditions may prevent certain things being completed before they are ready to move on to other things. See cover letter. 5. Minor modifications to match Act 250 approval. They describe this as minor, but I’m going to ask them to show me exactly what they mean so it’s not a matter of hunting & will share with you if I think it’ll affect your area of jurisdiction. Please also provide any other comments that are relevant to this stage of review. Their previous approval was SD-22-10A. They’ve retained the exhibit numbering, so if you want to do a before and after comparison, you can look in this folder for the previously approved plans for the same location: plans Sincerely, Marla Keene, PE Development Review Planner 5 City of South Burlington 180 Market Street South Burlington, VT 05403 (802) 846-4106 www.southburlingtonvt.gov Notice - Under Vermont’s Public Records Act, all e-mail, e-mail attachments as well as paper copies of documents received or prepared for use in matters concerning City business, concerning a City official or staff, or containing information relating to City business are likely to be regarded as public records which may be inspected by any person upon request, unless otherwise made confidential by law. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return email. Thank you for your cooperation.