HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 07_Bourne Staff Comment ResponsesCITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
SD-24-04_760 Shelburne Road_Bourne_PP FP_2024-04-16.docx
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
Report preparation date: April 10, 2024
Application received: March 22, 2024
760 Shelburne Road – Gary Bourne
Preliminary and Final Plat Application #SD-24-04
Meeting Date: April 16, 2024
Owner
Gary J. Bourne & 764 Shelburne Road, LLC
414 West Grove
Middleboro, MA 02346
Applicant
Gary Bourne
414 West Grove
Middleboro, MA 02346
Property Information
Tax Parcels 1540-00760, 1540-00764, 1700-00031
Commercial 1-R15 Zoning District, Traffic Overlay District, Transit Overlay District, Urban Design-Secondary Node Overlay District
Parcel size: 1.43 acres
Engineer
TCE
478 Blair Park Road
Williston, VT 05495
Location Map
/
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Combined preliminary and final plat application #SD-24-04 of Gary Bourne to create a General Planned Unit Development by re-subdividing three existing lots into three new lots of 0.18
acres (Lot 1), 0.14 acres (Lot 2), and 1.06 acres (Lot 3), and constructing a 3,350 sf financial institution on Lot 1, a 6,480 sf 2-story mixed commercial and residential building on
Lot 2 containing two market rate and one inclusionary units, and a three-story 27-unit multifamily building on Lot 3, of which 9 units are proposed to be inclusionary, 760 Shelburne
Road.
PERMIT HISTORY
Preliminary and final plat application SD-23-05 was denied by the Board on August 2, 2023. There were two major criteria, and a few subsidiary criteria, identified in that decision
as not met. Minor modifications to the LDR, and the passage of Act 47, have occurred since the time of the previous denial by the DRB.
The related sketch plan application was reviewed by the Board on December 5, 2023. As a new PUD application, the Board is not obligated to uphold any of the findings of denied preliminary
and final plat application #SD-23-05, though for the purposes of this report Staff has assumed the Board will make the same findings on things that are unchanged from that application.
Feedback provided by the Board on December 5, 2023 included direction on modifying the Shelburne Road façade of the corner building, widening the direct pedestrian access required by
the urban design overlay district, transparency of glazing, and mix of inclusionary units.
COMMENTS
Development Review Planner Marla Keene and Director of Planning and Zoning Paul Conner, hereafter referred to as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted by the applicant and offer the
following comments.
General PUDs are subject to the requirements of 15.C.04 and 15.C.07, as well as site plan review standards, general provisions, and supplemental regulations as applicable.
Numbered items for the Board’s attention are in red.
SUMMARY OF THE BOARD’S AUTHORITY TO WAIVE OR MODIFY STANDARDS
The applicant has requested a modification or waiver for each dimensional standard of the LDR. As a preamble to discussion of the applicant’s requested modifications and waivers, Staff
has summarized the ability of the Board to waive or modify standards.
Article 15.C describes the authority of the Board in granting PUD approval:
15.C.01A. Authority
The Development Review Board (DRB) has the authority under 24 VSA § 4417 to review, and to approve, to approve with modifications and conditions, or to disapprove an application for
a Planned Unit Development (PUD).
The DRB also has the authority to modify the Land Development Regulations in association with PUD review, subject to the standards and conditions for Planned Unit Development, as specified
by PUD type under this Article, in support of more efficient, compact, walkable, and well-planned forms of residential neighborhood, mixed use, and infill development, and the permanent
conservation of resource lands and other open space.
In addition to modifications or waivers intended to accommodate site constraints under Section 15.A.01 of the subdivision regulations, this may include modifications of underlying zoning
and subdivision regulations pertaining to blocks, building lots, building types, allowed densities of development, and the type and mix of allowed uses.
This may also include DRB review and approval of alternative forms of compliance with applicable PUD standards under Section 15.C.04.
Staff calls the Board’s attention to the underlined section (2) above, which describes the purpose for why the LDR provides the authority for standards to be modified in a PUD. Within
the General PUD in particular, which provides more latitude in determining the extent of any modifications than in other PUD types, Staff considers it particularly important that the
design be more efficient, compact, walkable, and well-planned than the project would be if it were to fully comply with the dimensional standards.
The specific parameters of the modifications enabled in a General PUD are contained within 15.C.07G.
15.C.07(G). General PUD Dimensional Standards.
Relevant subdivision, site plan, zoning district, and applicable overlay district dimensional standards shall form the basis of the design of a General PUD and shall apply unless modified,
reduced, or waived by the DRB under (2) below.
The DRB must find an application meets the requirements of 15.C.07(G)(2) in order to modify, reduce, or waive Site Plan requirements using 14.04(A)(3), Site Plan application requirements
using 14.05(G), Subdivision requirements using 15.A.01(B)(3), Scenic Overlay District requirements using 10.02(I)(2), (J), and/or (K).
The DRB has authority to allow alternative compliance under 15.C.04(C)(3).
Height restrictions may be modified, reduced, or waived in underlying zoning districts identified in 3.07(D)(2) by the DRB under (2) below, except as noted in 15.C.07(C)(2)(b) above.
The standards of review in 3.07(D)(2) shall apply.
The DRB cannot modify, reduce, or waive standards as listed in 15.C.07(A)(3).
In response to the existing or planned Development Context in the Planning Area, the DRB may modify, reduce, or waive one or more applicable dimensional standards as necessary to:
Accommodate reductions in the available area associated with infill or redevelopment, that result in insufficient acreage to meet applicable dimensional standards; or
Allow for more creative and efficient subdivision and site layout and design that advances the purposes of the underlying zoning district and/or the goals of the Comprehensive Plan,
particularly in response to existing site limitations that cannot be eliminated; or
Ensure that the pattern and form of proposed development is compatible with existing or planned Development Context in the Planning Area determined under 15.C.07(F) and to Transition
Zone standards in 15.C.04(E); or
Allow for greater energy efficiency, use of alternative energy, green building design, or otherwise furthering of the South Burlington City Council’s Resolution on Climate Change dated
August 7, 2017.
Context shall be determined by the existing or planned Development Context in the Planning Area under Section 15.C.07(F) and (G).
Within a General PUD, 15.C.07A describes limitations on the Board’s authority to modify standards:
15.C.07A. Authority and Limitations.
The Development Review Board (DRB) has the authority under 24 VSA § 4417 to review, to approve, to approve with modifications and conditions, or to disapprove an application for a Planned
Unit Development (PUD), as further described in Section 15.C.01.
Limitations on DRB authority under 14.04(A)(3)(b) apply.
In addition, in no case shall the DRB vary:
Density restrictions and/or allow an increase in overall density except as authorized via use of Transferrable Development Rights or via Inclusionary Zoning.
Requirements of the Urban Design Overlay District and Transit Overlay District, as applicable.
Applicable lot coverage and/or building coverage maximums allowed within each zoning district, as measured across the PUD as a whole, except as authorized via use of Transferrable Development
Rights.
Environmental Protection Standards under Article 12, except as authorized within that Article.
Parking and building location requirements in Section 14.06(A)(2), except as authorized within that Section.
15.C.04(C) provides additional information pertaining to modification of standards via a separate tool, alternative compliance:
15.C.04(C)(3) Alternative Compliance. One or more PUD dimensional and design standards under this Article may be modified at applicant request for an alternative form of compliance,
subject to separate DRB review and approval, to provide the flexibility necessary to address unique site conditions or constraints; to enable compatibility with existing or planned
development in the vicinity; or to allow for exceptional and innovative design. Note that alternative compliance does not constitute an exemption from a PUD standard. Allowed modifications
include proposed functional or design alternatives that may be considered in place of a specific requirement under this Article, only if the intent of the requirement is met or exceeded.
In approving a request for alternative compliance, the DRB must find that the proposed alternative:
Conforms to the intent, description, and defining characteristics of the selected PUD type(s);
Achieves the intent of the PUD standard to be modified;
Results in development that is equivalent or demonstrably superior in function, design, and quality to that required under the standard to be modified; and
Does not adversely impact properties, uses or facilities within, adjacent to, or in the vicinity of the planned development (e.g., regarding walkability, traffic, parking, drainage).
The DRB in approving an alternative form of compliance may attach conditions as necessary to ensure compliance, or to mitigate any adverse impacts resulting from a proposed alternative.
This option is separate from the authority granted for standards of the underlying zoning district to be modified in a PUD; it has greater applicability (to include design standards
in addition to dimensional standards) and established as an opportunity to demonstrate how a different standard can better meet the intent of the Regulations. Staff calls the Board’s
attention to the underlined section (c) above, which describes additional requirements for the Board to modify a standard. Modified standards must result in development that is equivalent
or demonstrably superior in function, design, and quality to that required under the standard to be modified. The Board may require additional conditions to mitigate adverse impacts
resulting from a proposed alternative.
In summary, under the current LDR, the Board must only grant a modification for cause, and the modification must result in better compliance with the objectives of the LDR.
ZONING DISTRICT AND DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS
5.01A Commercial 1 – C1 Zoning District Purpose.
A Commercial 1 District is hereby formed in order to encourage the location of higher-intensity residential, retail, office, and vertically mixed uses in a manner that serves as or enhances
a compact central business area. Other uses that would benefit from nearby access to a central business area, including clustered residential development and small industrial employers,
may be permitted. Warehouses, major industrial employers, and incompatible industrial uses shall not be permitted. Urban design supporting a transition for these areas from a suburban
environment to compact centers is encouraged.
15.C.07B General PUD Description, Purpose, and Characteristics.
A General PUD is a type of planned development that allows for relief from the strict dimensional standards for individual lots in order to encourage innovation in design and layout
and efficient use of land consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Defining characteristics of a General PUD include well-planned, -sited, and -designed development projects that:
Conform to the goals in the City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan and South Burlington City Council’s Resolution on Climate Change dated August 7, 2017.
Support and enable affordable housing development.
Contribute to the City’s economic vitality, in response to changing markets and consumer demand, by providing needed housing, goods, services, and employment opportunities.
Redevelop underperforming properties and commercial strips (retrofits), contaminated sites (brownfields), and large expanses of parking (gray fields) into more compact forms of walkable,
pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use development.
Extend or re-establish existing street, sidewalk, and recreation path connections.
Incorporate a density of development that supports walkable residential, mixed use, and transit-oriented development, compatible in design with the surrounding area.
Improve the physical appearance, walkability, and amount of civic and green space within existing residential neighborhoods, commercial centers, and commercial strip development.
Introduce missing or complementary uses, facilities, services, amenities, or civic space intended to serve the immediate and surrounding area.
Foster context-sensitive transitions among and between neighborhoods, commercial areas, mixed use areas, civic spaces, and natural resource areas.
Staff has included these purpose statements for the underlying district and the General PUD as they inform the Board’s objectives in evaluating this proposed Planned Unit Development.
Dimensional Requirements
Commercial 1-R15 Zoning District
Required
Proposed Lot 1
Proposed Lot 2
Proposed Lot 3
Proposed Overall
@ Min. Lot Size
40,000 sq. ft.
8,054 sq. ft.
6,287 sq. ft.
46,359 sq. ft.
60,700 sq. ft
@ Max. Building Coverage
40 %
41.6%
51.5%
22.9%
28.4%
@ Max. Overall Coverage
70 %
63.8%
83.7%
75.7%
74.9%
@ Min. Front Setback, Urban Design Overlay
20 ft.
11 ft.
13 ft.
78 ft.
N/A
@ Min. Side Setback
10 ft.
10 ft.
9.9 ft.
11 ft
N/A
@ Min. Rear Setback
30 ft.
N/A
9.9 ft.
N/A
N/A
@ Max. Front Setback Coverage, Shelburne Road
30%
37.7%
36.4%
45.6%
39.0%
@ Max. Front Setback Coverage, Swift St
30%
21.8%
N/A
66.3%
52.7%
@ Max. Height
5 stories max, Appearance of 2 stories min
1 story
2 stories
3 stories
N/A
√ Zoning Compliance
@ Modification or Waiver Requested, discussed below.
Lot Size
The applicant has requested modification of minimum lot size from 40,000 sf to less than 6,300 sf. This is to allow the creation of three buildings, two of which are proposed to be
under 6,000 sf, on what would otherwise be required to be developed as a single lot with a single principal structure. While Staff does not have concerns about the reduction in lot
size specifically, Staff recommends the Board hold the project to the standard of creating a relatively large cohesive site rather than three distinct sites, and take the district lot
size into consideration when reviewing the height modification request below.
Height
Buildings within the Urban Design Overlay secondary node are required to have the appearance of at least two stories. All three buildings are located within the urban design overlay,
and therefore must have the appearance of at least two stories. The applicant has provided a one-story building on Lot 1, the building most proximate to the intersection of Shelburne
Road & Swift Street. At sketch the Board provided
feedback that only a portion of the façade achieved the appearance of two stories and directed the applicant to modify the southernmost portion of the Shelburne Road façade.
Elevations presented at sketch:
/
Elevations presented with this preliminary and final plat application:
/
Staff is unable to discern any difference between the two elevations, and in fact the revision date on the plans is unchanged. There is no justification provided for why the applicant
did not make modifications in the plans in response to the Board’s feedback to integrate the blank wall into the remainder of the building.
Staff recommends the Board as the applicant to describe why they did not make any changes. Staff reminds the Board they are not obligated to make a determination in public session but
they should obtain all the information they need to make a decision before moving on.
ARCHITECT RESPONSE: In the final decision letter for SD-23-05 dated 8/2/2023 the below was included:
/
See plans by TGP Architecture dated 2023-08-28. The proposed building does not differ from the building the Board noted met criteria in the excerpt above.
Other Modifications: Staff recommends the Board consider the remaining modification requests in total as well as individually.
Building Coverage
The applicant has requested a waiver of maximum building coverage for two lots, though taken together, the building coverage for the PUD would be below the building coverage for the
district. Staff has no concerns with this request given the overall site layout appears to be consistent with
the feedback provided by the Board at sketch.
Lot Coverage
The applicant has proposed to increase lot coverage above the maximum allowable in the zoning district through the use of additional on-site open/civic space in 10.05E. This is analyzed
under Urban Design Overlay below.
Front Setback and Front Setback Coverage on Shelburne Road
The applicant has proposed reduced front setbacks and increased setback coverage compared to the standards of the zoning district. Because the property is located within the urban design
overlay (UDO), front setbacks are 20-ft instead of the standard 30-ft for the C1-R15 zoning district, though the applicant is proposing front setbacks as small as 10 feet.
Staff continues to consider that front setback coverage is calculated incorrectly. 3.06H is as follows.
H. Front Setback Area Landscaping for Non-Residential Uses.
In the case of nonresidential uses, not more than thirty percent (30%) of the area of the required front setback shall be used for driveways and parking and the balance shall be suitably
landscaped and maintained in good appearance. Design approaches that that use landscaping elements in the front setback which enhance stormwater infiltration or management are encouraged.
No portion of the required front setback shall be used for storage or for any other purpose except as provided in this section. In addition, a continuous strip fifteen (15) feet in
width traversed only by driveways and sidewalks shall be maintained between the street right-of-way line and the balance of the lot, which strip should be landscaped and maintained
in good appearance. This provision shall apply also to yards that abut a right-of-way designated for a future street.
Despite numerous comments directing the applicant to recalculate coverage as only driveways and parking, the applicant’s values still seem higher than what is actually present (for instance
on Lot 1 there are NO driveways or parking, therefore front setback coverage should be reported as zero). As the applicant has not provided this calculation, Staff recommends instead
the Board include a condition specifying that driveways and parking within the front setback shall not be expanded by any subsequent site plan modification.
Side and Rear Setbacks
The applicant has proposed Lot 2 to have side setbacks slightly less than the required minimum of 10 ft, and Lot 2 to have a rear setback significantly less than the required minimum
of 30 ft. Staff considers the side and rear setback modifications to be unimportant since the property lines are relatively arbitrary and are not located to coincide with a site feature.
10.05 Urban Design Overlay District (UDO)
A. Purpose. It is the purpose of the Urban Design Overlay District to recognize the impact of simple design principles and to reflect a design aesthetic that fosters accessibility and
creates civic pride in the City’s most traveled areas and gateways, while furthering the stated goals of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The Urban Design Overlay District aids in fulfilling
the City’s vision to enable infill and conversion development, encourage pedestrian movement, serve local and regional shopping and employment needs, and make use of existing public
transportation. The City intends for the applicable
areas to provide safe and inviting access to adjacent neighborhoods.
The Urban Design Overlay District is located exclusively along Shelburne and Williston Roads.
C. Boundaries & Applicability.
Nodes. These regulations recognize that some areas of a corridor serve or will serve as important connections, gateways, or areas of activity. As such, a more urban form is desired and,
where noted, required and permitted. Site design and buildings within designated nodes shall provide a welcoming and safe street presence for all users. Nodes are listed as ‘primary’
and ‘secondary’, and are mapped and regulated accordingly.
The project is located within a secondary node.
D. Standards. Except where noted herein, the dimensional standards, use, and other standards of the underlying Zoning District shall still apply.
Staff reminds the Board that the standards of the Urban Design overlay are not permitted to be modified, as described in 15.C.07A.
Entries. Buildings on subject properties must have at least one entry facing the primary road in the corridor. Any such entry shall:
All three buildings are proposed to have an entry facing the street.
Be an operable entrance, as defined in these Regulations.
An operable entrance is defined as one which is useable and open to the tenants / owners for entry and exit. Staff recommends the Board include a condition requiring entrances be operated
in a manner consistent with this definition.
Serve, architecturally, as a principal entry. Front entries shall be a focal point of the front façade and shall be an easily recognizable feature of the building. Possibilities include
accenting front entries with features such as awnings, porticos, overhangs, recesses/projections, decorative front doors and side lights, or emphasis through varied color or special
materials. This requirement does not preclude additional principal entry doors.
Staff considers this criterion met for all three buildings.
Shall have a direct, separate walkway to the primary road. This walkway shall be at least eight (8) feet in width and may meander for design purposes, but must serve as a pedestrian-oriented
access.
This criterion is met for the proposed bank and the proposed multiuse building. The applicant has provided only a 5-ft wide sidewalk connecting Swift Street to the multifamily building.
At sketch some Board members expressed that they believed an 8-ft wide walkway to be unnecessary for the multifamily building, but nevertheless the standards of the urban design overlay
district cannot be modified or waived. See 15.C.07(A)(3)(b) above. Staff recommends the Board direct the applicant to modify the design to provide a direct 8-ft wide walkway from
Swift Street to the principal entrance of the multifamily building, or indicate that it is not their intention to do so, in which case Staff considers the Board must find this criterion
not met.
TCE RESPONSE: The sidewalk has been revised to be 8’ wide by shifting the driveway entrance on Swift Street west by 3’.
Glazing. Windows are key to the overall design of a building and the relationship between its exterior and interior.
For all properties in the Urban Overlay District, a minimum of 75% of glazing shall be transparent.
At sketch, the applicant requested that they be allowed to demonstrate compliance with this criterion at the preliminary plat stage of review. It appears from the provided elevations
that some of the glazing is not proposed to be transparent, though the elevations are unlabeled, and no calculation is provided. Staff has been unable to locate any demonstration of
the percent transparency in the applicant’s submission. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to specifically enumerate the proposed glazing transparency for the proposed bank.
ARCHITECT RESPONSE: Glazing information is provided on sheet A-3 by TPG Architecture dated 2023-08-28, included in the materials submitted in response to staff comments.
/
And:
/
In non-residential uses, first story glazing shall have a minimum height of 7 vertical feet.
Staff considers this criterion met.
For residential uses, first story glazing shall have a minimum height of 5 vertical feet.
Staff considers this criterion met.
Dimensional Standards
Height Minimum
(Maximums per underlying zoning district)
Glazing
Features
Setback from ROW
Designated Primary Node
2 stories
First stories: minimum of 60% glazing across the width of the building facade on primary street; 40% minimum glazing across width of the façade facing the secondary street.
Must have significant architectural feature at corner of corner building.
Minimum 20 feet
Designated Secondary Node
Appearance of two stories. Buildings with a GFA of less than 6,000 SF may be one story.
First stories shall have a minimum of 60% glazing across the width of the building facade on primary street; 40% minimum glazing across width of the façade facing the secondary street.
Must have significant architectural feature at corner of corner building.
Minimum 20 feet
All other properties
No height minimums
First stories shall have a minimum of 40% glazing across the width of the building facade
Minimum 20 feet
This property, and the street facing facades of all three buildings, are located within a secondary node.
Height and setbacks are discussed above.
Staff considers the remainder of these criteria met.
Building Stories, Heights, and Rooftop Apparatus.
Minimum stories of buildings within the Urban Design Overlay District are defined as per Article 2- Definitions and Section 8.06(F)(1) of these Regulations.
Section 8.06(G) of these regulations shall apply to rooftop elements of buildings within the Urban Design Overlay District.
The applicant has provided plans indicating that the buildings are proposed to have rooftop mechanical equipment. Staff recommends the Board include a condition that the equipment shall
be arranged so as to minimize visibility from any point at or below the roof level of the subject structures and screened with materials that are consistent with the materials of the
building. prior to issuance of a zoning permit for construction.
Landscaping. Projects within the Urban Design Overlay District shall meet minimum landscaping requirements as per Section 13.04 of these Regulations. Projects are also subject to the
following supplemental standards:
Landscaping which is required elsewhere in these Regulations to serve as a buffer between properties shall not count towards the minimum landscaping budget.
This criterion refers to lots that are adjacent to residential zoning districts and is not applicable.
For lots with buildings which are set back 50 or more feet from the front lot line, at least 50% of the required landscaping shall be installed between the front building line and the
front lot line.
This criterion applies to the building on Lot 3, and is closely linked to the location of the project within an urban design node:
Nodes. These regulations recognize that some areas of a corridor serve or will serve as important connections, gateways, or areas of activity. As such, a more urban form is
desired and, where noted, required and permitted. Site design and buildings within designated nodes shall provide a welcoming and safe street presence for all users. Nodes are listed
as ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’, and are mapped and regulated accordingly.
Further, the regulations require the front of the building to face the street. (10.05D: Buildings on subject properties must have at least one entry facing the primary road in the
corridor. Any such entry shall… serve architecturally as a principal entry. Front entries shall be a focal point of the front façade and shall be an easily recognizable feature of
the building.)
The applicant has demonstrated that 50% of the landscaping required on Lot 3 (based on the computation in 13.04G) has been provided between the building on Lot 3 and the street.
Allowance for Increase Lot Coverage via supplemental On-Site Open/Civic Space or Transferable Development Rights. For parcels with land underlying the Urban Design Overlay District,
the maximum lot coverage may be increased by up to ten (10) percentage points using one of the two methods described below. Such allowance shall apply only to the subject lot with land
underlying the Urban Design Overlay District and not any adjacent lots and must be approved in conjunction with a site plan or Planned Unit Development for the subject lot.
Example: For a lot in a zoning district where the maximum lot coverage as identified in Appendix C is 70%, the maximum lot coverage for said lot may be increased to 80%.
The applicant is proposing a total lot coverage within the PUD of 74.9%, 4.9% over the maximum allowable. They are proposing to add additional on-site open/civic space using this allowance.
On-Site Open/Civic Space Option. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with each of the following standards as part of any proposal to increase lot coverage under this subsection:
For each additional increment of lot coverage, an area on the site equal to thirty (30) percent of said increment shall be designated on the site plan for the subject parcel as one or
more Snippets/Parklets and/or Pocket/Mini-Parks as enumerated in Article 11.B;
The additional lot coverage is equal to 3,016 sq. ft. Therefore, the applicant must provide 905 additional sq. ft. of open space in a snippet/parklet or pocket/mini-park than is otherwise
required in 14.06C.
The selected Open/Civic Space type(s) must comply with all requirements and guidelines for the applicable type in Article 11.B;
All elements of the applicable Open/Civic Space type shall be constructed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy;
Where elements of such Open/Civic Space type are pre-existing, they may be used to qualify under this section; and,
Impervious areas within an approved Open/Civic Space shall not be considered lot coverage for the purposes of these Regulations.
The applicant is proposing to create additional space in the snippet/parklet open space type, evaluated below under 14.06C.
Phasing
The applicant has proposed to construct the project in two phases. The first phase includes the bank
building and the mixed use building (Lots 1 & 2). The second phase includes the multifamily building. not proposed any phasing. The applicant has provided a phasing plan showing the
geographic extents of each phase and the site elements included in each. The have also provided an open space and landscaping calculation demonstrating that the required minimums for
each are met on a phase by phase basis.
The required site amenity is calculated as follows.
Required
Provided
Phase 1
6,590 sf non-residential x 6% = 396 sf
3 units x 100 sf / unit = 300 sf
890 sf snippet
Phase 2
27 units x 60 sf / unit = 1,620 sf
3,016 additional sf lot coverage in Urban Design Overlay = 905 sf
1,840 sf snippet
1,830 sf snippet
Total
3,221 sf
4,560 sf
Site amenity is met on a phase by phase basis.
Landscaping Phasing
The required landscaping is calculated as follows.
Required
Provided
Phase 1
$51,500
$62,756
Phase 1 + 2
$123,500
$133,769
Provided landscaping includes hardscape elements of benches and sculptures. Landscaping value is met on a phase by phase basis.
Bicycle Parking Phasing
The required bicycle parking is calculated as follows.
Required Long-Term Parking
Provided Long-Term Parking
Required Short-Term Parking
Provided Short-Term Parking
Phase 1
4
4
8
4
Phase 2
27
27
4
8
Total
31
31
12
12
Two of the long-term bicycle parking spaces in Phase 1 are located within an interior room within the proposed bank building. Users of the racks would have to pass through what appears
to be the employee break room with their bicycles in order to use the racks. While the LDRs provide limited detail on the location of long-term bicycle parking, Staff considers the
location to be less than ideal and considers a more accessible location would be one way the applicant could improve the project in light of the dimensional modifications the applicant
is requesting as a PUD.
Staff recommends the Board discuss and determine whether they will require improvements to the location of long term bicycle parking in the bank building.
APPLICANT RESPONSE: The applicant would like to keep the interior bike parking as shown on the plan. The provided interior bike parking appears to meet the regulations and it is not
clear that the LDRs require a different layout than provided.
Bicycle racks serving lots 1 and 2 are located just beyond the Lots 1 and 2 property lines on Lot 3. The applicant has not made any waiver request for this. Since the project is proposed
as a PUD, Staff considers off-site bicycle racks may count towards the required minimum. However, the bike racks serving Lots 1
and 2 (together comprising Phase 1) do not provide the minimum for those lots (8 spaces required, 4 provided).
Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to provide temporary short term bicycle parking for Phase 1 until such time as Phase 2 is complete. Any Board finding allowing such
an alternative should provide a specific location for the temporary spaces.
TCE RESPONSE: The Applicant would like to request a waiver for the Phase I bike racks. If the board finds that not acceptable, (4) additional temporary short-term bike parking spaces
can be added adjacent to the bike rack at the end of the northwest parking area. If this is required the shade tree will shift east.
/
Residential Density and 18.01 Inclusionary Zoning
18.01B. Applicability
(2) Covered Development.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this bylaw, the provisions of this section shall apply in the locations defined in Subsection (B)(1) (Applicability – Zoning Districts and Locations)
to any development, notwithstanding any phasing of the development, that will result in the creation of twelve (12) or more total dwelling units through subdivision, Planned Unit Development,
new construction, or the conversion of an existing structure or structures from non-residential to residential use.
The proposed project is proposed to include 30 dwelling units. The project is therefore subject to the Inclusionary Zoning minimum requirements.
C. Inclusionary Units
(1) For covered development, at least fifteen percent (15%) of the total dwelling units offered for rent. Inclusionary Rental Units and at least ten percent (10%) of the total dwelling
units offered for sale, including units offered for sale in fee simple, shared, condominium or cooperative
ownership, shall be Inclusionary Ownership Units. Prior to or upon request for the Certificate of Occupancy the applicant shall notify the City whether the units will be Inclusionary
Rental Units or Inclusionary Ownership Units so that the City, or its designee, may confirm that the offered rents or sales prices meet these requirements prior to issuance of the Certificate
of Occupancy. In addition:
The applicant is proposing to construct 30 rental units consisting of 1 one-bedroom unit and 29 two-bedroom units.
The residential base zoning density for the C1-R15 zoning district allows for the construction of 20 units, given the acreage of the property in question (1.39 acres x 15 units per acre
= 20.9 units). Of those 20 units, 15% must be inclusionary rental units, so 3 inclusionary rental units are required. The applicant therefore is permitted to construct 17 market-rate
and 3 inclusionary rental units as per this section. Offsets and bonus provisions are discussed below.
Inclusionary units required under this section shall be:
Constructed on site, unless off-site construction is approved under Section 18.01(E)(1)(b) (Off-Site Construction).
Ten inclusionary unit are proposed in the multifamily building on Lot 3.
Integrated into the overall project layout and similar in architectural style and outward appearance to market rate units in the proposed development.
The inclusionary units are proposed to be integrated into a 27-unit building consisting of ten inclusionary units and seventeen market rate units.
(iv) Inclusionary units may differ from market rate units with regard to both interior amenities and amount of Habitable Area. However, the minimum Habitable Area of inclusionary units
shall be 450 square feet for studios, 650 square feet for 1-bedroom units, 900 square feet for 2-bedroom units and 1,200 square feet for three (3) or more bedrooms. If the average
(mean) area of the Habitable Area of the market rate units is less than the minimum area required for the Habitable Area of inclusionary units, then the Habitable Area of the inclusionary
units shall be no less than 90% of the average (mean) Habitable Area of the market rate units.
Staff is unable to locate information demonstrating compliance with this criterion in the applicant’s submission. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to provide information
demonstrating the areas of the proposed inclusionary units.
APPLICANT RESPONSE: See attached memo from Rabideau Architects dated April 12, 2024.
(vii) The average (mean) number of bedrooms in the inclusionary units shall be no fewer than the average number of bedrooms in the market rate units. For projects involving 50 or more
dwelling units, the applicant shall provide a revised estimate to the Administrative Officer at each interval of 50 dwelling units; the revised estimate shall account for the differences
in estimates vs. actuals for the units permitted to date and shall apply to inclusionary units for which the Administrative Officer has not issued a zoning permit.
The applicant indicated all of the units in the 27-unit building will be 2-bedroom units. Staff considers this criterion met.
F. Offset for Fulfillment of Inclusionary Unit Requirements
To offset an applicant’s fulfillment of this Section’s inclusionary unit requirement is an allotment of one additional dwelling unit for each required Inclusionary Rental Unit that is
constructed.
As per 18.01.C(1) above, the applicant is allowed to construct 20 units (17 market rate and 3 inclusionary). However, 18.01.F(2) allows one additional dwelling unit for each required
inclusionary rental unit constructed. Since the applicant is required to construct 3 inclusionary units, they may build 3 additional market rate units as an offset for fulfilling the
requirements of 18.01.C(1), for a total of 23 units (20 market rate and 3 inclusionary).
G. Density Bonuses for Exceeding Inclusionary Housing Requirements
When an applicant voluntarily includes, in the base zoning density unit-maximum for the development, more than the number of inclusionary units required under Section 18.01(C)(1), then
upon the applicant’s request, the development shall receive, in addition to the offset units, a density bonus. The density bonus shall be one dwelling unit for each voluntary Inclusionary
Rental Unit and two dwelling units for each voluntary Inclusionary Ownership Unit, up to a maximum density of 50% more than the base maximum density permitted in the zoning district.
Example (4): In a 40-unit rental housing development on a 10-acre plot in a R4 district, the developer is required to build six (6) inclusionary units. The developer shall receive
an offset of six (6) market rate dwelling units, and the project now includes a total of 46 dwelling units. In order to receive approval for the maximum 50% density increase (which
equates to a maximum of 14 additional units in this example since the offset units need to be accounted for), the developer includes an additional fourteen (14) inclusionary units in
the base zoning density unit-maximum (40) for which the developer receives 14 bonus density units. In sum, the total project includes 60 units, 20 of which are inclusionary (33% of
the units) and 40 of which are market rate (67% of the units).
This section applies to applicants seeking bonus units, which are beyond the 3 offset units described in (F) above. Based on LDR 18.01G(2) and supported by Example (4), the applicant
must include one inclusionary unit in the base zoning density unit-maximum for each bonus unit they wish to construct. Therefore in order to construct 30 units total (10 over the base),
the applicant must provide in the 20 base (67% of the units) the three required inclusionary units and an additional 7 inclusionary units, for a total of 10 inclusionary units (33%
of the units).
Staff considers this criterion met.
I. Administration and Compliance
Application Requirements. In addition to other submission requirements applicable to proposed projects specified within this bylaw, applications under this section shall include the
following information:
A site or subdivision plan that identifies the number, locations, types, and sizes of inclusionary units in relation to market rate units;
This information is summarized above.
Documentation supporting the allocation of inclusionary and market rate units, including inclusionary unit set aside calculations;
This information is summarized above.
A description of each unit’s type, floor area, number of bedrooms, estimated housing costs, and other data necessary to determine unit affordability;
In denied application SD-23-05, the applicant had indicated that the maximum monthly rent will be limited to one twelfth of 30% of the targeted HUD Area Median Income (80%) corresponding
to two unit bedrooms. No such testament has been made here. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to clarify. Staff notes the computation of housing cost must include rent
and utilities pursuant to 18.01D(1).
APPLICANT RESPONSE: See attached memo from Rabideau Architects dated April 12, 2024.
A list of proposed options, if any, to be incorporated in the plan, as provided for under Subsection (E) (Developer Options) of this Article;
No alternative compliance options have been proposed.
Documentation regarding household income eligibility;
The applicant has stated in their cover letter that the inclusionary rental units maximum monthly rent will be limited to one-twelfth of 30% of the targeted HUD Area Median income (80%)
corresponding to the size of the specific unit as measured in number of bedrooms.
Information regarding the long-term management of inclusionary units, including the responsible party or parties, as required to ensure continued affordability;
Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to describe the proposed long term management of the inclusionary units.
APPLICANT RESPONSE: See attached memo from Rabideau Architects dated April 12, 2024.
Draft legal documents required under this section to ensure continued affordability;
No draft legal documents have been provided. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to submit draft documents, and allow sufficient time for a brief review by Staff to confirm
they generally cover the necessary subject areas, prior to closing the hearing.
APPLICANT RESPONSE: See attached memo from Rabideau Architects dated April 12, 2024.
Construction timeline for both inclusionary and market rate units; and
Staff considers that concurrent construction of the inclusionary units as part of the 27 unit building to be adequate.
Other information as requested by the Administrative Officer to determine project compliance with inclusionary zoning requirements.
Staff recommends the Board include a condition that additional reasonable information necessary to determine project compliance with inclusionary zoning requirements may be requested
by the Administrative Officer prior to issuance of a zoning permit.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
15.C.04 PUD Standards Applicable to All PUD Types
A. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed PUD must conform to the City’s Comprehensive Plan in effect at the time of application. Conformance with the plan in this context
means that the proposed PUD must:
Advance any clearly stated plan policies and objectives specific to the type and location of the proposed development;
The property is located at the intersection of Shelburne Road and Swift Street in an area designated as “Balanced Mixed Residential and Commercial: High-Scale” on the Future Land Use
Map in City Plan 2024. This land use type promotes pedestrian-scale, walkable, urban, mixed-use spaces that integrate well-landscaped public areas and amenities. Small commercial establishments
should complement nearby residential uses and be at urban-scale density to promote use of the transit and active transportation systems. Specifically, Goal 79 states: “Support mixed-use
development that realizes the vision of this Plan,” Action 129 states “Minimize overall demand for parking through design, regulations, and investments that foster pedestrian, bicycle,
and transit use, and provide efficient, aesthetically pleasing shared parking options,” and Action 130 states “Focus infill and redevelopment in these areas and at a higher scale and
urban level of density.” Staff considers this specific objective to be met.
Incorporate preferred settlement patterns, including future land uses, densities and intensities of development referenced in the land use plan, as implemented through planned unit development
provisions specific to each PUD type.
Planned land use is balanced mixed residential & commercial high scale.
Incorporate, as applicable, planned facilities, services and infrastructure identified in the utilities and facilities plan, as implemented under the City’s adopted Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) and Official Map.
The applicant is proposing to extend the existing recreation path along Swift Street to Shelburne Road. Compatibility with that recreation path is discussed below.
B. Conformance with the Master Plan. Each phase of a PUD developed in one or more phases must conform to the PUD Master Plan, as approved or amended by the DRB under Article 15.B, including
the approved development plan, phasing schedule, buildout budget, management plan, and any associated development agreements or conditions of master plan approval.
All PUDs are subject to master plan review unless the DRB waives the requirement. The Board may waive this requirement for a PUD of less than four acres to be developed in a single
phase of no more than three years.
Staff recommends the Board waive master plan for this application.
C. Compliance with Regulations.
This standard is excerpted under Board Authority above as 15.C.04(C). In order to grant modification of a standard, the Board must find the development is equivalent or demonstrably
superior in function, design, and quality to that required under the standard to be modified.
D. Development Density.
Intent. A Planned Unit Development is intended to accommodate within a designated Development Area typically higher effective densities of development than the underlying zoning district
may allow, as necessary to accommodate:
The clustering of development to conserve resources identified for protection;
A more efficient and cost-effective use of land, facilities, services, and infrastructure;
Densities that support a walkable, pedestrian-oriented pattern of development; or
Transit-supportive densities of development along existing and planned transit routes.
Staff considers this criterion to be largely designed to apply to larger PUDs and not applicable here.
Within a PUD, the overall density and intensity of development shall be determined based on the total Buildable Area included within designated Development Areas, as shown on the PUD
Master Plan; and land use allocations, PUD density and dimensional standards, and allowed building types and standards as specified by PUD type.
Buildable area, land use allocations, and building types are not relevant concepts for General PUD type4s. Dimensional standards are discussed above.
Buildable Area. As there are no identified natural resource constraints and no proposed public rights-of-way on the property, the buildable area is equal to the total land area.
Land Use Allocations. Not applicable.
Minimum (Base) Density.
Nonresidential Base Density.
Maximum Development Density.
Minimum and maximum density are not applicable concepts for General PUD types; requirements of the underlying districts apply.
E. Transition Zone. A PUD may also incorporate one or more transition zones along PUD or property boundaries, as indicated on the PUD Master Plan and delineated on preliminary and final
subdivision plans, to include the minimum land area necessary to either extend and integrate compatible, complementary forms of planned development, or to separate and buffer conflicting,
incompatible forms of planned development, in relation to existing and planned development in the vicinity of the PUD.
The applicant has provided the required context analysis which has been used to evaluate compliance with this criterion.
The “Transition Area” for purposes of analysis, must at minimum incorporate the prevalent pattern of development directly adjacent to and within the vicinity of the PUD, including the
relative layout, type and density of existing and planned development (e.g., street, block and lot configurations, building placement and height); existing and planned transportation
and infrastructure connections; traffic patterns; public facilities and services; and civic space, resource land and other designated open space areas located within one-quarter to
one-half mile of PUD boundaries, depending on the development context.
The applicant describes the prevalent development pattern by quadrant, with the residential neighborhoods to the south east having 1/4 to 1/3 acre lots with 25 – 30 ft setbacks, Swift
Street
having lots in the 0.5 to 1.5 acre range with 20 – 30 ft setbacks, and the commercial lots on Shelburne Road being varied in size with generally larger setbacks of 80 ft or greater.
Building heights in the project vicinity vary from single story to two story, with some newer buildings on Swift Street from three to four stories tall.
Acceptable design techniques and modifications applied within a Transition Zone, subject to DRB review and approval, include but may not be limited to:
Avoiding incompatible land uses along PUD boundaries, for example by ensuring that similar, or compatible, complementary uses are located on facing blocks or lots, and incompatible uses
abut rear lot lines or are otherwise separated by buffers or open space.
Using existing natural features, such as changes in topography, waterways, or tree stands to visually screen or functionally separate different forms and intensities of development.
Modifying street and block dimensions and standards as necessary to connect with or to extend adjoining street, block, and path networks.
Using streets and streetscape elements to visually define transitions and to functionally integrate or separate different forms and intensities of development.
Matching the relative density or intensity of adjoining development along PUD boundaries by adjusting or averaging lot dimensions (frontage, depth); building orientation and spacing
(front, side setbacks); or building height (step downs, upper floor step backs) within the transition zone.
Introducing and designing civic or other open space areas (e.g., greenbelts, parks, greens, squares, or plazas) to visually define transition areas, and to functionally integrate or
separate different forms and intensities of development.
Incorporating greenbelts or vegetative buffers and screening of sufficient width and density to visually and functionally separate incompatible forms and intensities of development.
Staff considers this criterion to be largely designed to apply to larger PUDs and not applicable here. Nonetheless, Staff considers the scale of the proposed development to largely
complement the adjoining area, and considers no reservation of land for transitions to be necessary. Discussion of required cross-lot connections is included under LDR 13.02F below.
F. Allowed Uses. Allowed uses within a PUD, unless otherwise expressly allowed or prohibited by PUD type, include any use listed in Appendix C as a permitted or conditional use in the
underlying zoning district(s) that can be accommodated within, or in association with, designated land use allocations and allowed building types.
Conditional uses allowed within the underlying zoning district shall be considered permitted uses within a PUD. Separate conditional use review and approval shall not be required.
Not applicable.
Given the emphasis on compact, walkable forms of residential and mixed use development within a PUD, auto-oriented uses, building types, and facilities, including uses that require expansive
onsite parking, are generally precluded from locating within a PUD, unless specifically designed to
emphasize a pedestrian scale and orientation of development fronting on and accessed from the adjacent street, for example by locating shared parking facilities to the rear of the building,
as accessed from a side street. New drive-through facilities are prohibited from locating within a PUD.
Shared parking is provided, and as discussed above under Urban Design Overlay, the project broadly emphasizes a pedestrian scale and orientation.
G. PUD Dimensional Standards. PUD dimensional standards, where applicable by PUD type, define a range of block, lot, and building height dimensions which are intended to provide, within
defined parameters, some flexibility in the overall pattern of development specific to each type. Where PUD standards vary from associated building type standards, the upper and lower
PUD dimensional limits (maximum and minimum) limits shall apply.
Dimensional standards for a General PUD are those of the underlying zoning district. As described above, within a General PUD, the Board may modify dimensional standards as necessary
to ensure the proposed development is compatible with the Development Context and to better advance the purposes of the underlying zoning district and/or the goals of the Comprehensive
Plan.
H. Street, Building, and Civic Space Types. Not applicable in General PUDs.
I. Solar Siting Preferences. Applicants are encouraged to incorporate renewable energy facilities, and in particular roof- or ground-mounted solar energy facilities that are compatible
with PUD layout and design, as specified by PUD type. Any areas reserved for ground mounted solar installations serving the development must be indicated on the PUD Master Plan and
depicted on preliminary and final subdivision plans.
Renewable energy standards are described in LDR 3.18 and include the requirement for solar-ready roof design in accordance with the Vermont Residential Building Energy Standards (RBES)
and Vermont Commercial Energy Standards (CBES).
3.18C(1)New commercial buildings subject to this Section for which a complete application is submitted following the date these Regulations become effective, shall be required to meet
the standards of Appendix CA: – Solar-Ready Zone of the Commercial Building Energy Standards as prepared and revised by the Vermont Public Service Department.
The applicant has provided rooftop plans demonstrated how the standards of Appendix CA will be met for the two smaller buildings. The City’s current regulations require installation
of a solar array for buildings subject to Appendix CA of the CBES at the time a zoning permit is issued.
J. PUD Design Standards. A proposed PUD must also incorporate and comply with design standards specific to that PUD type, except as allowed in association with a form of Alternate Compliance
approved by the DRB under 15.C.04(C).
General PUD standards are discussed immediately below.
15.C.07 General PUD
General PUD Dimensional Standards.
General PUD dimensional standards are the underlying subdivision, site plan, zoning district, and applicable overlay district standards. This section of the LDR pertains to the DRB’s
authority for modification of zoning district standards, and is excerpted at the beginning of this document under DRB authority.
H. Development Density.
(1) Development Density regulations and definitions included in Section 15.C.04(D) shall apply to General PUDs.
(2) Development density within a General PUD is determined by maximum development density in the underlying zoning district, except as follows.
(a) Density can be re-allocated within the PUD area within single zoning districts;
(b) Additional density may be achieved through either or both Inclusionary Zoning and application of Transferrable Development Rights where specifically authorized by and as regulated
by Section 18.01 or Article 19.
Compliance with allowable density has already been discussed under 18.01 Inclusionary Zoning above.
I. General PUD Design Standards
Design Standards, Generally. The design for a General PUD shall comply with existing Site Plan, Subdivision, and Overlay District regulations and standards, but may allow for variations
from applicable regulations that respond to and incorporate the development context within the Planning Area and under the specific circumstances listed in Section 15C.09(G)(4).
Staff considers no additional discussion of this criterion to be necessary.
Streets. Not applicable
Parking. Parking design and building location requirements applicable in all underlying zones and districts apply to General PUDs, including all requirements in Section 14.06(A)(2).
Parking design and location is discussed under 14.06A(2) below.
Buildings. Buildings and associated building lots within a General PUD must be compatible with the development context in the Planning Area as described under Section 15.C.07(F) and
(G).
Buildings, and their compatibility with the context analysis, are discussed under 14.06B below.
Civic Spaces and Site Amenities. Civic Spaces and/or Site Amenities must be compatible with the existing or planned development context. General PUDs must comply with applicable Civic
Space and/or Site Amenity requirements in Subdivision (Section 15.A.16(B)(4)) and Site Plan (Section 14.06(4)).
Civic spaces are discussed under 14.06C below.
Section 15.A.16(C)(4) requirement for minimum 10% of the total buildable area to be civic space lots apply to General PUDs only for PUDs that involve subdivision of land resulting in
three (3) or more lots, not including the resulting lots that only contain civic space(s).
15.A.16(C)(4) only applies to lots over two acres in size. This criterion is not applicable.
In a General PUD, Civic Spaces required under Subdivision Regulations (Section 15.A.16(C)(4)) and under Site Plan Regulations (Section 14.06(4)) can be satisfied by a combination of
Civic Spaces, Site Amenities, or a combination, applied across the PUD area.
Housing Mix. In a General PUD with more than four (4) residential dwelling units, a mix of two or more dwelling unit types (as allowed within the applicable zoning district) must be
provided as described by Section 15.A.17. Types of dwelling units are differentiated by either housing type under Article 11.C or, within multi-family structures with more than four
(4) dwelling units, by number of bedrooms per unit.
Multifamily structures are provided. At sketch, the Board indicated they should provide a mix of bedroom counts, and indicated they would consider this criterion met if the applicant
switched a number of the two bedroom units to one and three bedroom units. The applicant agreed to do this. However, with this submission, the applicant has not made any changes to
the proposal and instead continues to propose 29 two bedroom units and one (1) one bedroom unit. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to confirm it was their intention to
not make modifications to address the sketch plan comments of the Board.
SITE PLAN REVIEW
14.06 General Review Standards
Except within the City Center Form Based Code District, the following general criteria and standards shall be used by the Development Review Board in reviewing applications for site
plan approval. They are intended to provide a framework within which the designer of the site development is free to exercise creativity, invention, and innovation while improving the
visual appearance of the City of South Burlington. The Development Review Board shall not specify or favor any particular architectural style or design or assist in the design of any
of the buildings submitted for approval. The Development Review Board shall restrict itself to a reasonable, professional review, and, except as otherwise provided in the following
subsections, the applicant shall retain full responsibility for design.
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 DRB shall consider the following:
Street Frontage. Maintain internally-consistent building setbacks and landscaping along the street.
The setbacks along Shelburne Road are inconsistent with adjoining properties and inconsistent with planned development patterns (i.e., the 20-ft zoning district setback). However as
noted above under dimensional standards, Staff considers the reduced front setback allows the project to better meet other applicable standards.
Building Placement, Orientation. Maintain or establish a consistent orientation to the street and, where a prevalent pattern exists, shall continue the manner in which the site’s existing
building foundations relate to the site’s topography and grade.
Staff considers the building orientation and placement to be consistent with the planned pattern of development.
Transition Contrast in Scale. Minimize and mitigate abrupt contrasts in scale between existing, planned or approved development, and proposed development.
As discussed above under 15.C.04 PUD Standards Applicable to All PUD Types, Staff considers the
scale of the proposed development to largely compliment the adjoining area.
Pedestrian Orientation. Improve and enhance pedestrian connections and walkability within the area proposed for development.
Staff considers the proposed site configuration addresses this consideration.
Solar Gain. Orient their rooflines to maximize solar gain potential, to the extent possible within the context of the overall standards of these regulations.
Buildings are proposed to have flat roofs, and must comply with Appendix CA of the Commercial Energy Code pertaining to solar ready roofs. Staff considers this requirement adequately
addresses this consideration.
(2) Parking:
(a) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings. Any side of a building facing a public street shall be considered a front side of a building for the purposes of this
subsection.
Staff considers this criterion met.
(b) Not applicable
(c) Parking area width. Surface parking areas and affiliated drive aisles located to the side of buildings shall not exceed the width of building(s), Civic Spaces, and Site Amenities
along any street frontage. This may be calculated separately or cumulatively for corner lots. Parking approved pursuant to 14.07(B)(2)(b) shall be exempt from this subsection.
Staff considers this criterion met.
(d) Not applicable
(3) Without restricting the permissible limits of the applicable zoning district, the height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and existing or anticipated
adjoining buildings.
Height is discussed above under dimensional standards. Staff considers that the proposed building scale is compatible with planned development, but a single large building would also
be compatible.
B. Relationship of Structures and Site to Adjoining Area.
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.
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.
(3) To accomplish (1) and (2), the DRB shall consider:
Pattern and Rhythm. Update or maintain or extend the overall pattern of development defined by the planned or existing street grid, block configurations, position and orientation of
principal buildings, prevalence of attached or detached building types.
No new streets are proposed. As described by the applicant, there is a mix of building types in the area defined by the context analysis, and buildings are generally oriented to the
street, a pattern of development continued by this proposed development. Staff considers this consideration to be addressed.
Architectural Features. Respond to recurring or representative architectural features that define neighborhood character, without adhering to a particular architectural style.
If the same architectural style as is proposed for Lots 1 or 2 were proposed for a single building on the whole PUD, for instance, Staff would consider it to be incompatible, but Staff
considers the proposed buildings to have an appropriate level of architectural detail for their scale and to be consistent with the neighborhood.
Privacy. Limit impacts and intrusions to privacy on adjoining properties, including side and back yard areas through context sensitive design.
In consideration for future redevelopment of the adjoining site, and in consideration of the fact that there is insufficient room to provide significant screening, the applicant has
provided an east elevation that includes building bump outs and step backs as well as varied siding materials. Staff considers this consideration to be addressed.
C. Site Amenity Requirement
The required area shall be:
For Non-Residential development, a minimum of 6% of non-residential building gross floor area.
For Residential development, determined by number of units as:
For fewer than 10 units, 100 square feet per unit;
For 10 to 19 units, 85 square feet per unit; or
For 20 or more units, 60 square feet per unit.
The required site amenity is calculated as follows.
6,590 sf non-residential x 6% = 396 sf
27 units x 60 sf / unit = 1,620 sf
3 units x 100 sf / unit = 300 sf
In addition, the proposed 3,016 sf lot coverage beyond the maximum allowable 70% requires an additional 905 sf of site amenity.
Total required site amenity = 3,221 sf
The applicant has proposed for the site amenities to be shared through the PUD. Site amenities are proposed to be along the west façade of the multifamily building (1,840 sf) between
the building and the parking lot, along the north of the multifamily building (1,830 sf) and between the buildings on Lots 1 and 2 (890 sf). The latter site amenity is split between
two lots. Site amenities total 4,560 sf.
The site amenities are proposed to be of the type “snippet/parklet.” This type is a small sitting area clearly intended to provide a welcoming respite between or adjacent to buildings.
It must be between 600 and 4,000 sf, directly adjacent to the public right of way or sidewalk or an operable building entry. Seating must be the main focus of the space, be present
year-round, and be composed of high quality materials. Fixed seating is required. Landscaping is also a primary component of the space, and must be carefully landscaped in a higher
proportion than larger spaces. Landscaping should not interfere with seating, but instead complement it. Spaces should appear warm and inviting and permanent rather than temporary.
With respect to the northern space, Staff considers the space itself to not meet the landscaping requirement, but that it is nested within a heavily landscaped area. Staff considers
the criteria met for all three spaces.
14.07 Specific Review Standards
In all Zoning Districts and the City Center Form Based Codes District, the following standards shall apply:
A. Environmental Protection Standards. All proposed development shall be subject to the applicable requirements of Article 12, Environmental Protection Standards.
None of the resources identified in Article 12 exist on the site.
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.
These standards are contained 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 Board’s findings in SD-23-05 emphasized that the project should not create an attractive cut-through between Shelburne Road and Swift Street. No changes have been made, and Staff
considers the proposed configuration supports this objective by visually screening the connection from view of Shelburne Road. Staff also supports the location of the Swift Street
driveway on the far east of the site.
The Director of Public Works and Deputy Director of Capital Projects reviewed the plans associated with SD-23-05 on 2/22/2023 and offer the following comments. No aspects of the plan
affecting these comments have been changed.
The Swift Street ROW is owned by the City of South Burlington. The applicant is reminded that they will need to obtain a ROW permit from the department of public works before completing
any work in this ROW.
TCE RESPONSE: Ok.
The Shelburne Road ROW is owned by the State of Vermont. The applicant is reminded that they will need to obtain a section 1111 permit from VTrans before completing any work in this
ROW.
The applicant has provided a copy of their correspondence with VTrans demonstrating that VTrans approves of the project concept, although they no longer issue formal letters of intent.
Please confirm that the City will have an easement for the sidewalk located on the north side of the property adjacent to the Swift St ROW.
TCE RESPONSE: Confirmed, the City will have an easement for this sidewalk. This can be shown on a revised plat. It is requested the revised plat showing this change be a condition of
approval.
Please provide more information on the crosswalk signal pole. It’s location appears to be in the middle of the sidewalk and it may need to get moved.
TCE RESPONSE: The crosswalk signal pole is currently in a green belt. We have revised sidewalk in this location to maintain the current condition for the crosswalk signal pole so no
relocation is necessary.
The DRB should include a condition that all EPSC measures be maintained and any soil tracked off site must be collected (swept up) at the end of each work day.
TCE RESPONSE: Ok.
The radii on the driveway entrances are very large. Can it be confirmed that they need to be this wide or if entrances and radii can be tightened?
TCE RESPONSE: The driveway radii shown on the plans are necessary for the ingress/egress of emergency vehicles and cannot be reduced further without negatively impacting emergency vehicle
access.
Where truncated domes are needed (particularly crossing Swift St), please ensure that they are large enough and placed according to PROWAG standards (See sections R305.1.4 and 305.2)
TCE RESPONSE: The truncated domes will meet PROWAG standards. The plans have been revised to better illustrate this.
Staff recommends the Board include the relevant conditions to ensure DPW comments are addressed.
This criterion also references 15.A.15. Much of 15.A.14 pertains to the construction of streets, which are not applicable to this application. The applicable sections of 15.A.14 follow.
15.A.14 (D) Functional Capacity and Transit Oriented Development. The nearest signalized intersection or those intersections specified by the DRB shall have an overall level of service
“D” or better, at the peak street hour, including the anticipated impact of the fully developed proposed PUD or subdivision. In addition, the level of service of each through movement
on the major roadway shall have a level of service of “D” or better at full buildout.
The applicant has not made any modifications to the traffic study submitted in conjunction with application #SD-23-05.
The provided traffic study concludes that the project reduces pm peak hour trips compared to existing by 4, from 124 trips to 120 trips. The allowable trip generation for the subject
property, in the traffic overlay district zone 1 is limited to 15 trips per 40,000 sf, or the previously approved trip generation as long as the proposed project does not exceed the
trips generated by the previous approval. For this 60,700 sq ft PUD, the allowable trip generation is limited to 22 trips if the previously approved trip generation is exceeded.
The Deputy Director of Capital Project reviewed the Traffic Impact Assessment on 2/22/2023 and provided comments. The applicant provided a revised traffic impact assessment dated March
23, 2023, upon review of which the Deputy Director of Capital Project indicated had addressed their comments.
The project is located in the traffic overlay district zone 1, and is limited to 15 trips per 40,000 sf or the previously approved maximum if they are not proposing to exceed the previously
approved maximum. The previously approved maximum is 124 PM peak hour vehicle trip ends, and the currently proposed is 120 trips. Staff recommends the Board approve the proposed 120
trip generation.
15.A.14(E) Access and Circulation. The applicant must demonstrate that the street network is arranged to meet applicable access management, traffic, and pedestrian circulation standards
under these Regulations, including criteria for site plans under Article 14, Transect Zone Subdivisions under Article 9, or a type of Planned Unit Development under Article 15.C; and,
for
state highways, VTrans Access Management Program Guidelines in effect at the time of application. Unless otherwise specified under these regulations, the street network, including the
location and arrangement of streets, must be designed to:
(1)-(6) not applicable
(7) Provide for safe access to abutting properties for motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians, including safe sight distances, access separation distances, and accommodations for high-accident
locations.
Staff considers this criterion met.
(8) Align access point with existing intersections or curb cuts and consolidate existing access points or curb cuts within the subdivision, to the extent physically and functionally
feasible.
Though the applicant has not proposed to align the Swift Street curb cut with the curb cut on the north side of Swift Street, Staff considers the proposed configuration to be better
than an aligned one due to the queue length on Swift Street and considers this criterion met.
(9) Minimize vehicular access point (curb cuts) to abutting properties and building lots along pedestrian oriented street frontage; and provide, where feasible, shared vehicular access
to frontage and other abutting building lots via rear alleys, side streets, service lanes, shared driveways, or rear cross connections between adjoining parcels.
In addition to this criterion, 13.02F requires cross-lot connections between all commercial lots: “All commercial lots located adjacent to other commercial lots must provide a driveway
connection to any adjacent commercial lot.” The applicant has provided a cross-lot connection to the south, but not to the east. The design of the property, with the multifamily building
along the entire east property line, would preclude a viable cross lot connection to the east. Staff considers this criterion met.
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.
Urban design overlay standards are discussed above.
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.
Staff considers no improvements to be necessary to Shelburne Road, a state highway. As noted above, Swift Street has an existing recreation path that ends near the eastern property
line, which the applicant has proposed to extend to Shelburne Road. The applicant is proposing a road sign in the middle of the path. Staff recommends the Board include a condition
requiring the applicant to work with the Department of Public Works to relocate this sign to an appropriate location prior to issuance of a zoning permit.
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.
Cross lot connections have been discussed above.
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.
The utility plan shows the potential electrical connection to each building and includes a transformer north of the building on Lot 1.
The South Burlington Water District reviewed the plans associated with SD-23-05 and indicated the following comments. While these comments are extensive, Staff considers they do not
affect the appearance of the project and are sufficiently specific that they can be included as conditions of approval.
It is the responsibility of the contractor to be familiar with the CWD Specifications beyond what is included in this information. The Champlain Water District Specifications and Detail
for the Installation of Water Lines and Appurtenances information can be found at www.champlainwater.org
Plan Specific Comments
Sheet C3-01. (See sheet C3-01)
The proposed eight-inch (8”) tee shall include a main line gate valve on either side of the new tee to be cut-in, secured to the tee with Foster Adapters; total three (3) eight-inch
gate valves. This must be shown on the plans. The cut-in of this tee shall require a shutdown on the only line supplying the northern part of the City so must be scheduled for night
work. At least three weeks’ notice must be provided to the SBWD so all affected customers can be notified in advance of the water service interruption.
TCE RESPONSE: Please note the water connection to the 8” main in Swift Street has been removed from the plans. A cut in 8”x8” tee will now be used for the connection to the main along
Shelburne Road and will include (3) 8” gate valve secured with foster adapters. Per conversation with CWD on 04/15/24, it is likely that a daytime shutdown can be performed for the
cut in tee in the main along Shelburne Road. At least three weeks’ notice ahead of the required main shutdown will be provided to CWD.
Include a tracing wire box near tee per CWD Specifications.
TCE RESPONSE: This will be included.
A six-inch (6”) valve on the line supplying the Multi-family Residential 27DU building shall be secured to the hydrant tee. Add a tracing wire box to this tee, per CWD Specifications.
TCE RESPONSE: Please note modifications have been made to the water system layout and the pipe material has changed to DI which does not require tracer wire.
Place the 1.5” curb box inside a gate valve box top when located in concrete or asphalt surface areas. Include a minimum 1” paving riser.
TCE RESPONSE: This will be included.
Locate and abandon all three existing water services at the corporations. Close the corporations, disconnect the service lines, and wrap the service taps in V-Bio polyurethane.
TCE RESPONSE: The existing water service lines will be abandoned and closed as noted above.
The services to all of the proposed buildings shall be copper and DI if petroleum infused soils are encountered. See VT Water Supply Rule requirements.
TCE RESPONSE: The pipe material has been revised to DI and copper. V-Bio poly wrap will be provided around all DI pipes as required.
Install 6” gate valve on FS line to 27 DU Multifamily Residential building. Add tracing wire box per CWD Specifications.
TCE RESPONSE: Please note modifications have been made to the water system layout. The pipe material has also changed to DI which does not require tracer wire.
See CWD Specifications for tracing wire requirements for all PVC water pipe.
TCE RESPONSE: Pipe material has been revised to DI which does not require tracing wire. DI pipe joints shall be installed with bronze wedges per CWD Specifications.
Sheet C8-04
Water Details must be those found in the CWD Specifications. The Department will not accept any pipe or material that is not in compliance with the CWD Specifications. There are too
many discrepancies to list here between Sheet C8-04 Water Details and the CWD Specifications.
TCE RESPONSE: Sheet C8-04 has been revised to show details from the CWD Specifications.
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
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.
Dumpsters are proposed to be enclosed in a stone veneer wall with a decorative steel gate. Staff considers this criterion met.
SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS
13.02 Off Street Parking and Loading
The applicant is proposing 38 surface parking spaces and 27 garage parking spaces. For the proposed housing, the City is prohibited from requiring more than 30 parking spaces by Act
47.
The applicant has proposed to reserve 11 spaces for commercial parking only during business hours. 13.02L pertains to reservation of non-residential parking spaces for single tenants
or users.
13.02L. Reserved Parking Spaces. Reservation of non-residential parking spaces for single
tenants or users is strongly discouraged. Reserved parking, and associated signage, shall be permitted only under the following circumstances:
To meet or exceed Federal ADA requirements
To provide a limited number of courtesy spaces for users (examples: 15-minute only, pick & drop off, seniors, expectant mothers)
To provide for electric vehicles, carpool spaces, car-share spaces, or other similar purposes
To provide a minimal number of spaces for a small commercial business where other residential or non-residential uses would otherwise dominate parking areas
Where the Development Review Board finds that other demonstrated unique circumstances exist that would require a limited number of reserved spaces. In such an instance, the Board shall
permit only the minimum number necessary to address the unique circumstances.
The Board previously approved the proposed 11 partially reserved spaces allowable under (4) above, provided the reservation is only during business hours. No changes are proposed, and
Staff recommends the Board carry the approval forward.
13.03 Bicycle Parking and Storage.
The bicycle parking requirements are discussed under Phasing above.
Staff recommends the Board include a condition requiring the applicant demonstrate the long term bike parking in the parking garage meet the lockable and secure requirements of 13.03
as a condition of approval prior to issuance of a zoning permit.
13.04 Landscaping, Screening & Street Trees
13.04G requires minimum landscaping based on the value of new structures. The applicant estimates the building cost to be $11,600,000, requiring $123,500 in new trees and shrubs. There
are a number of landscaping standards pertaining to landscaping of parking lots, including the requirement for one shade tree per five parking spaces, 10% of parking areas consisting
of interior landscaping islands, curbing to protect parking lot landscaping, and a minimum shade tree size of 2.5 inches. Additional landscaping standards not specific to parking lots
require screening or buffering between dissimilar sites, of parking areas, of outdoor storage, and of utility cabinets. Front yards along collector streets are required to be landscaped,
and a mix of large canopy tree species is required throughout.
B. Landscaping of Parking Areas.
(1) All off-street parking areas shall be landscaped around the perimeter of the lot with trees, shrubs and other plants. Perimeter planting shall be set back from the curb sufficiently
to allow for snow storage. The purpose of perimeter planting shall be to mitigate the view of the parking lot from the public way and from adjacent uses and properties, and to provide
shade and canopy for the parking lot. In some situations it may be necessary both for surveillance purposes and for the perception of safety to install the size and type of plants that
leave visual access between the parking lot to the public way or other pedestrian areas.
Staff considers the parking area to be largely screened from view of the public right of way by the proposed buildings.
In all parking areas containing twenty-eight (28) or more contiguous parking spaces and/or in parking lots with more than a single circulation lane, at least ten percent (10%) of the
interior of the parking lot shall be landscaped islands planted with trees, shrubs and other plants. Such requirement shall not apply to structured parking or below-ground parking.
The applicant has not provided any information demonstrating whether this criterion is met. Typically applicants provide an exhibit showing the area of the parking (which includes drive
aisles adjacent to parking spaces) and the area of landscape planting islands contained therein. Staff recommends the Board provide the applicant the opportunity to provide this information
prior to closing the hearing.
TCE RESPONSE: An exhibit showing these calculations is included materials submitted with this response.
All interior and perimeter planting shall be protected by curbing unless specifically designed as a collection and treatment area for management of stormwater runoff as per 13.04(B)(5)(c)
below. Interior planted islands shall have a minimum dimension of six (6) feet on any one side, and shall have a minimum square footage of sixty (60) square feet. Large islands are
encouraged.
This criterion is met.
Landscaping Requirements
Landscaping shall include a variety of trees, shrubs, grasses and ground covers. All planting shall be species hardy for the region and, if located in areas receiving road runoff or
salt spray, shall be salt-tolerant.
Staff considers this criterion met.
At least one (1) major deciduous shade tree shall be provided within or near the perimeter of each parking area, for every five (5) parking spaces. The trees shall be placed evenly throughout
the parking lot to provide shade and reduce glare. Trees shall be placed a minimum of thirty (30) feet apart.
38 surface parking spaces are provided, requiring 8 shade trees. More than 8 shade trees are provided. Staff considers this criterion met.
Trees shall have a caliper equal to or greater than two and one-half (2 ½) inches when measured on the tree stem, six (6) inches above the root ball.
Staff considers this criterion met.
(d) Where more than ten (10) trees are installed, a mix of species is encouraged; the species should be grouped or located in a manner that reinforces the design and layout of the parking
lot and the site.
Staff considers this criterion met.
(7) Snow storage areas must be specified and located in an area that minimizes the potential for erosion and contaminated runoff into any adjacent or nearby surface waters.
Snow storage is not shown. The applicant has provided the following statement as it pertains to snow storage.
Snow will be stored onsite in landscape beds and green spaces where feasible. Snow that cannot be stored onsite will be removed from the site.
Typically, the Board requires snow storage to be located in a manner in which sensitive vegetation is protected from impacts of deicing chemicals and the weight of excess snow. Staff
recommends the Board consider whether the provided statement is adequate or whether they will require snow storage areas be specifically shown on the plan.
TCE RESPONSE: It is anticipated that most snow will need to be removed from the site. There is one location along the northern interior driveway that will have snow storage, this is
reflected in the revise plans.
13.05 Stormwater Management
Stormwater standards apply when one-half acre or more of impervious surface exists or is proposed to exist, and where 5,000 sf of impervious is created or reconstructed. The City Stormwater
Section reviewed and provided comments on the plans associated with SD-23-05, which the applicant addressed. The total impervious cover for the current application is reduced over
that in the previous application.
13.07 Exterior Lighting
Lighting requirements are summarized as follows.
Fixtures must be downcast and shielded;
Illumination must be evenly distributed;
Fixtures must be placed to minimize lighting from becoming a nuisance;
Poles shall be rustproof metal, cast iron, fiberglass, finished wood or similar structural material, with a decorative surface or finish;
Poles & building mounted fixtures may be no higher than 30-ft; and,
Poles must be located in safe locations.
Specific requirements for maximum illumination levels are included in Appendix A and are limited to 3 footcandles average at ground level and 0.3 footcandles at the property line. The
applicant has provided a photometric drawing. Slightly greater than 0.3 footcandles is provided at the northern property line, but given the presence of a recreation path in this location,
Staff recommends the Board allow the proposed lighting as a modification.
The Board in their decision on SD-23-05 directed the applicant to reduce illumination levels over the south property line to 0.3 footcandles maximum and at the east entrance to the bank
to no more than 8 to 10 footcandles. While this application has lower numbers, they do not adhere to the specific conditions established in SD-23-05. Staff recommends the Board direct
the applicant to meet those requirements.
TCE RESPONSE: The lighting plan has modified to meet the standards noted above by (a) shifting the two parking lot lights on the southern property line north in the parking island, and
(b) removing one fixture under the financial institution entrance canopy.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Board work with the applicant to address the issues identified herein.