Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Minutes - Development Review Board - 12/16/2014
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 16 DECEMBER 2014 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 16 December 2014, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. MEMBERS PRESENT: T. Barritt, Chair; B. Miller, D. Parsons, J. Smith, J. Wilking, B. Breslend ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; T. Chittenden, G. Stampul, R. Jeffers, P. O’Leary, D. Sherman, G. Rabideau, D. Burke, D. & P. Sande, J. Larkin, P. O’Brien, P. Kahn, B. Bartlett, D. O’Rourke, A. Dery, E. Langfeldt, S. Schenker, J. Boyd 1. Additions, deletions, or changes in order of agenda items: No changes were made to the agenda. 2. Comments & Questions from the public not related to the agenda: No issues were raised. 3. Announcements: The Regional Planning Commission is considering a “DRB summit” meeting involving all Chittenden County DRBs. There will be more on this in the future. 4. Site plan application #SP-14-65 of Larkin Tarrant & Hoel Partnership for after-the-fact approval to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of: 1) a 9,356 sq. ft. 275 seat standard restaurant, 2) a 71 room hotel (Comfort Suites), and 3) an 89 room hotel (Homewood Suites). The amendment consists of revising the landscaping plan, 5 Dorset St. Mr. Rabideau reviewed some landscaping changes including the replacement of the hedge along the south boundary. Some trees that were supposed to stay were removed and have been replaced. The dollar amount remains the same. They are hoping to come in for a Certificate of Occupancy in late January or early February. They want to be sure the record is correct with no obstacles. Mr. Wilking noted that 14” caliper trees are being replaced with 3” caliper and questioned whether this is to avoid the cost of 14” caliper. Mr. Barritt asked who establishes the value of trees. Mr. Rabideau said Craig Lambert originally did. All he gave credit for were some crab apple trees. Mr. Rabideau also stressed that they were very upset when the trees were cut down. The applicant had to buy more trees, so there was no advantage to them. No other issues were raised. Mr. Miller moved to close #SP-14-65. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 5. Continued final plat application #SD-14-31 of Gristmill Builders, Ltd. For approval to create two footprint lots, 110 Chipman Street & 53 Frost Street: Mr. Stampul said this is a duplex lot which they are dividing into two lots. Mr. Belair said staff has no issues. Mr. Miller moved to close #SD-14-31. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 6. Continued final plat application #SD-14-33 of South Village Communities, LLC, for approval of Phase II of 334 unit planned unit development. Phase II is to consist of the following: 1) 31 single family dwellings, 2) 13 two-family dwellings, 3) one 3-unit multi-family dwelling, and 4) 39 multi-family dwelling units in four buildings, 1840 Spear Street: Mr. Barritt noted there is a draft decision which the Board can act on later tonight. Mr. Burke showed where they have revised the elevations to show full porches. They have also split the driveways for units 22, 23, 28 and 29, and there is now a wrap-around porch on unit 25. One driveway comes off Marsh and the other off S. Jefferson. Mr. Burke said they want to add to conditions #16 “…unless approved by the State wetland permit.” He noted that Mr. Belair had made that change. No issues were raised. Mr. Miller moved to close #SD-14-33. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 7. Continued conditional use application #CU-14-10 of J. Peter & Diane Sande to raze an existing 1,136 sq. ft. single family dwelling with a 1,136 sq. ft. footprint and construct a new single family dwelling with a 1,703 sq. ft. footprint, 50 Bartlett Bay Road: Ms. Sande said they got approval from the state to build. There is also a revised landscape plan. The state and Mr. Belair wanted more plantings so they did some planting on both sides and a couple of rain gardens. No issues were raised. Mr. Miller moved to close #CU-14-10. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed 6-0 8. Preliminary Plat Application #SD-14-32 of Willowbrook Homes, LLC, for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) the subdivision of a 31.87 acre parcel developed with one single family dwelling into two lots of 5.0 acres and 26.87 acres and, 2) developing the 5.0 acre parcel with nine single family dwellings, 1675 Dorset Street: Mr. O’Leary said they have made some slight changes since sketch review. They are extending the proposed road to the northern boundary line. He showed the roadway system on the plan. He also showed one area that would be kept open and mowed. It would be maintained by the homeowners’ association. The property is located in three zoning districts: Village Residential in front, Neighborhood Residential, and a Natural Resources Protection District in the rear. At final plat, they may propose plantings along the rec path and possibly some fencing. The units will be 25 feet apart, and there will be a variety of designs for the units. They are relinquishing use of the old driveway which will be reseeded. Mr. O’Leary showed where the new driveway will come in. He also showed an area where there might be future development. The homeowners’ association will be responsible for maintaining the stormwater system. The swale has the capacity for a 25-year storm. Public Works has OK’d water, sewer, stormwater and the road. The road will be 24’ wide with 5’ sidewalks. The Fire Chief has approved the hydrant location. Mr. Barritt questioned the road layout. Mr. O’Leary showed where the new drive will come in (they will be buying 5 acres to accommodate that) and where it will connect to the 60-foot right-of-way. There will be a connection to Dorset Farms which Mr. O’Leary indicated. Mr. Barritt asked about the forested wetland area. Mr. O’Leary said it is in the back of the property. Nothing is being proposed there. Mr. Barritt asked if residents will be denied access to that area. Mr. O’Leary said there won’t be fencing, but anyone going back there would be trespassing on someone else’s property. Mr. O’Leary showed the wetland buffer, none of which is on the parcel being developed. Mr. Barritt asked about the common area. Mr. O’Leary said it will be kept mowed. It could be a community garden, if the residents want that. Mr. Barritt was concerned with is proximity to Dorset Street if children are playing there. He suggested a possible barrier to keep things from rolling out into the road. Mr. O’Leary suggested a low row of vegetation. Mr. O’Leary said they are glad to meet with the Bike/Pedestrian Path Committee. He noted a possible future connection to the Dorset Farms path. He added that they had no problem giving an easement along their frontage. Mr. Wilking felt the plan was much improved from the last hearing. Mr. O’Leary noted that at final plat they will include elevations, types of materials, etc. Mr. Barritt suggested keeping vents off the south-facing sides of the buildings so as to be solar ready. Mr. Barritt asked if there will be decks. Mr. O’Leary said there will. Mr. Belair noted this counts towards the overall coverage. Mr. O’Leary said if each building had a 2600 sq. ft. footprint, they would still have only 10% coverage. Mr. Barritt suggested lighting on a more pedestrian scale. A neighbor noted the danger of children walking along Dorset St. No other issues were raised. Mr. Miller moved to close Preliminary Plat Application #SD-14-32. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 9. Site Plan Application #SP-14-60 of Technology Park Campus, LLC, to construct a 3-story, 54,459 sq. ft. general office building, 88 Technology Park Way: Mr. Langfeldt said this building will mirror the existing building. He showed the access off Community Drive. Mr. Barritt noted there is parking in front of the building because of a utility easement, and there are even more encumbrances on this lot than on the previous one. Mr. Langfeldt said the building will be 3 stories, the same height as the other building. They have increased the setback to allow for the 50-foot height. The Board had no issue with this. Mr. Barritt questioned the amount of parking and asked if there could be shared parking with the other building. Mr. Langfeldt said that the leases don’t allow for shared parking, and that lot is pretty full. It was noted that in the future there will be spaces set aside for electrical charging. Mr. Wilking noted the increase in parking needs from companies. They are asking for 5-6 spaces per 1000 sq. ft., and the city requires 3.5 spaces. Members were OK with parking. The applicant indicated they will comply with plantings on parking lot islands. Mr. Barritt noted that staff recommends a traffic analysis. 843 peak hour trip ends are proposed. The applicant noted that the Master Plan requires a traffic study at 900 trip ends. Mr. Barritt said he is concerned because there is a Police Station on the other side of Community Drive. He suggested a possible discussion with Chief Whipple. Mr. Langfeldt noted that when they did the first building, they did turning lanes which calmed traffic and mitigated safety issues. Mr. Wilking noted that at his building they can’t get out of the driveway at 4 p.m. because of the stop sign. He felt that Kimball Ave. will need signalization soon. Mr. Barritt said he was willing to have Public Works look at this as a first step. Mr. Langfeldt said Technology Park is not the only cause of traffic at that intersection. He didn’t feel they should foot the whole bill. Mr. Barritt responded that as the “new piece” with proximity to the intersection, they could be the “tipping point,” and the “last one in foots the bill.” He stressed that the Board doesn’t want to make that intersection worse without doing due diligence. Mr. Langfeldt noted the building will be designed to LEED Gold Standard. Other audience members agreed with the traffic concerns especially where Kimball Avenue narrows closer to Williston. No other issues were raised. Mr. Miller moved to continue #SP-14-60 to 20 January 2015. Mr. Parsons seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 10. Minutes of 2 December 2014: Mr. Miller moved to approve the Minutes of 2 December 2014 as written. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 11. Other Business: Mr. Belair presented a request for a 6-month extension to Wedgewood Development Corp. final approval SD-14-17. Mr. Miller moved to approve the 6-month extension to final approval SD-14-17. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed 6-0. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 9:15 p.m. Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. #SP-14-65 - 1 – CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING LARKIN TARRANT HOEL PARTNERSHIP – 5 DORSET STREET SITE PLAN APPLICATION #SP-14-65 FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION Site plan application #SP-14-65 of Larkin Tarrant and Hoel Partnership for after-the-fact approval to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of: 1) a 9,356 sq. ft. 275 seat standard restaurant, 2) a 71 room hotel (Comfort Suites), and 3) an 89 room hotel (Homewood Suites). The amendment consists of revising the landscaping plan, 5 Dorset Street. The Development Review Board held a public hearing on December 16, 2014. Greg Rabideau represented the applicant. Based on the plans and materials contained in the document file for this application, the Development Review Board finds, concludes, and decides the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Larkin Tarrant and Hoel Partnership is seeking after-the-fact approval to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of: 1) a 9,356 sq. ft. 275 seat standard restaurant, 2) a 71 room hotel (Comfort Suites), and 3) an 89 room hotel (Homewood Suites). The amendment consists of revising the landscaping plan, 5 Dorset Street. 2. The owner of record of the subject property is Larkin Tarrant and Hoel Partnership 3. The subject property is located in the Commercial 1 Residential 12 Zoning District. 4. The application was received on December 1, 2014. 5. The plan submitted consists of four (4) pages, page one is entitled “Overall Site Plan 5 Dorset Street Hotel Larkin Family Partnership, LLC South Burlington, Vermont” dated 05/01/13, and last revised on 12/03/14. DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS 6. No change in coverages proposed. 7. Setback requirements will continue to be met. SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Vehicular access 8. No changes proposed. #SP-14-65 - 2 – Circulation 9. No changes proposed. Parking 10. No change in the number of spaces proposed. The only change to parking is the relocation of the handicapped spaces behind the new hotel building. Landscaping 11. The applicant has submitted a revised landscaping plan detailing after-the-fact plantings made due to trees lost during construction. Three (3) existing red pine trees (14 inches in caliper) and an apple tree (12 inches in caliper) were removed during construction. Section 13.06 (I) of the LDRs require that when trees of greater than 5 inches in caliper are to be replaced, that DRB approval is necessary. The total landscaping value required is $77,500. The total value of the landscaping planted is $77,695. In an email dated 12-4-14 to staff, the City Arborist indicated that he reviewed and approved the revised landscaping plan. This criterion is met. Outdoor Lighting 14. No changes proposed. Pursuant to Sections 14.06 and 14.07 of the Land Development Regulations, the following review standards shall apply to site plan applications: Traffic 15. No changes proposed. (a) The relationship of the proposed development to goals and objects set forth in the City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. 16. No changes proposed. (b) 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. 17. This requirement is being met. (c) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings. 18. No changes proposed. #SP-14-65 - 3 – (d) 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 adjoining buildings. 19. No changes proposed. (e) Newly installed utility service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. 20. No changes proposed. (f) The combination of common materials and architectural characteristics, landscaping, buffers, screens, and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings or different architectural styles shall be encouraged. 21. This requirement is being met. (g) 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. 22. No changes proposed. In addition to the above general review standards, site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards set forth in Section 14.07 of the Land Development Regulations: (a) 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. 23. No changes proposed. (b) Electric, telephone, and other wire-served utility lines and service connections shall be underground. Any utility installations remaining above ground shall be located so as to have a harmonious relation to neighboring properties and to the site. 24. This requirement is being met. (c) All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling 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). 25. No changes proposed. DECISION #SP-14-65 - 4 – Motion by _________________, seconded by _________________, to approve site plan application #SD-14-65 of Larkin Tarrant and Hoel Partnership subject to the following stipulations: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations shall remain in full effect except as amended herein. 2. This project shall be completed as shown on the plans submitted by the applicant and on file in the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning. 3. The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months pursuant to Section 17.04 of the Land Development Regulations or this approval is null and void. 4. The applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy from the Administrative Officer prior to occupancy of the building. 5. Any change to the site plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Development Review Board or the Administrative Officer. Tim Barritt– yea nay abstain not present Mark Behr – yea nay abstain not present Brian Breslend – yea nay abstain not present Bill Miller – yea nay abstain not present David Parsons – yea nay abstain not present Jennifer Smith – yea nay abstain not present John Wilking – yea nay abstain not present Motion carried by a vote of X– 0 – 0. Signed this ____ day of __________________ 2014, by _____________________________________ Tim Barritt, Chair Please note: An appeal of this decision may be taken by filing, within 30 days of the date of this decision, a notice of appeal and the required fee by certified mail to the Superior Court, Environmental Division. See V.R.E.C.P. 5(b). A copy of the notice of appeal must also be mailed to the City of South Burlington Planning and Zoning Department at 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, VT 05403. See V.R.E.C.P. 5(b) (4)(A). Please contact the Environmental Division at 802-828-1660 or http://vermontjudiciary.org/GTC/environmental/default.aspx for more information on filing requirements, deadlines, fees and mailing address. The applicant or permittee retains the obligation to identify, apply for, and obtain relevant state permits for this project. Call 802.879.5676 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist. EXISTINGPROPOSEDBUILDING SETBACK123CONTOUR123WETLAND LIMITSEASEMENT LINEPROPERTY LINEROOF DRAINRDWATER SUPPLYSTORM SEWERSANITARY SEWEROVERHEAD WIREELECTRIC POWERLUMINAIREUTILITY POLESIGNSANITARY SEWER M.H.STORM SEWER INLETHYDRANTGATE VALVEOHWEW 8"DISDLEGENDTELEPHONET6"SS8" DIW8"SSFENCESD 12" HDPENATURAL GASGGEXISTING SIDEWALKL=63.62'T=31.85'R=500.74'Δ=07°16'48"N 04°21'48" W161.78'LINE EASEMENTASSUMED WATER9.59'T = 13.42'L = 23.26'R = 18.63' Δ=71°31'48"37.91'S66°17'33"E63.00'S 76°07'29" EN 59°39'58" E51.00'53.69'N 57°32'42" E75.69'N 41°44'20" E14.03'N 01°01'13" WN 48°59'39" E71.34'191.01'N 44°23'10" E99.00'S 05°14'15" W113.89'S 11°39'35" WS 06°56'54" E145.35'S 83°44'24" W632.23'274.76'N 54°52'36" EELEV. = 311.92TBM #3LIGHT POLE BASECHAMPLAINN\FOIL CO.INTERSTATE 89 EXIT RAMPGREERN/FFINARD, SEARSN/FPAVED50' BUILDING SETBACK50' BUILDING SETBACK30' REARSETBACK50' BUILDING SETBACKZONED: COMMERCIAL 1ZONED: COMMERCIAL 1ZONED: INTERSTATE HIGHWAY OVERLAYEXISTING LEASE LINE (TYP.)TBM #2 CUT SQUARE INNW CORNER ELEV. = 314.24RAISED, MOUNTABLE ISLANDPROPOSED SCREENEDDUMPSTER ON CONCRETE PADPROPOSED ONE-WAY CONNECTION TO MALLPROPOSEDENCLOSEDPOOL ANDCOURTYARDPROPOSED HOTELPORTECOCHERERESTORE TO GRASSRESTORE TO GRASSPROPOSEDDECORATIVEFENCEPROPOSED DECORATIVEFENCE WITH GATENOTES:1. OWNER/APPLICANT: LARKIN FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, LLC LARKIN REAL ESTATE 410 SHELBURNE ROAD BURLINGTON, VERMONT2. ZONED: C1/IHO3. COVERAGE CALCULATIONS: TOTAL PARCEL AREA 244,503 SFEXISTING PROPOSEDBUILDINGS 49,770 SF 20.4% 42,196 SF 17.3%PAVEMENT 101,470 SF 41.5% 107,520 SF 44.0%SIDEWALKS 13,140 SF 5.4% 17,136 SF 7.0%TOTAL IMPACT 164,380 SF 67.2% 166,852 SF 68.2%FRONT YARD (WILLISTON RD.) 7,900 SFTOTAL IMPACT 7,035 SF 89.0% 7,035 SF 89.0%FRONT YARD (DORSET ST.) 26,870 SFTOTAL IMPACT 17,130 S.F. 63.8% 14,740 SF 54.9%FRONT YARD COVERAGE WAIVER REQUESTED4. PARKING REQUIRED: 89 ROOM HOTEL 89 SPACES8 EMPLOYEES 8 SPACES71 ROOM HOTEL 71 SPACES8 EMPLOYEES 8 SPACES9,552 SF RESTAURANT172 SPACES348 SPACES CURRENT EXISTING PARKING: 240 SPACES PROPOSED PARKING (THIS APPLICATION): 267 SPACES 81 SPACE WAIVER REQUESTED (23.3%)5. PERIMETER PROPERTY LINE INFORMATION TAKEN FROM PLANENTITLED "BOUNDARY SURVEY-LARKIN TARRANT HOEHLPARTNERSHIP" BY KREBS & LANSING CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.DATED JAN. 13, 1998, REVISED FEB. 2, 1998.6. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC AND UTILITIES INFORMATION FROM PLANENTITLED "UTILITY PLAN-HOWARD JOHNSON'S" BY KREBS & LANSINGCONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. DATED DEC. 22, 1997, REVISED 3/20/98.PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN ACCESSTO ADJOINING PROPERTY LINEEXISTING HOTELEXISTING RESTAURANT71 ROOMS275 SEATSDORSET STREETWILLISTON ROADEXISTING MALL ACCESSONE WAY DRIVESNOW STORAGESHEET NO.OF SHEETS112C-2OVERALL SITE PLANfeetPROJECT NO........ 2011015CHECKED BY................ CRCSCALE......................... 1" = 30'DATE........................ 05/01/12DRAWN BY................ DJLSCALE: 1" = 30'30 0 30 12060REVISION: 12/03/14 RELOCATED COMFORT INN REAR HANDICAP PARKING.REVISION: 11/26/14 ADDED CAR CHARGING STATION, BOLLARDS, RELOCATED COMFORT INN POOL EQUIPMENT ROOM.REVISION: 08/26/14 REVISED LOCATION OF PROPOSED POOL EQUIPMENT SHED.REVISION: 08/21/14 MOVED LIGHT POLE NEAR CB7 LOCATION TO AVOID EXISTING CHILLER.REVISION: 07/24/14 ADDED APPROVED LIGHT POLE LOCATIONS.REVISION: 06/05/14 REVISED SEWER SERVICE AND EXISTING SEWERREVISION: 04/10/14 REVISED POWER AND COMMUNICATION SERVICES' ENTRANCES INTO BUILDING, MOVED CONCRETE PAD LOCATION, ANDADDED 'DO NOT ENTER' SIGN AT MALL CONNECTION, REMOVED PATIO PAVING OUTSIDE OF ENCLOSED COURTYARD, REMOVEDSHED, ADDED POOL EQUIPMENT ROOM TO ADJACENT EXISTING HOTEL, UPDATED COVERAGE CALCULATIONS.REVISION: 03/07/14 FINAL DESIGN SUBMITTALREVISION: 01/16/14 REVISED BUILDING FOOTPRINT, GAS SERVICE, CONCRETE PADS, CHILLER LOCATIONREVISION: 09/20/13 REVISED FOR ELECTRICAL AND GAS SERVICES, PATIO, LIGHTS, PARKING AND EXISTING CHILLERREVISION: 08/22/13 REVISED FOR CONSTRUCTIONREVISION: 07/19/13 REVISE STORM SYSTEMREVISION: 02/22/13 UPDATE TITLE BLOCKREVISION: 09/12/12 UPDATE DRAWINGS/TITLE BLOCKS, REVISE/ADD PARKING, RELOCATE PEDESTRIAN MALL ACCESS, REVISE VEHICLE MALLACCESS, ADD SANITARY SEWER SERVICE, ENHANCE ENTRY DETAILREVISION: 06/20/12 UPDATE PLAN, RELOCATE SW TO MALLREVISION: 06/07/12 UPDATE PLAN, CREATE PRELIMINARY PLAT DOCS 05/24/12 UPDATE PLAN, UPDATE TITLE BLOCKSNOW STORAGEC20 KIMBALL AVE., STE. 202NSO. BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403PHONE - (802) 658-2100 FAX - (802) 658-2882COPYRIGHT 2013 - RUGGIANO ENGINEERING, INC.OVERALL SITE PLAN5 DORSET STREET HOTELLARKIN FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, LLC SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONTTBM #1TOP OFMONUMENTELEV. = 310.92EXISTING PAVED PARKING15' SIDESETBACKSITESITE LOCATION MAPNOT TO SCALENORTH20'EASEMENTTO C.W.D.EXISTING SMHEXISTINGSMHEXISTINGSMHEXISTINGSMHEXISTINGSMHEXISTINGSMHEXISTINGSMHEXISTINGSMHEXISTINGSMHPROPOSEDOUTLETSTRUCTUREPROPOSEDDETENTIONBASINEXISTINGDETENTIONBASINPROPOSED DETENTIONBASIN AND SWALEEXISTINGDETENTIONBASINPROPOSED CB#7PROPOSED CB#8PROPOSED CB#6PROPOSED CB#5PROPOSED CB#4PROPOSED CB#3PROPOSED CB#2PROPOSED CB#1PROPOSED 6"PERFORATED PVCFOOTING DRAIN.SEE STRUCTURALPLANSTBM #2 CUT SQUARE INNW CORNER ELEV. = 314.24PROPOSED PAVED PARKINGEXISTING PAVED PARKINGSSSSWW8"DI6"DIW8"DIWW12" WWWWWWW12"WW12"W WWW8"WWW6"SS6"SS8"SSSSSS8"SS8"SS8"SSSSSSSS12"SSSS10"SS10"SS4"SSSSSSSSSSSSSS SS8"SS8"SS8"SS10"SSSSSSSSWW WWW4"ACW W6"DIW WWWWWSD12"PESDSDSSSSWSDEXISTINGDETENTIONBASINSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSD SDSDSDSDSDSDTTTT TTTTTEEEETSDTWWSSFAIRPOINT &COMCAST WITHU.G. ELECTRICEXISTINGPOOL TOREMAINSNOWSTORAGERD 8" HDPEZONED: INTERSTATE HIGHWAY OVERLAY50' INTE R S T A T E HIGHW A Y OVERLA Y ZONE RDRDRD 8" HDPERD 8" HDPERD RDRDRDPROPOSED 12" HDPE ROOFDRAIN COLLECTOR.89.40'S 10°08'00" WTOWILLISTONTOSHELBURNEEXISTING CONCRETERETAINING WALLSNOWSTORAGEEEEREMOVEEXISTINGELECTRICALPADEXISTINGELECTRICALPADS8"SSGGGPROPOSED UNDERGROUND COMMUNICATIONS,AND ELECTRICAL SERVICES APPROXIMATELOCATION. FINAL LOCATION BY UTILITIES.COMMCOMMCOMMGGGGPROPOSED GASSERVICE, FINALLOCATION BYVERMONT GASSNOWSTORAGEEEPROPOSEDDIRECTIONSIGNEXISTINGMONUMENTSIGNPROPOSEDSIGNSEXISTINGCHILLER PADLOCATION TOREMAINEXISTING LUMINAIRETO REMAIN.REPAIR/REPLACEBASE AS REQUIRED89 ROOMSF.F.E. 317.00PLANTINGSPROPOSED PATIO -SEE ARCHITECTURALDRAWINGSRD 8" HDPERD 8" HDPEPROPOSED'DO NOT ENTER'SIGNSSPROPOSED ELECTRICVEHICLE CHARGINGSTATIONPROTECTIVEBOLLARDSPOOLEQUIPMENTROOM #SD-14-31 1 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING GRISTMILL BUILDERS, LTD. SOUTH VILLAGE – 334 UNIT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 110 CHIPMAN STREET & 53 FROST STREET FINAL PLAT APPLICATION #SD-14-31 FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION Gristmill Builders, Ltd., hereinafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking approval for final plat application #SD-14-31 to create two (2) footprint lots, 110 Chipman Street & 53 Frost Street. The Development Review Board held a public hearing on November 18, 2014 and December 16, 2014. Dave Lachtrupp represented the applicant. Based on testimony provided at the above mentioned public hearing and the plans and supporting materials contained in the document file for this application, the Development Review Board finds, concludes, and decides the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The amendment consists of creating two (2) footprint lots, 110 Chipman Street & 53 Frost Street. 2. The owners of record of the subject properties is Gristmill Builders, Ltd. 3. The application was received on October 17, 2014. 4. The subject property is located in the Southeast Quadrant Zoning subdistrict. 5. The plan submitted is entitled “Plat of Survey Lot 31 Townhouses South Village 110 Chipman Street & 61 Frost Street”, dated October 15, 2014 and prepared by Civil Engineering Associates, Inc. Dimensional Standards: The applicant proposes to create two (2) footprint lot lines in between the individual dwelling units and including front and year yard areas with each dwelling unit previously approved in this subdivision. This action would create non-conforming lots (being of insufficient individual size, and having zero setback in between each unit on a lot) and therefore will not be considered individual lots for the LDRs. For purposes of the LDRs, the two footprint lots included in this proposal shall be considered one lot (Lot 31) as approved previously. The applicant will be required to record a “Notice of Condition” to this effect which has been approved by the City Attorney prior to recording the final plat plan. #SD-14-31 2 DECISION Motion by _________________________, seconded by __________________, to approve Final Plat Application #SD-14-31 of Gristmill Builders, Ltd. subject to the following conditions: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations for the South Village project shall remain in full effect except as amended herein. 2. This project shall be completed as shown on the plat submitted by the applicant and on file in the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning. 3. The plat plan shall be revised to show the changes below and shall require approval of the Administrative Officer. Three (3) copies of the approved revised plat shall be submitted to the Administrative Officer prior to recording the plat. a. The plat shall be revised to indicate the correct address of the Frost Street lot as #53 not #61. b. The plat shall be revised to include the seal and signature of the land surveyor. 4. For purposes of the LDRs, all lots included in this subdivision shall be considered one (1) lot as approved previously. The applicants shall record a “Notice of Condition” to this effect which has been approved by the City Attorney prior to recording the final plat plans. 5. A digital PDF version of the full set of approved final plat shall be delivered to the Administrative Officer before recording the final plat plan. 6. Any changes to the final plat plan shall require approval of the South Burlington Development Review Board. 7. The final plat plan (survey plat) shall be recorded in the land records within 180 days or this approval is null and void. The plat plan shall be signed by the Board Chair or Clerk prior to recording. Prior to recording the final plat plan, the applicant shall submit copies of the survey plat in digital format. The format of the digital information shall require approval of the South Burlington GIS Coordinator. Tim Barritt– yea nay abstain not present Mark Behr – yea nay abstain not present Brian Breslend yea nay abstain not present Bill Miller – yea nay abstain not present David Parsons - yea nay abstain not present Jennifer Smith – yea nay abstain not present John Wilking – yea nay abstain not present #SD-14-31 3 Motion carried by a vote of X – 0 – 0 Signed this ____ day of __________________ 2014, by _____________________________________ Tim Barritt, Chair Please note: An appeal of this decision may be taken by filing, within 30 days of the date of this decision, a notice of appeal and the required fee by certified mail to the Superior Court, Environmental Division. See V.R.E.C.P. 5(b). A copy of the notice of appeal must also be mailed to the City of South Burlington Planning and Zoning Department at 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, VT 05403. See V.R.E.C.P. 5(b) (4)(A). Please contact the Environmental Division at 802-828-1660 or http://vermontjudiciary.org/GTC/environmental/default.aspx for more information on filing requirements, deadlines, fees and mailing address. The applicant or permittee retains the obligation to identify, apply for, and obtain relevant state permits for this project. Call 802.879.5676 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist. 1263,4$97//9 7589$97//9 % % ( &$$$ &%' ! % $&#'*$ &%&# % '# % ) ;/-;;;./,:9.53 The undersigned, being a Land Surveyor licensed in and bythe State of Vermont, hereby states that: To the best of myknowledge & belief this plan includes all information requiredby 27A VSA Section 2-109 "Plats and Plans", other than thatinformation shown on architectural plans prepared by others.This statement valid only when accompanied by my originalsignature and seal.__________________________________________________Timothy R. Cowan VT LS 597 NOTES:1. The subject property is Lot 31 of "South Village" Subdivision, east of Spear Street, South Burlington, VT, and is aPORTION of lands conveyed to South Village Communities, LLC by deed of Paul R. Calkins, dated November 29, 2007and recorded in Volume 348 Page 416 South Burlington Land Records. Purpose of this plan is to define and depict thedivision of Lot 31 into 2 townhouse "Units" as shown. Other property lines or details shown on neighboring parcels areshown for reference purposes only. Reference shall be made to reference plats A and B for further notations and detailsof the underlying property.2. Unit division line shown is intended to be a projection of the center line of party walls as constructed.3. Bearings shown are referenced to Grid North, Vermont Coordinate System of 1983, based on the referenced plats.Monumentation shown typically consists of 5/8" rebar or 4" square concrete monuments with aluminum caps embossed"Civil Engineering Assocs. - VT LS 597". (Proposed)4. Buried utility lines shown are schematic only and not all are shown. Actual locations may vary.5. Subject parcel falls within "Zone C" (outside of any flood hazard area) as identified by Flood Insurance Rate Map,Community Panel No. 5001 950005 B, effective date 3/16/1981.6. Frost Street and Chipman Street are described in an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication to the City of South Burlington,dated October 2007 and recorded in Volume 798 Page 241 South Burlington Land Records7. The division of Lot 31 will be subject to conditions of approval by resolution of the Development Review Board of theCity of South Burlington.REFERENCE PLATS:A. "Phase I Subdivision Plat - South Village", prepared by Civil Engineering Associates, Inc.,dated July 2004, last revised 01/15/2014.B. "Downing-Calkins Revocable Trust - South Village - Plat of Survey", prepared by Civil EngineeringAssociates, Inc., dated March 23, 2005, South Burlington Land Records.EASEMENT NOTES:The units will be served by water service lines entering from Chipman Street and Frost Street.Subject property is both subject to and benefited by easements for buried electrical and telecommunicationslines and appurtenances. Easements conveyed to Green Mountain Power Corporation (GMP) and Verizon NewEngland, Inc. (Verizon) by deed dated December 13, 2007 and recorded in Volume 803 Page 687, SouthBurlington Land Records. (Both units will be served by lines entering from near the northwest corner of Unit31.1) Easements are typically 10' wide, centered on utility as built, except as shown.Subject property is both subject to and benefited by easements for buried natural gas lines and appurtenances.Easements conveyed to Vermont Gas Systems, Inc. (VGS) by deed dated January 17, 2008 and recorded inVolume 807 Page 129, South Burlington Land Records. (Both units will be served by lines entering from thenorthwesterly sideline of Unit 31.1.) Easements are typically 10' wide, centered on utility as built.Both units will be served by sanitary sewer service line exiting at the northerly sideline of Unit 31.1. No record ofeasement was found at time of survey.The northeasterly corner of Lot 31 is subject to "Corner Site Triangular Restrictive Area" as depicted on this planand Reference Plat A.E1#' # # # % # #$ % %* $ &% &# % '# % %++++++++++++++ % ++++++ * ++++++++++ +++++%%$%++++++++++++++++++++++++++++%* # !!# ' * #$ &% % ' ! % #'( # % %* $ &% &# % '# % % +++++ * ++++++++ ++++ $&% % %#"&# %$ % $ $ #$ &% $ %$+++++* +++++++++ ++++++*+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++#!#$ E2E3E4E5#%057#/:2/; )(%&%" (' !# ' + %( $!() !*!'!%$ + !(&%& (%&&% 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington Development Review Board FROM: Ray Belair, Administrative Officer RE: Agenda #6, December 16th meeting Application #SD-14-33, South Village DATE: December 12, 2014 Continued final plat application #SD-14-33 of South Village Communities, LLC for approval of Phase II of 334 unit planned unit development. Phase II is to consist of the following: 1) 31 single family dwellings, 2) 13 two (2) family dwellings, 3) 1 three (3) unit multi-family dwelling, and 4) 39 multi- family dwelling units in four (4) buildings, 1840 Spear Street. The applicant has submitted a revised site plan showing more variability in the design of some of the duplexes. Revised typical building elevations were also submitted to reflect the residential design guidelines narrative proposed by the applicant. Two (2) of the corner duplexes were redesigned to take advantage of being on a corner lot by splitting the driveways between the two (2) streets. Staff feels that adherence to these guidelines will result in a mix of housing styles as required by the LDRs. Staff is working with the applicant to come up with the language to make sure that the variability proposed will be maintained in the Phase of development. Staff is working of the draft decision which we will have available for the Board so the Board could deliberate after the regular meeting. >29:250 =2-.9:684=*:.8.*9.4.5:29786769.-:6+.8.,65<.?.-*94;3:27;8769..*9.4.5:/689:684=*:.876:.5:2*3/;:;8.8.,8.*:2657*:195 / 650>.47:*423?$8;9: # $ # $ 123456789101112131415161718192120222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748a49a505152535455596056-5871-8081-90 " ##$ " '$"$ $ "#$( " # & $### $ $# ($( 5 / 650".<6,*+3.$8;9: " # $ $$( !;2.: *:1 !;2.: *:1;3-.9*,:6+.:.8425*:.-;765.>:.592656/" ' !;2.: *:161-7091-991. This sheet depicts the boundaries of proposed lots of Phase 2.2. The perimeter boundary survey was performed during 2004-5using an electronic total station and GPS.3. Bearings shown are referenced to Grid North, VermontCoordinate System of 1983, related to National GeodeticSurvey marks PG1580 "F 65" and AB9571 "NE Aiken"established by RTK GPS measurements.4. Spear Street has a 66 foot wide right of way. Location wasdetermined by existing monumentation and the traveledportion of the road. Reference Town of Burlington "Highwaysand Roads 1802-1865", Page 22, and Town of ShelburneTown Minutes Volume 1, Page 229.5. This property lies within the "Southeast Quadrant" and the"Spear Street - Allen Road Scenic View Protection Overlay"zoning districts. .0.5-#;8<.? 6:.9NOTE:CAPPED IRON RODSPROPOSED AT LOTCORNERS (TYP.)#168: 25.$*+3.;8<.$*+3.To the best of my knowledge & belief this plat, consistingof three sheets, properly depicts the results of a surveyconducted under my supervision and is based uponrecords & field evidence found. Perimeter boundariesshown are in substantial conformance with the recordsunless noted otherwise. This plat is in substantialcompliance with 27 VSA 1403 "Recording of Land Plats". _______________________________________ Timothy R. Cowan VT LS 597GAC1" = 80'01243.08P2 # $$ $# %$& % $# #7.*8#:8..:#6;:1;83250:65&.8465:TRCTRCOCT. 31, 2013"& "" " $ " "# $$( # %$%" $ &" $$))))) $)))))( )))))))))) )) $$#$))))))))))))))))))))))))))))$( "APPROVED BY RESOLUTION OF THE DEVELOPMENTREVIEW BOARD OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON,VERMONT, ON THE ____ DAY OF _____________, 2014,SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONSOF SAID RESOLUTION.SIGNED THIS ____ DAY OF ______________, 2014,BY _____________________________, CHAIRPERSON.4212.04.2013 Lot 48 & Common lands labels & areasTRC08.22.2014 Add Sheet P3 (Easements)TRC10.10.2014 Notes & Lot NumberingTRC##$ 6//68 $ ##$ 6//68# $#61-7010.15.2014 Lot Numbering ChangesTRC11.26.2014 Rev. bldg footprintsTRC12.08.2014 Bldg footprints 22-25, 28, 29TRC +*&(&# *) '$* ,! * &, %"*(&( *&((& 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington Development Review Board FROM: Ray Belair, Administrative Officer RE: Agenda #7, December 16, 2014 Application #CU-14-10, DATE: December 12, 2014 Continued conditional use application #CU-14-10 of J. Peter & Diane Sande to raze an existing 1,136 sq. ft. single family dwelling with a 1,136 sq. ft. footprint and construct a new single family dwelling with a 1,703 sq. ft. footprint, 50 Bartlett Bay Road. Since the Board’s last discussion of this application at it November 4, 2014 meeting, the following new information has been provided: • A copy of the approved Shoreland Protection Individual Permit (Permit Number 49) issued by the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation effective December 4, 2014 and provided via email to the City that same day. • A revised landscaping plan received on December 11, 2014 depicting existing vegetation and trees, newly-planted landscaping and trees, proposed native plantings, rain gardens and shrubs. Staff considers the applicant to have now met the conditions for approval of the application. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_pre lim DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: December 12, 2014 Plans received: October 28, 2014 WILLOWBROOK HOMES, LLC – 1675 DORSET STREET PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION #SD 14-32 Agenda #8 Meeting date: December 16, 2014 Applicant Willowbrook Homes, LLC c/o Peter Kahn 44 Park Street Essex Junction, VT 05452 Owners William & Gail Lang 1675 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Engineer David Burke O’Leary Burke Civil Associates 1 Corporate Drive, Suite #1 Essex Junction, VT 05452 Property Information Tax Parcel 0570-1675-R Volume 770, Pages 588-590. SEQ – Village Residential, SEQ-Neighborhood Residential, SEQ-Natural Resource Protection 31.87 acres Location Map PROJECT DESCRIPTION CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc Preliminary plat application #SD-14-32 of Willowbrook Homes, LLC for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) the subdivision of a 31.87 acre parcel developed with one (1) single family dwelling into two (2) lots of 5.0 acres and 26.87 acres and, 2) developing the 5.0 acre parcel with nine (9) single family dwellings, 1675 Dorset Street. COMMENTS Administrative Officer Raymond Belair and Planner Temporary Assignment Dan Albrecht referred to herein as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted on October 28, 2014 and offer the following comments. Dimensional Requirements The current parcel is located within the three separate zoning subdistricts of the Southeast Quadrant. Staff’s analysis for compliance is focused solely on the project’s compliance with those for the Village Residential sub-district wherein the proposed project is taking place. Table 1. Dimensional Requirements SEQ-VR Zoning District Required Existing Proposed √ Min. Lot Size 12,000 ft.2 29.30 acres 5.00 acres subdivided from existing 31.87 acre parcel √ Max. Building Coverage 15% t.b.d. (~18,000 s.f.) √ Max. Total Coverage 30% 2.85% (7,150 s.f.) t.b.d. (~43,500 s.f.) √ Min. Front Setback 20 ft. >20 ft. >20 ft. √ Min. Side Setback 10 ft. >10 ft. >10 ft. √ Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. >30 ft. >30 ft. √ Max. Building Height (pitched roof) 28 ft. <28 ft. √ zoning compliance PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Pursuant to Section 15.18 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, PUDs shall comply with the following standards and conditions: (A)(1)Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity is available to meet the needs of the project. According to Section 15.13(B)(1) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, the existing public utility system shall be extended to provide the necessary quantity of water, at an acceptable pressure, to the proposed dwelling units. According to Section 15.13 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, the subdivider or developer shall connect to the public sewer system or provide a community wastewater system approved by the City and the State in any subdivision where off-lot wastewater is proposed. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc Applicant shall obtain preliminary water/ wastewater allocation approvals prior to submittal of a final plat. (A)(2)Sufficient grading and erosion controls will be utilized during and after construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties. The proposed project shall adhere to standards for erosion control as set forth in Section 16.03 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. In addition, the grading plan shall meet the standards set forth in Section 16.04 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. Erosion control specifications and grading plans have been submitted with the application. Staff considers this criterion to be met. (A)(3)The project incorporates access, circulation, and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unreasonable congestion of adjacent roads. The applicant is proposing to cease use of a portion of the existing driveway and create a new road that will serve the existing single family lot and the proposed nine new homes. The relevant portion of Section 15 of the LDRs is as follows: (4) Connections to adjacent parcels. If the DRB finds that a roadway extension or connection to an adjacent property may or could occur in the future, whether through City action or development of an adjacent parcel, the DRB shall require the applicant to construct the connector roadway to the property line or contribute to the cost of completing the roadway connection. (a) In any such application, the DRB shall require sufficient right-of-way to be dedicated to accommodate two (2) lanes of vehicle travel, City utilities, and a ten-foot wide grade-separated recreation path. The applicant has proposed an alternate curved road that terminates at the northern property line. Should the property be further developed in the future, there is a city right-of-way along the northern boundary of Dorset Farms which would facilitate a connection into the middle of the parcel near the existing single family home. No formal connection is provided to the Shapiro property immediately to the south. Said southern property may have some wetland and/or deed limitations and given that it is a single family lot staff feels that a road connection to this parcel is not warranted. Staff considers this Criterion to have been met. 1. The Board should review the proposed revised road layout with the applicant to confirm that connections to adjacent properties are adequately addressed. (A)(4)The project’s design respects and will provide suitable protection to wetlands, streams, wildlife habitat as identified in the Open Space Strategy, and any unique natural features on the site. There is an existing small stream and associated wetland running north-south through the property, identified on the plan as, “Existing Zoning Boundary.” The 50 ft. stream buffer is shown as is the 50 ft. wetland buffer. No development other than use of the existing driveway crossing is proposed within the buffers. In this part of the City, the Arrowwood Environmental Report (2005) updated the findings from the Open Space Report and was a foundation for the current SEQ zoning. The western edge of the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc property is contained within the SEQ – Natural Resources Protection District and includes forested and wetlands areas. 2. The Board and the applicant should discuss strategies for management of that forested/wetland area. (A)(5)The project is designed to be visually compatible with the planned development patterns in the area, as specified in the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose of the zoning district(s) in which it is located. Pursuant to Section 9.01 of the Land Development Regulations, the Southeast Quadrant District (SEQ) is hereby formed in order to encourage open space preservation, scenic view and natural resource protection, wildlife habitat preservation, continued agricultural use, and well as planned residential use in the largely undeveloped area of the City known as the Southeast Quadrant. The open character and scenic views offered in this area have long been recognized as very special and unique resources in the City and worthy of protection. The location and clustering of buildings and lots in a manner that in the judgment of the Development Review Board will best preserve the open space character of this area shall be encouraged. The proposal calls for nine (9) new single family homes. The project is located within the VR subdistrict, which allows for up to eight (8) units per acre (with the transfer of development rights); the proposal is well below this maximum. Compatibility of the proposed development with planned development patterns is further assessed under the SEQ standards. The proposed homes and layout are consistent with the standards of the VR subdistrict. Staff considers this criterion to have been met. (A)(6)Open space areas on the site have been located in such a way as to maximize opportunities for creating contiguous open spaces between adjoining parcels and/or stream buffer areas. See discussion under SEQ standards. (A)(7)The layout of a subdivision or PUD has been reviewed by the Fire Chief or (designee) to ensure that adequate fire protection can be provided. In an email to staff dated December 1, 2014, the Fire Department commented as follows: Willow Brook Lane (formerly Dog Lane?): Just a note that the Hammerhead at the end of the lane must accommodate FD apparatus- post snow storage area. The hammer head area shall be posted " no parking vehicles towed at owners expense". Hydrant location is acceptable. 3. The Board should direct the applicant to comply with the Fire Marshall’s recommendation. (A)(8)Roads, recreation paths, stormwater facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility lines and lighting have been designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent landowners. See discussion below under SEQ standards. (A)(9)Roads, utilities, sidewalks, recreation paths, and lighting are designed in a manner that is consistent with City utility and roadway plans and maintenance standards. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines shall be underground. (A)(10)The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s). Staff considers the project to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Southeast Quadrant District This proposed subdivision is located in the southeast quadrant district. Therefore it is subject to the provisions of Section 9 of the SBLDR. 9.06 Dimensional and Design Requirements Applicable to All Sub-Districts The following standards shall apply to development and improvements within the entire Southeast Quadrant Zoning District. A. Height. (1) The maximum height of any occupied structure in the SEQ-NRP, SEQ-NRT, or SEQ-NR sub-district shall not exceed forty-five feet (45’); the waiver provisions of Section 3.07(E) shall not apply to occupied structures in these sub-districts. 1. The maximum height of any structure shall not exceed those allowed within the Table of Uses and Dimensional Standards (Appendix C). The nine proposed homes are to be 1.5 stories in height. This criterion is likely met. B. Open Space and Resource Protection. (1) Open space areas on the site shall be located in such a way as to maximize opportunities for creating usable, contiguous open spaces between adjoining parcels. As most of the parcel remains undeveloped, there still remains contiguous open space between adjoining parcels. No details are provided any plans for use or maintenance of that common land, although a trail is proposed as an amenity for the homeowners. Staff recommends that the applicant further refine the placement and delineation of open space on the lot to create space for the “backyards” and for “common use”. Having this separation and delineation would create better conditions for all homeowners there. (2) Building lots, streets and other structures shall be located in a manner consistent with the Regulating Plan for the applicable sub-district allowing carefully planned development at the average densities provided in this bylaw. See the discussion below under SEQ. (3) A plan for the proposed open spaces and/or natural areas and their ongoing management shall be established by the applicant. Section 9 of the SBLDR states that “a range of parks should be distributed through the SEQ to meet a variety of needs including children’s play, passive enjoyment of the outdoors, and active recreation.” CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc Furthermore, “parks should be provided at a rate of 7.5 acres of developed parkland per 1,000 population per the South Burlington Capital Budget and Program” and “a neighborhood or mini park of 10,000 square feet or more should be provided within a one-quarter mile walk of every home not so served by an existing City park or other publicly-owned recreation area.” No formal park is proposed here, but as noted, there is a common area available for use although no management plan is proposed. It is unclear what uses will be allowed on this area, whether it will be planted with lawn grass or remain as a farm meadow and who will have responsibility for maintenance. Staff feels that at least some of this area should be cleared, graded and planted with lawn grass so there is sufficient room for neighborhood children to play soccer, football, etc. or for community gatherings. In response to an email inquiry from staff regarding these issues, the applicant replied as follows: -------- Original message -------- From: Peter Kahn <peterskahn@live.com> Date:12/11/2014 11:20 AM (GMT-05:00) To: Dan Albrecht <dalbrecht@ccrpcvt.org> Cc: ray@sburl.com, Paul O'leary <poleary@olearyburke.com> Subject: Re: Willow Brook Homes, common area Hi Dan, We moved the trail to its current location in order to delineate the open space from the backyards of the units. This was a suggestion from staff, and we like the idea. We propose to to grade out the open space, seed it with grass, and mow regularly in order to create an area for passive recreational use. Mowing the area after build out would then be a responsibility of the association. Thank you, Peter Kahn Willowbrook Homes LLC From: Dan Albrecht Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 10:48 AM To: peterskahn@live.com Cc: ray@sburl.com Subject: Willow Brook Homes, common area Hi Peter: I’m noticing that there is not much detail on the future disposition of the common area in the NE corner of the property. Can you provide details on: -will there be a document describing how this common area will be managed, who can use it and what are allowed uses -do you think it is feasible for you to grade and seed a portion of it so some of this area can be used for soccer, touch football, casual family play, etc……….otherwise I don’t seeing it being much of an amenity other than the trail along its western edge. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc Also, my comments will note there needs to be some delineation via fencing or planting between the backyards of the homes and the common area. Thanks, Dan See also the discussion under 15.8(A)(4) above regarding the western portion of the property. 4. The Board should discuss the proposed common area with the applicant, whether a document to be recorded in the land records specifying allowed users and uses of the property would be warranted, and whether development of some basic amenities (graded and seeded lawn area, benches, gazebos or sun shelters, etc.) in this common area would be appropriate. (4) Sufficient grading and erosion controls shall be employed during construction and after construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties. In making this finding, the Development Review Board may rely on evidence that the project will be covered under the General Permit for Construction issued by the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. The project shall adhere to erosion control standards in Section 16.03 of the LDRs. The grading plan shall meet the standards in Section 16.04 of the LDRs. The applicant has submitted plans to meet this standard. See discussion above. Staff considers this criterion to be met. (5) Sufficient suitable landscaping and fencing shall be provided to protect wetland, stream, or primary or natural community areas and buffers in a manner that is aesthetically compatible with the surrounding landscape. Chain link fencing other than for agricultural purposes shall be prohibited within PUDs; the use of split rail or other fencing made of natural materials is encouraged. The area proposed for development is distant from any wetland, stream or natural community areas. Staff feels that neither additional landscaping nor fencing is warranted. C. Agriculture. The conservation of existing agricultural production values is encouraged through development planning that supports agricultural uses (including but not limited to development plans that create contiguous areas of agricultural use), provides buffer areas between existing agricultural operations and new development, roads, and infrastructure, or creates new opportunities for agricultural use (on any soil group) such as but not limited to community-supported agriculture. As noted above, most of the central portion of the property remains undeveloped and could be farmed in the future. There are no existing agricultural operations adjacent to or impacted by this project. Staff recommends that the applicant include provisions for garden plot(s) on common land if no private footprint lots are to be established. D. Public Services and Facilities. In the absence of a specific finding by the Development Review Board that an alternative location and/or provision is approved for a specific development, the location of buildings, lots, streets and utilities shall conform with the location of planned public facilities as depicted on the Official Map, including but not limited to recreation paths, streets, park land, schools, and sewer and water facilities. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 8 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc The proposed development is compatible with the location of planned public facilities depicted on the Official Map. (1) Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity shall be available to meet the needs of the project in conformance with applicable State and City requirements, as evidenced by a City water allocation, City wastewater allocation, and/or Vermont Water and Wastewater Permit from the Department of Environmental Conservation. The applicant shall submit required documentation regarding this standard prior to Final Plat application. This criterion is not yet met. (2) Recreation paths, storm water facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility lines, and lighting shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. (3) Recreation paths, utilities, sidewalks, and lighting shall be designed in a manner that is consistent with City utility plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. (4) The plan shall be reviewed by the Fire Chief or his designee to insure that adequate fire protection can be provided, with the standards for evaluation including, but not limited to, minimum distance between structures, street width, vehicular access from two directions where possible, looping of water lines, water flow and pressure, and number and location of hydrants. See Fire Marshall’s comments above. E. Circulation. The project shall incorporate access, circulation and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unsafe conditions on adjacent roads and sufficient to create connectivity for pedestrians, bicycles, vehicles, school transportation, and emergency service vehicles between neighborhoods. In making this finding the Development Review Board may rely on the findings of a traffic study submitted by the applicant, and the findings of any technical review by City staff or consultants. (1) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. (2) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is consistent with City roadway plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. With regards to recreation paths, the Bike-Ped Committee met on November 13, 2014 to review the application and indicated that the “committee would like to recommend that the applicant explore options to connect the new development to the existing bike/ped network, both along Dorset Street and in the Dorset Farms neighborhood..” 5. The Board should discuss recreation path connections and perhaps have the applicant meet with the Bike-Ped Committee prior to final plat submittal to consider options. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 9 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc The applicant has submitted several plans addressing standards D. (2) & (3) and E. (1) & (2) above. As excerpted below, the plans have been reviewed by the Department of Public Works and the applicant has responded to those comments as follows: From: Bryan Currier [mailto:bcurrier@olearyburke.com] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 1:21 PM To: ray Cc: Paul O'Leary Subject: RE: Willowbrook Homes, LLC - 1675 Dorset Street Good Afternoon Ray, I have reviewed the comments supplied by Public Works and the City Arborist and made the following revisions shown in red below: Landscaping: 1. Road Cross Sections show 14 inches of dense graded crushed stone and 12 inches of sand under street trees. Trees require a minimum depth of 2.5 feet of loam or sandy loam through the greenbelt to provide adequate soil volume to support tree growth. Trees on the side of the street without a greenbelt could be moved back further from the street to address this. Sheet 3 – Roadway Details (attached) has been revised to limit the road sub base to the curb. 2. Fertilizer and lime recommendations should be reworked. Rates specified for liquid fertilizer are excessive, the granular fertilizer recommendations are meaningless without a fertilizer analysis and lime rates should be based on a soil test results Sheet 7 – Landscaping Plan (attached) has been revised to require soil testing and a fertilizer analysis before lime or fertilizer is applied on-site. 3. Recommend specifying a different Freeman Maple cultivar( Celebration and Sienna Glen both have better structural form than Autumn Blaze) Sheet 7 – Landscaping Plan has been revised to show Celebration street trees rather than Freeman Maple. 4. Recommend a larger maturing tree than Japanese Tree Lilac as a street tree. Sheet 7 – Landscaping Plan has been revised to show Common Hackberry street trees rather than Japanese Tree Lilac. 5. Clause at bottom of the plant schedule should state that any species substitutions must be approved by the City of South Burlington Sheet 7 – Landscaping Plan has been revised accordingly. Public Works 1. The project proposes to disturb greater than 1 acre of land and create greater than 1 acre of impervious area. Therefore, it will need construction (3-9020) and operational (3-9015) stormwater permits from the State of Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. N/A CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 10 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc 2. The applicant has provided a summary of hydrologic modeling results on sheet 4. This information was helpful during review. N/A 3. Where will overflow from swale #2 flow during a large storm event, or in the event that the swale overflow device fails? See Sheet 4 – Storm & EC Details The swale overflow device is equipped with a stone emergency spillway. 4. The City’s minimum drainage pipe size is 15”. Pipes in the road ROW should have this minimum diameter. Sheet 2 – Plan & Profile (attached) has been revised to show a 15” PE pipe between CB#1,CB#2, CB#3. 5. Consider installation of a stone splash pad or other means to prevent the drainage pipe entering swale 1 from causing erosion. Sheet 2 – Plan & Profile has been revised to show rip rap for the drainage pipe entering swale 1. 6. Maintenance of the proposed stormwater treatment system may be eligible for transfer to the City in the future. The applicant may want to consider showing proposed drainage an access easements around the stormwater facilities on the plat in order to facilitate this. Otherwise, they may need to be added at a later date. Sheet 1 – Site Plan (attached) and Sheet PL1 – Preliminary Plat (attached) has been updated to show an access easement to the stormwater facilities for the City of South Burlington 7. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance structures on site. N/A 8. Is the road and associated infrastructure (three stormwater areas, force main, pump station) intended to become public in the future? Yes, the intent is to have the city take over the stormwater, forece main, and pump station. 9. The pump station appears to be off the side of the drive for the house to the west of the development though it is unclear if the area around the PS is to be made of stable materials that would allow for access of heavy maintenance vehicles. Yes, the pump station is located right off a future ROW and will be accessible by heavy maintenance vehicles. 10. The top coat of pavement needs to be 1 ½” thick for a total thickness of 4”. Sheet 3 – Roadway Details has been revised to include 1.5” of type II top coat pavement. 11. The project is proposing a stop sign where it meets Dorset Street. It will need a stop bar and 50’ of yellow double centerline leading back from the sign. All pavement markings shall be Type 1 Permanent Tape or DPW approved equal. Sheet 3 – Roadway Details has been revised to show a stop bar and 50’ of double yellow CL on the intersection detail. Please let me know if you have any additional questions or comments before the DRB meeting 12/16. Thanks, CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 11 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc Bryan On December 10, 2014 the Department of Public Works indicated to staff that the applicant’s responses were satisfactory. However, with regards to stormwater the Department indicated as follows: From: Tom Dipietro Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 1:58 PM To: ray; Justin Rabidoux; Craig Lambert Subject: RE: Willowbrook Homes, LLC - 1675 Dorset Street Ray, Looks good to me. Just one new comment and a couple things to repeat at final: 1. The project proposes to disturb greater than 1 acre of land and create greater than 1 acre of impervious area. Therefore, it will need construction (3-9020) and operational (3-9015) stormwater permits from the State of Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. 2. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance structures on site. 3. If the applicant intends to turn the stormwater system over to the City they will want include the pipe leaving CB#9 and entering the swale within the proposed easement. -Tom Thomas J. DiPietro Jr. Deputy Director Department of Public Works City of South Burlington 6. The applicant should address the outstanding stormwater questions raised by the Department of Public Works in their December 10th email. 7. The Board should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance structures on site. (3) The provisions of Section 15.12(D)(4) related to connections between adjacent streets and neighborhoods shall apply. See discussion above 9.07 Regulating Plans A. Description and Regulatory Effect. The regulatory text of this Article is supplemented with illustrations, officially known as the Regulating Plan, illustrating the dimensional and design concepts. The Regulating Plan contains basic land planning and neighborhood design criteria that are intended to foster attractive and walkable neighborhood development patterns. Design criteria and guidelines set forth below are intended to address basic neighborhood design relationships related to scale, connectivity, and overall orientation that promote pedestrian friendly development as follows in Section 9.07(C). CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 12 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc The Regulating Plan is an illustrative guide; it does not have the same force of regulation as does the text in this bylaw. However, the Development Review Board will refer to both the Regulating Plan and the text of this section in its project reviews B. General Provisions (1) The Regulating Plan shall apply to new development within the SEQNRT, SEQ-NR, SEQ-VR and SEQ-VC sub-districts. (2) All residential lots created on or after the effective date of this bylaw in any SEQ sub-district shall conform to a standard minimum lot width to depth ratio of one to two (1:2), with ratios of 1:2.5 to 1:5 recommended. The lot overall is rather square rather than rectangular. However, generally the layout of the individual nine homes indicate that their building envelopes and yards would be compliant with a 1:2 width-depth ratio and that the therefore the intent of this criterion is met. C. Street, Block and Lot Patterns (1) Overall Criteria: Development criteria within the Street, Block and Lot Pattern section are intended to provide pedestrian-scaled development patterns and an interconnected system of streets that allow direct and efficient walking and bicycling trips, and decrease circuitous vehicular trips. (2) Street Design: The intention of street design criteria is to provide a system of attractive, pedestrian- oriented streets that encourage slower speeds, maximize connections between and within neighborhoods, and contribute to neighborhood livability. (3) Building Design: The intention of the building design guidelines is to ensure that new housing and commercial development reinforce a pedestrian-friendly environment, while allowing creativity in design. Given the small size of the development, there are limited streets and blocks. The proposal includes a sidewalk along the eastern edge of the new proposed street as well as a proposed trail connecting with Dorset Street. It is unclear whether this is a footpath or whether it will be paved or graveled recreation path. The layout of the street is such that a future connection to the east or north is feasible. Staff recommends that the plans be revised to include a sign at the end of the turn-around indicating that the roadway may be extended to the north in the future, pursuant to 9.09(A)(3). D. Parks Design and Development. (1) General standards. The SEQ has an existing large community park, the Dorset Street Park Complex. Parks in the SEQ may be programmed as neighborhood parks or mini-parks as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. Mini parks in the SEQ should be a minimum of 10,000 square feet, with programming approved by the South Burlington Recreation Department. Such parks are to be located through the neighborhoods in order to provide a car-free destination for children and adults alike, and to enhance each neighborhood’s quality of life. They shall be knitted into the neighborhood fabric as a focal point in the neighborhood, to add vitality and allow for greater surveillance by surrounding homes, local streets and visitors. Each park should be accessible by vehicle, foot, and bicycle and there should be a park within a quarter-mile of every home. (2) Specific Standards. The following park development guidelines are applicable in the SEQ- NRT, SEQ-NR, SEQ-VR, and SEQ-VC districts: (a) Distribution and Amount of Parks: CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 13 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc (i) A range of parks and open space should be distributed through the SEQ to meet a variety of needs including children’s play, passive enjoyment of the outdoors, and active recreation. (ii) Parks should serve as the focus for neighborhoods and be located at the heart of residential areas, served by public streets and fronted by development. (iii) Parks should be provided at a rate of 7.5 acres of developed parkland per 1,000 population per the South Burlington Capital Budget and Program. (iv) A neighborhood or mini park of 10,000 square feet or more should be provided within a one-quarter mile walk of every home not so served by an existing City park or other publicly-owned developed recreation area. (b) Dedication of Parks and Open Space: Parks and protected open space must be approved by City Council for public ownership or management, or maintained permanently by a homeowners’ association in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. (c) Design Guidelines (i) Parks should be fronted by homes and/or retail development in order to make them sociable, safe and attractive places. (ii) Parks should be located along prominent pedestrian and bicycle connections. (iii) To the extent feasible, single-loaded roads should be utilized adjacent to natural open spaces to define a clear transition between the private and public realm, and to reinforce dedicated open space as a natural resource and not extended yard areas. See discussion of common land above. 9.08 SEQ-NR &NRT Sub-District; Specific Standards No land development is proposed on the NR portion of this property. 9.09 SEQ-VR Sub-District; Specific Standards The SEQ-VR sub-district has additional dimensional and design requirements, as enumerated in this Section. A. Street, Block and Lot Pattern (1) Development blocks. Development block lengths should range between 300 and 400 linear feet; see Figure 9-2 for example. If longer block lengths are unavoidable blocks 400 feet or longer must include mid-block public sidewalk or recreation path connections. (2) Interconnection of Streets (a) Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 400 feet. (b) Dead end streets (e.g. culs de sac) are discouraged. Dead end streets shall not exceed 200 feet in length. (c) Street stubs are required at the end of dead end streets to allow for future street connections and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections to open space and future housing on adjoining parcels per section 15.12(D)(4). CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 14 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc The new access road serving the new homes is less than 300 feet long. As noted above, the issue of street stubs has been addressed. (3) Street Connection to Adjoining Parcels. Street stubs are required to be built to the property line and connected to adjacent parcels per section 15.12(D)(4) of these Regulations. Posting signs with a notice of intent to construct future streets is strongly encouraged. (4) Lot ratios. Lots shall maintain a minimum lot width to depth ratio of 1:2, with a ratio of 1:2.5 to 1:5 recommended. As footprint lots on a single PUD parcel, this criterion is not applicable but the Board may wish to discuss the layout of the homes with the intent of the lot ratio requirement in mind and determine if the intent of having the homes closer together is met. 8. The Board should discuss the layout of the homes to discuss consistency with the intent of the lot ratio requirements. B. Street, Sidewalk & Parking Standards (1) Street dimensions and cross sections. Neighborhood streets (collector and local) in the VR sub-district are intended to be low-speed streets for local use that discourage through movement and are safe for pedestrians and bicyclists. Dimensions for public collector and local streets shall be as set forth in Tables 9-3 and 9-4, and Figures 9-8 and 9-9 below. (2) Sidewalks (a) Sidewalks must be a minimum of five feet (5’) in width with an additional minimum five-foot planting strip (greenspace) separating the sidewalk from the street. (b) Sidewalks are required on one side of the street, and must be connected in a pattern that promotes walkability throughout the development. The DRB may in its discretion require supplemental sidewalk segments to achieve this purpose. (3) Street Trees; see Section 9.08(B)(3) (4) On-street parking; see Section 9.08(B)(4). (5) Intersection design. Intersections shall be designed to reduce pedestrian crossing distances and to slow traffic; see Figure 9-6 and Section 9.08(B)(5). (6) Street and sidewalk lighting. Pedestrian-scaled light fixtures (e.g., 12’ to 14’) shall be provided sufficient to ensure pedestrian safety traveling to and from public spaces. Overall illumination levels should be consistent with the lower-intensity development patterns and character of the SEQ, with lower, smoother levels of illumination (rather than hot-spots) and trespass minimized to the lowest level consistent with public safety. The Department of Public Works has addressed the project’s compliance with these standards in the discussion above. These criteria are met. C. Residential Design (1) Building Orientation. Residential buildings must be oriented to the street. Primary entries for single family and multi-family buildings must face the street. Secondary building entries may open onto garages and/or parking areas. (Special design guidelines apply to arterial streets). (2) Building Façades. Building facades are encouraged to employ a theme and variation approach. Buildings should include common elements to appear unified, but façades should be varied from one building to the next to avoid monotony. Front porches, stoops, and balconies that create semi-private space and are oriented to the street are encouraged. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 15 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc (3) Front Building Setbacks. In pedestrian districts, a close relationship between the building and the street is critical to the ambiance of the street environment. (a) Buildings should be set back fifteen feet (15’) from the back of sidewalk. (b) Porches, stoops, and balconies may project up to eight feet (8’) into the front setbacks. Porch, stoop and balcony areas within the front setback shall not be enclosed or weatherized with glazing or other solid materials. (4) Placement of Garages and Parking. See Section 9.08(C)(4) and Figure 9-7. (5) Mix of Housing Styles. A mix of housing styles (i.e. ranch, cape cod, colonial, etc.), sizes, and affordability is encouraged within neighborhoods and developments. These should be mixed within blocks, along the street and within neighborhoods rather than compartmentalized into sections of near-identical units. The applicant has submitted a two page document undated document entitled “UNIT DESIGN GUIDELINES WILLOWBROOK DELOPMENT (SIC), SOUTH BURLINGTON prepared by Michael Dugan Architect (included in packet) toward satisfying standards C. (1) through (5) above. Staff feels that this is a first pass at variability but does not feel that the project meets the standard for a mix of housing styles, sizes or affordability. Staff also feels that the buildings as proposed may be “near identical” units based on the proposed guidelines. 9. The Board should discuss these guidelines and decide if they are sufficient to address compliance with these five standards. UTILITY CABINETS The plans do not show this level of detail. As with other site elements noted above, these will be addressed in final plat review. NOTICE OF CONDITIONS There are “footprint” lots proposed around several of the units. For purposes of planning and zoning, all lots will be considered one lot. Eventually, as part of final plat review, the applicant will be required to record a “Notice of Condition” to this effect which has been approved by the City Attorney prior to recording the final plat plans. SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Pursuant to Section 14.03(A)(6) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any PUD shall require site plan approval. Section 14.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations establishes the following general review standards for all site plan applications: 14.06(B)(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. 14.06(B)(2) Parking 14.06(B)(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 adjoining buildings. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 16 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc This is a proposed small, single family development of homes on a single, new street. A landscaping plan is proposed, the development includes a sidewalk on one side of the street and each home will include a driveway and a two (2) car garage. The proposed homes will be less than 28 ft. in height and of a size similar to others in the subdistrict. These three criteria are met. 14.06(B)(4) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. Not applicable. 14.06(C)(1) The DRB shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural characteristics, landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of different architectural styles. 14.06(C)(2) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain, and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. No elevation plans have yet been submitted. Compliance with these two standards are best addressed at final plat review. 10. The Board should discuss these two standards with the applicant and provide direction as to the level of detail the applicant should provide for final plat review. Site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: 14.07 Specific Review Standards A. 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. The applicant will be constructing two hammerheads at the end of the new neighborhood street to facilitate a westerly connection to the remainder of the property and a northerly connection to the adjacent parcel. Staff considers this criterion to be met. B. 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. Details on wire served utility lines are not provided. Compliance with this standard is best addressed at final plat review. C. Disposal of Wastes. All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 17 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc compliance with any recycling 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. No dumpsters are necessary as the development consists of single family homes with 2 car garages and likely to be serviced via family sized totes. D. Landscaping and Screening Requirements. See Article 13, Section 13.06 Landscaping, Screening, and Street Trees. Pursuant to Section 13.06(A) of the proposed Land Development Regulations, landscaping and screening shall be required for all uses subject to planned unit development review. The minimum landscape requirement for this project is determined by Table 13-9 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. The costs of street trees are above and beyond this minimum landscape requirement. When a planting plan is submitted as part of preliminary and final plat review, it will be submitted to the City Arborist for review and comment. A landscape plan has been submitted which includes a proposed house landscaping schedule. According to the applicant, the construction cost per unit is $150,000. The total construction cost for these nine condos is therefore $1,350,000. The minimum landscaping standard is $7,500 on the first $250,000 of total building cost, $5,000 on the next $250,000 and $8,500 on the remaining $850,000 for combined total of $21,000. This schedule proposes a budget of $2,296.00 per unit for a total landscaping budget for the nine condominiums of $20,664.00 and therefore this standard is not quite met. The applicant should revise their landscaping plan to include an additional $336 in total or $37.33 per condominium. E911 Addresses The applicant shall submit a proposed name for this street, and E911 addresses for the proposed project, in conformance with the E911 addressing standards, with the final plat application. Other Pursuant to Section 15.08 (D) of the LDRs, the applicant shall submit homeowner’s association legal documents with the final plat application. The final plat application shall include a Certificate of Title as required in Section 15.17 of the LDRs. Pursuant to Section 15.17 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, prior to issuance of the first zoning permit or start of utility or road construction, the applicant shall submit all appropriate legal documents including easements (e.g. irrevocable offer of dedication and warranty deed for proposed public roads, utility, sewer, drainage, water, and recreation paths, etc.) to the City Attorney for approval and recorded in the South Burlington Land Records. Prior to the start of construction of the improvements described in the condition above, the applicant shall post a bond which covers the cost of said improvements. Pursuant to Section 15.14(E)(2) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, within 14 days CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 18 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_32_1675DorsetSt_WillowbrookHomesLLC_PUD_prelim.doc of the completion of required improvements (e.g. roads, water mains, sanitary sewers, storm drains, etc.) the developer shall submit to the City Engineer, “as-built” construction drawings certified by a licensed engineer. RECOMMENDATION The Board should review the numbered and italicized items in red above and discuss these and other issues as needed. Respectfully submitted, ________________________________ Ray Belair, Administrative Officer Copy to: Peter Kahn, Willowbrook Homes #SP-14-60 - 1 – CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: December 12, 2014 Application received: November 3, 2014 SITE PLAN REVIEW #SD-14-60 TECHNOLOGY PARK CAMPUS, LCC Agenda #9 Meeting Date: December 12, 2014 Applicant Evan Langfeldt, Technology Park Partners 55 Community Drive South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Contact Person Evan Langfeldt, Technology Park Partners 55 Community Drive South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Owners Technology Park Campus, LLC 55 Community Drive South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Technology Park Campus, LLC, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is requesting site plan review to construct a 3-story 54,459 sq. ft. general office building, 88 Technology Park Way. 1. Technology Park Campus, LLC, the applicant, is requesting site plan review to construct a 3-story 54,459 sq. ft. general office building, 88 Technology Park Way. 2. The owner of record of the subject property is Technology Park Campus, LLC. 3. The subject property is located in the Mixed Industrial & Commercial (Mixed IC) Zoning District. 4. The plans submitted consist of a twenty-one (21) page set of plans, page one (1) entitled, “88 Technology Park Way Technology Park – Lot 3 South Burlington, Vermont Drawing Index” prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers, last revised on 10/30/14. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements Table 1. Dimensional Requirements IC Zoning District Required/Limit Existing Proposed √ Min. Lot Size 40,000 SF 3.9 acres √ Max. Building Coverage 40% -0- 10.47% √ Max. Overall Coverage 70% 8.94% 57.44% √ Min. Front Setback (Kimball Avenue) 50 ft. 65 ft. √ Max Front Yard Coverage (Kimball Ave.) 30% 17.26% 17.26% √ Min. Side Setback 10 ft. 17.5 ft. #SP-14-60 - 2 – √ Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. 45 ft. ♣ Maximum Building Height 35 ft (flat roof) 50 ft √ zoning compliance ♣ Waiver Required The applicant is proposing a building height of 50 feet in height and therefore a waiver is required. Given the relative location of the building and the subject parcel, the presence of a similar 50 ft. building on Lot 2 and an increase in the minimum front and rear setbacks pursuant to Section 3.07.D.2.a, staff has no concerns regarding the proposed height and supports grant of a 15 foot height waiver. Staff feels that the additional height does not affect the view from Kimball Ave. 1. The Board should review and confirm that the requested height waiver, which mirrors the building to the west, is acceptable. SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Pursuant to Section 14.03(A)(6) of the Land Development Regulations, any PUD shall require site plan approval. Section 14.06 establishes the following general review standards for all site plan applications: B. (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. Section 13.01(G)(5) requires that bicycle parking or storage facilities are provided for employees, residents, and visitors to the site. A bicycle rack is appropriately located on the plans. Pursuant to Section 13.01(B) of the Land Development Regulations, the proposed 54,459 square feet of general office use will require 191 parking spaces, including 6 handicapped-accessible parking spaces. The plans depict 194 parking spaces, including 8 handicapped-accessible. This criterion is met. (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. (b) The Development Review Board may approve parking between a public street and one or more buildings if the Board finds that one or more of the following criteria are met. The Board shall approve only the minimum necessary to overcome the conditions below. (i)……… (ii)………. (iii) The lot has unique site conditions, such as a utility easement or unstable soils, that allow for parking, but not a building, to be located adjacent to the public street; (iv)………….. (v)…… #SP-14-60 - 3 – (vi) The lot is located within the Mixed Industrial-Commercial Zoning District and meets the following criteria: a. The lot is located in an approved subdivision where the parking on each lot in the subdivision is proposed to be located between the building or buildings on each lot and the public street so that a significant greenspace surrounded by buildings may be incorporated similar to a college campus style “quad”, as detailed below. b. The parking on any lots that include a part of the greenspace shall be aligned in a similar fashion so that the buildings are located between the greenspace and the parking and so that the parking is located between the buildings and the public street to maintain the integrity and continuity of the greenspace . Prior to gaining approval from the Development Review Board, the applicant for each lot is required to provide a written agreement, such as a shared parking, greenspace and use agreement, from each lot owner in the approved subdivision whose lot will include a portion of the greenspace that provides that each lot owner will comply with this general parking, building and greenspace alignment, layout and design in the future development of each of their lots. c. The minimum required total area of the greenspace shall be 150,000 square feet. For purposes of this subsection 14.06(B) (2)(b)(vi), “greenspace” shall be defined as a consolidated and continuous landscaped area located across more than two lots in the approved subdivision, similar in nature to a common open space, largely surrounded by buildings, but shall not include building or impervious parking areas. The greenspace may extend between buildings, but shall not extend beyond the building line of the principal building on each lot that includes a portion of the greenspace. The greenspace shall consist of pervious surfaces such as lawns, trees, plantings, wetlands, and gardens, and may include impervious landscape features, such as path networks, sculptures, gazebos, water features, footbridges, sitting areas, stone walls, and other features and amenities that may be built within and throughout the greenspace in order to create a more attractive and enjoyable environment. The area of the greenspace shall be calculated by measuring and adding the portion of the total greenspace defined on the site plan for each lot in the approved subdivision that includes a portion of the greenspace. d. Any parking located between a proposed building and a public street shall include landscape screening at least three (3) feet in height above the grade of the adjacent public street, except as necessary to maintain adequate sight distances. The site in question has a large number of existing unique site conditions. They include: • The presence of a 100-foot wide utility easement along the front of the property adjacent to Kimball Ave, which allow for parking, but no principal structures; • The presence of a 25-wide New England Telephone & Telegraph utility easement roughly parallel and to the south of the power utility easement • The presence of a 60-foot access and utility easement (Technology Park Way) through the center of the property parallel to Kimball Ave; #SP-14-60 - 4 – In addition, access to the building to the west (124 Technology Park Way) was specifically laid out to provide safe and predictable vehicular and utility access for both 124 and 88 (the subject lot). A building placed between these easements would, in staff’s opinion, result in splitting the parking both to the front and rear of the building, and to both sides of a private road. Altogether, this would present an awkward, inefficient, and potentially unsafe condition. Finally, staff feels that the proposed layout would not preclude – and in fact reinforces – the applicant’s long-standing concept for a “quad”. Staff supports the plan as submitted and feels that criterion (iii) above for unique site conditions is met. 2. The Board should review the applicant’s request for the location of parking. B. (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 adjoining buildings. The height of the proposed building is 50’, which is over the 35’ maximum height for flat roofs for the City. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a 15 foot height waiver. The applicant has submitted a preliminary rendering of the building. See notes above. In addition, staff notes that the adjacent building and the building at 55 Community Drive were approved as 3-story buildings. B. (4) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. The plans submitted detail that this criterion is met. C. (1) The DRB shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural characteristics, landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of different architectural styles. C. (2) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. The applicant has submitted sufficient building elevations. The proposed building will be similar to the existing buildings in the subdivision and be a mirror image of the existing office building located immediately to the west on Lot 2. The applicant has also proposed extensive landscaping similar to that previously planted in the subdivision. Staff feels that these two criteria are met. Site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: #SP-14-60 - 5 – 14.07 Specific Review Standards A. 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. The applicant has submitted plans detailing the various easements on the property. This shows an access easement across the subject lot to provide access to the adjacent lot to the west. This criterion is met. B. 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. The applicant has submitted plans detailing the required information. This criterion is met. C. Disposal of Wastes. All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling 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. The plans depict a proposed enclosed dumpster area at the east side of the building. This criterion is met D. Landscaping and Screening Requirements. See Article 13, Section 13.06 Landscaping, Screening, and Street Trees. Pursuant to Section 13.06(A) of the proposed Land Development Regulations, landscaping and screening shall be required for all uses subject to planned unit development review. The minimum landscape requirement for this project is determined by Table 13-9 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. The costs of street trees are above and beyond this minimum landscape requirement. A landscape plan and plant list has been submitted. The total construction cost for the building is $5,239,132. The minimum landscaping requirement is $59,891 and $80,879 of plantings is proposed. This requirement is being met. The City Arborist provided the following comments to staff in an email dated December 1, 2014. Parking lot islands should be filled with loam or sandy loam to a minimum depth of 2.5 feet to provide adequate soil volume to support tree growth The 15 Pin Oaks that are proposed to be transplanted were part of landscaping requirement for a previous plan and may not fully qualify towards the required landscape budget (consult w/Planning and Zoning) 3. The applicant should comply with the City Arborist’s comments. #SP-14-60 - 6 – Lighting Pursuant to Appendix A.9 of the Land Development Regulations, luminaries shall not be placed more than 30’ above ground level and the maximum illumination at ground level shall not exceed an average of three (3) foot candles. Pursuant to Appendix A.10(b) of the Land Development Regulations, indirect glare produced by illumination at ground level shall not exceed 0.3 foot candles maximum, and an average of 0.1 foot candles average. All lighting shall be shielded and downcast. The applicant has submitted a lighting point by point plan and lighting cut sheets which are appropriate and meet the guidelines of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. The average foot-candle in the parking lot area is 1.7 Fc. This criterion is met. Other – Traffic The Board previously approved 703.47 vehicle trip ends (VTEs) for the three (3) existing buildings. Sub- allocations comprising this total are: 30 Community Drive = 404.17 VTEs, 55 Community Drive = 159.5 VTEs and 139.8 VTEs for 124 Technology Park Way. The proposed 54,459 square feet of general office space is estimated to generate 140 VTEs for a proposed new traffic generation for the property of 843.47 VTEs. The Board hereby approves a total of 843.47 VTEs for the property. The applicant shall pay for the increased trip ends, minus any credits determined by the South Burlington Impact Fee Ordinance. Staff recommends that a traffic analysis be completed to determine whether any improvements are needed. 4. The Board should discuss traffic with the applicant. Other – Fire Safety The Deputy Fire Chief provided comments to staff via email on December 1, 2014 as follows: 88 Technology Park: Requires sprinkler protection, Class 3 standpipe in egress stair tower, fire alarm system include CO detection and a stretcher compliant elevator ( current plan shows an undersized car). FDC must be located within 100' of a hydrant ( hydrants not shown on submittals) 5. The applicant should comply with the Fire Department’s comments. Other – Public Works/Stormwater The Department of Public Works provided comments to staff via email on December 2, 2014 as follows: From: Tom Dipietro Sent: Monday, December 01, 2014 3:28 PM #SP-14-60 - 7 – To: Justin Rabidoux Subject: DRB Site Plan Review: 88 Technology Park Way Lot 3 Justin, I reviewed the plans for 88 Technology Park Way that were prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers and last revised on 10/30/14. I would like to offer the following comments: · The project proposes to disturb greater than 1 acre of land and create greater than 1 acre of impervious area. Therefore, it will need construction (3-9020) and operational (3-9015) stormwater permits from the State of Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. · The applicant should provide information on the existing State permit coverage for this project (permit number 1-1458) and how it will be updated/amended to facilitate this project. · The applicant proposes to make changes to the extended detention wetland outlet located on lot 2. Provide updated hydrologic model information related to the detention wetland and its treatment/detention of runoff from lots 2 and 3. · The DRB should confirm that the applicant has permission to make changes on adjacent lots (e.g. changes to wetland outlet, snow storage area shown crossing the lot boundary, and landscaping berm). My review assumes that these lots are also owned by Technology Park LLC, or that agreements are in place. · The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance structures on site. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Thomas J. DiPietro Jr. Deputy Director Department of Public Works 6. The Board should discuss the recommendations of the Department of Public Works with the applicant Recommendation Staff recommends that the Board discuss the items above and assure that all items have been addressed prior to closing the hearing. Respectfully submitted, _____________________________ Raymond Belair, Administrative Officer Copy to: Evan Langfeldt, Technology Park Partners FDFDFDFDFDFD FD SSSSSDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD D D D D DWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW FOWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPFDFDS S S S S UP(2)UP(2)UP(2)UPUPUPCTV CTV CTV CTV CTVUPUPUPUPUPUP UPUPUPUPUPUPCTV CTV CTV CTVCTVCTVUP(2)UP(2)UP(2)UT(2)UDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDFDFDFD UTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUT WWWWWOOOODDDD UPS S S S S S S S SSSSSSGGGGGGGGGGGGG GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGS(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)UP(2)UP(2)UP(2)UP(2)UP(2)UP(2)(2)(2)(2)UT(2)352352350 350350350350348 348344344342 342342340353352352 351351350350350350 349349349349349 349348348348 348348 347347 347347346 346346 346345345345 345 344344344343TECHNOLOGY PARK WAYCONCRETE SIDEWALKSHARED USE PATHGGGGGGGGFDFDFDFD FDD DD D D DDD DDDDD PROPOSED3 STORYOFFICE BUILDINGFFE=348.33W18 SNS10 GTS10 GTS18 FR81 JHBH17 TC17 JHBH4 PC20 JHBH25 TC57 FR40 SNS3 TOS3 TOS3 TOS4 AC2 MSA62 JHBH52 FR61 JHBH37 TC3 SJS30 FR81 JHBH39 TC4 PC10 SR8 SR2 AC24 SNS16 SJS(PHASE II)2 QP (T)1 QP (T)2 GTS2 GTS10 SJS8 GTS2 QP (T)1 MSABOULDERS4 PS2 AR2 AC5 CR3 PN3 PG4 IV8 CSI4 CSI3 MSA7 IV6 CRSSNOW STORAGE10 QP (T)EXIST. QPEXIST. QPEXIST. EVERGREENSEXIST. QPEXIST. EVERGREENSDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDSNOW STORAGEEXIST. QP20071000FeetGraphic Scale30 30 60 90 120Sheet TitleProject TitleUse of These Drawings1. Unless otherwise noted, these Drawings are intended forpreliminary planning, coordination with other disciplines orutilities, and/or approval from the regulatory authorities.¬They are not intended as construction drawings unless notedas such.2. Only drawings specifically marked “For Construction” areintended to be used in conjunction with contractdocuments, specifications, owner/contractor agreementsand to be fully coordinated with other disciplines, includingbut not limited to, the Architect, if applicable.¬ TheseDrawings shall not be used for construction layout. ContactTCE for any construction surveying services or to obtainelectronic data suitable for construction layout.3. These Drawings are specific to the Project and are nottransferable. As instruments of service, these drawings, andcopies thereof, furnished by TCE are its exclusive property.¬Changes to the drawings may only be made by TCE. Iferrors or omissions are discovered, they shall be brought tothe attention of TCE immediately.4. By use of these drawings for construction of the Project,the Owner represents that they have reviewed, approved,and accepted the drawings and have met with allapplicable parties/disciplines to insure these plans areproperly coordinated with other aspects of the Project.¬ TheOwner and Architect, are responsible for any buildingsshown, including an area measured a minimum five (5) feetaround any building.¬5. It is the User's responsibility to ensure this copy contains themost current revisions.DRAFTDRAFTProject Reference:DRAFTDRAFTScale:Project Number:Date:Drawn By:Project Engineer:Approved By:No. Description Date ByFor Permitting OnlyRevisions478 BLAIR PARK ROAD | WILLISTON, VERMONT 05495802 879 6331 | WWW.TCEVT.COMTRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERSDRAFTField Book:Landscaping PlanL1-0110/30/141" = 30'2014088NPCAAD¬¬¬88 TechnologyPark WayTechnology Park - Lot 3South Burlington, VermontL-001LAST REVISED 03/15/20132013 TRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERSTREE PLANTING DETAIL4" SAUCER RIMBACKFILL WITH EXCAVATEDMATERIAL. IF SOIL ISPREDOMINATELYCLAY OR GRAVELINCORPORATEORGANIC MATERIAL ASDIRECTED AND APPROVEDBY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTPLANT PIT WIDTH3X BALL DIA.NOTES:* STAKE ONLY IN EXTREMELY WINDY CONDITIONS AS APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT * IF KNOWN, PLANT THIN BARKED TREES WITH THE SAME SUN ORIENTATION OR WRAP WITH WHITE POLYPROPYLENE WRAP * BURLAP: LOOSEN, CUT, & REMOVE NATURAL BURLAP FROM TOP 1/2 OF ROOT BALL. REMOVE SYNTHETIC BURLAP * WIRE BASKETS: CUT AWAY BOTTOM RINGS. PARTIALLY BACKFILL THEN REMOVE REMAINING WIRE. * PLANT TREE TO EXPOSE ROOT FLARE, MAIN ORDER ROOT, AND IN SAME ORIENTATION AS TREE WAS GROWN. DO NOT PLANT TOO DEEP * 3" LAYER SHREDDED BARK MULCH (TO BE APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT) OVER PERMEABLE WEED FABRIC. DO NOT PLACE NEXT TO TREE TRUNK6" CLEARANCE2' DIA.MULCH RINGSLOPE GROUNDTO DRAINDIG TREE PIT ONLY ASDEEP AS ROOT BALLL-002LAST REVISED 03/15/20132013 TRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERSBALL AND BURLAP SHRUBFROM TOP 1/3 OF ROOT BALL*LOOSEN, CUT, & REMOVE BURLAPCONTINUOUS WHEN USED IN BEDS.WEED BARRIER FABRIC TO BE*SHREDDED BARK MULCH ANDGROWNWHICH SHRUB HAD PREVIOUSLY*PLANT SHRUB AT SAME DEPTH ATARCHITECT) OVER PERMEABLE WEED(TO BE APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE3" LAYER SHREDDED BARK MULCH3" SAUCER RIMFABRIC. DO NOT PLACE CLOSE TOMAIN STEM.PLANT PIT WIDTH 3XBALL DIA.NOTES:BACKFILL WITH EXCAVATEDMATERIAL. IF SOIL IS PREDOMINATELYCLAY OR GRAVEL INCORPORATEORGANIC MATERIAL AS DIRECTEDAND APPROVED BY LANDSCAPEARCHITECTPLANT LIST FOFOFOFO FOFO FOFOFOFOFOFOFO FO FOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOS:\_TCE DRAWINGS\2007\100 Tech Park\2007100-44.dwg, 7/14/2014 10:26:35 AM BASEMENT PLANSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"1Phone:(802)985-5595Phone:(802)863-8727ARCHITECT:S2 Architecture5224 Shelburne Rd.Shelburne, VT 05482DESIGN-BUILDER:ReArch Company55 Community DriveSouth Burlington, VT 05403Technology Park - Lot 3South Burlington, VTDATE:10.28.14REVISIONSBASEMENT PLANNA2.0 FIRST FLOOR PLANSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"1Phone:(802)985-5595Phone:(802)863-8727ARCHITECT:S2 Architecture5224 Shelburne Rd.Shelburne, VT 05482DESIGN-BUILDER:ReArch Company55 Community DriveSouth Burlington, VT 05403Technology Park - Lot 3South Burlington, VTDATE:10.28.14REVISIONSFIRST FLOOR PLANNA2.1 SECOND FLOOR PLANSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"1Phone:(802)985-5595Phone:(802)863-8727ARCHITECT:S2 Architecture5224 Shelburne Rd.Shelburne, VT 05482DESIGN-BUILDER:ReArch Company55 Community DriveSouth Burlington, VT 05403Technology Park - Lot 3South Burlington, VTDATE:10.28.14REVISIONSSECOND FLOOR PLANNA2.2 THIRD FLOOR PLANSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"1Phone:(802)985-5595Phone:(802)863-8727ARCHITECT:S2 Architecture5224 Shelburne Rd.Shelburne, VT 05482DESIGN-BUILDER:ReArch Company55 Community DriveSouth Burlington, VT 05403Technology Park - Lot 3South Burlington, VTDATE:10.28.14REVISIONSTHIRD FLOOR PLANNA2.3 ROOF PLANSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"1Phone:(802)985-5595Phone:(802)863-8727ARCHITECT:S2 Architecture5224 Shelburne Rd.Shelburne, VT 05482DESIGN-BUILDER:ReArch Company55 Community DriveSouth Burlington, VT 05403Technology Park - Lot 3South Burlington, VTDATE:10.28.14REVISIONSROOF PLANNA2.4 14'-0"19'-2"14'-0"96'-0"24'-0"2'-5"24'-0"72'-0"24'-0"2'-5"14'-0"14'-0"17'-0"24'-0"24'-0"24'-0"24'-0"17'-0"PRE-CAST CONCRETECOPING (TYP.)BRICK VENEER (TYP.)PRE-FINISHED ALUMINUMWINDOWS (TYP.)PRE-CAST CONCRETEPANELS (TYP.)PRE-CAST CONCRETEHALF ROUND (TYP.)PRE-CAST CONCRETEPANELS (TYP.)WALL MOUNTEDLIGHT FIXTURE (TYP.)PRE-CAST CONCRETECOPING (TYP.)BRICK VENEER (TYP.)PRE-FINISHED ALUMINUMWINDOWS (TYP.)PRE-CAST CONCRETEPANELS (TYP.)PRE-CAST CONCRETEHALF ROUND (TYP.)A5.11A5.11DUMPSTER AREA W/6' HIGH BRICK SCREENING WALL14'-0"24'-0"216'-0"96'-0"16'-0"16'-0"24'-0"16'-0"24'-0"13'-0 1/2"24'-0"17'-0"14'-0"48'-0"13'-0 1/2"24'-0"24'-0"24'-0"72'-0"PRE-CAST CONCRETECOPING (TYP.)BRICK VENEER (TYP.)PRE-FINISHED ALUMINUMWINDOWS (TYP.)PRE-CAST CONCRETEHALF ROUND (TYP.)PRE-CAST CONCRETEPANELS (TYP.)WALL MOUNTEDLIGHT FIXTURE (TYP.)PRE-CAST CONCRETECOLUMN COVER (TYP.)A5.12A5.13EL. 348'-0"GRADE @ BUILDINGEL. 348'-4"T.O. SLAB - LOBBYDUMPSTER AREA W/6' HIGH BRICK SCREENING WALL14'-0"14'-0"EL. 348'-0"GRADE @ BUILDING14'-6"14'-0"216'-0"96'-0"17'-0"16'-0"16'-0"48'-0"24'-0"24'-0"13'-0 1/2"24'-0"24'-0"72'-0"24'-0"24'-0"24'-0"17'-0"16'-0"13'-0 1/2"PRE-CAST CONCRETECOPING (TYP.)BRICK VENEER (TYP.)PRE-FINISHED ALUMINUMWINDOWS (TYP.)PRE-CAST CONCRETEHALF ROUND (TYP.)PRE-CAST CONCRETEPANELS (TYP.)WALL MOUNTEDLIGHT FIXTURE (TYP.)A5.13A5.12EL. 348'-4"T.O. SLAB - LOBBYDUMPSTER AREA W/6' HIGH BRICK SCREENING WALLPhone:(802)985-5595Phone:(802)863-8727ARCHITECT:S2 Architecture5224 Shelburne Rd.Shelburne, VT 05482DESIGN-BUILDER:ReArch Company55 Community DriveSouth Burlington, VT 05403Technology Park - Lot 3South Burlington, VTDATE:10.28.14REVISIONSNORTH ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"1EXTERIOR ELEVATIONSA4.1SOUTH ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"2WEST ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"3EAST ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"4 GWB.GWB.GWB.14'-0"14'-0"17'-0"14'-0"14'-0"17'-0"14'-0"HEIGHT ABOVE AVERAGE GRADE - 45'-6"HEIGHT ABOVE AVERAGE GRADE - 45'-6"MECH. / ELEC. / SPRINKLER7'-0"5'-0"12'-0"3'-0"18'-0"7'-0"5'-0"12'-0"3'-0"24'-0"12'-0"2'-5"19'-2"5'-0"12'-0"2'-5"19'-0"14'-0"14'-0"17'-0"Phone:(802)985-5595Phone:(802)863-8727ARCHITECT:S2 Architecture5224 Shelburne Rd.Shelburne, VT 05482DESIGN-BUILDER:ReArch Company55 Community DriveSouth Burlington, VT 05403Technology Park - Lot 3South Burlington, VTDATE:10.28.14REVISIONSBUILDING SECTION - LOOKING NORTHSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"1BUILDING SECTIONSA5.1BUILDING SECTION - LOOKING WESTSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"3BUILDING SECTION - LOOKING EASTSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"2 FDFDFDFDFDFD FDSSSSSDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD D D D D DDD D D DDDDDDWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWFOFOFOWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPFDFDFDFDFDS S S S S UP(2)UP(2)UP(2)UP(2)UP(2)UP(2)UPUPUPUPCTV CTV CTV CTV CTV UPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPCTV CTV CTV CTVCTVCTVCTVUP(2)UP(2)UP(2)UP(2)UT(2)UDUDUDUDUDUDUUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDFDFDFD UTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUT UT UT UT UT UT UT UT UTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUTUT WWWWWOOOOODDDDD UPS S S S S S S S SSSSSSGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG GGGGGGGGGGGGGGS(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)UP(2)UP(2)UP(2)UP(2)UP(2)UP(2)(2)(2)(2)UT(2)35235235235252 352352350350350350350 350346344344344344344342342342342342342342342 342342342342342342342 340 340 340340340340340340 340340338338338338338338 338338338336336336336336336336336336336336336334334334334 34 334334 332332 332353352352352351351351351351 350350 350350350 350349349349349349349349 349348348348348 348348347347347347 3473473 346346346346 346346 345345345345345 345344 344344 344344 344343343343343343 343 34234234150' WETLANDBUFFER (STATE& LOCAL)KIMBALL AVENUETECHNOLOGY PARK WAY45' SETBACK17.5'SETBACK65' SETBACK17.5'SETBACKCONCRETE SIDEWALKSHARED USE PATHG G G GGGGGSMH 3Rim=343.49iIN=339.89iIN(8)=339.82iOUT=339.74SMH 5Rim=348.26iIN=340.91iOUT=340.83AIR RELEASE MANHOLERIM=349.24i=342.5±TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONDUITS4" PVC WITNESSESSMH 2Rim=344.83iIN(8)=339.16iOUT=339.06PROPOSED SIDEWALK(TYPICAL)WITNESS i=341.12PROPOSED PADWITH BIKE RACKSOUTDOOR PATIOFUTURE PHASE 2 CONCRETEGENERATOR PADDROP CURB ANDACCESSIBLE ENTRYDROP CURB8" WATER SERVICEiOUT=342.83PROPOSED DUMPSTER AREA WITH6' HIGH BRICK WALL SCREENINGHYDRANTSTRIPED CROSSWALKPAVEMENT JOINT(SEE DETAIL)PEDESTRIANCROSSING SIGNPEDESTRIAN CROSSINGDMH #9RIM=342.94iIN(15)=335.30iIN(12)=335.94iOUT(18)=335.12CB #5RIM=342.51iIN=337.01iOUT=336.41CB #6RIM=343.77iIN(12)=338.64iIN(4)=339.18iOUT=338.28DMH #1CB #10RIM=339.97iOUT=333.57CB #11RIM=337.19iIN=334.02iOUT(18)=333.36iOUT(12)=334.19WETLAND OUTLETRIM=336.35iIN(3X3")=334.36iOUT=334.16WETLAND OUTLETRIM=334.35iIN(3X3")=332.87iOUT=332.50CB #4RIM=336.37i(2)=333.82iOUT=333.59DMH #8RIM=339.63iIN(8)=334.34iIN(12)=333.08iOUT=333.03i=332.54DMHRIM=339.45iIN=335.46iOUT=335.38ALTERNATE/ADDITIONALROOF DRAIN CONNECTIONCONNECT ROOF DRAINTO EXISTING STUBiOUT=342.72CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY UTILITYLOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS PRIOR TOCATCH BASIN SUBMITTAL/FABRICATIONCONTRACTOR TO VERIFY UTILITYLOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS PRIOR TOCATCH BASIN SUBMITTAL/FABRICATIONEXISTING RETAINING WALLEXISTING RETAINING WALLHANDICAP ACCESSIBLESIGN (TYP.)CLEANOUT (TYP.)POLE-MOUNTEDLED LUMINAIRE26' PAVEDGGGGGGFDFDFDFD FDSEWER SERVICEi=341.70DROP CURBDDD D D DDD DDDDD SMH 4RIM=346.30iIN(E)(8)=340.30IOUT=340.30LOT 2LOT 4LOT 6PROPOSED3 STORYOFFICE BUILDINGFFE=348.33BFE=336.25W124 TECHNOLOGY PARKWAYEXISTING 3 STORY BUILDING12" HDPE2"SHARED USE PATHSTORMWATER SYSTEMSTORMWATER SYSTEM8"8" PVC8" PVCPVC8" PVC18" HDPE12" HDPE15" HDPE 15" HDP E 12" HDPE18" HDPE12" HDPE12" HDPE12" HDPE12" HDPE8" PVC12" HDPE8" CLASS 52 WATER MAIN8" PVC8" CLASS 52 WATER MAIN8"PVC12"HDPE12"HDPE 8" PVC8" PVC 12" HDPE+348.0348.0 ++348.0348.0 ++348.0348.0 ++348.0348.0 ++350.16350.16++BC:348.30TC:348.88347.94++347.46+BC:347.10TC:347.68BC:346.63TC:347.21++345.79BC:345.73TC:346.01++BC:344.23TC:344.81+345.97346.81+BC:347.17++BC:347.83BC:350.23++BC:351.17BC:352.08++BC:347.64+348.0+347.48+348.84BC:349.81+BC:346.13+352.08+346.83+SAWCUTSAWCUTSAWCUTSAWCUTSAWCUTSAWCUTS8" PVCSNOW STORAGESAWCUT i=333.38i=334.589i=332.23i=342.59iIN(NEW 12)=338.64SMH 1 (ASSUMED INV)Rim=348.51iIN(SW)(8)=338.08iOUT=337.98+349.03346.27++BC:351.71BC:348.53+6"5' CONCRETE SIDEWALK WITH CURB+344.83 350.83 ++ 350.83 344.83+4" PVC6" PVCi=341.00i=344.25i=334.58CB #3-1CB #3-2CB #3-3CB #3-4CB #3-5CB #3-7YD #1YD #218" HDPE 18" HDPE 15" HDPE 15" HDPE 15" HDPE 12" HDPE 15" HDPE 15" HDPE 12" PVC C.O.8"2"SAWCUTDUDUDUDUDUDCB #3-6C.O.i=342.50UDUDUDUDUDC.O.i=343.50TC:350.01BC:349.43END OF CURB4" PERF. PVC4" PERF. PVCC.O.i=344.69C.O.i=343.80348347347346347349348351350350351350349 348345348351350349352343344345346 345347346 348350349350349350349351 350346347349349345 344 347 350 349350FUTURE EVCHARGINGSTATIONS+346.33++BC:344.73UPPER SLAB FOOTINGDRAIN ELEV.=343±SEE DETAIL SHEET C8-04FOR MODIFICATIONSSNOW STORAGE356353354351352353357356353351352356355353353356355350349EXISTING UTILITY CABINETFIBER OPTIC CONNECTIONC.O.C.O.YARD DRAINYARD DRAINEXISTING STORMWATERNAME RIM iIN iOUTDMH #1 347.43 340.50 340.53N/ATYPEN/ABBBBBBBTYPELOT 3 PROPOSED STORMWATERNAME RIM iIN iOUT15" HDPE IN 344.25 N/A 344.25CB #3-7 344.75 N/A 339.59CB #3-6 348.71 N/A 345.96CB #3-5 347.10 343.93 343.83CB #3-4 344.23 340.35 340.00CB #3-3 349.81 N/A 339.76CB #3-2 346.13 337.11 336.86CB #3-1 345.00 336.03 335.9318" HDPE OUT 334.58 334.58 N/AYD #2 346.75 N/A 343.75YD #1 347.70 343.00 N/AN/A342.90336.96339.44339.44339.34340.10LOT 33.98 ACRES20071000FeetGraphic Scale30 30 60 90 120Sheet TitleProject TitleUse of These Drawings1. Unless otherwise noted, these Drawings are intended forpreliminary planning, coordination with other disciplines orutilities, and/or approval from the regulatory authorities.¬They are not intended as construction drawings unless notedas such.2. Only drawings specifically marked “For Construction” areintended to be used in conjunction with contractdocuments, specifications, owner/contractor agreementsand to be fully coordinated with other disciplines, includingbut not limited to, the Architect, if applicable.¬ TheseDrawings shall not be used for construction layout. ContactTCE for any construction surveying services or to obtainelectronic data suitable for construction layout.3. These Drawings are specific to the Project and are nottransferable. As instruments of service, these drawings, andcopies thereof, furnished by TCE are its exclusive property.¬Changes to the drawings may only be made by TCE. Iferrors or omissions are discovered, they shall be brought tothe attention of TCE immediately.4. By use of these drawings for construction of the Project,the Owner represents that they have reviewed, approved,and accepted the drawings and have met with allapplicable parties/disciplines to insure these plans areproperly coordinated with other aspects of the Project.¬ TheOwner and Architect, are responsible for any buildingsshown, including an area measured a minimum five (5) feetaround any building.¬5. It is the User's responsibility to ensure this copy contains themost current revisions.DRAFTDRAFTProject Reference:DRAFTDRAFTScale:Project Number:Date:Drawn By:Project Engineer:Approved By:No. Description Date ByFor Permitting OnlyRevisions478 BLAIR PARK ROAD | WILLISTON, VERMONT 05495802 879 6331 | WWW.TCEVT.COMTRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERSDRAFTNo. 9020CIVILABIGAIL A. D ERYSTATE OF VERMO N T PRO FESSIONALENGINEERLICENSEDField Book:Site PlanC2-0210/30/141" = 30'2014088NPCAAD¬¬¬88 TechnologyPark WayTechnology Park - Lot 3South Burlington, VermontNOTES:1. POWER AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONNECTIONS,PEDESTALS AND CONDUITS TO BE FINALIZED BYELECTRIC CONTRACTOR.2. FOOTING DRAINS PER ARCHITECTURAL PLANS,COORDINATE WITH MEP DRAWINGS.3. LIGHT POLE LOCATION FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSESONLY. SEE LIGHTING PLAN FOR FINAL HEIGHT ANDLOCATION. DISCREPANCIES SHALL BE BROUGHT TOTHE ATTENTION OF THE ENGINEER.4. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY PIPE SIZES PRIOR TOORDERING DRAINAGE STRUCTURES.TECHNOLOGY PARK CAMPUS LLCS:\_TCE DRAWINGS\2014\088 Tech Park - Lot 3 - South Burlington\2014088 - Site.dwg, 10/30/2014 4:59:37 PMNo. 9020CIVILABRY PRABRPR020CIVILNo 350350350350350350 334 340 340 340340340340340340340340340340340340 340340330 330 330330350350350350350 350345345345345345345 345CLASS 2WETLANDCLASS 2WETLANDCLASS 3WETLAND50' LOCALBUFFERDELINEATED WETLAND BY TCE DECEMBER, 2012 (TYPICAL)50' LOCALBUFFER50' WETLANDBUFFER (STATE& LOCAL)D KIMBALL AVENUETECHNOLOGY PARK WAYCOMMUNITY DRIVECOMMUNITY DRIVECONCRETE SIDEWALKSHARED USE PATHG GGG100' OVERHEADPOWER EASEMENT25' UNDERGROUNDTELEPHONE EASEMENT20' SEWER EASEMENT60' ACCESS &UTILITY EASEMENT40' SIDEWALK &UTILITY EASEMENTLOT 1LOT 2LOT 4LOT 6LOT 14PROPOSED3 STORYOFFICE BUILDINGFFE=348.33124 TECHNOLOGY PARKWAYEXISTING 3 STORY BUILDINGSTORMWATER SYSTEMSTORMWATER SYSTEM212520212021202026PROPOSEDPARKINGLO20071000FeetGraphic Scale50 50 100 150 200Sheet TitleProject TitleUse of These Drawings1. Unless otherwise noted, these Drawings are intended forpreliminary planning, coordination with other disciplines orutilities, and/or approval from the regulatory authorities.¬They are not intended as construction drawings unless notedas such.2. Only drawings specifically marked “For Construction” areintended to be used in conjunction with contractdocuments, specifications, owner/contractor agreementsand to be fully coordinated with other disciplines, includingbut not limited to, the Architect, if applicable.¬ TheseDrawings shall not be used for construction layout. ContactTCE for any construction surveying services or to obtainelectronic data suitable for construction layout.3. These Drawings are specific to the Project and are nottransferable. As instruments of service, these drawings, andcopies thereof, furnished by TCE are its exclusive property.¬Changes to the drawings may only be made by TCE. Iferrors or omissions are discovered, they shall be brought tothe attention of TCE immediately.4. By use of these drawings for construction of the Project,the Owner represents that they have reviewed, approved,and accepted the drawings and have met with allapplicable parties/disciplines to insure these plans areproperly coordinated with other aspects of the Project.¬ TheOwner and Architect, are responsible for any buildingsshown, including an area measured a minimum five (5) feetaround any building.¬5. It is the User's responsibility to ensure this copy contains themost current revisions.DRAFTDRAFTProject Reference:DRAFTDRAFTScale:Project Number:Date:Drawn By:Project Engineer:Approved By:No. Description Date ByFor Permitting OnlyRevisionsDRAFTNo. 9020CIVILABIGAIL A. D ERYSTATE OF VERMO N T PRO FESSIONALENGINEERLICENSEDField Book:Overall Site PlanC2-0110/30/14¬1" = 50'2014088NPCAAD¬¬¬88 TechnologyPark WayTechnology Park - Lot 3South Burlington, VermontPROJECT INFORMATION:1. OWNER/APPLICANT: TECHNOLOGY PARK CAMPUS, LLC55 COMMUNITY DRIVE SUITE 402 SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403PHONE: (802) 860-16912. TAX PARCEL ID: 0436-00030.033. DEED REFERENCE: v. 898 p. 210 SLIDES 510, 5414.PARCEL SIZE: 3.98 ACRES5. ZONING DISTRICT: MIXED INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL6. BUILDING SIZE: 54,459 SF7. PARKING SPACES: 3.5/1000 SF = 191 SPACES (OFFICE) PROVIDED: 194 SPACES8 ACCESSIBLE SPACES8. LOT COVERAGE:a) BUILDING: EXISTING 0% PROPOSED 10.47% 0 S.F. 18,152 S.F.b) OVERALL (BUILDING & PARKING)EXISTING 8.94% PROPOSED 57.44% 15,500 S.F. 99,583 S.F.c) FRONT YARD (KIMBALL AVENUE)EXISTING 17.26% PROPOSED 17.26% 29,923 S.F. 29,923 S.F.9. PARKING LOT: 60,952 SF10. PARKING LOT ISLANDS: 6,923 SF (11.36%)11. TRAFFIC: ITE TRIP GENERATION, 9TH EDITIONPM PEAK TRIPST = 1.12x + 78.45 = 140 TRIPS12. WATER DEMAND: 200 EMPLOYEES x 15 GPD/EMPLOYEE = 3000 GPD13. SEWER DEMAND: 200 EMPLOYEES x 15 GPD/EMPLOYEE x 0.8 = 2400 GPD14. BUILDING HEIGHT: MAX = 35 FT, PROPOSED = 50 FT;50'-35' = 15' WAIVER, SEE SETBACK CALCULATION*14. SETBACK CALCULATION:IC MININCREASE* PROVIDED MINFRONT: 50 FT 1x15'=15' 65 FTSIDE: 10 FT 0.5 x15' =7.5' 17.5 FTREAR: 30 FT 1 x 15'=15' 45 FT15. REFER TO EASEMENT PLAT FOR DETAILS ON EASEMENTS.15°±Grid1° ±TrueMagneticG PROJECT LOCATIONN/F CABLEHOLDCOEXCHANGE III, LLCN/F RUBY B. WILLISFAMILY TRUSTN/F EDLUNDCOMPANYN/F INVESTORSCORP. OF VT.TECHNOLOGY PARK CAMPUS LLCLOT 33.98 ACRESN/F TECHNOLOGYPARK PARTNERSN/F TECHNOLOGYPARK PARTNERSN/F TECHNOLOGYPARK PARTNERSNo. 902CIVILAY PRO LIDAY PRO LIEDNo. 902CIVILo. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 2 DECEMBER 2014 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 2 December 2014, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. MEMBERS PRESENT: T. Barritt, Chair; B. Miller, M. Behr, D. Parsons, J. Smith, J. Wilking, B. Breslend ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; L. Michaels, D. Bell, T. DiPietro, R. Weldy, S. Homsted, A. Klugo, D. Fenstemacher, M. Bettenhausen, D. White, D. Leban, L. Murphy, D. Burke, P. O’Brien, P. Heil, S. Ireland, R. Jeffers, C. Frank 1. Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items: No changes were made to the Agenda. 2. Comments & questions from the public not related to the Agenda: No issues were raised. 3. Announcements: Mr. Barritt introduced Brian Breslend, the new Board member. 4. Miscellaneous application #MS-14-10 of City of So. Burlington to: 1) reconstruct an existing stormwater detention basin, and 2) install an underground water quality unit, Midas Drive: Mr. DiPietro explained there is now a small stormwater pond in the same as the larger one in the proposed plan. It will provide detention and water will be filtered before it gets into the pond. The pond now services only a small area, and a lot of water doesn’t get treated before it goes into Potash Brook. This project will correct this. No issues were raised. Mr. Miller moved to close #MS-14-10. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Continued sketch plan application #SD-14-24 of O’Brien Farm Road, LLC, for a planned unit development to develop 24 acres with 245 dwelling units and 55,410 sq. ft. of commercial space in two buildings, 255 Kennedy Drive: The applicant reviewed changes made since the last presentation. In response to the discussion of open space, parks and trails, they have expanded the proposed park to 5 acres and moved the density from that area elsewhere on the site. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD, 2 DECEMBER 2014, PAGE 2 The single family home area where there had been 2 cul-de-sacs now becomes a connected road. Mr. Michaels showed where there might be a short connecting road across the park area, so people wouldn’t have to drive all the way around to get to the other side. The “dog-leg” from one of the building lots has been removed in response to a neighbor’s concerns. Mr. Homsted showed where the road might be reduced from 24 feet to 18 feet as it will be a one-way only road. The connection to Old Farm Road has been removed in response to staff comments. The applicants then showed the sight-lines from various locations on the property. The specifically showed existing and proposed conditions in “area C,” where there is the most concern because of a 5-story building. They noted that even though buildings are tall, they are not imposing because they are set into the hill. The parking levels are below grade for buildings in the sight-line. Mr. Behr asked how much of the treed buffer on Kennedy Drive will be maintained. Mr. Homsted said they are clearing only what will be needed for stormwater retention. They would leave a strip by the ponds. He showed the location of the stormwater areas. Mr. Michaels noted they are hoping to put a hotel in that area, and the owners will want it to be seen from Kennedy Drive. Some screening will, however, be maintained. Mr. Michaels stressed that the road system shown is a “place holder.” He then showed where backyards will be facing existing homes, in response to neighbors’ concerns. He also showed areas for single family homes and town homes. It was noted that there had been a concern with water intrusion into residents’ garages. Mr. Homsted said there is a steep slope that pushes water down there. The proposed road will intercept that water. The road will be curbed with piping to direct water to the detention pond. This should improve the current condition. Mr. Wilking asked how this will look to people coming from the direction of the Airport. Mr. Michaels showed where buildings will be in relation to the road from the Airport. Mr. Klugo felt it was a great project. With respect to area “C”, he said the rooftops become very important as residents will be looking over them. He suggested some kind of amenity like a green roof. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD, 2 DECEMBER 2014, PAGE 3 The applicant noted that the Board had supported incursion into some Class 3 wetland (a ditch with cattails). The project will improve the function of that area. The applicant is requesting a 15-20% parking waiver based on on-street and shared parking. Members were OK with this as long as the applicant was comfortable that they have enough parking. Ms. Leban of the Bike/Ped Committee noted that pedestrian and bike paths are not just recreational and they want to be sure people can easily bike and walk to Old Farm Road and Kennedy Drive. Mr. Michaels said they have pedestrian and bike access to both streets. No other issues were raised. 6. Continued Preliminary Plat Application #SD-14-25 of Halvorsen Development to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of: 1) a 9,356 sq. ft. 275 seat standard restaurant, 2) a 71-room hotel (Comfort Suites), and 3) an 89 room hotel. The amendment consists of: 1) razing the 275 seat restaurant building, and 2) constructing 11,242 sq. ft. retail building, 1 Dorset Street: Ms. Bell showed the entrance area reduced to 18 feet. It will still accommodate fire engines. She also indicated where there will be signage. She showed the proposed striping where there will be “Do No Block Entrance” signage. There is also pedestrian access from the hotel to crosswalks/sidewalks leading to the CVS entrance. To meet the building/parking ration, they are proposing a structure facing Dorset Street with a sidewalk connection from Dorset Street under the structure. The building will have architectural shingles with a weathered wood pattern. There is also planned vegetation in front of the structure. Ms. Bell then showed the landscape plan and an area where plans would be above the eye level of a person driving by on Dorset Street. She specifically noted that Dorset Street is 30 inches below the site. An entrance has been located on the northeast and southeast corners of the CVS building. They have moved the sidewalk connection on Williston Road to facilitate people going to the entrance. Members were OK with the setback waivers and circulations pattern. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD, 2 DECEMBER 2014, PAGE 4 Members did see an opportunity to make the second structure a lot more than what is proposed. They suggested possibly hanging flower baskets, solar panels, etc., to “spruce it up.” The applicant confirmed that the Williston Rd. entrance will be open at all business hours. Members were OK with the parking. Mr. Barritt asked that the back of the building have some glazing or other features so it doesn’t look like a “brick wall.” Mr. Klugo suggested brick recesses as well as windows. He also did not see how the second building benefits the community or the project. Mr. Barritt also noted that the CVS sign cannot face the Interstate. This is state law. Ms. Leban noted that the Williston Rd. /Dorset St. intersection is the most dangerous for bicyclists in the state. She said the applicant should show how the streets can be joined safely. Ms. Bell said they don’t propose to take the sidewalk connections away but they will not be making any changes to the state highway from what is there today. Mr. Barritt didn’t think that would be within the scope of the project. Mr. White said they are only doing work on the private site, not the public realm. He acknowledged there is a safety issue, but that is a public sector problem. No other issues were raised. Mr. Miller moved to close Preliminary Plat Application #SD-14-25. Mr. Parsons seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Final Plat Application #SD-14-33 of South Village Communities, LLC, for approval of Phase II of 334 unit planned unit development. Phase II is to consist of the following: 1) 31 single family dwellings, 2) 13 2-family dwellings, 3) three unit multi-family dwelling, and 4) 39 multi-family dwelling units in four buildings, 1840 Spear Street: Mr. Burke said they have no issue with staff notes, and all “bugs” got worked out. He then reviewed the history of the project. He noted they are seeking approval for 60 units, with place-holders for the others. Mr. Burke noted the Public Works and Fire Departments are OK with them narrowing the street at the intersections. The multi-use path has been relocated and is a full width path. Missing sidewalk pieces have been added. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD, 2 DECEMBER 2014, PAGE 5 There will be pedestrian scale LED lights and screening for utility cabinets. Phase I now has a second access, which removes that issue from this application. They have received their wetland permit from the state. Mr. Burke then reviewed staff notes as follows: #1 & #2 – Delineation between open space and wetlands and between developed and common lands. This has been addressed with signage and the wetland buffer. There will be a 45-foot split rail fence separating the areas and advising when someone is on “common land.” #3 – Fire Chief’s recommendations: Mr. Burke noted that the regulations don’t require sprinklering single family homes. This was not required in Phase I or in other projects, and they are not proposing them. He noted that hydrants meet standard spacing. Driveways are the same length as in Phase I. Mr. Belair read from the regulations. Mr. Burke noted the regulations are for homes on a road; he said these homes are on driveways. #4 – Public Works has requested the sidewalk on the east side of North Jefferson Rd. That is where it has been placed. #5 – Infrastructure phasing: they hope to do all infrastructure by spring. #6 – Alignment of rec path: The path will be fully paved and full width. It is located where it was in the Master Plan. They have proposed to revise an existing 20-foot storm easement to the city to make it a multi-use easement. The city could decide to build a rec path there. #7 – They have made all changes requested by Public Works and Public Works is OK with them. #8 – They did some follow-up on the planting budget. $67,500 is required. They have put just over $32,000. They have 3 acres of woods to be preserved on the north side of the project. The Landworks project alone brings them over $83,000 without counting the woods. Mr. Belair said staff is fine with that. #9 – Lot width waiver – The Board was OK with this at preliminary approval. #10 – Garage setback waiver – The Board was OK with this. #11 – Mix of housing styles – Mr. Burke noted they have single family, carriage, multi-family, etc. They agreed that the narrow front porches will be made full. There will also not be 2 houses of the same color next to each other. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD, 2 DECEMBER 2014, PAGE 6 There is a request for rear or side-loaded garages on three corner duplexes One suggestion was to do a wrap-around porch on lot #25 to give a different feel. Lots 28 and 29 would be OK for side-loaded garages or wrap-around porches. Members asked for assurance that there won’t be any “unbroken” sides of buildings. Mr. White said they will all have features (e.g., windows). The applicant noted the delineation of the end of the backyards with trees as well as signage. Mr. Behr was comfortable with the signage. #12 – They will come up with a spread sheet for colors of houses. Mr. Belair was OK with this. Mr. Belair asked if the Board wants to see a plan with things that were discussed at this meeting. Members said they did, particularly the side-loaded garages, and suggested they could close the hearing at the next meeting and then deliberate after that meeting. Members were OK with not requiring sprinklering of the single family homes on driveways. Mr. Behr said he would like to see a break of some kind in the double driveways. Mr. Burke suggested a “bumpout” between the garage doors. Members were OK with that. Mr. Miller moved to continue Final Plat Application #SD-13-33 until 16 December 2014. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Minutes of 18 November 2014: Mr. Miller moved to approve the Minutes of 18 November 2014 as written. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Other Business: Mr. Belair presented a request for a one-year extension on the Rye Associates project. Staff was OK with this. Mr. Miller moved to grant a one-year extension on# SD-14-15 of Rye Associates. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Belair also presented a request for a 3-month extension on the South Pointe project. Staff was OK with this. Mr. Miller moved to approve a 3-month extension to #SD-14-14. Mr. Parsons seconded. Motion passed unanimously. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD, 2 DECEMBER 2014, PAGE 7 As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 10:20 p.m. ____________________________, Clerk