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 - 01/21/2014
The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 21 January 2014, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room of the Police Station, 19 Gregory Drive. MEMBERS PRESENT: T. Barritt, Chair; B. Miller, D. Parsons, J. Smith ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; G. Rabidoux, P. Simon, D. Marshall 1. Announcements: No issues were raised. 2. Site Plan Application #SP-13-66 of Malone Properties, Inc., to amend a previously approved plan for a 54,480 sq. ft. shopping center. The amendment consists of adding two utility cabinets, 150 & 166 Dorset Street: and 3. Design Review Application #DR-13-06 of Malone Properties to install two utility cabinets, 150 & 166 Dorset Street: Mr. Simon explained that one transformer pad will be new, one refurbished. There are doors to the utility cabinet. The cabinets will be screened with Arborvitae shrubs. Mr. Belair asked the applicant to confirm that the cabinets will not interfere with the access connection between the two properties. Mr. Simon gave that confirmation. Mr. Barritt read from an e-mail from Mr. Klugo asking if the cabinets could be relocated. The applicant replied that they cannot. There was no public comment. Mr. Miller moved to close both the Site Plan Application and the Design Review Application. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 4-0. 4. Preliminary and Final Plat Application of Malone Dorset Street Properties, LLC, to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of: 1) a 33,733 sq. ft. gfa building with 31,351 sq. ft. (including mezzanine) of retail food establishment use and 2,382 sq. ft. of short-order restaurant use, 2) a 12,800 sq. ft. building for retail food use, and 3) A 14,000 sq. ft. building for retail use. The amendment consists of: 1) resubdividing the lots into three lots, and 2) site modifications including lighting, and architectural revisions to building #1 and #2, 200 and 222 Dorset Street: Mr. Simon explained that now that they know the tenant for building 2 (Pier I), they can make appropriate modifications to the building. He directed attention to p. 5 of the summary and outlined some of the modifications to the plan as follows: a. Existing conditions plans removed b. Sign and signage notes removed c. “Option B Retail & Restaurant” removed d. Pier I building parapet is now 28 feet; the elevation of the second floor is 13 feet (was previously 12 feet). Windows remain the same. Mr. Simon noted the re-subdivision will happen when the city takes over the right-of-way. This is important for signage applications for both buildings. Mr. Simon then showed the Pier I buildings elevations, specifically indicating the “see‐through” and filmed over glass. Mr. Belair reminded the applicant that any change to the windows would have to come back to the DRB. Mr. Barritt noted comments from Mr. Klugo regarding windows on the second floor which look “sparse” to him. Other members had no issues with the windows. Mr. Miller moved to close the hearing. Mr. Parsons seconded. Motion passed 4-0. 5. Continued Preliminary Plat Application #SD-13-22 & Master Plan Application #MP-13-01 of Rye Associates to subdivide an 18.01 acre parcel into 30 lots for development of: 1) 36 single family dwellings, 2) four 4-unit multi-family dwellings, and 3) four commercial buildings totaling 20,000 sq. ft., 1075 Hinesburg Road: Mr. Marshall noted the withdrawal of 2 requests for waivers. Mr. Parsons noted he is personally acquainted with the person whose property abuts this development. They have had no discussions about the project, and Mr. Parsons has no financial interests. The applicant had no issue with Mr. Parsons hearing the application. Mr. Belair will check on the correct application number since 2 conflicting numbers appear. Mr. Belair also noted that staff recommends preparing findings of fact and keeping the Master Plan application open until then. There was no issue with this. The Board had no issues with the Master Plan. Mr. Miller moved to continue the hearing on the Master Plan until 4 February 2014 with a draft decision to be prepared by staff. Mr. Parsons seconded. Motion passed 4-0. Regarding the Preliminary Plat, Mr. Marshall noted the applicants have had a number of meetings with staff. Staff prepared a list of items “a” through “f” for discussion: a. A 23-foot setback is proposed along Hinesburg Road for commercial buildings. Staff is comfortable with that request. The original plan showed 30 feet; however, the setback has to be shown from the future right-of-way, which is 14 feet wider. Mr. Belair noted that the trend is to have buildings closer to the street. He also noted that the plan shows only buildings that are part of this preliminary plat. b. Staff is OK with a minimum of 14 parking spaces and a 4-space (25%) waiver. There will be on-street parking for Rye Circle. Mr. Rabidoux noted they know the tenant for building #1, and they are OK with this. It is a daytime use only. Mr. Marshall noted the building and parking lot will be moved north to allow for 13 parking spaces. He also noted that the requirement is 3 spaces per 1000 feet, not 3.5 as staff had indicated, which means only a one-space waiver. Mr. Belair checked the regulations and confirmed that this is the case. c. Staff is OK with a one space (7%) waiver for the cottage homes on lot #5. There is on-street parking on Edgewood. d. The 7 cottage homes on lot #7 will be revised to combine 4 units into 2 duplex buildings and 3 single family dwellings so as not to exceed the number of single family units on a private street. The applicant will consult with the Fire Chief regarding sprinklering. Mr. Marshall noted that the client didn’t like this and asked if it could be made a public street. The Public Works Director said it must then look like a public street. Therefore, they have increased the radiuses, added a sidewalk. The road is shown as 20 feet. e. The applicant will be proposing a method to assure that homes on the single family lots will comply with the residential design guidelines. There will be variety in color and style, but the applicant wants flexibility to allow buyers to choose what they want. Mr. Belair said this can be done in a variety of ways f. Plans will be revised for the next meeting to: remove the driveways to the single family lots, add a note as to the number of parking space available for the multi-family units, add more detail to the site plan for the commercial building, add a note that the garages for the cottage homes on lot #7 meet the 8-foot setback requirement from the front of the houses. Mr. Marshall noted that the Recreation Department asked that the open space/park be made as large as possible, so they have added footage to it. The Rec Path Committee asked that the surface on the part of the path that heads to the best to a trampled grass area be made gravel to indicate the transition. Mr. Barritt asked about street lights. Mr. Marshall said they will be to city standard. Mr. Marshall noted that some of the street names result in an E911 conflict. These will be changed. Mr. Belair said this application should work similarly to the Master Plan. The applicant will have revised drawings far enough ahead for review, and a draft decision can be prepared for that meeting. The applicant was comfortable with this. Mr. Miller moved to continue the Site Plan Application to 4 February 2014. Mr. Parsons seconded. Motion passed 4-0. 6. Site Plan Application #SP-13-67 of Peck Electric seeking after-the-fact approval to amend a previously approved site plan for a 6,400 sq. ft. building used for contractor or building trade facility use. The amendment consists of site modifications relating to parking, outside storage and dumpster storage, 4090 Williston Road: It was noted that the applicant requested a continuance to a future meeting. Mr. Miller moved to continue #SP-13-67 to 18 February 2014. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 4-0. 7. Minutes of 17 December 2013 and 7 January 2014: Minutes were not available. 8. Other Business: No issues were raised. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Clerk February 18, 2014, Date Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. 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 Cc: Malone Dorset Street Properties, LLC, Applicant FROM: Ray Belair, Administrative Officer MEETING DATE: January 21, 2014, Agenda items #2 & #3 SUBJECT: 150 & 166 Dorset Street Design Review Application #DR-13-06 Site Plan Application #SP-13-66 150 & 166 Dorset Street Site plan application #SP-13-66 of Malone Properties, Inc. to amend a previously approved plan for a 54,480 sq. ft. shopping center. The amendment consists of adding two (2) utility cabinets, 150 & 166 Dorset Street. DR-13-06_Dorset_MaloneTraderJoes_utilitycabinetsatBlueMall.doc Page 2 Design review application #DR-13-06 of Malone Properties, Inc. to install two (2) utility cabinets, 150 & 166 Dorset Street. Applicant Malone Dorset Street Properties, LLC, seeks “after the fact” design review and site plan approval to amend the previously approved site plan for a 54,480 sq. ft. shopping center, in order to make legal two existing electrical utility cabinets behind the 166 Dorset Street building which is adjacent to the adjoining parking lot serving 200 Dorset Street and 59 Garden Street. One replaced a previously existing transformer box, and a second one has been added, for an additional 80 sq ft of overall lot coverage on the subject site. One box continues to serve 166 Dorset Street; the other will serve 200 Dorset Street and 59 Garden Street. Both will be screened by a total of 17 five foot tall cedar shrubs. This combined review will serve to satisfy the requirements for both design review in the LDRs and to amend the site plan for the subject property at 150 and 166 Dorset Street. As appropriate and required, the owners of 150 & 166 Dorset Street have consented to and signed on to these applications. Below please find citations from the relevant sections of the LDRs; we have not included the lengthy citations related to building design, since no new buildings nor renovations are proposed. The sections below appear to ‘cover the bases’ for the issue before us. DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION The subject property is located in Design District 1 of the City Center Design Review Overlay District which is defined as follows: 11.01 (C)(1) Design District 1 - This area is generally located on both sides of Market Street and extends south to San Remo Drive. This area is planned to be the core area of the City Center, with the highest density and greatest mix of uses. It is the intent of this area is to be the main “downtown” for South Burlington, and therefore, should uphold the highest quality of design. Building materials should consist only of natural, indigenous materials (brick or stone) and the buildings themselves should relate directly to the public street. They should be placed up front on the property line and the main entrance should face the street rather than parking lots. In addition, a pedestrian promenade shall be provided along Market Street in order to promote pedestrian activity and provide cover from inclement weather. Section 11.01(F), Criteria for Approval, states: the Development Review Board shall find that any development or activity specified in Section (D) above shall conform substantially to the following design criteria: 11.02 Site Design for City Center Design Review District A. Landscape and plantings. Significant trees and vegetation should be preserved in its natural state insofar as practicable. Any grade changes should be in keeping with the general appearance of neighboring developed areas. Landscape plantings and amenities shall be well designed with appropriate variations and shall be included as an integral enhancement of the site and, where needed, for screening purposes. In particular, parking areas shall be well screened by berms, plantings, or other screening methods to minimize their visual impact. Planting islands shall be used to break up larger expanses of paved parking areas. DR-13-06_Dorset_MaloneTraderJoes_utilitycabinetsatBlueMall.doc Page 3 B. Integrate special features with the design. Storage areas, machinery and equipment installation, service areas, truck loading areas, garbage and refuse collection areas, utility connections, meters and structures, mailboxes, and similar accessory structures shall be positioned in such a way to minimize visibility from the public street, existing or planned. Such features shall be incorporated within or designed as part of the building on the site, not added as an afterthought. HVAC equipment should not be pad mounted at grade. Utility connections shall be installed underground and utilities shall co-exist to the greatest extent possible. The two proposed/existing utility cabinets are located in a manner consistent with this intent. They are behind a commercial building, adjacent to the private parking lot next door, and screened on three sides (one side must be left accessible for maintenance). If these did not already exist, it would have been worth considering whether the ‘open’ side of these should instead face to the rear (east), so that these are screened from anywhere visible by the public; or at least to the north, within the subject property. According to the applicant’s engineer, the westerly cabinet is 5.6’ x 2’ and 2.4’ high. The concrete base is set back roughly 5’ from the edge of the 200 Dorset Street parking lot and roughly 2’ from the property line. The easterly utility cabinet is 5.3’ x 4.3’ and is 5.3’ high. It is set back from the edge of the parking lot by 12’ and 10’ from the property line. These cabinets are both dark green in color, a good choice that is less conspicuous, and blends in well with landscaping/screening. SITE PLAN REVIEW According to the application, the new utility cabinet added 80 sq ft of new lot coverage to the site. Existing building coverage is at 16%; this does not change, and is well within the otherwise permitted building coverage of 40% or 80% in Central District 1. Overall impervious coverage goes from 69.1% to 69.9%; again well within the otherwise permitted limits of 90% or 95% as indicated in the LDRs. DR-13-06_Dorset_MaloneTraderJoes_utilitycabinetsatBlueMall.doc Page 4 The value of the new plantings around the utility cabinets is $500. The applicant will be required to post a bond in that amount prior to the issuance of the permit. Section 13.18, Utility Cabinets and Similar Structures, also applies here. B. Specific Standards for Utility Cabinets and Similar Structures. (1) The facility shall serve the City of South Burlington and/or immediately adjacent communities. (2) The minimum required lot for a public utility cabinet, substation, or communication relay station may be reduced from the zoning district requirements, at the discretion of the Development Review Board. In the event that the facility shall be erected on property not owned by the utility, the Development Review Board shall require that the facility be located unobtrusively. (3) If the parcel containing the facility is landlocked, there shall be a recorded easement or permission granting access to the utility or owner of the facility. (4) There shall be sufficient landscaping with evergreens of sufficient height and density to screen effectively the facility from surrounding property. Landscaping may allow for the use of any doors so long as the door-side of the units are visible from an existing or planned public street. (5) There shall be adequate off-street parking for maintenance, service, or other vehicles. (6) The location of the facility shall be shown on all relevant site plans. (7) The Development Review Board may attach conditions in order to prevent any hazard to the public or noise nuisance to surrounding property. Utility cabinets shall be located a minimum of five (5) feet from all existing or planned public roads or rights-of-way. (8) A facility that would be a nuisance to surrounding properties due to smoke, gas, heat, odor, noise, or vibration shall not be permitted in any district. The proposed/existing utility cabinets will meet these criteria, as summarized below: They serve the City. These are not on a standalone lot, so minimum lot size does not apply. The location is “unobtrusive”. The facility is not landlocked. Landscaping should be sufficient for screening. However, the access doors are not visible from an existing or planned public street because they are not adjacent to a public street, instead, they are visible/accessible from the adjoining parking lot. There is adequate parking on site for maintenance and service, but the far more likely reality, given the placement of these cabinets and the orientation of the access doors, is that service vehicles will park on the adjoining property to perform any maintenance. The location of the cabinets is shown on a relevant site plan. It does not appear that other conditions are needed to prevent noise or hazard. The cabinets are more than five feet from existing or planned public roads or rights of way. These cabinets are a regular feature on developed properties. There should no nuisance due to smoke, gas, heat, odor, noise, or vibration. If any were to develop, the applicant/landowner shall remedy that nuisance promptly. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD P:\Development Review Board\Staff Comments\2013\SD_13_41_200Dorset_MaloneDors etStProp_prelimfinal.doc DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: 1/17/14 Plans received: 12/03/13 200 and 222 DORSET STREET, 59 GARDEN STREET PRELIMINARY & FINAL PLAN APPLICATION #SD-13-41 Agenda #4 Meeting Date: January 21, 2014 Owner/Applicant Malone Dorset Street Properties LLC 122 Gallison Hill Road Montpelier, VT 05602 Contact Paul Simon White + Burke Real Estate Investment Advisors 168 Battery Street PO Box 1007 Burlington, VT 05402-1007 Property Information CD 1 Zoning District Design District 1 Lot size: 5.8 acres Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING PROJECT DESCRIPTION Preliminary & final plat application #SD-13-41 of Malone Dorset Street Properties, LLC to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of: 1) a 33,733 sq. ft. gfa building with 31,351 sq. ft. (including mezzanine) of retail food establishment use and 2,382 sq. ft. of short-order restaurant use, 2) a 12,800 sq. ft. building for retail food use, and 3) a 14,000 sq. ft. building for retail use. The amendment consists of: 1) resubdividing the lots into three (3) lots, and 2) site modifications including lighting, and architectural revisions to buildings #1 & #2 ,200 and 222 Dorset Street & 59 Garden Street. COMMENTS Administrative Officer Ray Belair and Planner Temporary Assignment Lee Krohn, AICP have reviewed the plans submitted by the applicant and have the following comments: The proposed amendments to the project are individually and cumulatively relatively minor. In lieu of a detailed review of each individual element of the proposed amendments under each facet of subdivision and site plan review, staff has only highlighted significant elements of the proposal in the enclosed notes. There were no concerns raised in the sketch plan review for these amendments. The only changes since then are updated landscaping costs (required minimum $34,300, proposed $38,670), and revised trip estimates for peak hour traffic flow (prior estimate 164 peak hour vehicle trips, new estimate 161). All other proposed amendments are as seen in sketch plan review. The traffic estimates are revised to reflect a different mix of land uses than proposed previously. Building #1 will remain as before, with 12,800 sq ft of retail space. Building #2 had been approved for 7000 sq ft of retail and 7000 sq ft of second floor office space; or 4000 sq ft of retail, with a 3000 sq ft short order restaurant and 7000 sq ft of second floor office. Proposed now is 14,000 sq ft of retail space. This was discussed at sketch plan review and is noted below as well. All dimensional requirements remain “as is” within the PUD as a whole, just on separate lots. The street was already subject to an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City, and under certain state rules, could by itself have created a “natural subdivision” of these lots. A “Notice of Conditions” will be required that the three (3) lots remains one lot for planning and zoning purposes. Regarding landscaping, note that the landscape plan itself (as previously approved) shows more trees to be planted than the planting list submitted with this application. Correspondence with the applicant indicates that they will adjust upward the planting list and costs, the result being that they will comply with the original plan, and are spending more than required under the LDRs. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING ZONING DISTRICT & DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS CD 1 Zoning District Required/Max Proposed (PUD) Min. Lot Size none 5.8 acres Max. Building Coverage 40% 19.0 % Max. Overall Coverage 90% 74.7% Front Setback (Dorset Street) See below 5 ft. Front Setback (New Street) See below 5 ft. Side Setback See below 5ft. Max. Building Height 35 ft. 27 ft. zoning compliance Note: No rear setbacks; corner property Central District Requirements 8.01 General Purpose of the Central District The Central District is hereby formed in order to encourage the location of a balanced and coordinated mixture of residential, commercial, public and private uses adjacent to Dorset Street that support the city center goals and objectives contained in the Comprehensive Plan. It is designed to promote efficient use of land by concentrating mixed uses within a well-defined Central District. This will provide a pedestrian-oriented circulation network that minimizes vehicular traffic. It also encourages the traditional town center pattern of appropriately scaled buildings facing onto a well-defined and active public street. Innovative site planning and master planning are encouraged to maximize uses, shared parking, public open space and pedestrian amenities which create an aesthetically pleasing and socially active community center on and around Dorset Street. To this end, all applications involving ten (10) or more acres of land in any Central District shall require a Master Plan approval pursuant to Article 15 of these Regulations. 8.02 Establishment of Sub-Districts The Central District is divided into four (4) sub-districts - Central District 1, Central District 2, Central District 3 and Central District 4. Permitted and Conditional Uses and dimensional standards vary by sub-district as established in Sections 8.06 through 8.10 of these Regulations. The subject lot is located within Central District 1. 8.04 Dimensional Requirements in All Districts A. Purpose. The general intent of the building setbacks in the Central District is to require all buildings to front on to public streets and to require that parking facilities are located in the center of the blocks to the greatest extent practicable, occupy only minimal frontage on public streets, and are thoroughly screened from view from public streets and rights-of-way. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING B. Location of buildings and structures. (1) All buildings and structures, with the exception of parking facilities, are required to be constructed within an allowable building envelope. The maximum depth of allowable building envelopes shall be eighty (80) feet and, in general, shall be measured from the nearest planned public street right-of-way as shown on the South Burlington Official Map. (2) The Development Review Board may approve a building, a portion of which extends beyond the building envelope provided the building contains a minimum of two (2) stories and the overall site design of the property is found to be in conformance with the intent and purpose of the Central District. (3) Exemption for master planned buildings and structures. Buildings and structures whose footprint, parking, and access are subject to and reviewed in conjunction with an approved master plan in the Central District 1 shall be exempt from requirements for the maximum depth of an allowable building envelope. C. Special Standards for Setbacks (1) Side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of five (5) feet, or between zero (0) and five (5) feet if a fire wall is provided. (2) The front yard setback area along Dorset Street, Brookwood Drive and Sherry Road shall be restricted to the following uses or improvements: (a) landscaping and green space (b) access drives (c) pedestrian oriented improvements including but not limited to sidewalks, plazas, benches, and bicycle racks. (d) utility services provided they are placed underground. Appurtenant facilities such as transformers and amplifiers may be installed at ground level where such is in accordance with Section 13.18 of these Regulations (utility cabinets and structures). D. Location of Parking Areas and Structures (1) Multi-level parking garages and decks may be constructed within an allowable building envelope, and/or outside of an allowable building envelope if located in the center of a block. (2) Surface parking may be provided within the allowable building envelope if it is located behind a building and is hidden from view from the public street. (3) The Development Review Board may approve surface parking which is within the allowable building envelope and which is not hidden from view from the public street by a building, provided: (a) the subject parking represents the smallest practicable portion of the total parking required for the property, (b) the area encompassed by the subject surface parking represents a significantly minor portion of the total allowable building envelope area existing on the property, (c) the applicant has sought parking waivers from the DRB to reduce the amount of surface parking required, and (d) the overall site design of the property is found to be in conformance with the intent and purpose of the Central District. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING E. Parking Requirements (1) The parking requirements of Table 13 are required in the Central District. These standards may be met on-site or off-site if the parking facility is located within seven hundred (700) feet of the main entrance of the establishment and is approved by the Development Review Board. (2) The Development Review Board may accept a contribution to the parking trust fund to establish a municipal parking lot in lieu of parking spaces. The amount of the contribution shall be based on a per space fee set by the City Council. (3) The Development Review Board may further reduce the amount of parking required, up to a maximum of eighty percent (80%) of the number of spaces required, in conjunction with an approved master plan upon a showing by the applicant that the master plan includes viable provisions for off-site employee parking and transportation and construction of mass transit stops within the master planned area sufficient to further reduce parking demand. (4) Parking lots located in the centers of blocks shall be connected with openings between lots to allow traffic flow between lots. F. Density. Height, coverage, setbacks, floor area ratios (F.A.R.) and the maximum size of units will govern the density of the Central District. The F.A.R. is the ratio of building square footage to lot size. Staff feels that the proposed changes are consistent with the above standards. See below under Site Plan for a complete list of proposed changes to the plan. 8.05 Specific Sub-District Regulations A. Central District 1 (1) Building envelopes: Allowable building envelopes shall be in accordance with Section 8.04(B), with the exception of Dorset Street. The standards for review of a proposed building envelope and setbacks shall be: (a) The proposed site layout shall provide for a strong building presence of habitable or leasable building area along all public streets on which the property fronts. Interruptions in the street presence of the proposed building shall be located to front on service thoroughfares. (b) Surface and structured parking areas shall be screened from all public thoroughfares by habitable or leasable areas of buildings. The DRB may allow a minor portion of the parking on a site to be screened by building facades if in the DRB's judgment the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the City Center are met. (c) For lots fronting on public streets on three or more sides, a strong building presence of habitable or leasable building area shall be required along a length of street frontage equivalent to the combined length of the two longest street frontages on the property. (d) Surface parking may only be allowed along public street frontage or service thoroughfares if in the DRB's judgment all practicable measures to avoid such location have been taken and all parking areas will be completely screened from view by the habitable or leasable area of a building or by a building façade. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING (2) Allowable building envelopes in the Central District 1 along Dorset Street: In the Central District 1 along Dorset Street, the envelope is measured from a point twenty (20) feet east of the right-of-way, thereby creating a twenty (20) foot minimum front yard setback from Dorset Street. (3) Building Coverage. For buildings not subject to an approved master plan, the maximum coverage shall be forty percent (40%) for buildings only and ninety percent (90%) overall. The overall site coverage for all non-landscaped surfaces (including buildings) for a master plan shall be sixty percent (60%). For individual parcels subject to an approved master plan, the maximum coverage shall be eighty percent (80%) for buildings only and ninety-five percent (95%) overall (including buildings, parking, walks, and all other non-landscaped surfaces), provided the overall site coverage for all properties subject to the approved master plan is not exceeded by the grant of an individual permit. (4) Density in Central District 1: The base maximum density of development shall not exceed an F.A.R. of 0.8. The Development Review Board may explicitly approve development up to an overall F.A.R. of 1.5 in conjunction with a master plan approval of a parcel or parcels within the CD1 district as a bonus for the provision of special, public-oriented amenities such as parks, courtyards, pedestrian ways, etc. The maximum residential density shall be forty (40) units per acre (with a minimum unit size of five hundred (500) square feet). The maximum F.A.R. for an individual parcel subject to an approved master plan shall be 0.8, provided the overall maximum approved F.A.R. for all properties subject to the approved master plan is not exceeded by the grant of an individual permit. All are as previously reviewed and approved. See below under Site Plan for a complete list of proposed changes to the plan. SECTION 11- CITY CENTER DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT Below is a list of the building design changes proposed. Building #1 Revisions: ‘Sills’ changed from concrete material to granite material (see 3.1 elevation plans) Minor adjustment to building dimensions from 142’-0” by 90’-0” to 142’-0-5/8” by 90’-0-1/8” reflecting actual brick sizes. Add painted steel overhead coiling door and heavy metal door locations to loading & service area at north side of building (see building plan and elevation drawings) The addition of another window to the 2nd floor Dorset Street Facade. Building #2 Revisions: Building fenestration adjustments (tall glazing at SW corner; display windows; clear glass with applied window film to coordinate with shelving, and 1st level windows are taller (see plans and elevations) CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING Minor adjustment to building dimensions from 125’-0” by 56’-0” to 125’-4” x 56’-0” to reflect actual brick sizes. Building mounted lighting and signage – additional building mounted lights and signage per Pier 1 design. Additional awnings included – per plans and elevations Awning color surrounding building #2 will be black Painted steel overhead service door and heavy metal door added on east elevation Number and location of doors revised per plans and elevations ‘Sills’ changed from concrete material to granite material (see 3.1 elevation plans) F. Criteria for Approval. Prior to granting design plan approval, the Development Review Board shall find that any development or activity specified in Section (D) above shall conform substantially to the following design criteria: (1) Building Design (a) Consistent design. Building design shall promote a consistent organization of major elements; and decorative parts must relate to the character of the design. All sides of a building shall be designed so that they are compatible in terms of material, window treatments, architectural accents, cornice/parapet design, etc. In Design Districts 1 and 3, the design of a building should consider the design features of other structures in the area so as not to be harshly discordinate with other nearby buildings. (b) Materials used. High quality, attractive materials shall be used on all buildings. Natural, indigenous materials of stone and masonry are highly encouraged, if not required. Specific requirements for each Design District are as follows: (i) Design District 1. Natural, indigenous materials of stone and masonry shall predominate. Examples of acceptable materials include red brick, indigenous stone (i.e., granite, limestone, and marble), and architectural concrete. Glass may predominate if used in combination with brick or stone. Other materials may be used as an architectural accent provided they are harmonious with the building and site. Examples of unacceptable materials include vinyl siding, metal skin, synthetic stucco and laminated wood (e.g., T- 111). (c) Colors and textures used. The color and texture of the building shall be harmonious with the building itself and with other buildings on the site and nearby. Colors naturally occurring from building materials and other traditional, subdued colors are encouraged. More than three (3) predominant colors are discouraged. (d) Windows and doors. Window and door treatment (i.e., the arrangement of windows and doors into a pattern) shall be a careful response to the buildings interior organization as well as the features of the building site. The treatment of windows and doors shall be in a manner that creates a rhythm that gives necessary order and unity to the facade, yet avoids monotony. In Design Districts 1 and 2, for sides of buildings that front or face a public street, existing or planned, the majority of the first floor’s facade area shall consist of see-through glass in order to promote pedestrian activity, however, the windows and/or doors should be of a human scale so as to welcome, not overwhelm, the pedestrian. (e) Use of “human-scaled” design elements. Larger buildings shall incorporate the use of CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 8 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING design elements, such as pilasters, colored or textured bands, or window and door treatments, in order to reduce the larger building’s apparent overall size and, therefore, avoid a large or long monotonous appearance. (f) Roofs as a design element. Roofs shall be part of, or define, the style of a building. They shall be used creatively to break up long facades and potentially long roof lines. Specific requirements for each Design District are as follows: (i) Design Districts 1 and 2. For one-story structures, the minimum and maximum slope of a pitched roof shall be 8 on 12 and 12 on 12, respectively. Only a small portion of roof area on one-story buildings may be flat provided it is not visible from the public street, existing or planned, and does not detract from the overall design and harmony of the building. For structures of two (2) or more stories, the minimum and maximum slope of a pitched roof shall be 5 on 12 and 12 on 12, respectively. Where flat roofs are used, particularly on structures of two (2) or more stories, architectural elements such as cornices and parapets shall be included to improve the appearance and provide interest. Large, low-slope (i.e., less than 5 on 12) gable forms are discouraged. (g) Orient buildings to the public street. Buildings shall be designed in a manner that relates the building to the public street in order to protect the integrity of city blocks, present an inviting street front and promote traditional street patterns. In Design Districts 1and 2, new buildings shall be built to the street property line. The Development Review Board may approve building locations, or portions thereof, that are set back from the street property line, provided, the Development Review Board finds the overall site layout to be in conformance with the City Center goals. The primary entrance to buildings shall be designed as such and shall be oriented directly on the public street rather than facing parking lots. The upper floors of taller buildings (i.e., floors four (4) and up) may need to be “stepped back” or otherwise sited to avoid creating a “canyon” effect and to maintain a pedestrian friendly public edge. In all Design Districts, for existing buildings undergoing renovation, improvements shall be done to relate the building better to the public street. Such improvements could include the installation of doors and windows along the sides of the building facing the public street, or the construction of walkways between the building and street. (h) Conceal rooftop devices. Rooftop mechanical equipment and appurtenances to be used in the operation or maintenance of a structure shall be arranged so as to minimize visibility from any point at or below the roof level of the subject structure. Such features, in excess of one foot in height, shall be either enclosed by outer building walls or parapets, or grouped and screened in a suitable manner, or designed in themselves so that they are balanced and integrated with respect to the design and materials of the building. (i) Promote energy efficiency. Where feasible, the design of a building should consider solar energy and the use of natural daylight by capturing the sun’s energy during the winter and providing shade during the summer. (j) Pedestrian promenade along Market Street. In Design District 1, the provision of a covered pedestrian promenade along Market Street is required in order to protect pedestrians from inclement weather and promote walking. Any pedestrian canopy, or portion thereof, that is proposed to be located within or encroach into the public R.O.W. shall meet the specifications identified in the City Center Streetscape Guidelines. An applicant may elect to incorporate a covered pedestrian promenade as a component of the building and completely CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 9 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING on the applicant’s property, provided the promenade is at least 10 feet high and 8 feet deep. The Development Review Board may waive the requirement for a covered pedestrian promenade or canopy on a building or portion thereof if the Development Review Board finds that the block on which the building is located is adequately covered by other existing promenades/canopies. 11.02 Site Design for City Center Design Review District A. Landscape and plantings. Significant trees and vegetation should be preserved in its natural state insofar as practicable. Any grade changes should be in keeping with the general appearance of neighboring developed areas. Landscape plantings and amenities shall be well designed with appropriate variations and shall be included as an integral enhancement of the site and, where needed, for screening purposes. In particular, parking areas shall be well screened by berms, plantings, or other screening methods to minimize their visual impact. Planting islands shall be used to break up larger expanses of paved parking areas. B. Integrate special features with the design. Storage areas, machinery and equipment installation, service areas, truck loading areas, garbage and refuse collection areas, utility connections, meters and structures, mailboxes, and similar accessory structures shall be positioned in such a way to minimize visibility from the public street, existing or planned. Such features shall be incorporated within or designed as part of the building on the site, not added as an afterthought. HVAC equipment should not be pad mounted at grade. Utility connections shall be installed underground and utilities shall co-exist to the greatest extent possible. C. Walls, fences or other screening features: Such elements, if used, shall be employed in a skillful manner and in harmony with the architectural context of the development. Such features should be used to enhance building appearance and to strengthen visual linkages between a building and its surroundings. D. Accessible open space. When providing open space on a site, it shall be designed to be visually and physically accessible from the public street. Open space should add to the visual amenities of the vicinity by maximizing its visibility for persons passing by or overlooking the site from neighboring properties. If open space is intended for active use, it should include such elements as benches, shade trees, and refuse containers and be so designed to maximize its accessibility for all individuals, including the disabled, and encourage social interaction. The siting of open space on a lot shall also consider the potential impact of buildings, both existing and potential, on shadow casting and solar access. E. Provide efficient and effective circulation. With respect to vehicular and pedestrian circulation, special attention shall be given to the location and number of access points to public streets and sidewalks, to the separation of vehicles and pedestrians, to the arrangement of parking areas and to service and loading areas, and to the location of accessible routes and ramps for the disabled. Site design shall also provide for interconnections, both vehicular and pedestrian, between adjacent properties. F. Outdoor Lighting. Outdoor lighting shall be designed to be both aesthetically pleasing and CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 10 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING functional. The lighting type or types shall be metal halide, compact fluorescent and/or induction lamps and shall be of a white color with a Color Rendering Index (CRI) of seventy (70) or greater recommended. Light fixtures shall be appropriately shielded to preclude glare and overall illumination levels should be evenly distributed. G. Provide for nature’s events. Attention shall be accorded to design features which address the affects of rain, snow and ice at building entrances and on sidewalks, and to provisions for snow and ice removal from circulation areas. H. Make spaces secure and safe. With respect to personal safety, all open and enclosed spaces should be designed to facilitate building evacuation, and provide reasonable accessibility by fire, police or other emergency personnel and equipment. I. Streetscape improvements. An applicant for new development shall be responsible for implementing streetscape improvements (e.g., sidewalks, street lighting, street trees, etc.) within the portion of the public street ROW directly fronting the parcel of land for which development is proposed. Such streetscape improvements shall be in accord with the specifications contained in the City Center Streetscape Design Guidelines. Staff feels the proposed design changes are consistent with the standards above. 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 (paraphrased): A. General Standards (1) Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity is available to meet the needs of the project. (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. (3) The project incorporates access, circulation, and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unreasonable congestion of adjacent roads. (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. (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. (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. (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. (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. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 11 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING 15.12 D. Criteria for Public and Private Roadways. (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. 15.12 E. Standards for Construction of Roadways (1) All streets shall be constructed completely by the applicant. (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. (10) The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s). All of these fundamental elements remain as approved before. See below under Site Plan for a complete list of proposed changes to the plan. SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Below is a list of changes proposed to the site plan: Civil / Site Changes: Relocated transformer to “As-built” location Revised sewer location due to field conditions Adjusted building dimensions Adjusted doors and awning/canopy locations on building #2 Adjusted water line location to coordinate with interior layout Adjusted underground utilities to coordinate with interior layout Re-graded sidewalks for relocated HC spaces Re-graded east side of building to accommodate new doors (man and overhead) Added new landing and stairs to accommodate new door at southeast corner Added new dumpster pad and re-graded as necessary Update interior island calculations Page 3 of 4 Landscape Revisions: Added dumpster/recycling area for I building #2 in parking lot island. The dumpster/recycling service area will be screened with a screen fence similar to the approved building #1 dumpster/recycling area screen. Minor sidewalk modifications due to updated building #2 pedestrian entries. Minor planting (shrub and perennial) adjustments to respect updated walkway alignments, building entries, and building elevations. Added (1) shrub to the overall total (reflected in the cost estimate). Minor perennial adjustment too but those do not count for the estimate. Adjusted bike rack location on north east corner of Pier I building. Lighting Revisions: Revised site lighting in the parking lot area of building #1 and building #2. New overall average photometric levels 2.77 fc CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 12 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING Increased the number of building mounted lights per building #2 elevations. Adjusted fixture manufacturer for building mounted lights. Fixture look/style remains the same. (This was driven by electrical contractor to use one rep). Minor adjustment to pole location adjacent to bio swale island. Pole moved to accommodate added dumpster/recycling enclosure for building #2. Added two poles to the lighting plan. One near the sidewalk west of the building #1 dumpster/recycling enclosure and another pole location along the center of the bio swale island near the pedestrian bridge structure. Revisions to Site Plan Waivers A potential tenant has now been identified for the second building. This will change the use of the 2nd building to retail for both the first and second floors. The current approved project permit allows two possible mixtures of uses each with a slightly different parking waiver: A. 7,000sf retail on the first floor and 7,000sf office with a 16.1% parking waiver. B. 4,000sf retail & 3,000 short order restaurant on the first floor with 7,000sf office on the second floor with a 21.2% parking waiver. The proposed revised use (all retail) requires a parking waiver that falls between the two currently approved waivers: C. 14,000sf retail on both the first and second floors with an 18.6% parking waiver. This represents a 63 space short fall with 271 spaces provided. 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: (a) 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. Chapter 14.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations states the following: 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) The parking area is necessary to meet minimum requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act; (ii) The parking area will serve a single or two-family home; CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 13 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING (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) The lot contains one or more existing buildings that are to be re- used and parking needs cannot be accommodated to the rear and sides of the existing building(s); or, (v) The principal use of the lot is for public recreation. (c) Where more than one building exists or is proposed on a lot, the total width of all parking areas located to the side of building(s) at the building line shall not exceed one half of the width of all building(s) located at the building line. Parking approved pursuant to 14.06(B)(2)(b) shall be exempt from this subsection. (d) For through lots, parking shall be located to the side of the building(s) or to the front of the building adjacent to the public street with the lowest average daily volume of traffic. Where a lot abuts an Interstate or its interchanges, parking shall be located to the side of the building(s) or to the front adjacent to the Interstate. Parking areas adjacent to the Interstate shall be screened with sufficient landscaping to screen the parking from view of the Interstate. (b) 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. (c) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. (d) 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. (e) 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. Site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the South Burlington 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 of collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. (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. (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). Staff feels that the proposed changes are consistent with the above standards. Specifically, staff has is comfortable with the proposed revised parking waiver, and feels that the proposed new screened dumpster area for building #2 is consistent with the standards above.. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 14 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING (d) Landscaping and Screening Requirements. Pursuant to Section 13.06(A) of the Land Development Regulations, landscaping and screening shall be required for all uses subject to site plan and PUD review. Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations requires parking facilities to be curbed and landscaped with appropriate trees, shrubs, and other plants including ground covers. Landscaping plans have been revised; more than the minimum required cost is proposed. Snow Storage Pursuant to Section 13.06(B) (4) of the Land Development Regulations, snow storage areas must be shown on the plans. Snow storage areas are shown on the plans. Landscape Budget Landscaping budget requirements are to be determined pursuant to Section 13.06(G) (2) of the SBLDR. The applicant reports a minimum requirement of $34,300 at an estimated construction cost of $100 per square foot. The applicant now proposes a minimum of $38,670 in landscaping. RECOMMENDATION Presuming the Board finds everything in order, then the hearing may be closed. Respectfully submitted, ________________________________ Ray Belair, Administrative Officer M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Development Review Board From: Paul Simon, Project Manager Date: December 3, 2013 Re: Subdivision & Site Plan Modifications Preliminary and Final DRB Application Submission Project Narrative Enclosed is our (combined) Preliminary and Final application to subdivide the Healthy Living PUD into three lots and make some minor site plan modifications. As you know, the applicant, Malone Properties, has previously received approval for and is currently under construction with two new buildings on the north side of the existing entry drive for Healthy Living. One of these buildings will house Trader Joe’s, a 12,800 sf retail food establishment. The second building was previously approved for 7,000 sf retail with 7,000 sf office above OR 4,000 sf retail with 3,000 sf short-order restaurant and 7,000 sf office above. This amendment requests approval for the second building to be entirely 14,000 sf retail use on both floors. In reference to the latest revisions, the project was reviewed and approved under interim zoning by the city council on November 18th. The DRB subsequently reviewed sketch plan application including the latest revisions on November 19, 2013. Subdivision to three lots Malone properties requests to re-subdivide the existing PUD into three new parcels as depicted in the attached survey plat B1 and outlined as follows: Lot 1: 2.95 Acre parcel – contains the Healthy Living Building Lot 2: .55 Acre parcel – Right of Way to be conveyed to the City of South Burlington Page 2 of 5 Lot 3: 2.35 Acre parcel includes both the Pier 1 and Trader Joes buildings Site Plan Modifications As presented at the sketch plan hearing on November 19, 2013, we are proposing detail changes including changing the second building from retail and/or short order restaurant on the first floor with offices on the second floor, to all retail. The design of the second building has been slightly modified along with various detail site plan changes. The submission plans have been updated by the architect, landscape architect, and civil engineer to include these proposed revisions. These minor revisions do not change the merit of the application or any previous requirements and/or Interim Zoning criteria. Plan changes include: Building #1 Revisions: ‘Sills’ changed from concrete material to granite material (see 3.1 elevation plans) Minor adjustment to building dimensions from 142’-0” by 90’-0” to 142’-0-5/8” by 90’- 0-1/8” reflecting actual brick sizes. Add painted steel overhead coiling door and heavy metal door locations to loading & service area at north side of building (see building plan and elevation drawings) Additional window added to south (Garden Street) Elevation. Upper portion of all second story windows lowered. Building #2 Revisions: Building fenestration adjustments (tall glazing at SW corner; display windows; clear glass with applied window film to coordinate with shelving, and 1st level windows are taller (see plans and elevations) Minor adjustment to building dimensions from 125’-0” by 56’-0” to 125’-4” x 56’-0” to reflect actual brick sizes. Building mounted lighting and signage – additional building mounted lights and signage per Pier 1 design. Additional awnings included – per plans and elevations Awning color surrounding building #2 will be black Painted steel overhead service door and heavy metal door added on east elevation Number and location of doors revised per plans and elevations ‘Sills’ changed from concrete material to granite material (see 3.1 elevation plans) Upper story windows now include ‘muntins’ to match storefront architectural glazing character. Height of building increased from 24’-6” T.O. Parapet to 28’-0” T.O. Parapet with respective interior ceiling height increases for both first and second floors. Civil / Site Changes: Relocated transformer to “As-built” location Revised sewer location due to field conditions Adjusted building dimensions Adjusted doors and awning/canopy locations on Pier 1 building Page 3 of 5 Adjusted water line location to coordinate with interior layout Adjusted underground utilities to coordinate with interior layout Re-graded sidewalks for relocated HC spaces Re-graded east side of building to accommodate new doors (man and overhead) Added new landing and stairs to accommodate new door at southeast corner for building #2. Added new dumpster pad and re-graded as necessary Update interior island calculations Landscape Revisions: Added dumpster/recycling area for Pier I building in parking lot island. The dumpster/recycling service area will be screened with a screen fence similar to the approved TJ dumpster/recycling area screen. Minor sidewalk modifications due to updated building #2 pedestrian entries. Minor planting (shrub and perennial) adjustments to respect updated walkway alignments, building entries, and building elevations. Added (1) shrub to the overall total (reflected in the cost estimate). Minor perennial adjustment too but those do not count for the estimate. Adjusted bike rack location on north east corner of Pier I building (building #2). Lighting Revisions: Revised site lighting in the parking lot area of building #1 and building #2. New overall average photometric levels 2.77 fc Increased the number of building mounted lights per Pier I elevations. Adjusted fixture manufacturer for building mounted lights. Fixture look/style remains the same. (This was driven by electrical contractor to use one rep). Minor adjustment to pole location adjacent to bio swale island. Pole moved to accommodate added dumpster/recycling enclosure for building #2. Added two poles to the lighting plan. One near the sidewalk west of the Trader Joe’s dumpster/recycling enclosure and another pole location along the center of the bio swale island near the pedestrian bridge structure. Revisions to Site Plan Waivers A potential tenant has now been identified for the second building. This will change the use of the 2nd building to retail for both the first and second floors. The current approved project permit allows two possible mixtures of uses each with a slightly different parking waiver: A. 7,000sf retail on the first floor and 7,000sf office with a 16.1% parking waiver. B. 4,000sf retail & 3,000 short order restaurant on the first floor with 7,000sf office on the second floor with a 21.2% parking waiver. Page 4 of 5 The proposed revised use (all retail) requires a parking waiver that falls between the two currently approved waivers: C. 14,000sf retail on both the first and second floors with a 18.6% parking waiver. Updated Trip Generation and Revisions to Traffic Impact Fees: PM Peak hour Trip Generation: With the second building consisting of entire retail use, updated trip generation forecasts have been provided per October 24, 2013 memorandum by Stantec. The findings indicate a small reduction of estimated trip generation from 164 to 161 additional PM peak hour trips. (see attached Stantec memorandum dated October 24, 2013). Traffic Impact Fees: Previously, the Board approved a credit toward traffic impact fees for the costs of the infrastructure improvements in the City Right of Way and serving as part of the roadway network for City Center. City Council also approved this credit. In the prior application, the applicants estimated cost contribution for the in-kind improvements to the city center network were $166,471. This exceeded the road impact fees. With the reduction in estimated trips to 161 the estimated road impact fee is now $158,002. The applicants estimated in-kind contribution of $166,471 remains unchanged and exceeds the traffic impact fee; therefore no additional road impact fee would be assessed with this application. Response to Staff comments at Sketch Plan Hearing November 19, 2013: City staff provided the following “OTHER” comments following sketch plan review for the applicant to address: All signs on the building elevations should be removed for the preliminary & final plat submissions. RESPONSE: All signs have been removed from the building elevations The plans should be revised to correctly reflect the current conditions. RESPONSE: We contacted the zoning administrator who advised removal of Existing Conditions Plan C1.01 and PUD Existing Conditions Plan C1.08 since they contain data of the 3 house lots and details no longer existing. The B-1 Survey Plan will is a close representation to the (current) existing conditions and will remain as part of the submission set; this survey plat includes the new property lines for the subdivision as well. Page 5 of 5 Summary of additional plan updates since sketch plan submission 11/19/2013: 1. Update cover sheet to remove C1.01 Existing Conditions Plan (per staff request) 2. Update cover sheet to remove C1.08 PUD Existing Conditions (per staff request) 3. Remove all signage & sign notes shown on Trader Joe's elevation plans 4. Remove note "Option 'B' Retail & Restaurant" on Pier One First Floor Plan 5. Remove all signage & sign notes shown on Pier 1 elevation plans Exchanging the approved office use to retail along the second floor of the 14,000sf building will contribute to the storefront market-style vibrancy for this commercial core of the city center district. In addition, we believe this use will further draw pedestrian activity to the plaza between both buildings expanding upon the aesthetics and liveliness of this center as a whole. Please find enclosed (3) three copies 24” x 36” and (1) one copy 11” x 17” including the following site plan modifications and 3-lot subdivision plan: W+B Cover Sheet Architectural: Trader Joes Floor Plan Trader Joes Building Elevations Pier One First and Second Floor Plans Pier One Building Elevations Civil Engineering Plans: C0.01 Cover Sheet (Zoning Data, Proposed Use and Parking Requirements) C0.02 Legend and General Notes C1.02 Site Plan C1.03 Grading Plan C1.04 Utility Plan C1.05 Erosion Control Plan C1.06 Pond Crossing Plan C1.07 Island Calc Plan C1.09 PUD Site Plan C2.01-C2.02 Utility Profiles C5.01-C5.04 Construction Details Subdivision Plans: B1 Property Survey Plat Landscape Architectural Plans: LA.01 Landscape Plan LA.02 Landscape Details LA.03 Site Lighting Plan LA.04 Site Lighting Details In summary, we request DRB review and approval of the 3-lot subdivision request and site plan modifications as included in the updated plans dated October 18, 2013. We believe the plan revisions and requests add to the vibrancy of the city center district and goals of South Burlington. ONLYMALONE DORSET STREETPROPERTIESLOT COVERAGESHealthy Living (withoutentry drive)Trader Joe's (withoutentry drive)Entry DriveEntire PUD (withoutentry drive)Entire SiteFront Yard Area (sf)6,319 5,157 1,49311,476 12,969Total Area (sf)128,469 102,727 23,737 231,196 254,933ExistingBuilding Coverage (sf)28,73622.4%4,2284.1%00.0%32,96414.3%32,96412.9%Front Yard Coverage (sf)3,23351.2%1,39727.1%67245.0%4,63040.3%5,30240.9%Overall Coverage (sf)93,05572.4%8,3728.1%9,25639.0%101,42743.9%110,68343.4%ProposedBuilding Coverage (sf)28,73622.4%19,80019.3% 0 0.0%48,53621.0%48,53619.0%Front Yard Coverage (sf)3,23351.2%3,11360.4%79052.9%6,34655.3%7,13655.0%Overall Coverage (sf)93,05572.4%78,56676.5%15,61965.8%171,62174.2%190,38574.7% ONLY 1751801851901952002052101751801851901952002052103+003+743+003+25 3+503+741751801851901952002052101751801851901952002052100+000+710+000+25 0+500+711751801851901952002052101751801851901952002052100+000+620+000+25 0+500+621751801851901952002052101751801851901952002052100+000+590+000+25 0+500+59 ONLY 1801851901952002052101801851901952002052100+051+002+002+750+050+25 0+50 0+751+001+25 1+50 1+752+002+25 2+502+751801851901952002052101801851901952002052100+001+002+002+880+000+25 0+50 0+751+001+25 1+50 1+752+002+25 2+50 2+752+881801851901952002052101801851901952002052100+001+001+480+000+25 0+50 0+751+001+251+481801851901952002052101801851901952002052100+001+002+002+750+000+25 0+50 0+751+001+25 1+50 1+752+002+25 2+502+75 1751801851901952002052101751801851901952002052100+001+002+002+500+000+25 0+50 0+751+001+25 1+50 1+752+002+252+501801851901952002052101801851901952002052100+051+002+00 2+250+050+25 0+50 0+751+001+25 1+50 1+752+00 2+251751801851901952002052101751801851901952002052102+253+00 3+442+252+50 2+753+003+253+441801851901952002052101801851901952002052100+00 0+270+000+250+271801851901952002052101801851901952002052102+003+00 3+092+002+25 2+50 2+753+00 3+09 1751801851901952002052101751801851901952002052100+001+002+000+000+25 0+50 0+751+001+25 1+50 1+752+001751801851901952002052101751801851901952002052102+003+003+852+002+25 2+50 2+753+003+25 3+50 3+753+85 June 29, 201212079001TRADER JOE'SDORSET STREETSOUTH BURLINGTON, VTByDateDescriptionRev.File:NorthScale:Date:Checked By:Revisions:Drawn By:TitleSheet Number:Project Number:L a n d s c a p e A r c h i t e c t s131 C h u r c h S t r e e tB u r l i n g t o n, V T 0 5 4 0 1w w w . s e g r o u p . c o mse groupse group11/28/12Preliminary Application Update1APMalone PropertiesOwner/Developer122 Gallison Hill RoadMontpelier, VT 0560203/05/13Interim Zoning Submission2AP03/13/13Final Plat Application3AP08/16/13Site Lighting Update4AP08/30/13Building Fixture Note5AP09/17/13Issued for Construction6AP10/18/13Final Plat Resubmission7AP1" = 20'MJLAMPLANDSCAPE PLANLA.0140'20'10'0Graphic ScalePLANT LISTKEYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMEQTY.SIZE REMARKSDECIDUOUS TREES:AC Amelanchier canadensis Serviceberry 5 2 1/2" -3" Cal. B&B, Single StemACM Amelanchier canadensis Serviceberry 1 2 1/2" -3" Cal. B&B, Multi-StemAF Acer x freemanii Autumn Blaze Maple 3 3" - 3 1/2" Cal. B&BGT Gleditsia triacanthos var. inermis Shademaster Honeylocust 9 3" - 3 1/2" Cal. B&B'Shademaster'MRG Malus 'Royal Gala' Royal Gala Apple Tree 1 2 1/2" -3" Cal. B&BML Malus 'Libery' Libery Apple Tree 12 1/2" -3" Cal. B&BMH Malus 'Honeycrisp' Honeycrisp Apple Tree 3 2 1/2" -3" Cal. B&BPC Pyrus calleryana 'Chanticleer' Chanticleer Pear 6 3" - 3 1/2" Cal. B&BZS Zelkova serrata 'Green Vase' Green Vase Zelkova 6 2 1/2" -3" Cal. B&BSHRUBS:AA Aronia arbutifolia 'Brilliantissima' Red Chokeberry 11 3'-4' Ht. B&B, Plant 48" o.c.CH Clethra alnifolia 'Hummingbird' Hummingbird Summersweet 36 24"-30" Spread C.G., Plant 36" o.c.CA Corylus avellana 'Contorta' Harry Lauder's Walking Stick 3 5'-6' Ht. B&B, SpecimenCS Cornus baileyi Bailey Dogwood 14 2'-3' Ht. C.G., Plant 48" o.c.FG Fothergilla gardenii'Jane Platt' Dwarf fothergilla 24 24"-30" Spread C.G., Plant 36" o.c.HM Hydrangea macrophylla Endless Summer Hydrangea 18 24"-30" Spread C.G., Plant 36" o.c.'Endless Summer'IG Ilex glabra 'Compacta' Compact Inkberry 0 2'-3' B&B, Plant 36" o.c.IJ Ilex verticilata 'Jim Dandy' Winterberry 2 3'-4' Ht. B&B, Plant 48" o.c.IV Ilex verticilata 'Red Sprite' Winterberry 9 2'-3' Ht. B&B, Plant 36" o.c.PF Potentilla fruticosa 'Mango Tango' Mango Tango Potentilla 33 24"-30" Ht. C.G., Plant 36" o.c.RA Rhus aromatica 'Grow Low' Grow Low Sumac 65 15"-18"' Spread C.G., Plant 36" o.c.SB Spiraea x bumalda 'Anthony Waterer' Anthony Waterer Spirea 25 2'-3" Ht. C.G., Plant 36" o.c.TO Thuja occidentalis 'Nigra' Northern White Cedar 18 5'-6' Ht. B&B, Plant 48" o.c.PERENNIALS:AI Asclepias incarnata Swamp Milkweed 40 1 Gal. C.G. Plant 18" o.c.AN Aster novae-angliae New England Aster 88 1 Gal. C.G. Plant 18" o.c.AE Astilbe 'Erica' Astilbe (Pink) 30 1 Gal. C.G. Plant 18" o.c.CKL Calamagrostis acutiflora Feather Reed Grass 42 1 Gal. C.G. Plant 24" o.c.'Karl Forester'EP Echinacea purpurea Purple Coneflower 51 1 Gal. C.G. Plant 18" o.c.EPW Eupatorium purpureum Joe-Pye Weed 35 1 Gal. C.G. Plant 18" o.c.GS Geranium sanguimeum 'Max Frei' Cranesbill Geranium 30 1 Gal. C.G. Plant 12" o.c.HS Hemerocallis 'Stella D' Oro' Stella D' Oro Daylily 274 1 Gal. C.G. Plant 18" o.c.HP Heuchera 'Palace Purple' Coral Bell 34 1 Gal. C.G. Plant 12"o.c.HBC Hosta 'Blue Cadet' Blue Cadet Hosta 44 1 Gal. C.G. Plant 18" o.c.IE Iris versicolor Blue Flag Iris 35 1Gal. C.G. Plant 18" o.c.NR Nepeta racemosa 'Walkers Low' Walkers Low Catmint 24 1 Gal.C.G., Plant 24” o.c.PA Pennisetum alopecuroides 'Hameln' Dwarf Fountain Grass 94 1 Gal. C.G. Plant 18" o.c.RF Rudbeckia fulgida 'Goldsturm' Goldsturm Black-Eyed Susan 61 1 Gal. C.G. Plant 18" o.c.SEEDING:LAWN Green Mountain Special Mix Oliver Seed Co. (or approved equal)BIO-SWALE Wet Meadow/Detention Basin Mix Vermont Wetland Plant Supply (or approved equal)STORMWATER BASIN UPLAND Wet Meadow/Detention Basin Mix Vermont Wetland Plant Supply (or approved equal)STORMWATER BASIN WET POND Marsh, Swamp, and Bog Wetland Vermont Wetland Plant Supply (or approved equal)NOTES:1. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO VERIFY ALL PLANT QUANTITIES FOUND IN THE PLANTING PLANS. IF ANY DISCREPANCIES ARE FOUND, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT SHOULD BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY.2. FINAL LAYOUT AND PLACEMENT OF ALL PLANT MATERIAL TO BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.3. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO SEED ALL DISTURBED AREAS ACCORDING TO THE SPECIFICATIONS.4. REFER TO DRAWING PLANTING DETAILS FOR PLANT MATERIAL INSTALLATION, REFER TO SHEET LA.025. CONTINUOUS PLANTING PITS FILLED WITH PLANTING MIX IS REQUIRED IN ALL TREE , SHRUB AND PERENNIALS BED, OR ASNOTED.6. IF THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR PROPOSES A SUBSTITUTE PLANT SPECIES, ALL SUBSTITUTES NEED TO BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND THE CITY ARBORIST IN WRITING PRIOR TO ORDERING.7. ALL AREAS NOT IDENTIFIED FOR HARDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS SHALL RECEIVE TOPSOIL AND SEED. AJune 29, 201212079001TRADER JOE'SDORSET STREETSOUTH BURLINGTON, VTByDateDescriptionRev.File:NorthScale:Date:Checked By:Revisions:Drawn By:TitleSheet Number:Project Number:L a n d s c a p e A r c h i t e c t s131 C h u r c h S t r e e tB u r l i n g t o n, V T 0 5 4 0 1w w w . s e g r o u p . c o mse groupse group11/28/12Preliminary Application Update1APMalone PropertiesOwner/Developer122 Gallison Hill RoadMontpelier, VT 0560203/05/13Interim Zoning Submission2AP03/13/13Final Plat Application3AP08/16/13Site Lighting Update4AP08/30/13Building Fixture Note5AP09/17/13Issued for Construction6AP10/18/13Final Plat Resubmission7APMJLAMPLANDSCAPE DETAILSLA.02TREE PLANTINGSCALE 1/4" = 1'-0"18"18"FINISH GRADE2" HEMLOCK BARK MULCHREMOVE TOP HALF OF WIRE CAGECUT AND REMOVE BURLAPFROM ROOTBALLBACKFILL MIX FOR TREE PLANTING BEDS,85% TOPSOIL, 15% ORGANIC COMPOST,SUBMIT SOIL SAMPLE AND LAB TEST DATA FOR EACHMATERIAL TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTIONTOP OF ROOTBALL, ROOT FLARE SHOULDBE EVIDENT. IF ROOT FLARE IS NOT EVIDENT,THEN SCRAPE OFF THE TOP LAYER OF SOILBUILD UP ON TOP OF ROOTBALL FROM NURSERY.UNDISTURBED GRADEEXCAVATE ONLY TO SPECIFIEDPLANTING DEPTH TO ENSURESTABLE BASEBREAK APART EDGE OF EXCAVATIONW/ SHOVEL AND BLEND PLANT MIXW/ EXISTING SOIL TO PROVIDETRANSITION TO UNDISTURBED GRADENOTES:1. EXAMINE ENTIRE TREE AND REMOVEALL NURSERY TAGS, ROPE, STRING, ORSURVEYORS TAPE TO PREVENT FUTUREGIRDLING.2. WIDTH OF TREE PIT SHALL BE 3 TIMES THEDIAMETER OF THE ROOT BALL UNLESS NOTEDOTHERWISE ON THE PLANTING PLAN WHERETREES ARE BEING PLANTED IN CONTINUOUS PITS.SURROUNDING SOIL SHOULD NOTEXCEED 80% COMPACTION, DRAINAGEWILL BE REQUIRED IF COMPACTEDSOILS ARE PRESENTTEMPORARY WATERING BASIN212" HARDWOOD STAKES. ALIGNSTAKES PARALLEL W/ ROAD/ WALKSOR PARALLEL W/ DIRECTION OFPREVAILING WIND, REFER TO TREESTAKING DETAILNYLON STRAPWITH 3/4" GROMMETS,REFER TO SPECIFICATIONSFASTEN WIRE BELOW POINT OFMAJOR BRANCHING OR TO MAJOROUTSIDE TRUNK.3 TIMES THE DIAMETEROF THE ROOT BALLREFER TO NOTE #2DECIDUOUS TREESEE PLANTING LIST FOR PLANT SPACINGAADDDDDPERENNIAL PLANTINGSCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"PLANT SPACINGPLANT CENTERSET AT ORIGINAL PLANTING DEPTHFINISH GRADEMULCH AS SPECIFIEDSUB GRADESEE PLANTING PLAN FOR SPACINGAND QUANTITIES2. CONTINUOUS PLANTING PITS FILLED WITH PLANTING MIX PER THEDEPTH AS NOTED IN THE SPECIFICATIONS IS REQUIRED.p-perennial.dwgSPACING "D" ROW "A" NUMBER OF PLANTS/SQ.FT.36" O.C. 31.20" 0.12530" O.C. 26.00" 0.18024" O.C. 20.76" 0.28112" O.C. 10.44" 1.12510" O.C. 8.64" 1.6608" O.C. 6.96" 2.6006" O.C. 5.16" 4.610NOTE:1. PLANT QUANTITIES DETERMINED BY MULTIPLYING AREA (SQ. FT.)BY NUMBER OF PLANTS/SQ. FT. FOR REQUIRED SPACING.CONTINUOUS PLANTING PIT FILLED WITHBACKFILL MIX, 85% TOPSOIL,15% ORGANIC COMPOST, SUBMIT SOIL SAMPLEAND LAB TEST DATA FOR EACH MATERIAL TOLANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTIONAS NOTED IN PLANTING SCHEDULE.NOTE:SHRUB PLANTINGSCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"SPACING "D"ROW "A"NUMBER OFPLANTS/SQ. FT.5' O.C.4' O.C.36" O.C.30" O.C.24" O.C.41.52"31.20"26.00"20.76"51.96"0.280.180.040.120.07DADDDAD1'-0"MINSEE PLANFOR SPACINGPLANT ROWPLANT CENTERPLANT SPACINGALL EQUAL ORAS SHOWN ONPLANTING PLANFINISH GRADEMULCH, AS SPECIFIEDSHRUB ROOTBALLSUB GRADE2. CONTINUOUS PLANTING PITS FILLED WITH PLANTINGMIX PER THE DEPTH AS NOTED IN THE SPECIFICATIONSIS REQUIRED.1. QUANTITY OF SHRUBS AND SPACINGBACKFILL MIX FOR SHRUB PLANTING BEDS,CONTINUOUS BED, 85% TOPSOIL,15% ORGANIC COMPOST, SUBMIT SOILSAMPLE AND LAB TEST DATA FOR EACHMATERIAL TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIORTO CONSTRUCTIONBDSCREEN FENCE AND SWING GATESCALE 1/2" = 1'-0"FINISH GRADE, SEEGRADING PLANCONCRETE SLAB, REFER TO CIVILDRAWINGSNOTES:1. ALL GATE HINGES ARE TO BE SS COMMERCIAL GRADE WITH GREASE FITTINGS.2. PROVIDE LOCKING MECHANISM SO DOORS STAY LATCHED.3. ALL ASSOCIATED HARDWARE SHOULD BE SS, PAINTED BLACK TO MATCH.4. MAINTAIN 16'-0" CLEARANCE WHEN GATE PANELS ARE IN THE OPEN POSITION.5. ALL WOOD FENCE COMPONENTS TO BE PRIMED AND PAINTED TO MATCH BUILDING6. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS OF DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE LAYOUT ANDSERVICE AREA LAYOUT, INCLUDING ALL PROPOSED MATERIALS AND HARDWARE.1" X WOOD SLAT,WIDTH VARIES, ALIGNCOURSING6" x 6" PT POST, PAINTED(2 COATS MIN).6'-0", TYP.3/4" MIN SPACING B/WSLATSSUB-BASE, REFER TOCIVIL ENGINEER'S DRAWINGSAND SPECIFICATIONSIMAGE FOR REFERENCE ONLY1" x 6 " TRIM BOARD1" x 4 " SUPPORTBRACESEATING BOULDERSCALE 1" = 1'-0"LENGTH VARIES2'-0"6" GRADED GRAVEL BASECOMPACTED SUBGRADE1'-6"NOTES: HEIGHT OF ALL STONE BOULDERS TO BE 2 FEET WITH6" RECESSED BELOW GRADE. LENGTH OF BOULDER MAY VARYSEE LAYOUT PLAN. BOULDER TYPE AND STYLE TO MATCHEXISTING HEALTHY LIVING INSTALLATION. BOULDERLOCATIONS AND STONES TO BE APPROVED BY LANDSCAPEARCHITECT.FINISH GRADE,MATERIALS VARYSEE PLAN.CE June 29, 201212079001TRADER JOE'SDORSET STREETSOUTH BURLINGTON, VTByDateDescriptionRev.File:NorthScale:Date:Checked By:Revisions:Drawn By:TitleSheet Number:Project Number:L a n d s c a p e A r c h i t e c t s131 C h u r c h S t r e e tB u r l i n g t o n, V T 0 5 4 0 1w w w . s e g r o u p . c o mse groupse group11/28/12Preliminary Application Update1APMalone PropertiesOwner/Developer122 Gallison Hill RoadMontpelier, VT 0560203/05/13Interim Zoning Submission2AP03/13/13Final Plat Application3AP08/16/13Site Lighting Update4AP08/30/13Building Fixture Note5AP09/17/13Issued for Construction6AP10/18/13Final Plat Resubmission7AP1" = 20'MJLAMPSITELIGHTING PLANLA.0340'20'10'0Graphic ScaleFIXTURE AND POLE SCHEDULE200LABLP (Black Paint)Gullwing 18 LED (GL18)Mounting:Manufacturer:Fixture AVoltage:Pole:Fixture:LED Wattage:Optical System:Finish:TBDGardco Lighting1 (Single Pole Mount)SSA5-STB-25M-D1-BLPType IIIOptions: TBDFixture BNW (Neutral White)LED Selection:200LABLP (Black Paint)Gullwing 18 LED (GL18)Mounting:Manufacturer:Voltage:Pole:Fixture:LED Wattage:Optical System:Finish:TBDGardco LightingSSA5-STB-25M-D1-BLPType IVOptions: TBDNW (Neutral White)LED Selection:200LABLP (Black Paint)Gullwing 18 LED (GL18)Mounting:Manufacturer:Fixture CVoltage:Pole:Fixture:LED Wattage:Optical System:Finish:TBDGardco Lighting1 (Single Pole Mount)SSA5-STB-25M-D1-BLPType VOptions: TBDNW (Neutral White)LED Selection:Fixture F - City of South Burlington, Fixture Specs TBDP135A-14Pole:Bass Cover: B50LumecConfiguration:Lamp:Options:Color:Manufacturer:Optics:Fixture:65W49LED4KBKTX (Textured Black)PS (polycarbonate globe)L801 (POLE TOP)LE4BKTX (Textured Black)Pole Color:Pole Options: BAS22 (Banner arm), GFICS (clear satin lens)2195LEDFixture Manufacturer:Fixture GFixture:BegaColor: BlackAluminumMaterial:3.4watt LEDLamp:Fixture E2 (Twin Pole Mount at 180)1 (Single Pole Mount)IS (Internal Houseside Shield)Options:Fixture DBlackSmall Pima LEDGINE (CXF6)Manufacturer:Fixture:Optics:Color:Philips HadcoLED: 64Type IVWall MountedArm:200LABLP (Black Paint)Gullwing 18 LED (GL18)Mounting:Manufacturer:Fixture C2Voltage:Pole:Fixture:LED Wattage:Optical System:Finish:TBDGardco LightingSSA5-STB-25M-D2-BLPType VOptions: TBDNW (Neutral White)LED Selection:4000KColor Temp:BlackSmall Pima LEDGINE (CXF6)Manufacturer:Fixture:Optics:Color:Philips HadcoLED: 64Type IIIWall MountedArm:4000KColor Temp:LD409Fixture Manufacturer:Fixture H (under canopy fixture)Housing and Lumens:Cooper LightingColor: H (Semi-Specular Clear)D010Driver:EMR4- 835Power Module:Max/MinSTATISTICAL AREA SUMMARYGrid Units: FootcandlesGrid Type: Horizontal Illuminance at finish grade.MinMaxAveAve/MinThis analysis was calculated in accordance with published IES calculation methods and procedures withthe data as entered by the user. This analysis is based on tested IES photometric data, light loss factors asdefined in the LLF value. This analysis is a mathematical model of real life situations, and it can be only asaccurate as the model itself. Calculated values may vary from actual measurements in certain situations.SE Group is not responsible for light output deviations due to lamp/ballast combinations or other variables.Disclaimer:Overall Parking Area 2.77 5.7 0.5 5.54 11.40.500.251.00ISO-CONTOUR KEY2.00 DJune 29, 201212079001TRADER JOE'SDORSET STREETSOUTH BURLINGTON, VTByDateDescriptionRev.File:NorthScale:Date:Checked By:Revisions:Drawn By:TitleSheet Number:Project Number:L a n d s c a p e A r c h i t e c t s131 C h u r c h S t r e e tB u r l i n g t o n, V T 0 5 4 0 1w w w . s e g r o u p . c o mse groupse group11/28/12Preliminary Application Update1APMalone PropertiesOwner/Developer122 Gallison Hill RoadMontpelier, VT 0560203/05/13Interim Zoning Submission2AP03/13/13Final Plat Application3AP08/16/13Site Lighting Update4AP08/30/13Building Fixture Note5AP09/17/13Issued for Construction6AP10/18/13Final Plat Resubmission7APMJLAMPSITELIGHTING DETAILSLA.04EBCALIGHT POLE FOOTING-RAISED (CONDITION B)SCALE 1/2" = 1'-0"24"MAINTAIN A 3" MINIMUMCOVERAGE ON ALL BARS3"POLEPOLE BASE WITH 1" GROUTBASEPLATE AND ANCHOR BOLTS(AS PRE MANUFACTURERS SPECS.)WIRE ANCHOR RODSTO REINFORCINGCONCRETE FOOTING 35OO PSIPVC ELECTRICAL CONDUIT, TYP.SUPPLIED BY ELECTRICALCONTRACTOR6-#5 BARS WITHIN A6x6 10/10 W.W.F. CAGENOTE: POLE BASE IS TO BE ONE CONTINUOUS POUR.(ALL POLE BASES MUST BE POURED ON SITE)THE CONTRACTOR WILL TAKE SPECIAL CARE TOENSURE CONCRETE POLE BASES ARE POUREDABSOLUTELY VERTICAL AND LEVEL.CLAMP SUITABLE FORDIRECT BURIAL#8 BARE GROUND WIREINSTALL WITH ASEPERATE CONDUITINTO CONCRETE BASE3/4" Ø x 8'-0" COPPERCLAD GROUNDING RODLIGHT POLE BASE TOHAVE 45° CHAMFERED EDGEPARKING LOT LIGHT FIXTURE (A, A2, AND B)SCALE 1/2" = 1'-0"DLIGHT POLE FOOTINGCONDITION VARIES, REFER TOLIGHTING PLAN FOR POLE BASEIDENTIFICATIONLIGHT FIXTURE AND MOUNTING ARMREFER TO LIGHTING PLANFOR SPECIFICATIONSCLNOTES:1. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOPDRAWINGS AND CUT-SHEETS FORLIGHT FIXTURE, POLE, AND ALL HARDWARE,FOR APPROVAL BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.2. ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATEWITH ELECTRICAL ENGINEER FOR ALL WIRINGAND CIRCUITS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SITELIGHTING.LIGHT POLEREFER TO LIGHTING PLANFOR SPECIFICATIONSBUILDING MOUNT LIGHT FIXTURE (C AND D)SCALE 1/2" = 1'-0"LIGHT FIXTURE AND MOUNTING ARMREFER TO LIGHTING PLANFOR SPECIFICATIONSNOTES:1. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOPDRAWINGS FOR LIGHT FIXTURE, POLE,AND ALL HARDWARE, FOR APPROVALBY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.BUILDINGWALKWAYSTREET LIGHT FIXTURE (E) - TBD BY CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTONSCALE 1/2" = 1'-0" d-light fixture - street.dwg LIGHT FIXTURENOTES:1. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS FOR ALL COMPONENTS FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.DLIGHT POLE FOOTING- FLUSHLIGHT POLEPLAN VIEWLIGHT POLE BASELIGHT FIXTURECLSIDE VIEWLIGHT POLE FOOTING-24" FLUSHSCALE 1/2" = 1'-0" d-light footing 24-flush.dwg2'MAINTAIN A 3" MINIMUMCOVERAGE ON ALL BARS3"POLEBASEPLATE AND ANCHOR BOLTS(INSTALL PER MANUFACTURERS SPECS.)WIRE ANCHOR RODSTO REINFORCINGCONCRETE FOOTING 35OO PSI6-#5 BARS WITHIN A6x6 10/10 W.W.F. CAGENOTE: POLE BASE IS TO BE ONE CONTINUOUS POUR.THE CONTRACTOR WILL TAKE SPECIAL CARE TOENSURE CONCRETE POLE BASES ARE POUREDABSOLUTELY VERTICAL AND LEVEL.POLE BASE WITH GROUTIF NECESSARYELECTRICAL CONDUIT, TYP.SUPPLIED BY ELECTRICALCONTRACTORCLAMP SUITABLE FORDIRECT BURIAL#8 BARE GROUND WIREINSTALL WITH ASEPARATE CONDUITINTO CONCRETE BASE3/4" Ø x 8'-0" COPPERCLAD GROUNDING RODLIGHT POLE BASE TO BE2" ABOVE FINISH GRADEW/ 45° CHAMFERED EDGE 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com RYE ASSOCIATES Agenda Item #5 PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION #SD-13-33 & MASTER PLAN APPLICATION #MP-13-01 MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington Development Review Board FROM: Ray Belair, Administrative Officer Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning RE: Rye Associates – Preliminary Plat & Master Plan Application DATE: January 17, 2014 The enclosed submittals from the applicant address both Master Plan and Preliminary Plat elements. Staff has prepared this cover memo to highlight key elements for discussion under each and provides a recommendation. 1. Master Plan: The Master Plan portion of the project appears to be complete; staff recommends that the Development Review Board confirm the items below and, if satisfied, direct staff to prepare a Draft Decision in to be provided advance of the next DRB meeting, and to continue the Master Plan application to that meeting to allow all parties to see the draft decision before the hearing is closed. As Master Plan reviews are rare, staff recommends this as a prudent step for all parties. Master Plan Review Elements The overall review criteria for Master Plan remains the same as for sketch, preliminary, and final plat, but at a Master Plan level. The items below would establish the “baseline elements” that would be approved as part of the Master Plan and therefore serve as the determination of whether any future amendments are needed to the Master Plan if the project is modified. Section 15.07(D) (3) Any application for amendment of the master plan, preliminary site plan or preliminary plat that deviates from the master plan in any one or more of the following respects, shall be considered a new application for the property and shall require sketch plan review as well as approval of an amended master plan: 2 (a) An increase in the total FAR or number of residential dwelling units for the property subject to the master plan; As the project involves both residential dwelling units and non-residential buildings on various parts of the plan, FAR is not useful. Instead, the proposed plan is described as consisting of 52 residential dwelling units and 20,000 square feet of non-residential development. (b) An increase in the total site coverage of the property subject to the master plan; Total site coverage for the proposed plan is 29.82%, below the maximum of 30%. (see also waiver request concerning individual lots) (c) A change in the location, layout, capacity or number of collector roadways on the property subject to the master plan; The proposed project contains two collector roadways: Swift Street extension and the eastern leg of Rye Circle, from Swift Street Extension to Edgewood Lane (note, all street names subject to change) (d) Land development proposed in any area previously identified as permanent open space in the approved master plan application; and/or See the proposed Master Plan for areas identified as permanent open space. (e) A change that will result in an increase in the number of PM peak hour vehicle trip ends projected for total buildout of the property subject to the master plan. The project is proposed to result in 107 PM peak hour vehicle trip ends. Section 15.07(D)(2) In its approval of a Master Plan, the DRB shall specify the level of review and process required for subsequent applications pursuant to the approved Master Plan provided such procedure is consistent with the intent of these Regulations. The DRB may, for example, specify that final site plan only shall be required for specified portions of a project subject to a master plan, or that a section of a PUD shall be able to be amended with a final plat amendment action. Staff recommends that the Master Plan approval specify that any individual lot created by the initial subdivision be subject only to site plan review if it contains only one (1) building. In addition, staff recommends that future amendments to any portion of the project, following initial preliminary and final plat approval, be subject only to final plat approval (assuming Master Plan amendment is not required). Section 15.07(C)(3) (xii) A list of waivers the applicant desires from these regulations. An applicant may seek approval of certain waivers applicable to the Master Plan which would then apply to all future applications for preliminary and final plat, site plan, and zoning permits as applicable. The applicant has detailed these is a memo (enclosed). They are, in sum (applicant’s request in italics): 1. Section 3.06(C) Setbacks and Buffers; Yards Abutting a Planned Street. With the assumption that the reference to “Swift Street” also means Swift Street Extension, the applicant seeks a waiver for Cottage buildings 7-1 and 7-7 (to 30’) and residential lots #22 and #23 (to 20’) and Commercial Lot #1 (to 30’) to achieve the goals set forth in the SEQ district guidelines. 3 2. Section 3.06(I) Buffer Strip for Non-Residential Uses Adjacent to Residential District Boundaries. A modification of the requirement that the required side or rear setback shall be increased to sixty- five (65) feet. In this case the applicant seeks a waiver indicating that the front yard setback shall be reduced to 20 feet when a street with a Rights-of-way width of at least 50’ is proposed between the residential use and the proposed commercial use. The side and rear lot setbacks shall otherwise be consistent with the SEQ-VC District requirements. 3. Section 9.07 (Table 9-2) The request is to waive the following requirements: Minimum radius of curves for Local streets from 200' to 50’ 4. Appendix C Table C-2 Dimensional Standards - The following waivers are requested to allow greater interaction between the proposed buildings in support of enhancing the fabric of the neighborhood. A. Single Family Minimum Lot Size from 12,000 SF to 9,937 SF. - B. Single Family Max. Building Coverage from 15% to 20% for all lots. C. Single Family Max. Lot Coverage from 30% to 42% for Lot 7. D. Single Family Front Yard Setback from 20’ to 10' (Cottage Units 6-1 & 6-2 off of Edgewood Drive). E. Single Family Rear Yard Setback from 30' to 20’ (Cottage Units 7-2 thru 7-6). F. Multi-Family Max. Building Coverage from 15% to 28% for Lot 6. G. Multi-Family Max. Lot Coverage from 30% to 55% for Lot 6. H. Commercial Lot Coverage from 30% to 54% for all lots except for Lot 3 which shall be 63% I. Commercial Building Coverage from 15% to 21% for all lots except for Lot 3 which shall be 26% J. PUD Lot Coverage to Exclude City Recreation Paths. 5. Section 9.09(A)(2): SEQ-VR Sub-District; Specific Standards & Dimensional Standards; Interconnection of Streets; (a) Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 400 feet. Applicant seeks waiver to reflect minimization of street intersections on future collector road (Swift Street Extension). 6. Section 9.10 (A)(1)SEQ-VC Sub-District; Specific Regulations; Development blocks. Development block lengths should range between 200 and 300 linear feet; see Figure 9-2 for example. Blocks 300 feet or longer must include mid-block public sidewalk or recreation path connections. The applicant seeks a waiver from the absolute values to reflect the commercial use on the east side where the curb cuts to Hinesburg Road are to be minimized, to the south where the pre- existing development pattern precludes the inclusion of addition intersections, and to the north where again, curb cuts on to future collector streets are to be minimized. The west side proposes the inclusion of a “mid” block pedestrian connector. 7. Section 9.10 (A)(2) SEQ-VC Sub-District; Specific Regulations; Interconnection of Streets; (a) Average intersection spacing shall be 200 to 300 feet. 4 The applicant is not proposing any new streets within the Village Commercial District. 8. Section 9.10 (D) SEQ-VC Sub-District; Specific Regulations; D. Design Standards for Non-Residential Land Uses in the SEQ-VC Sub-District; (3) Building Setbacks. New buildings with commercial uses must be built to a ‘build-to line’ established no less than fifteen feet (15’) and no more than twenty feet (20’) from the edge of the curb. The area between the building and the curb shall provide for convenient pedestrian access via sidewalk or recreation path; see Section 9.10(C)(1) above. Parking is prohibited between the building and the sidewalk. As the Development Review Board expressed its’ desire to orient the commercial buildings with the interior of the PUD and not Hinesburg Road, the applicant seeks a waiver for all of the commercial lots as this will conflict with the requirements of section 9.11(B)(2). 9. Section 9.11 (A) Supplemental Standards for Arterial and Collector Streets; Setbacks. The minimum front setbacks from Dorset Street, Old Cross Road, Nowland Farm Road, Hinesburg Road, Swift Street, Swift Street Extension, and Old Cross Road Extension, shall be as set forth in Section 3.06(B) (1) and (2) of these Regulations (see below). a. (1) New developments with frontage on Dorset Street, Old Cross Road/Nowland Farm Road, or Swift Street, or which have the potential to include frontage along Swift Street Extension or Old Cross Road Extension, shall maintain a setback of twenty feet (20’) from the edge of the planned right-of-way. No issue, this is acceptable. b. (2) Supplemental Standards for Arterial and Collector Streets; Setbacks. New developments with frontage on Hinesburg Road shall maintain a setback of forty feet (40’) from the edge of the planned right-of-way. The applicant seeks a waiver from 40-feet to 23-feet to enable the comprehensive planning and interconnection of the parking infrastructure serving the commercial buildings in the narrow VC district area. Recommendations: The Board has previously discussed each of these and expressed that it is comfortable with the requests (see note below under preliminary plat for request #11). Staff recommends that to Master Plan draft decision include reference all waiver requests except the following: Request #1 – staff recommends that the applicant either (a): indicate an area on the Master Plan where this setback waiver would apply or (b) the waiver be issued in the Preliminary Plat level and NOT at the Master Plat level. Request #4 (a-i) – staff recommends these waivers be issued in the Preliminary plat level and NOT at the Master Plan level as they are very site specific. 2. Preliminary Plat: The applicant submitted revised preliminary plans (enclosed). Additional revisions are being prepared based on staff feedback. These are highlighted below. Full staff notes will be completed with the revised set of plans. Further, staff has met with the applicant to review the outstanding items which should be discussed by the Board at the meeting. These issues are as follows: 5 A. Applicant is proposing a 23 ft. setback for the commercial buildings along Hinesburg Road. The requirement is 57 ft. The Board has previously discussed a setback waiver, but not this specific number. Staff is comfortable with this request. B. The site plan for the general office building will be revised to show a minimum of 14 parking spaces and request a four (4) space or 25% waiver. Staff is comfortable with this request, as Rye Circle_01 is proposed to include on-street parking. C. The applicant will be requesting a one (1) space or 7% parking waiver for the cottage homes on lot #5. Staff has no issues with these 2 parking waivers as on street parking will be available for guests and the units are proposed to be small (reducing the likelihood of multiple cars in each unit). D. The seven (7) cottage homes on lot #7 will be revised to combine 4 units into 2 duplex buildings and three (3) single family dwellings so as not to exceed the number of single family units on a private street. The applicant will be consulting with the Fire Chief concerning any sprinkler requirements. E. The applicant will be proposing a method to assure that the homes on the single family lots will comply with the residential design guidelines. This may be presented at this or a subsequent meeting. F. The plans will be revised for the continued meeting to: remove the driveways to the single family lots, add a note as the number of parking spaces available for the multi-family units, add more detail to the site plan for the commercial building, add a note that the garages for the cottage homes on lot #7 meet the eight (8) foot setback requirement from the front of the house. Staff recommends the Board review and provide guidance on each of these items and then continue the preliminary plat to allow the applicant to make the revisions. DSMDSMACL1" = 50'11202MP1DEC., 2011PROPOSEDCONDITIONSSITE PLANSWIFT STREET EXTENSION55' R.O.W.55'R.O.W.55' R.O.W.55'R.O.W.80' R.O.W.RYE CIRCLEEDGEWOOD LANERYE CIRCLE DSMDSMACL1" = 50'11202MP2DEC., 2011EXISTINGCONDITIONSSITE PLAN DSMDSMACL1" = 50'11202MP3DEC., 2011GRADING &DRAINAGESITE PLANSWIFT STREET EXTENSIONRYE CIRCLEEDGEWOOD LANERYE CIRCLE DSMDSMACL1" = 50'11202MP4DEC., 2011OVERALLUTILITYPLANSWIFT STREET EXTENSIONRYE CIRCLEEDGEWOOD LANERYE CIRCLE TRCTRCACL1" = 50'11202P1MAY 23, 20131. Purpose of this survey and plat is to a.) retrace the boundaries of a portion ofproperty conveyed to Rye Associates and depicted as "Lot # 2" on ReferencePlat A, andb.) depict the subdivision of said Lot #2 into a Planned Unit Development asshown.Note that the bearings differ from Reference Plat A, since it idepicts bearingsfrom Magnetic North; this survey uses Grid North (Note 2).Other neighboring property lines and buildings shown may be approximate only,and are shown for informational purposes only.2. Field survey was conducted during 2012 and consisted of a closed-looptraverse utilizing an electronic total station instrument. Bearings shown are fromGrid North, Vermont Coordinate System of 1983, based upon our GPSobservations on or adjacent to the site.3. Iron pipes shown as "found" are typically labeled with inside diameter, rodswith outside diameter, unless otherwise indicated. Condition of pipes, rods andmarkers found are "Good" unless otherwise noted. Corners denoted "Proposed"shall typically consist of58" diameter X 40" long rebar or by 4" square concretemarkers, either type capped with aluminum disks stamped "Civil EngineeringAssocs. - VT LS 597", and typically set flush with existing grade.4. Land areas (acreages) shown are calculated to the sidelines of existing orproposed streets.A. "Lands of Brisson & Rye - Subdivision Plat" last revised 12/4/2006 byO'Leary - Burke Civil Associates, PLC. Recorded in South Burlington LandRecords.1. Lots 6-13, 22-30 and C1-4 are subject to a 10' wide easement locatedalong the street R.O.W. in favor of Green Mountain Power2. Lots 8-13 and 22-29 are subject to a 20' wide drainage easement in favor ofthe Rye HOA.3. Lots commercial 1-4 are subject to a 10' pedestrian easement centered onthe constructed walkway in favor of the Rye HOA.4. 20' wide recreation path R.O.W. located on the south side of Lots #26, #17and commercial Lot #1 to be deeded to the City of South Burlington. DSMDSMACL1" = 50'11202C1DEC., 2011PROPOSEDCONDITIONSSITE PLAN DSMDSMACL1" = 50'11202C1.2MAY, 2013SITELIGHTINGPLAN DSMDSMACL1" = 50'11202C2DEC., 2011EXISTINGCONDITIONSSITE PLAN DSMDSMACL1" = 50'11202C3DEC., 2011GRADING &DRAINAGESITE PLAN DSMDSMACL1" = 50'11202C4.0DEC., 2011OVERALLUTILITYPLANCWD Specifications: All work to be performed in accordance with theSpecifications and Details for the Installation of Waterlines and Appurtenances for all Water Systems Ownedby the Champlain Water District, the City of SouthBurlington, Colchester Fire District #1 and the Village ofJericho. Details should be modified to the abovereference specifications. DSMDSMACL1" = 50'11202C4.1DEC., 2011SEWER &WATERPLANCWD Specifications: All work to be performed in accordance with theSpecifications and Details for the Installation of Waterlines and Appurtenances for all Water Systems Ownedby the Champlain Water District, the City of SouthBurlington, Colchester Fire District #1 and the Village ofJericho. Details should be modified to the abovereference specifications. DSMDSMACL1" = 50'11202C4.2DEC., 2011ELECTRICAL& GASPLAN DSMDSMACL1" = 50'11202C6DEC., 2011EROSIONCONTROLPLAN Rye Associates Building & Lot Coverage Computation 6-May-13 Description # Units Indiv. Building Size Total Building Area Driveway Pavement (Each House) Decks (Each House) Walkways Total Decks/ Walks Total Lot Coverage Residential Lot 22 Varies 38,463 18,695 240 200 9,680 66,838 Typical Cottage Unit (N)7 1,272 8,904 10,086 0 0 18,990 Typical Cottage Unit (N)3 956 2,868 Inc. Above 0 0 2,868 Typical Cottage Unit (S)4 956 3,824 4,648 0 0 8,472 Cottage Car Port 1 1,386 1,386 -1,331 0 0 55 Commercial Lot #1 1 5,000 5,000 6,321 0 125 11,446 Commercial Lot #2 1 3,000 3,000 6,321 0 125 9,446 Commercial Lot #3 1 3,000 3,000 6,321 0 125 9,446 Commercial Lot #4 1 3,000 3,000 6,780 0 125 9,905 MultiFamily #4 1 2,800 2,800 14,793 0 178 17,771 MultiFamily #5 1 2,800 2,800 Inc. Above 0 178 2,978 MultiFamily #6 1 2,800 2,800 Inc. Above 0 168 2,968 MultiFamily #7 1 2,800 2,800 Inc. Above 0 168 2,968 Sidewalks 18,940 18,940 Street 50,878 0 50,878 Lot Size 18.01 Ac 80,645 123,512 29,813 9,680 233,969 784,516 SF Building Coverage 10.28% Maximum Allowed 15% Lot Coverage 29.82% Maximum Allowed 30% Rec Path 8,893 8,893 Front Yard Coverage Length Width Total Hinesburg Road SW 745 5 3,725 Building Walkways 160 5 800 Parking 1900 1,900 Total 6,425 SF Front Yard Size 745 57 42,465 SF 15.13% 30% Front Yard Coverage Maximum Allowed 1 Gilman & Briggs Environmental, Inc. 1 Conti Circle, Suite 5 Barre, Vermont 05641 Tel: (802) 479-7480; FAX: (802) 476-5610 gbenvironmental@earthlink.net MEMORANDUM To:South Burlington Design Review Board From:Errol C. Briggs Date:3 May 2013 Re:Rye Associates Planned Unit Development I have reviewed the Grading & Drainage Site Plan prepared by Civil Engineering Associates for the Rye Associates proposed subdivision on the 18.1 acre parcel located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Hinesburg Road and Fox Run Lane, which contains wetland delineation work prepared by our firm. The area is an hayfield, dominated by field grasses, clover, bedstraw and common vetch on uplands and reed-canary grass, creeping bent, water foxtail and bulrushes on wetter sites. The wetlands in this area of the property have formed along a small drainage way that ultimately drains into the west branch of Potash Brook. These wetlands are depicted on the existing condition site plan (Sheet C1.1). I delineated these wetlands in September 2011, using the methodology found in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the 2009 Interim Regional Supplement as required by both State and Federal Wetland Regulators. These wetlands are not depicted on the Vermont Significant Wetlands Inventory and because of their size and minimal functions and values, I regard them as Class Three Wetlands not protected by the Vermont Wetland Rules. These wetlands were found to be significant primarily for the function of protection of surface and ground water, either through trapping of sediments or uptake of nutrients –these functions being due to the dense vegetation within the wetlands. At present, there is some input of sediments or nutrients from the agricultural tilling of the soils immediately to the north. Chemical alteration of any toxicants that may be present is one function that may be performed by wetlands immediately adjacent to the drainageway. The wetlands also play a role in erosion control by binding the soil adjacent to the surface water conveyance areas. 2 The wetlands were not found to be significant for the functions of stormwater storage, fisheries, wildlife habitat, hydrophytic vegetation, threatened or endangered species, education or research, recreation or economic benefits. They are visible from a public way, but do not stand out as distinct elements in the landscape and therefore are not significant for aesthetics and open space. The proposed project will not encroach directly into the majority of these wetlands, but elements of the project will be within the 50’ buffer zones around them. There are two small isolated pockets of wetlands (Sta 12+15 A Street adjacent to Lot 24 and on Commercial Lot 4) that will be directly impacted by the project.These two areas are similar to depressional wetland areas on nearby parcels that have been determined to be “isolated” wetlands not subject to jurisdiction of the US Army Corps of Engineers. The Development Review Board indicated during its review of the Sketch Plan application that it would support the reduction of the 50-foot buffer down to 25-feet in recognition of the apparent low quality of the wetlands. Under Article 12.02 Section 3 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, three criteria are to be considered in deciding whether to grant approval for these encroachments. A discussion of each of the criterion is outlined herein. (a)The encroachment(s) will not adversely affect the ability of the property to carry or store flood waters adequately The project will not adversely affect this function. The area is not in a flood zone and the proposed encroachment will not inhibit the carrying capacity of the existing small stream. The proposed areas of encroachment are on sloped portions of the land form which are not used for storage of large storm events. Therefore, storage capacity will not be decreased in any way. Drainage from the project site will be collected within the proposed stormwater infrastructure and directed to the proposed stormwater management facilities. (b)The encroachment(s) will not adversely affect the ability of the proposed stormwater treatment system to reduce sedimentation according to state standards. I understand that the project’s stormwater treatment plan is designed to meet the design requirements of the State Stormwater Manual. This grading approach for the project will reduce some of the overland flows into the small stream which may actually improve the existing stream and wetland’s treatment capabilities by reducing the peak flows. (c)The impact of the encroachment(s) on the specific wetland functions and values identified in the field delineation and wetland report is minimized and/or offset by 3 appropriate landscaping, stormwater treatment, stream buffering, and/or other mitigation measures. The proposed grading plan creates a physical separation of the proposed land use from the wetlands and stream. As such, the functions and values associated with this waterway will be suitably protected from the potential impacts of the proposed land use. Specifically, stormwater runoff, snow storage melt-off, lawn maintenance and related human activities will not likely impact the wetlands based upon the physical characteristics of the proposed site without appropriate levels of pretreatment. Unlike some scenarios where there would be no physical differentiation between the buffer and the remaining land use, this project creates an identifiable physical separation that is not easily altered. It is also important to note that a number of street trees are planned in the 50’ buffer zones as well; these will be beneficial to wetland functioning. Rye Associates Request for Waivers Page 1 of 5 January 16, 2014 Rye Associates Preliminary Plan Submittal January 16, 2014 Request for Waivers The following waivers are requested in support of the development of a neighborhood friendly roadway system and layout of a traditional village style environment. General Development Standards Section Title Description & Reason 3.06 Setbacks and Buffers C.Yards Abutting a Planned Street.Yards abutting a right-of-way designated for a planned public street shall (Swift Street Extension)have a minimum setback equal to the front setback requirement for the district in which the lot exists, unless the yards abut any of those streets listed in above, in Section 3.06.B in which case the minimum setback shall be fifty (50) feet from the edge of the planned right-of-way.With the assumption that the reference to “Swift Street” also means Swift Street Extension, the applicant seeks a waiver for Cottage buildings 7-1 and 7-7 (to 30’)and residential lots #22 and #23 (to 20’) and Commercial Lot #1 (to 30’) to achieve the goals set forth in the SEQ district guidelines. Section 3.06 (I) I. Buffer Strip for Non-Residential Uses Adjacent to Residential District Boundaries. of the LDR’s requires that (with comments italicized): (1) Where a new non-residential use is adjacent to or within fifty (50) feet of the boundary of a residential district (The proposed commercial parking lots and buildings are proposed to be located within 50’ of the VR zoning district line), or where an existing non-residential use, structure or parking area that is adjacent to or within fifty (50) feet of the boundary of a residential district is proposed to be expanded, altered or enlarged, the required side or rear setback shall be increased to sixty-five (65) feet (This would make use of the VC district for commercial use extremely limited) . A strip not less than fifteen (15) feet wide within the sixty- five (65) foot setback shall be landscaped with dense evergreens, fencing, and/or other Rye Associates Request for Waivers Page 2 of 5 January 16, 2014 plantings as a screen (Acknowledged). New external light fixtures shall not ordinarily be permitted within the fifteen (15) foot wide buffer area (Acknowledged).. (2) The Development Review Board may permit new or expanded nonresidential uses, structures and/or parking areas, and new external light fixtures, within the setback and/or buffer as set forth in (1) above (the applicant is seeking to have the ability to place parking 5 feet from the District Line), and may approve a modification of the width of the required setback and/or landscaped buffer as set forth in (1) above. In doing so the DRB shall find that the proposed lighting, landscaping and/or fencing to be provided adjacent to the boundary of the residential district will provide equivalent screening of the noise, light and visual impacts of the new non-residential use to that which would be provided by the standard setback and buffer requirements in (1) above (The proposed layout creates multi-family structures which are 105 feet from the proposed edge of the parking with street trees and a 50’ right-of-way and an additional 15-feet of green space eligible for landscaping placement). However in no case may the required side or rear setback be reduced below the standard requirement for the zoning district in which the non-residential use is located (The applicant is not seeking a waiver of the 20’ side or rear yards nor the new front yard requirement of 20’ with the creation of Rye Circle, however it should be noted that the commercial structures will be located as little as 6 feet from the district line.).In summary, the applicant seeks: A modification of the requirement that the required side or rear setback shall be increased to sixty-five (65) feet. In this case the applicant seeks a waiver indicating that the front yard setback shall be reduced to 20 feet when a street with a Rights-of-way width of at least 50’ is proposed between the residential use and the proposed commercial use. The side and rear lot setbacks shall otherwise be consistent with the SEQ-VC District requirements. Southeast Quadrant District Section Title Description & Reason 9.07 Dimensional Standards -In the Southeast quadrant District, all requirements of Article XXV governing lot size, density, frontage, and setbacks shall apply. The request is to waive the following requirements: A.Minimum radius of curves for Local streets from 200' to 50’ Appendix Table C-2 Dimensional Standards -The following waivers are requested to allow greater interaction between the proposed buildings in support of enhancing the fabric of the neighborhood. A.Single Family Minimum Lot Size from 12,000 SF to 9,937 SF.- B.Single Family Max. Building Coverage from 15% to 20%for all lots. Rye Associates Request for Waivers Page 3 of 5 January 16, 2014 C.Single Family Max. Lot Coverage from 30% to 42%for Lot 7. D.Single Family Front Yard Setback from 20' to 10' (Cottage Units 6-1 & 6-2 off of Edgewood Drive). E.Single Family Rear Yard Setback from 30' to 20’(Cottage Units 7-2 thru 7-6). F.Multi-Family Max. Building Coverage from 15% to 28%for Lot 6. G.Multi-Family Max. Lot Coverage from 30%to 55%for Lot 6. H.Commercial Lot Coverage from 30% to 54% for all lots except for Lot 3 which shall be 63% I.Commercial Building Coverage from 15% to 21%for all lots except for Lot 3 which shall be 26% J.PUD Lot Coverage to Exclude City Recreation Paths. 9.07 Regulating Plans B. General Provisions (2) All residential lots created on or after the effective date of this bylaw in any SEQ subdistrict 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 applicant seeks a waiver to reflect the fact that certain lots do not conform the recommended values. Specifically waivers are requested for Lots, 6,7,8,15,16,17 and 30. The calculated ratios are outlined below. Lot depth to Width Ratios Lot #Depth Width Ratio 6 250.3 571.0 0.44 7 163.9 310.0 0.53 8 216.7 165.7 1.31 15 132.5 75.0 1.77 16 132.5 75.0 1.77 17 87.5 211.6 0.41 30 167.1 40.5 4.13 9.09 SEQ-VR Sub-District; Specific Standards &Dimensional Standards (A)(2)Interconnection of Streets (a) Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 400 feet.Applicant seeks waiver to reflect minimization of street intersections on future collector road (Swift Street Extension). 9.10 SEQ-VC Sub-District; Specific Regulations (1)Development blocks.Development block lengths should range between 200 and 300 linear feet; see Figure 9-2 for example. Blocks 300 feet or longer Rye Associates Request for Waivers Page 4 of 5 January 16, 2014 must include mid-block public sidewalk or recreation path connections.The applicant seeks a waiver from the absolute values to reflect the commercial use on the east side where the curb cuts to Hinesburg Road are to be minimized, to the south where the pre-existing development pattern precludes the inclusion of addition intersections, and to the north where again, curb cuts on to future collector streets are to be minimized. The west side proposes the inclusion of a “mid” block pedestrian connector. (2)Interconnection of Streets (a) Average intersection spacing shall be 200 to 300 feet.The applicant is not proposing any new streets within the Village Commercial district. D. Design Standards for Non-Residential Land Uses in the SEQ-VC Sub- District (3)Building Setbacks.New buildings with commercial uses must be built to a ‘build-to line’ established no less than fifteen feet (15’) and no more than twenty feet (20’) from the edge of the curb. The area between the building and the curb shall provide for convenient pedestrian access via sidewalk or recreation path; see Section 9.10(C)(1) above. Parking is prohibited between the building and the sidewalk.As the Development Review Board expressed its’ desire to orient the commercial buildings with the interior of the PUD and not Hinesburg Road, the applicant seeks a waiver for all of the commercial lots as this will conflict with the requirements of section 9.11(B)(2). 9.11 Supplemental Standards for Arterial and Collector Streets A.Setbacks.The minimum front setbacks from Dorset Street, Old Cross Road, Nowland Farm Road, Hinesburg Road, Swift Street,Swift Street Extension, and Old Cross Road Extension, shall be as set forth in Section 3.06(B) (1) and (2) of these Regulations (see below). B. Building Orientation along Arterial and Collector Streets. (1)New developments with frontage on Dorset Street, Old Cross Road/Nowland Farm Road, or Swift Street, or which have the potential to include frontage along Swift Street Extension or Old Cross Road Extension, shall maintain a setback of twenty feet (20’) from the edge of the planned right-of-way.No issue, this is acceptable. (2)New developments with frontage on Hinesburg Road shall maintain a setback of forty feet (40’) from the edge of the planned right-of-way. Rye Associates Request for Waivers Page 5 of 5 January 16, 2014 The applicant seeks a waiver from 40-feet to 23-feet to enable the comprehensive planning and interconnection of the parking infrastructure serving the commercial buildings in the narrow VC district area. D. Design Standards for Non-Residential Land Uses in the SEQ-VC Sub-District (4) Parking (a)Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 13 of these Regulations, each non- residential use shall provide three (3) off-street parking spaces per 1,000 gross square feet. The DRB may grant a parking waiver in conformance with Section 13.1(N)(3). Lot 1 has a GSF of 5,000 thereby requiring 15 parking spaces. The applicant is proposing 14 spaces on the Lot with the understanding that the parking lot as proposed will be extended and shared with other commercial buildings. The applicant seeks a waiver for 1 parking space with the recognition that there is ample nearby on-street parking for day time use of this commercial property. 13.01 Off Street Parking and Loading N. Exemptions, Waivers, and Modifications of Requirements. (2) Waivers.Where the Development Review Board determines that a proposed land use or structure is adequately served by existing or proposed parking facilities, the Development Review Board may waive the off-street parking space requirements stipulated in Tables 13-1 through 13-6, by no more than twenty-five percent (25%). The7 cottages shown on Lot 8 depict 13 parking spaces. As residential uses require 2 paces per unit for a total of 14, the applicant seeks a waiver of 1 parking space for this Lot in recognition that the small size of the unit will yield a smaller demand than the typical single family home. Rye Associates Master Plan Request for Waivers Page 1 of 4 January 16, 2014 Rye Associates -Master Plan January 16, 2014 Request for Waivers The following waivers are requested in support of the development of a neighborhood friendly roadway system and layout of a traditional village style environment. General Development Standards Section Title Description & Reason 3.06 Setbacks and Buffers C.Yards Abutting a Planned Street.Yards abutting a right-of-way designated for a planned public street shall (Swift Street Extension)have a minimum setback equal to the front setback requirement for the district in which the lot exists, unless the yards abut any of those streets listed in above, in Section 3.06.B in which case the minimum setback shall be fifty (50) feet from the edge of the planned right-of-way.With the assumption that the reference to “Swift Street” also means Swift Street Extension, the applicant seeks a waiver for Cottage buildings 7-1 and 7-7 (to 30’)and residential lots #22 and #23 (to 20’) and Commercial Lot #1 (to 30’) to achieve the goals set forth in the SEQ district guidelines. Section 3.06 (I) I. Buffer Strip for Non-Residential Uses Adjacent to Residential District Boundaries. of the LDR’s requires that (with comments italicized): (1) Where a new non-residential use is adjacent to or within fifty (50) feet of the boundary of a residential district (The proposed commercial parking lots and buildings are proposed to be located within 50’ of the VR zoning district line), or where an existing non-residential use, structure or parking area that is adjacent to or within fifty (50) feet of the boundary of a residential district is proposed to be expanded, altered or enlarged, the required side or rear setback shall be increased to sixty-five (65) feet (This would make use of the VC district for commercial use extremely limited) . A strip not less than fifteen (15) feet wide within the sixty- five (65) foot setback shall be landscaped with dense evergreens, fencing, and/or other plantings as a screen (Acknowledged). New external light fixtures shall not ordinarily be permitted within the fifteen (15) foot wide buffer area (Acknowledged).. Rye Associates Master Plan Request for Waivers Page 2 of 4 January 16, 2014 (2) The Development Review Board may permit new or expanded nonresidential uses, structures and/or parking areas, and new external light fixtures, within the setback and/or buffer as set forth in (1) above (the applicant is seeking to have the ability to place parking 5 feet from the District Line), and may approve a modification of the width of the required setback and/or landscaped buffer as set forth in (1) above. In doing so the DRB shall find that the proposed lighting, landscaping and/or fencing to be provided adjacent to the boundary of the residential district will provide equivalent screening of the noise, light and visual impacts of the new non-residential use to that which would be provided by the standard setback and buffer requirements in (1) above (The proposed layout creates multi-family structures which are 105 feet from the proposed edge of the parking with street trees and a 50’ right-of-way and an additional 15-feet of green space eligible for landscaping placement). However in no case may the required side or rear setback be reduced below the standard requirement for the zoning district in which the non-residential use is located (The applicant is not seeking a waiver of the 20’ side or rear yards nor the new front yard requirement of 20’ with the creation of Rye Circle, however it should be noted that the commercial structures will be located as little as 6 feet from the district line.).In summary, the applicant seeks: A modification of the requirement that the required side or rear setback shall be increased to sixty-five (65) feet. In this case the applicant seeks a waiver indicating that the front yard setback shall be reduced to 20 feet when a street with a Rights-of-way width of at least 50’ is proposed between the residential use and the proposed commercial use. The side and rear lot setbacks shall otherwise be consistent with the SEQ-VC District requirements. Southeast Quadrant District Section Title Description & Reason 9.07 Dimensional Standards -In the Southeast quadrant District, all requirements of Article XXV governing lot size, density, frontage, and setbacks shall apply. The request is to waive the following requirements: A.Minimum radius of curves for Local streets from 200' to 50’ Appendix Table C-2 Dimensional Standards -The following waivers are requested to allow greater interaction between the proposed buildings in support of enhancing the fabric of the neighborhood. A.Single Family Minimum Lot Size from 12,000 SF to 9,937 SF.- B.Single Family Max. Building Coverage from 15% to 20%for all lots. C.Single Family Max. Lot Coverage from 30% to 42%for Lot 7. D.Single Family Front Yard Setback from 20' to 10' (Cottage Units 6-1 & 6-2 off of Edgewood Drive). Rye Associates Master Plan Request for Waivers Page 3 of 4 January 16, 2014 E.Single Family Rear Yard Setback from 30' to 20’(Cottage Units 7-2 thru 7-6). F.Multi-Family Max. Building Coverage from 15% to 28%for Lot 6. G.Multi-Family Max. Lot Coverage from 30% to 55%for Lot 6. H.Commercial Lot Coverage from 30%to 54% for all lots except for Lot 3 which shall be 63% I.Commercial Building Coverage from 15% to 21%for all lots except for Lot 3 which shall be 26% J.PUD Lot Coverage to Exclude City Recreation Paths. 9.09 SEQ-VR Sub-District; Specific Standards &Dimensional Standards (A)(2)Interconnection of Streets (a) Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 400 feet.Applicant seeks waiver to reflect minimization of street intersections on future collector road (Swift Street Extension). 9.10 SEQ-VC Sub-District; Specific Regulations (1)Development blocks.Development block lengths should range between 200 and 300 linear feet; see Figure 9-2 for example. Blocks 300 feet or longer must include mid-block public sidewalk or recreation path connections.The applicant seeks a waiver from the absolute values to reflect the commercial use on the east side where the curb cuts to Hinesburg Road are to be minimized, to the south where the pre-existing development pattern precludes the inclusion of addition intersections, and to the north where again, curb cuts on to future collector streets are to be minimized. The west side proposes the inclusion of a “mid” block pedestrian connector. (2)Interconnection of Streets (a) Average intersection spacing shall be 200 to 300 feet.The applicant is not proposing any new streets within the Village Commercial district. D. Design Standards for Non-Residential Land Uses in the SEQ-VC Sub- District (3)Building Setbacks.New buildings with commercial uses must be built to a ‘build-to line’ established no less than fifteen feet (15’) and no more than twenty feet (20’) from the edge of the curb. The area between the building and the curb shall provide for convenient pedestrian access via sidewalk or recreation path; see Section 9.10(C)(1) above. Parking is prohibited between Rye Associates Master Plan Request for Waivers Page 4 of 4 January 16, 2014 the building and the sidewalk.As the Development Review Board expressed its’ desire to orient the commercial buildings with the interior of the PUD and not Hinesburg Road, the applicant seeks a waiver for all of the commercial lots as this will conflict with the requirements of section 9.11(B)(2). 9.11 Supplemental Standards for Arterial and Collector Streets A.Setbacks.The minimum front setbacks from Dorset Street, Old Cross Road, Nowland Farm Road, Hinesburg Road, Swift Street,Swift Street Extension, and Old Cross Road Extension, shall be as set forth in Section 3.06(B) (1) and (2) of these Regulations (see below). B. Building Orientation along Arterial and Collector Streets. (1)New developments with frontage on Dorset Street, Old Cross Road/Nowland Farm Road, or Swift Street, or which have the potential to include frontage along Swift Street Extension or Old Cross Road Extension, shall maintain a setback of twenty feet (20’) from the edge of the planned right-of-way.No issue, this is acceptable. (2)New developments with frontage on Hinesburg Road shall maintain a setback of forty feet (40’) from the edge of the planned right-of-way. The applicant seeks a waiver from 40-feet to 23-feet to enable the comprehensive planning and interconnection of the parking infrastructure serving the commercial buildings in the narrow VC district area. From: Brian Bertsch [mailto:bbertsch@olearyburke.com] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2014 10:01 AM To: ray Cc: Jeff@peckelectric.com; Joshl@gmes.com Subject: 4090 Williston Road Hi Ray, The applicants at 4090 Williston Road would like to request a continuance on their site plan amendment application scheduled for Tuesday January 21st. If there is room on agenda for the February 18th Development Review Board Meeting they would like to be postponed until then. The extra time will allow us to try and resolve some of the parking issues prior to going before the board. Please let me know if you have any questions or need anything else from us to process this request. Thanks, Brian Brian J. Bertsch, P.E., CPESC | Project Manager O’Leary-Burke Civil Associates 1 Corporate Drive, Suite 1, Essex Jct., VT 05452 p. (802) 878-9990x106 | bbertsch@olearyburke.com SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Pending Applications ___________________________________________ - 1 - - Last updated – January 17, 2014 Please note that the tentative schedule is indeed tentative. Items are subject to, and frequently do, change. The tentative schedule is also not indicative of the order in which items will be placed on the agenda. JANUARY 21, 2014 (@ PD) 1. Site plan application #SP-13-66 of Malone Properties, Inc. to amend a previously approved plan for a 54,480 sq. ft. shopping center. The amendment consists of adding two (2) utility cabinets, 150 & 166 Dorset Street. 2. Design review application #DR-13-06 of Malone Properties, Inc. to install two (2) utility cabinets, 150 & 166 Dorset Street. 3. Preliminary & final plat application #SD-13-41 of Malone Dorset Street Properties, LLC to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of: 1) a 33,733 sq. ft. gfa building with 31,351 sq. ft. (including mezzanine) of retail food establishment use and 2,382 sq. ft. of short-order restaurant use, 2) a 12,800 sq. ft. building for retail food use, and 3) a 14,000 sq. ft. building for retail use. The amendment consists of: 1) resubdividing the lots into three (3) lots, and 2) site modifications including lighting, and architectural revisions to buildings #1 & #2 ,200 and 222 Dorset Street & 59 Garden Street. 4. Continued preliminary plat application #SD-13-22 & Master plan application #MP-13-01 of Rye Associates to subdivide an 18.01 acre parcel into 30 lots for development of:1) 36 single family dwellings, 2) four (4) 4-unit multi-family dwellings, and 3) four (4) commercial buildings totaling 20,000 sq. ft., 1075 Hinesburg Road. 5. Site plan application #SP-13-67 of Peck Electric seeking after-the-fact approval to amend a previously approved site plan for a 6,400 sq. ft. building used for contractor or building trade facility use. The amendment consists of site modifications relating to parking, outside storage and dumpster storage, 4090 Williston Road. FEBRUARY 4, 2014 1. Continued master plan application #MP-11-03 & preliminary plat application #SD-11-51 of Farrell Real Estate for a planned unit development on 25.91 acres developed with two (2) single family dwellings. The project consists of: 1) razing one (1) single family dwelling, 2) constructing 24 single family dwellings, and 3) constructing 21 two (2) family dwellings, 1302, 1340, and 1350 Spear St. (applicant has requested that this item be continued to a future meeting). SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Pending Applications ___________________________________________ - 2 - 2. Sketch plan application #SD-13-42 of Wedgewood Development Corporation for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) six (6) two-family dwellings, and 2) three (3) single family lots, 232 Autumn Hill Road. 3. Preliminary plat application #SD-13-44 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) 23 single family units, 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. 4. Continued preliminary & final plat application #SD-13-39 of Super-Temp Realty Company, Inc. for a planned unit development to construct a 27,500 sq. ft. light manufacturing facility, 104 Bowdoin Street. 5. Continued sketch plan application #SD-13-36 of Elizabeth & Joel Bradley for a planned unit development to add one (1) dwelling unit to an accessory structure on two (2) lots developed with a retail building and a mixed use building (general office, personal service & 4 dwelling units), 1197 & 1203 Williston Road. 6. Conditional use application #CU-13-07 of Laura J. Waters & William L. Smith to create a 400 sq. ft. accessory residential unit and construct an exterior staircase to access the new accessory unit, 50 Central Avenue. FEBRUARY 18, 2014 1. Continued sketch plan application #SD-13-40 of The Snyder Pointe Limited Partnership to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of 32 single family dwellings. The amendment consists of removing one (1) single family dwelling and replacing it with four (4) single family dwellings, 111 Upswept Lane. 2. Site plan application #SP-13-68 of Stonington Circle Owners Association, Inc. for after-the-fact approval to amend a previously approved 47 unit multi-family unit development. The amendment consists of the removal of five (5) White Pine trees and replacement with six (6) Eastern White Cedar trees, Stonington Circle. 3. Preliminary & final plat application #SD-13-43 F + M Development Co., LLC to amend a previously approved planned unit development (PUD) consisting of: 1) a 41,000 sq. ft. general office building, 2) a 30 unit multi-family dwelling & 3,700 sq. ft. of light manufacturing use, 3) a 63 unit multi-family dwelling, and 4) a 47 unit congregate housing facility (not yet constructed). The amendment consists of: 1) subdividing an adjacent 5.20 acre parcel developed with a television studio into two (2) lots of 4.02 acres & 1.18 acres, 2) incorporating the 1.18 acre parcel into the existing PUD, and 3) converting the approved but not constructed 47 SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Pending Applications ___________________________________________ - 3 - unit congregate housing building into a 54 unit multi-family dwelling, 80 Eastwood Drive & 30 Joy Drive. MARCH 4, 2014 MARCH 18, 2014 1. Sketch plan application #SD-14-02 of Wedgewood Development Corporation for a planned unit development on parcel “F” of the Highlands Development subdivision consisting of: 1) seven (7) single family dwellings, and 2) two (2) two-family dwellings, Dorset Street & Foulsham Hollow Road.