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 - 03/04/2014
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MARCH 04, 2014 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 04 March 2014, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: T. Barritt, Chair; M. Behr, B. Miller, Art Klugo, D. Parsons, J. Smith ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; D. Burke, J. Caffrey, J. & E. Bradley, P. Sheppard, P. Brogna, T. Sheppard 1. Sketch plan application #SD-14-03 of Thomas & Pamela Meaker to resubdivide two (2) adjoining lots such that one lot will be reduced in area and the other lot will be increased in area, 21 & 25 Gilbert Street. The Chair opened the hearing. The Board and the applicant discussed the project. The public was invited to comment on the application. No further action was taken. 2. Continued 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 unit congregate housing building into a 54 unit multi-family dwelling, 80 Eastwood Drive & 30 Joy Drive. The Chair opened the hearing. The Board and the applicant discussed the project. The public was invited to comment on the application. A motion was made, seconded and approved to close #SD-13-43. 3. Conditional use application #CU-14-01 & site plan review application #SP-14-04 of Mt. Mansfield Television, Inc. to amend a previously approved plan for a television studio. The amendment consists of relocating an eight (8) foot diameter microwave dish (antenna) from the roof of the building to an existing monopole tower at 65 feet in height, 30 Joy Drive. The Chair opened the hearing. The Board and the applicant discussed the project. The public was invited to comment on the application. A motion was made, seconded and approved to close #CU-14-01 & #SP-14-04. 4. Sketch plan application #SD-14-01 of Willowbrook Homes, LLC for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) the subdivision of a 29.39 acre parcel developed with one (1) single family dwelling into two (2) lots of 5.3 acres and 24.09 acres and, 2) developing the 5.3 acre parcel with nine (9) single family dwellings, 1675 Dorset Street. The Chair opened the hearing. The Board and the applicant discussed the project. The public was invited to comment on the application. No further action was taken. 5. Sketch plan application #SD-14-04 of Blackbay Ventures VIII, LLC for a planned unit development to: 1) remove an existing single family dwelling, 2) construct four (4) three (3) unit multi-family dwellings, and 3) establish disputed boundary line with adjoining property, 135 Hinesburg Road. The Chair opened the hearing. The Board and the applicant discussed the project. The public was invited to comment on the application. No further action was taken. 6. Preliminary & final plat application #SD-14-05 of Greenfield Capital, LLC to amend a previously approved 14,878 sq. ft. light manufacturing facility. The amendment consists of constructing a 25,840 sq. ft. addition, 35 Thompson Street (the applicant has requested that this item be continued to a future meeting). The Chair opened the hearing. The Board and the applicant discussed the project. The public was invited to comment on the application. A motion was made, seconded and approved to continue #SD-14-05 to 15 April 2014. 7. Other Business: No issues were raised. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m. Clerk's Signature , Clerk December 15, 2015, Date Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Development Review Board\Staff Comments\2014\ SD_14_03_21&25GilbertSt_Meaker DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: February 25, 2014 Application received: January 10, 2014 AGENDA ITEM #2 21 & 25 Gilbert Street Sketch Plan Application #SD-14-03 Meeting date: March 4, 2014 Applicants/Owners Thomas and Pamela Meaker 21 Gilbert Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Property Information Tax Parcel ID Residential 4 District PROJECT DESCRIPTION Sketch plan application #SD-14-03 of Thomas & Pamela Meeker to resubdivide two (2) adjoining lots such that one lot will be reduced in area and the other lot will be increased in area, 21 & 25 Gilbert Street. COMMENTS Administrative Officer Ray Belair and Planner Temporary Assignment Lee Krohn, AICP (“Staff”) have reviewed the plans submitted on January 10, 2014, and offer the following comments. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements: Residential 4 Zoning District Required Existing Proposed Min. Lot Size 9500 S.F. 26,080 and 24,503 S.F 40,241 and 10,342 S.F. Max. Building Coverage 20% 7.6% and 6.4% 5.5% and 15.2% Max. Overall Coverage 40% 10% and 10.6% 6.5% and 25.2% Min. Front Setback 30 ft 26.6 ft and 14.8 ft No change Min. Side Setback 10 ft. 11.7 ft and 8.1 ft No change Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. > 30 ft No change, and 30.7 ft ? Max. Building Height 25/28 ft. Unknown No change Pre-existing non-complying Zoning compliance The proposed changes in land area are as follows: Location Existing land area Proposed land area 21 Gilbert Street: 26,080 sq ft 40,241 sq ft 25 Gilbert Street: 24,503 sq ft 10,342 sq ft CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING Both lots will remain conforming with minimum lot size requirements. Nothing else changes in regard to existing conformance or lack thereof with the LDRs, and no nonconformance would be increased or created by this change in lot size and boundary. No actual development upon the land is proposed; this is just moving the boundary between these two adjoining lots. A proper survey and table has been submitted to illustrate and explain all aspects of this proposal. 15.18 Criteria for Review of PUDs, Subdivisions and Master Plans A. General Standards. In all zoning districts of the City, the DRB shall make findings of fact on a PUD, subdivision and/or Master Plan in keeping with the standards for approval of subdivisions in Article 15 and/or site plans and conditional uses in Article 14. PUD, subdivision and Master Plan applications in the Central District shall meet the standards and criteria applicable in the appropriate sub-district and shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goals for the City Center. For PUD, subdivision and/or Master Plan applications within the SEQ, IO and R1-Lakeshore districts, the DRB shall also make positive findings with respect to the project’s compliance with the specific criteria in this section. The general standards applicable to all PUDs, subdivisions and Master Plans are: (1) Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity is available meet the needs of the project in conformance with applicable State and City requirements, as evidenced by a City water allocation, City wastewater allocation, and/or Vermont Water and Wastewater Permit from the Department of Environmental Conservation. (2) Sufficient grading and erosion controls will be utilized during construction and after construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties. In making this finding, the DRB may rely on evidence that the project will be covered under the General Permit for Construction issued by the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. (3) The project incorporates access, circulation and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unreasonable congestion of adjacent roads. In making this finding the DRB may rely on the findings of a traffic study submitted by the applicant, and the findings of any technical review by City staff or consultants. (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. In making this finding the DRB shall utilize the provisions of Article 12 of these Regulations related to wetlands and stream buffers, and may seek comment from the Natural Resources Committee with respect to the project’s impact on natural resources. (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 his designee to insure that adequate fire protection can be provided, with the standards for approval including, but not be limited to, minimum distance between structures, street width, vehicular access from two directions where possible, looping of water lines, water flow and pressure, and number and location of hydrants. All aspects of fire protection systems shall be designed and installed in accordance with applicable codes in all areas served by municipal water. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING (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 properties. (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, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. (10) The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s). These subdivision criteria are all more applicable to new development than to a case like this, where no new development upon the land is proposed. These criteria have all been considered and reviewed, and Staff suggests these are all “N/A”. This application is complete and ready to proceed to proceed to preliminary and final plat review. Respectfully submitted, ________________________________ Raymond J. Belair, Administrative Officer CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD F:\USERS\Planning & Zoning\Development Review Board\Staff Comments\2013\SD_13_43_80EastwoodDrive_prelimfinal DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: February 14, 2014 Application received: December 11, 2013 F&M DEVELOPMENT CO. – 80 EASTWOOD DRIVE & 30 JOY DRIVE PRELIMINARY & FINAL PLAT APPLICATION #SD-13-43 Agenda # 3 Meeting Date: March 4, 2014 Owner/Applicant F&M Development Co. P.O. Box 1335 Burlington, VT 05402 Engineer Civil Engineering Associates 10 Mansfield View Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 Property Information Tax Parcel 0617-00080 1.25 acres C-1-R-15 Zoning District Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_13_43_80EastwoodDrive_prelimfinal.doc PROJECT DESCRIPTION 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 5.21 acre parcel developed with a television studio into two (2) lots of 4.03 acres & 1.18 acres, 2) incorporating the 1.18 acre parcel into the existing PUD, and 3) converting the approved but not constructed 47 unit congregate housing building into a 54 unit multi-family dwelling, 80 Eastwood Drive & 30 Joy Drive. COMMENTS Administrative Officer Ray Belair and Planner, Temporary Assignment Lee Krohn, AICP, referred to herein as Staff, have reviewed the application submitted on December 11, 2013, and offer the following comments. The changes from the prior approval include: 1) subdividing an adjacent 5.21 acre parcel developed with a television studio into two (2) lots of 4.03 acres & 1.18 acres, 2) incorporating the 1.18 acre parcel into this existing PUD, and 3) converting the approved but not constructed 47 unit congregate housing building into a 54 unit multi-family dwelling, 80 Eastwood Drive & 30 Joy Drive. This application was continued from the February 18th meeting in order to provide the applicant an opportunity to make modifications to the plans recommended by the Board and to correct the method by which the average pre-construction grade is calculated. The changes made to the plans since the last meeting are as follows: The GMP transformer along Joy Drive was moved to comply with the five (5) foot setback requirement and includes the required landscaping buffer. The curb cut and service drive off from Joy Drive was eliminated and replaced with a pull-off parallel parking space and pedestrian sidewalk to the building. An accessible route was provided to the dog park by eliminating the stairs through the retaining wall. The accurate building height was calculated based on the correct method of calculating the average pre-construction grade. The materials for the construction of the retaining wall has been included. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements Table 1. Dimensional Requirements C-1, R-15 Zoning District Required Proposed ◊ Residential Density 15 units per acre (131 units) 146 units CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_13_43_80EastwoodDrive_prelimfinal.doc Max. Building Coverage 40% 12.4 % Max. Overall Coverage 70% 43.75 % Min. Front Setback (Eastwood Drive) 30 ft. 115 ft. * Min. Front Setback (Joy Drive) 30 ft. 25 ft. Min. Side Setback 10 ft. > 10 ft. Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. > 30 ft. * Max Building Height and Max. Stories 35 ft. / 4 stories 62.31 ft. / 5 stories zoning compliance ◊ Exceeds allowance; density bonus requested *Non-compliant, waivers requested (5’ decrease in front yard setback, 27.31’ height increase). The applicant seeks a 27.31 ft. height waiver (35’ max height + 27.31 waiver = 62.31 ft.). SUBDIVISION CRITERIA Pursuant to Section 15.18 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, subdivisions shall comply with the following standards and conditions: Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity is available to meet the needs of the project. According to Section 15.13 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, the existing public water system shall be extended so as to provide the necessary quantity of water, at acceptable pressure. Applicant had received preliminary wastewater approval with the previous project approval. The current application presents no increase in wastewater demand compared with that prior approval. 1. The applicant shall obtain final wastewater allocation prior to issuance of a zoning permit. Sufficient grading and erosion controls will be utilized during and after construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties. The applicant has included sufficient site grading and erosion control plans as part of this application. 2. The proposed project shall adhere to standards for erosion control as set forth in Section 16.03 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. In addition, the grading plan shall meet the standards set forth in Section 16.04 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. The project incorporates access, circulation, and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unreasonable congestion of adjacent roads. Access to the subject lot is proposed via an existing driveway off of Eastwood Drive and an existing driveway off of Joy Drive. In addition, a service drive is proposed off from Joy Drive to serve the new building. 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. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_13_43_80EastwoodDrive_prelimfinal.doc There are no unique natural features on the site. There are no impact resources identified in the Open Space Strategy. 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. The proposed building is compatible with those already built in the PUD and the area and the proposed use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning District. See further discussion of the height waiver request below. 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. The proposal sites a community garden, picnic table and grill area and a dog park to serve the PUD’s residents along the northeast edge of the parcel. This abuts the undeveloped northwest portion of the 30 Joy Drive/WCAX property. 3. The Board should confirm that these amenities are available to all owners/occupants of the entire PUD. 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. The Fire Chief has reviewed the plans and provided comments via email dated 6/7/13 to staff with the following recommendations: 1. Compliance with all requirements of Vermont Fire and Building Safety Code . 2. Automatic sprinklers and alarm system as required. 3. Fire Department Sprinkler Connection location to be specified by SBFD. 4. Fire Alarm panel and enunciator location to be specified by SBFD. 5. Provide 24 hour per day off-site (central station) monitoring of all fire alarm and protection systems. 6. Provide an emergency key box(s), location to be specified by SBFD. 7. Elevator car(s) to be sized large enough to accommodate an ambulance stretcher in the flat position. 8. Trees, fences and floral outcroppings should be placed so as not to interfere with the deployment of the aerial ladder, hose lines, portable ladders and other firefighting equipment. 9. There are access points and driveways within this plan which are not designed to provide adequate turning radii for responding fire apparatus. All such driveways and street corners shall meet a minimum of the WB 40 straight standard. The South Burlington Fire Marshall has indicated that no additional comments are needed. 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. The project will connect to existing water, sewer and stormwater infrastructure and will not impact the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent landowners. As a condition by the PUD’s current CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_13_43_80EastwoodDrive_prelimfinal.doc Final Plat Approval, the project will construct a new 5 ft. wide concrete sidewalk on the north side of Joy Drive adjacent to the Burlington Indoor Tennis Club, Inc. property which is currently used by a large day care facility. Roads, utilities, sidewalks, recreation paths, and lighting are designed in a manner that is consistent with City utility and roadway plans and maintenance standards. Staff has already noted that the City Engineer shall review the preliminary & final plat plans and provide comments prior to approval of the preliminary & final plat application. The City Engineer has commented in an email dated 2/18/14 to staff that he has no comments on the modified plan. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s). The proposed project and subdivision appear to conform with the South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. Aside from the subdivision itself, conversion in type of housing, and slight increase in number of dwelling units, the project is little changed from the previous approval. The proposed subdivision between this property and the adjoining lot owned and developed by Mt. Mansfield Television, Inc. (WCAX) also warrants review. The proposed subdivision would take from WCAX and give to Farrell 1.18+- acres of undeveloped land. This gives Farrell a total of 2.43+- acres of land for PUD lot #4, and leaves WCAX with 4.03 acres. While this adds to the developable density as proposed by Farrell, the applicant has also provided information confirming that the WCAX property will remain in conformance with the LDRs after the 1.18 acres are transferred. AFFORDABLE HOUSING – SECTION 13.14 A density bonus of 16 dwelling units is sought here, based on 50% of those units (rounded up to 8) being perpetually affordable. An “Affordable Housing Plan” has been submitted, which explains the density bonus calculation, as well as specific details of the size and nature of the affordable units and the income levels for which these units are intended. The DRB should require that the affordable housing covenant as approved by the City Attorney in 2011 be attached as a condition of any approval issued for this project, and be recorded in the land records before any zoning permits are issued for site work or construction. Having the City Attorney review this covenant under current needs and law would be prudent The subject property is 8.76 acres and so the maximum base density is 131 units. The applicant is proposing 147 units total or 16 additional units. This is within the 25% increase permitted via the Land Development Regulations cited above. As this increase creates an additional 16 units over the base maximum allowed, eight (8) units must meet the affordability criteria listed in Section 13.14 of the Land Development Regulations. Prior to recording of the final plat, and pursuant to Section 13.12(D) (3) (c), the applicant shall submit a plan detailing the affordable housing proposed as part of the PUD. The plan shall “include a mechanism acceptable to the City Attorney for controlling resale and re-tenanting the individual affordable housing units that ensures that the unit will remain affordable in perpetuity.” CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_13_43_80EastwoodDrive_prelimfinal.doc D. Criteria for Awarding Density Increase. In addition to the standards found in Article 15, Planned Unit Development and Article 14, Site Plan and Conditional Use Review, the following standards shall guide the Development Review Board: (1) The density upon which a bonus may be based shall be the total acreage of the property in question multiplied by the maximum residential density per acre for the applicable zoning district or districts. (2) Within the Residential 1 and Residential 2 zoning districts, the provisions of this Section 13.14 shall apply only to properties of five (5) acres or more, and the maximum allowable residential density with or without such a density increase shall be four (4) dwelling units per acre. (3) Development Standards. (a) Distribution. The affordable housing units shall be physically integrated into the design of the development in a manner satisfactory to the Development Review Board and shall be distributed among the housing types in the proposed housing development in the same proportion as all other units in the development, unless a different proportion is approved by the Development Review Board as being better related to the housing needs, current or projected, of the City of South Burlington. (b) Minimum Floor Area. Minimum gross floor area per affordable dwelling unit shall not be less than comparable market-rate units in the housing development. (c) Plan for Continued Affordability. Affordable housing units shall be available for sale, resale or continuing rental only to qualified below market rate households. The plan shall include a mechanism acceptable to the City Attorney for controlling resale and re-tenanting the individual affordable housing units that ensures that the unit will remain affordable in perpetuity. The City of South Burlington may as needed set a cap on resale prices such that the resale price must not exceed an appreciation on equity of a set percentage. (4) Administration. The City of South Burlington Housing Authority, if any, or a bona fide qualified non-profit organization shall be responsible for the on-going administration of the affordable housing units as well as for the promulgation of such rules and regulations as may be necessary to implement this program. The Housing Authority or non-profit organization will determine and implement eligibility priorities, continuing eligibility standards and enforcement, and rental and sales procedures. E. Housing Types. The dwelling units may at the discretion of the Development Review Board be of varied types including one-family, two-family, or multi-family construction, and studio, one-bedroom, two-bedroom, and three-bedroom apartment construction. The language above states that the affordable housing plan shall be presented to and reviewed by the Development Review Board for their approval. As such, this must be completed prior to final plat approval. Prior to recording of the final plat, and pursuant to Section 13.14(D) the applicant shall submit a plan detailing the 14 units of affordable housing proposed as part of the PUD. The plan shall “include a mechanism acceptable to the City Attorney for controlling resale and re-tenanting the individual affordable housing units that ensures that the unit will remain affordable in perpetuity.” The dispersion and method of financing and control shall be as prescribed in the affordable housing plan submitted by the applicant as CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_13_43_80EastwoodDrive_prelimfinal.doc part of the final plat application (titled The Olympiad…Affordable Housing Plan, marked as Exhibit A by staff). The plan illustrates the distribution and minimum floor area proposed. It is staff position that the proposed distribution of unit types meets and exceeds the overall mix of housing types in the building. The eight (8) affordable units are made up of the following types: One-Bedroom – 6 (75%) Two-Bedroom – 2 (25%) The average size of the eight (8) units is approximately 790 sf. Of the 16 allowable “bonus” units, 50% or eight (8) units are required to be perpetually “affordable”. The “affordable” units are specifically designated within the proposed building. The designated affordable housing units are as follows: 80 Eastwood Drive Unit 110 – 2-Bedroom (950 sf) Unit 205 – 1-Bedroom (750 sf) Unit 210 – 2 Bedroom (950 sf) Unit 207 – 1-Bedroom (750 sf) Unit 103 – 1-Bedroom (750 sf) Unit 105 – 1-Bedroom (665 sf) Unit 107 – 1-Bedroom (750 sf) Unit 203 – 1-Bedroom (750 sf) Floor plans for each building are attached for reference. The average size of the eight (8) “affordable” units is 790 sf. Affordable Rent Levels The affordable units will be rented to inhabitants whose gross annual household income does not exceed 65% of the county median income, as defined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Affairs, and the total annual cost of the housing, including rent, utilities, and condominium fees (if any), is not more than 30% of the household’s gross annual income. Affordable Sale Price Levels In the event the property were converted to a condominium form of ownership and the units are sold off, then the affordable units will be sold to inhabitants whose gross annual household income does not exceed 80% of the county median income, as defined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Affairs, and the total annual cost of the housing, including principal, interest, taxes and insurance, is not more than 30% of the household’s gross annual income. Administrative Oversight The property owner will contract with the Champlain Housing Trust, or a Municipal Housing Authority, if one is established by the city, to provide annual monitoring and certification of the continued compliance with the above referenced guidelines and restrictions. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 8 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_13_43_80EastwoodDrive_prelimfinal.doc Affordability Covenant To guarantee the compliance and enforcement of the above referenced guidelines and restrictions, in perpetuity, the property owner will record in the land records, a HOUSING SUBSIDY COVENANT in a form and substance satisfactory to the City Attorney, and Restrictive Covenant setting for the formulas for establishing the affordable rents and sale prices. This document was approved by the City Attorney on September 7, 2011 to cover a different mix of affordable units at this site. That document will be amended to reflect the current proposal. Upon the City Attorney’s approval, the Board finds these criteria satisfied. Staff believes that the applicant’s proposal for affordable housing has met the standards listed above. SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Pursuant to Section 14.03(A)(6) of the Land Development Regulations, any PUD shall require site plan approval. Section 14.06 establishes the following general review standards for all site plan applications: 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. 299 parking spaces are currently approved for the PUD. This project proposes a total of 311 spaces. Mark Smith, PE (of Resource Systems Group, Inc), has provided a shared parking analysis, dated 9 Jan. 2014. 1. Parking requirements- the existing approval with a parking waiver was dependent upon a shared parking analysis. The change in use from congregate care units to residential units results in an increased demand of parking. a. According to the LDRs, 467 parking spaces would be required if each use were to be built independently on their own lot, without any sharing. A shared parking analysis provides a common sense approach as those spaces which typically would peak in demand at one time would be able to complement those uses which would peak at different times. Residential uses are very complimentary to office uses, each typically having peaks at opposite times of the day, with some overlap in mid-morning and late afternoon. As can be seen in the spreadsheet, 320 parking spaces are needed at the peak hour of 10-11 am- when the most spaces are needed by all of the involved uses. This new peak demand number will thus become the base number for required parking. b. 311 parking spaces are proposed on site. If 15 parking spaces are reserved and removed from the shared parking analysis, then 296 parking spaces are provided for sharing. This is a shortfall of 9 spaces from the peak parking demand. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a parking waiver of 9 spaces, or 2.8%. Staff is comfortable with this analysis, and feels this waiver can be supported, as the project includes a significant number of one bedroom apartments, and is located near a transit line. Applicant also references a letter from Resource Systems Group dated 2/22/11 citing smart growth principles in support of this waiver. c. Staff supports the applicant’s request that the 15 parking spaces proposed to be reserved for medical office use be signed so as to limit their reservation to business hours. Although the independent review recommends 8-5 pm, staff is comfortable with reservation from 7 am to 7pm. This still allows for ample residential parking overnight. Fifteen (15) parking spaces may be reserved for the medical office use. They should be available for shared use CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 9 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_13_43_80EastwoodDrive_prelimfinal.doc between the hours of 7 pm and 7 am. Signage should reflect this accordingly. All other spaces within the PUD described above, with the exceptions noted above, and those reserved for handicapped accessibility, should be shared amongst all users and visitors of the PUD. 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; (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. The Board finds that these criteria have been satisfied. Section 13.01(G) (5) requires that bicycle parking or storage facilities are provided for employees, residents, and visitors to the site. Bicycle racks appear to be shown on the plans, but these should be noted or called out on the plans to clarify and confirm. 4. The plans should be revised to clearly indicate the bike rack. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 10 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_13_43_80EastwoodDrive_prelimfinal.doc 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. Depending upon which part of the application one reviews, the applicant proposes a five-story building that will be 62.31 ft. in height; and is therefore requesting a 27.31 waiver of the 35 ft. height limit stipulated in Appendix C, Uses and Dimensional Standards of the LDRs. See also the footnote in Table 1, Dimensional Requirements, at the beginning of this memo, regarding building height. According to subsection D of Section 3.7 Height of Structures, in the C-1-R-15 Zoning District: (b) For structures proposed to exceed the maximum height for structures specified in Table C-2 as part of a planned unit development or master plan, the Development Review Board may waive the requirements of this section as long as the general objectives of the applicable zoning district are met. A request for approval of a taller structure shall include the submittal of a plan(s) showing the elevations and architectural design of the structure, pre-construction grade, post-construction grade, and height of the structure. Such plan shall demonstrate that the proposed building will not detract from scenic views from adjacent public roadways and other public rights-of-way. The applicant has submitted plans detailing the required elevations and architectural design and has indicated they will provide an aerial illustration of the proposed five-story building as well as a shadow study to the Board. 5. The Board should review compliance with this standard as a follow up to the normal discussion and guidance provided at sketch plan level; and then discuss whether to grant the 27.31 ft. height waiver. Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. 6. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. 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. The applicant has submitted architectural elevations as part of this application. Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. The applicant has submitted architectural elevations as part of this application. In addition to the above general review standards, site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the Land Development Regulations: CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 11 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_13_43_80EastwoodDrive_prelimfinal.doc The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial or collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. Staff feels the reservation of additional land is not warranted. 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. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. 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). No new dumpster storage areas appear to be proposed. An existing dumpster is located approximately 420 ft. away at the end of parking lot serving the Lot 2 building. Staff believes it is appropriate to consider placement of a dumpster near the southern end of the line of new parking spaces to facilitate trash disposal of residents using the Dog Park, grill area and community gardens. The applicant should also discuss if trash or recycling bins will be located in the basement to service residents. 7. The Board should ensure that sufficient solid waste facilities are placed in appropriate locations, balancing positive aspects of convenience and usability with negative aspects of odor and early morning noise when dumpsters are emptied. Landscaping 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. Pursuant to Section 13.06(B) (4) of the Land Development Regulations, snow storage areas must be shown on the plans. The plans show “non-exclusive”, shared snow storage areas for the subject properties. Landscaping budget requirements are to be determined pursuant to Section 13.06(G) (2) of the SBLDR. The landscape plan and landscape budget shall be prepared by a landscape architect or professional landscape designer. According to the applicant, the original 2011 and newer 2012 required landscaping budget is $108,500. The proposed and approved landscaping budget in 2011 was $111,265; the 2012 proposed budget was $111,425.05; the latest 2013 landscaping budget is $124,612, and as before, includes transplanting two 6” Tilia trees and perennials, and does not include credit for existing landscaping. The applicant has bonded for $108,500 with the construction of the building at 78 Eastwood Drive so the difference left to be bonded is $16,112. Presumably, this increased amount relates proportionally to increased construction costs for the new building as compared with the structure as approved before. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 12 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_13_43_80EastwoodDrive_prelimfinal.doc Lighting Pursuant to Appendix A.9 of the Land Development Regulations, luminaries shall not be placed more than 30’ above ground level and the maximum illumination at ground level shall not exceed an average of three (3) foot candles. Pursuant to Appendix A.10(b) of the Land Development Regulations, indirect glare produced by illumination at ground level shall not exceed 0.3 foot candles maximum, with an average level of illumination of 0.1 foot candles. All lighting shall be shielded and downcast. The point by point lighting plan submitted complies with the lighting standards. TRAFFIC The applicant submitted an Updated Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by Mark Smith of RSG, Inc. dated January 8, 2014. The study concludes as follows: Redevelopment of the site will result in a net increase of 8 vehicle trip ends in the AM peak hour and a net decrease of 23 vehicle trips in the PM peak hour compared to the previous development (the health club). The redevelopment will not significantly alter the existing operational characteristics of the studied intersections. Other Details and specifications of the retaining walls have been submitted. 8. For purposes of the Land Development Regulations, the lots in this subdivision shall be considered one (1) lot. The applicant will be required to record a “Notice of Condition” to this effect which has been approved by the City Attorney prior to recording the final plat plans. RECOMMENDATION If the Board is satisfied that all the necessary information has been submitted, the hearing should be closed. Respectfully submitted, ________________________________ Raymond Belair, Administrative Officer Copy to: Eric Farrell, applicant CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD F:\USERS\Planning & Zoning\Development Review Board\Staff Comments\2014\CU_14_01_30JoyDrive_condusesiteplan DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: February 28, 2014 Application received: February 3, 2014 MOUNT MANSFIELD TELEVISION, INC. – 30 JOY DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE AND SITE PLAN APPLICATIONS #CU-14-01 & SP-14-04 Agenda #4 Meeting Date: March 4, 2014 Owner Mount Mansfield, Television, Inc. 30 Joy Drive South Burlington, VT 05403 Applicant Timothy Thayer 30 Joy Drive South Burlington, VT 05403 Engineer Property Information Tax Parcel C-1-R-15 Zoning District Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING CU_14_01_30JoyDrive_conduse_siteplan_moveantennadish.doc PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional use application #CU-14-01 & site plan review application #SP-14-04 of Mt. Mansfield Television, Inc. to amend a previously approved plan for a television studio. The amendment consists of relocating an eight (8) foot diameter microwave dish (antenna) from the roof of the building to an existing monopole tower at 65 feet in height, 30 Joy Drive. COMMENTS Administrative Officer Ray Belair and Planner, Temporary Assignment Lee Krohn, AICP, (“Staff”), have reviewed the application submitted on February 3, 2014, and offer the following comments. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements Table 1. Dimensional Requirements C-1, R-15 Zoning District Required Proposed Residential Density N/A N/A Max. Building Coverage 40% 9.8 % - NO CHANGE Max. Overall Coverage 70% 36 % - NO CHANGE Min. Front Setback (Eastwood Drive) 30 ft. NO CHANGE Min. Front Setback (Joy Drive) 30 ft. NO CHANGE Min. Side Setback 10 ft. NO CHANGE Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. NO CHANGE. * Max Building Height and Max. Stories 35 ft. / 4 stories RELATES TO DISH ANTENNA ONLY zoning compliance *Needs review/approval to be placed >35’ in height on existing monopole tower This is an interesting case. As you know, WCAX has long existed at this location, with its structures and array of dishes and antennas serving this broadcasting facility. Proposed here is a single change, moving an eight foot diameter dish antenna from a lattice tower on the roof of the main building to an existing 100’ tall monopole tower, “effectively increasing the height of the antenna to 65 feet from 40 feet”, as described by the applicant. According to the table of Uses and Dimensional Standards in the LDRs, buildings are limited in height to either 35’ or 40’, depending whether they have a pitched or flat roof. A dish antenna is included in the definition of “structure”, and “structure” includes buildings, so the height limit applies here. Since the new, proposed location for this antenna exceeds that 35’ limit, even though the existing tower itself is 100’ tall, this requires conditional use approval to exceed that height threshold. Staff has determined that site plan review is also required. Other changes proposed or required are adding a dumpster enclosure, bicycle rack, and showing snow storage areas on the site plan. As provided in Section 15 of the LDRs, the DRB shall issue a single, consolidated decision in cases like this that require both site plan and conditional use reviews. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING CU_14_01_30JoyDrive_conduse_siteplan_moveantennadish.doc 14.06 General Review Standards The following general criteria and standards shall be used by the Development Review Board in reviewing applications for site plan approval. They are intended to provide a framework within which the designer of the site development is free to exercise creativity, invention, and innovation while improving the visual appearance of the City of South Burlington. The Development Review Board shall not specify or favor any particular architectural style or design or assist in the design of any of the buildings submitted for approval. The Development Review Board shall restrict itself to a reasonable, professional review, and, except as otherwise provided in the following subsections, the applicant shall retain full responsibility for design. A. Relationship of Proposed Development to the City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. Due attention by the applicant should be given to the goals and objectives and the stated land use policies for the City of South Burlington as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. B. Relationship of Proposed Structures to the Site. (1) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and adequate parking areas. Already existing; no changes proposed. (2) Parking: (a) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings. Any side of a building facing a public street shall be considered a front side of a building for the purposes of this subsection. Already existing; no changes proposed. (3) Without restricting the permissible limits of the applicable zoning district, the height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and existing or anticipated adjoining buildings. (4) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansion shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. These are really the key issues here, as related to the proposed height of the 8’ diameter dish antenna the applicant seeks to mount upon the existing 100’ monopole tower. C. Relationship of Structures and Site to Adjoining Area. (1) The Development Review Board shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural characteristics (e.g., rhythm, color, texture, form or detailing), landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of different architectural styles. (2) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. Already existing; no changes proposed. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING CU_14_01_30JoyDrive_conduse_siteplan_moveantennadish.doc 14.07 Specific Review Standards A. Access to Abutting Properties. The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial or collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. No changes proposed. B. Utility Services. Electric, telephone and other wire-served utility lines and service connections shall be underground insofar as feasible and subject to state public utilities regulations. Any utility installations remaining above ground shall be located so as to have a harmonious relation to neighboring properties and to the site. Already covered above. C. Disposal of Wastes. All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling or other requirements, shall be accessible, secure and properly screened with opaque fencing to ensure that trash and debris do not escape the enclosure(s). Small receptacles intended for use by households or the public (ie, non-dumpster, non-large drum) shall not be required to be fenced or screened. Dumpster enclosure will be fully enclosed; this is shown on the site plan. D. Landscaping and Screening Requirements. See Article 13, Section 13.06 Landscaping, Screening, and Street Trees. Already existing; no changes proposed. No additional landscaping or screening will work or can help with regard to the dish antenna, so unless other landscaping additions or changes are warranted on the rest of the site, then this element is N/A. E. Modification of Standards. Where the limitations of a site may cause unusual hardship in complying with any of the standards above and waiver therefrom will not endanger the public health, safety or welfare, the Development Review Board may modify such standards as long as the general objectives of Article 14 and the City's Comprehensive Plan are met. However, with the exception of side yard setbacks in the Central District 1, in no case shall the DRB permit the location of a new structure less than five (5) feet from any property boundary and in no case shall be the DRB allow land development creating a total site coverage exceeding the allowable limit for the applicable zoning district in the case of new development, or increasing the coverage on sites where the pre-existing condition exceeds the applicable limit. The essence of this case here, and in conditional use review, relates to modifying the height standard to allow the dish antenna to be mounted on the tower higher than the otherwise applicable 35’ limit. In addition, the site plan must also be updated to illustrate provision for two other required elements: a bicycle rack, and snow storage areas for the parking lot(s). Sections 3.06 and 3.07 describe opportunities and constraints for setbacks and heights of accessory structures. 3.07 (D) (2) (a) states that, “The Development Review Board may approve a structure with a CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING CU_14_01_30JoyDrive_conduse_siteplan_moveantennadish.doc height in excess of the limitations set forth in Table C-2. For each foot of additional height, all front and rear setbacks shall be increased by one (1) foot and all side yard setbacks shall be increased by one half (1/2) foot. E. Accessory Structures in All Districts: (1) Accessory structures shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height, except that: (a) For industrial uses in non-residential districts, height standards for principal structures shall apply for accessory structures; and, (b) For residential uses, accessory structures up to twenty-five (25) feet in height shall be permitted where the structure is located at least thirty (30) feet from all property lines, the structure has a pitched roof, and the lot on which the structure is proposed is at least one (1) acre in size; and, (c) Accessory structures exceeding the height of the principal structure on the property shall require approval by the Development Review Board as a conditional use, pursuant to Article 14, Conditional Use Review. The applicant shall demonstrate to the Board that the accessory structure will be clearly secondary to the principal structure in function and in appearance from the public right-of- way This standard appears to be met. 14.10 Conditional Use Review: General Provisions and Standards E. General Review Standards. The Development Review Board shall review the proposed conditional use for compliance with all applicable standards as contained in these regulations. The proposed conditional use shall not result in an undue adverse effect on any of the following: (1) The capacity of existing or planned community facilities. Moving this dish antenna from the roof of the main building to the existing monopole tower on the property will have no effect upon this criterion. (2) The character of the area affected, as defined by the purpose or purposes of the zoning district within which the project is located, and specifically stated policies and standards of the municipal plan. Moving this dish antenna from the roof of the main building to the existing monopole tower on the property will have no effect upon this criterion. The property is already developed with buildings and an array of large dish antennas. Moving this dish from an existing roof mounted tower to the existing free standing tower will not have an adverse effect upon the character of the area. A site plan, photo simulation, and architectural elevations have been submitted to illustrate this proposal, but do not really show its true visibility from the Interstate. As also noted in the application, “The proposed antenna relocation project is minor in nature but vital to maintaining WCAX’s sole microwave radio link to its Mount Mansfield transmitter site. The May 1, 2014 completion date is essential to maintaining this link and a clear line of sight above the intervening forest canopy. This antenna relocation project was previously approved by South Burlington Planning & Zoning on September 9, 1997, but construction was deferred to present.” (3) Traffic on roads and highways in the vicinity. Moving this dish antenna from the roof of the main building to the existing monopole tower on the property will have no effect upon this criterion. (4) Bylaws and ordinances then in effect. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING CU_14_01_30JoyDrive_conduse_siteplan_moveantennadish.doc Moving this dish antenna from the roof of the main building to the existing monopole tower on the property will have no effect upon this criterion. (5) Utilization of renewable energy resources. Moving this dish antenna from the roof of the main building to the existing monopole tower on the property will have no effect upon this criterion. F. Expiration of Conditional Use Permits. A conditional use permit shall be deemed to authorize only one (1) specific conditional use on a subject property and shall expire if the conditional use shall cease for more than six (6) months for any reason, unless an umbrella approval has been granted. According to the applicant, this same project was approved by the City back in 1997, but was never actually implemented. That prior approval has clearly expired. 14.11 Conditional Use Review: Specific Uses and Standards N/A; these are specific to particular uses (parking garages, group homes, convenience stores, etc. RECOMMENDATION As described above, the singular change proposed is moving an existing dish antenna from one location to another location on site. The tower to which the dish would be moved already exists. That said, the tower itself is quite visible from the Interstate highway, and placing this dish antenna two thirds of the way up that tower will certainly add visual impact on its own. Note that under exemptions in federal law, the Board may not consider other questions that might arise related to certain technical or health related issues. Unless new issues are raised at the hearing, Staff recommends that the Board close the hearing and moving forward toward a consolidated decision on both site plan and conditional use applications. Respectfully submitted, ________________________________ Raymond Belair, Administrative Officer Copy to: Timothy Thayer, applicant CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: February 28, 2014 Plans received: January 8, 2014 Willowbrook Homes, LLC SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION #SD-14-01 Agenda #5 Meeting Date: March 4, 2014 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Sketch plan application #SD-14-01 of Willowbrook Homes, LLC for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) the subdivision of a 29.39 acre parcel developed with one (1) single family dwelling into two (2) lots of 5.3 acres and 24.09 acres and, 2) developing the 5.3 acre parcel with nine (9) single family dwellings, 1675 Dorset Street. COMMENTS Administrative Officer Ray Belair, and Planner, Temporary Assistant Lee Krohn, AICP (“Staff”) have reviewed the plans submitted on January 8, 2014 and offer the following comments. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements This property is 29.39 acres in size, and lies within the Village Residential, Neighborhood Residential, and Natural Resource Protection sub districts of the Southeast Quadrant. There is one single family home on the property today, set well back off of Dorset Street in the NRP subdistrict. The applicant proposes to subdivide CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD-14-01_WillowbrookHomesLLC_1675DorsetSt_sketch the property into two lots: a 5.3 acre parcel along the road in the VR subdistrict, which would have nine new homes on footprint lots, developed as a PUD; and the remaining 24.09 acres with the existing home to the rear. As a sketch plan review, this hearing will cover the basic elements of lot layout and project design, with many more specific details to come in preliminary, final, and PUD plan review. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Pursuant to Section 15.18 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, PUDs shall comply with the following standards and conditions: (A)(1)Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity is available to meet the needs of the project. According to Section 15.13(B)(1) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, the existing public utility system shall be extended to provide the necessary quantity of water, at an acceptable pressure, to the proposed dwelling units. According to Section 15.13 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, the subdivider or developer shall connect to the public sewer system or provide a community wastewater system approved by the City and the State in any subdivision where off-lot wastewater is proposed. Applicant shall obtain preliminary water/ wastewater allocation approvals prior to submittal of a final plat. (A)(2)Sufficient grading and erosion controls will be utilized during and after construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties. The proposed project shall adhere to standards for erosion control as set forth in Section 16.03 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. In addition, the grading plan shall meet the standards set forth in Section 16.04 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. Grading, drainage, and erosion control plans will be submitted as part of the preliminary plat application, and will be submitted to the Director of Public Works for review. (A)(3)The project incorporates access, circulation, and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unreasonable congestion of adjacent roads. There is a driveway serving the existing single family home. An upgraded and slightly realigned access road is proposed to serve the new homes; this would then continue into the property as a driveway serving the existing home. A proposed 50’ right of way is shown to facilitate possible, future internal connections to the adjoining properties to the south and the north. As a part of preliminary and final plat review, this road, and all other relevant aspects (roadway, sidewalks, stormwater, and the like) will all be submitted to DPW staff for review. Note that although the LDRs require that proposed roadway connections to adjoining properties be built as a part of such projects, no such connecting road is proposed to be built here; only a partial hammerhead “T” at the end of the new access road is shown on the plan. The relevant portion of Section 15 of the LDRs is as follows: CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD-14-01_WillowbrookHomesLLC_1675DorsetSt_sketch (4) Connections to adjacent parcels. If the DRB finds that a roadway extension or connection to an adjacent property may or could occur in the future, whether through City action or development of an adjacent parcel, the DRB shall require the applicant to construct the connector roadway to the property line or contribute to the cost of completing the roadway connection. (a) In any such application, the DRB shall require sufficient right-of-way to be dedicated to accommodate two (2) lanes of vehicle travel, City utilities, and a ten-foot wide grade-separated recreation path. 1. The Board should discuss with the applicant the requirement to extend the new street to the adjoining properties. (A)(4)The project’s design respects and will provide suitable protection to wetlands, streams, wildlife habitat as identified in the Open Space Strategy, and any unique natural features on the site. No wetlands or other natural resources are identified, although there appears to be a stream running north- south through the property, identified on the plan as, “Existing Zoning Boundary”. 2. The applicant should confirm (and show on plans as needed) in any preliminary plat submittal whether any wetlands or streams (and associated buffer areas) are located on the site. Pursuant to Section15.18 (B)(6) of the Land Development Regulations, the applicant shall submit a plan for the management and maintenance of the dedicated open spaces created through the Master Plan. The vast majority of the open land would remain on the rear lot, with the single family home. Since the new homes on the front lot are proposed as footprint lots within a PUD, it is presumed that the rest of that land is owned in common. No details are yet provided at this sketch plan level on any plans for use or maintenance of that common land, although a loop sidewalk is proposed as an amenity for the homeowners. The land common land within that sidewalk loop might be very useful as a community garden, and/or various types of light recreation. Please see additional discussion under SEQ standards. (A)(5)The project is designed to be visually compatible with the planned development patterns in the area, as specified in the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose of the zoning district(s) in which it is located. Pursuant to Section 9.01 of the Land Development Regulations, the Southeast Quadrant District (SEQ) is hereby formed in order to encourage open space preservation, scenic view and natural resource protection, wildlife habitat preservation, continued agricultural use, and well as planned residential use in the largely undeveloped area of the City known as the Southeast Quadrant. The open character and scenic views offered in this area have long been recognized as very special and unique resources in the City and worthy of protection. The location and clustering of buildings and lots in a manner that in the judgment of the Development Review Board will best preserve the open space character of this area shall be encouraged. (A)(6)Open space areas on the site have been located in such a way as to maximize opportunities for creating contiguous open spaces between adjoining parcels and/or stream buffer areas. See above. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD-14-01_WillowbrookHomesLLC_1675DorsetSt_sketch (A)(7)The layout of a subdivision or PUD has been reviewed by the Fire Chief or (designee) to ensure that adequate fire protection can be provided. The South Burlington Fire Chief shall review the plans as they progress through preliminary and final review. (A)(8)Roads, recreation paths, stormwater facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility lines and lighting have been designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent landowners. (A)(9)Roads, utilities, sidewalks, recreation paths, and lighting are designed in a manner that is consistent with City utility and roadway plans and maintenance standards. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines shall be underground. (A)(10)The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s). SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Pursuant to Section 14.03(A)(6) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any PUD shall require site plan approval. Section 14.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations establishes the following general review standards for all site plan applications: 14.06(B)(1) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and adequate parking areas. 14.06(B)(3)Without restricting the permissible limits of the applicable zoning district, the height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and existing or adjoining buildings. 14.06(B)(4) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines shall be underground. 14.06(C)(1) The DRB shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural characteristics, landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of different architectural styles. 14.06(C)(2) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain, and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. Site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD-14-01_WillowbrookHomesLLC_1675DorsetSt_sketch 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. 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. 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). Landscaping and Screening Requirements Pursuant to Section 13.06(A) of the proposed Land Development Regulations, landscaping and screening shall be required for all uses subject to planned unit development review. The minimum landscape requirement for this project is determined by Table 13-9 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. The costs of street trees are above and beyond this minimum landscape requirement. When a planting plan is submitted as part of preliminary and final plat review, it will be submitted to the City Arborist for review and comment. E911 Addresses The applicant shall submit a proposed name for this street, and E911 addresses for the proposed project, in conformance with the E911 addressing standards, with the final plat application. Other Pursuant to Section 15.08 (D) of the LDRs, the applicant shall submit homeowner’s association legal documents with the final plat application. The final plat application shall include a Certificate of Title as required in Section 15.17 of the LDRs. Pursuant to Section 15.17 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, prior to issuance of the first zoning permit or start of utility or road construction, the applicant shall submit all appropriate legal documents including easements (e.g. irrevocable offer of dedication and warranty deed for proposed public roads, utility, sewer, drainage, water, and recreation paths, etc.) to the City Attorney for approval and recorded in the South Burlington Land Records. Prior to the start of construction of the improvements described in the condition above, the applicant shall post a bond which covers the cost of said improvements. Pursuant to Section 15.14(E)(2) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, within 14 days of the completion of required improvements (e.g. roads, water mains, sanitary sewers, storm drains, etc.) the developer shall submit to the City Engineer, “as-built” construction drawings certified by a licensed engineer. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD-14-01_WillowbrookHomesLLC_1675DorsetSt_sketch Southeast Quadrant District This proposed subdivision is located in the southeast quadrant district. Therefore it is subject to the provisions of Section 9 of the SBLDR. 9.06 Dimensional and Design Requirements Applicable to All Sub-Districts The following standards shall apply to development and improvements within the entire SEQ: A. Height. (1) The maximum height of any occupied structure in the SEQ-NRP, SEQ-NRT, or SEQ-NR sub-district shall not exceed forty-five feet (45’); the waiver provisions of Section 3.07(E) shall not apply to occupied structures in these sub-districts. (2) The maximum height of any occupied structure in the SEQ-VR or SEQ-VC sub-district shall not exceed fifty feet (50’); the waiver provisions of Section 3.07(E) shall not apply to occupied structures in these sub-districts. Building heights must remain below these limitations. The table of dimensional requirements shall also apply to each structure. B. Open Space and Resource Protection. (1) Open space areas on the site shall be located in such a way as to maximize opportunities for creating usable, contiguous open spaces between adjoining parcels The Board should discuss this now as part of sketch plan review. (2) Building lots, streets and other structures shall be located in a manner consistent with the Regulating Plan for the applicable sub-district allowing carefully planned development at the average densities provided in this bylaw. The Board should discuss this now as part of sketch plan review. (3) A plan for the proposed open spaces and/or natural areas and their ongoing management shall be established by the applicant. The Board should discuss this now as part of sketch plan review. Section 9 of the SBLDR states that “a range of parks should be distributed through the SEQ to meet a variety of needs including children’s play, passive enjoyment of the outdoors, and active recreation.” Furthermore, “parks should be provided at a rate of 7.5 acres of developed parkland per 1,000 population per the South Burlington Capital Budget and Program” and “a neighborhood or mini park of 10,000 square feet or more should be provided within a one-quarter mile walk of every home not so served by an existing City park or other publicly-owned recreation area.” No formal park is proposed here, but as noted, there is a fair bit of common, open land to the south of the proposed homes, and this land is ringed with a new sidewalk for access, use, and enjoyment. Clustering the new homes fairly close together allows for this contiguous open space to exist, which also adjoins existing undeveloped land to the south. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD-14-01_WillowbrookHomesLLC_1675DorsetSt_sketch 3. The Board should discuss if this is sufficient; and as in other cases, should also discuss what form of delineation, if any, is appropriate or necessary to define private and common land. 4. The Board should also discuss possible future plans for this area to be available for future development on site. (4) Sufficient grading and erosion controls shall be employed during construction and after construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties. In making this finding, the Development Review Board may rely on evidence that the project will be covered under the General Permit for Construction issued by the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. The project shall adhere to erosion control standards in Section 16.03 of the LDRs. The grading plan shall meet the standards in Section 16.04 of the LDRs. The applicant will submit relevant plans as part of preliminary and final plat review. (5) Sufficient suitable landscaping and fencing shall be provided to protect wetland, stream, or primary or natural community areas and buffers in a manner that is aesthetically compatible with the surrounding landscape. Chain link fencing other than for agricultural purposes shall be prohibited within PUDs; the use of split rail or other fencing made of natural materials is encouraged. As previously stated, no wetlands are shown on the plans. The preliminary plat plans shall either include delineated wetlands or a statement from a qualified wetlands expert that the property has no wetlands. C. Agriculture. The conservation of existing agricultural production values is encouraged through development planning that supports agricultural uses (including but not limited to development plans that create contiguous areas of agricultural use), provides buffer areas between existing agricultural operations and new development, roads, and infrastructure, or creates new opportunities for agricultural use (on any soil group) such as but not limited to community-supported agriculture. As noted above, the open, common land offers opportunity for these on this and on the adjoining land. D. Public Services and Facilities. In the absence of a specific finding by the Development Review Board that an alternative location and/or provision is approved for a specific development, the location of buildings, lots, streets and utilities shall conform with the location of planned public facilities as depicted on the Official Map, including but not limited to recreation paths, streets, park land, schools, and sewer and water facilities. (2) Recreation paths, storm water facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility lines, and lighting shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. (3) Recreation paths, utilities, sidewalks, and lighting shall be designed in a manner that is consistent with City utility plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 8 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD-14-01_WillowbrookHomesLLC_1675DorsetSt_sketch (4) The plan shall be reviewed by the Fire Chief or his designee to insure that adequate fire protection can be provided, with the standards for evaluation including, but not limited to, minimum distance between structures, street width, vehicular access from two directions where possible, looping of water lines, water flow and pressure, and number and location of hydrants. E. Circulation. The project shall incorporate access, circulation and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unsafe conditions on adjacent roads and sufficient to create connectivity for pedestrians, bicycles, vehicles, school transportation, and emergency service vehicles between neighborhoods. In making this finding the Development Review Board may rely on the findings of a traffic study submitted by the applicant, and the findings of any technical review by City staff or consultants. (1) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. (2) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is consistent with City roadway plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. (3) The provisions of Section 15.12(D)(4) related to connections between adjacent streets and neighborhoods shall apply. These are all relevant for discussion at this early sketch plan stage. Issues to consider include: Whether the roadway connection is in the best or most appropriate location, being fairly close to a stream on the north side; How and whether roadway locations and designs are consistent with SEQ standards, especially as there is no road shown on the City’s Official Map; and All aspects of street design, sidewalks, and recreation paths on this site and as connected to adjoining sites. While these may be considered as part of preliminary plat review, it may also warrant advance review by the Bike-Ped Committee so that any recommendations may be included in the preliminary plat. D. Parks Design and Development. (1) General standards. The SEQ has an existing large community park, the Dorset Street Park Complex. Parks in the SEQ may be programmed as neighborhood parks or mini-parks as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. Mini parks in the SEQ should be a minimum of 10,000 square feet, with programming approved by the South Burlington Recreation Department. Such parks are to be located through the neighborhoods in order to provide a car-free destination for children and adults alike, and to enhance each neighborhood’s quality of life. They shall be knitted into the neighborhood fabric as a focal point in the neighborhood, to add vitality and allow for greater surveillance by surrounding homes, local streets and visitors. Each park should be accessible by vehicle, foot, and bicycle and there should be a park within a quarter-mile of every home. (2) Specific Standards. The following park development guidelines are applicable in the SEQ- NRT, SEQ-NR, SEQ-VR, and SEQ-VC districts: (a) Distribution and Amount of Parks: CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 9 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD-14-01_WillowbrookHomesLLC_1675DorsetSt_sketch (i) A range of parks and open space should be distributed through the SEQ to meet a variety of needs including children’s play, passive enjoyment of the outdoors, and active recreation. (ii) Parks should serve as the focus for neighborhoods and be located at the heart of residential areas, served by public streets and fronted by development. (iii) Parks should be provided at a rate of 7.5 acres of developed parkland per 1,000 population per the South Burlington Capital Budget and Program. (iv) A neighborhood or mini park of 10,000 square feet or more should be provided within a one-quarter mile walk of every home not so served by an existing City park or other publicly-owned developed recreation area. (b) Dedication of Parks and Open Space: Parks and protected open space must be approved by City Council for public ownership or management, or maintained permanently by a homeowners’ association in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. (c) Design Guidelines (i) Parks should be fronted by homes and/or retail development in order to make them sociable, safe and attractive places. (ii) Parks should be located along prominent pedestrian and bicycle connections. (iii) To the extent feasible, single-loaded roads should be utilized adjacent to natural open spaces to define a clear transition between the private and public realm, and to reinforce dedicated open space as a natural resource and not extended yard areas. Already addressed above. 9.08 SEQ-NR &NRT Sub-District; Specific Standards No land development is proposed on the NR portion of this property. 9.09 SEQ-VR Sub-District; Specific Standards The SEQ-VR sub-district has additional dimensional and design requirements, as enumerated in this Section. A. Street, Block and Lot Pattern (1) Development blocks. Development block lengths should range between 300 and 400 linear feet; see Figure 9-2 for example. If longer block lengths are unavoidable blocks 400 feet or longer must include mid-block public sidewalk or recreation path connections. (2) Interconnection of Streets (a) Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 400 feet. (b) Dead end streets (e.g. culs de sac) are discouraged. Dead end streets shall not exceed 200 feet in length. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 10 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD-14-01_WillowbrookHomesLLC_1675DorsetSt_sketch (c) Street stubs are required at the end of dead end streets to allow for future street connections and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections to open space and future housing on adjoining parcels per section 15.12(D)(4). The new access road serving the new homes is less than 300 feet long. As noted above, the issue of street stubs must be addressed. (3) Street Connection to Adjoining Parcels. Street stubs are required to be built to the property line and connected to adjacent parcels per section 15.12(D)(4) of these Regulations. Posting signs with a notice of intent to construct future streets is strongly encouraged. (4) Lot ratios. Lots shall maintain a minimum lot width to depth ratio of 1:2, with a ratio of 1:2.5 to 1:5 recommended. As footprint lots on a single PUD parcel, this criterion is not applicable but the Board may wish to discuss the layout of the homes with the intent of the lot ratio requirement in mind and determine if the intent of having the homes closer together is met. . B. Street, Sidewalk & Parking Standards (1) Street dimensions and cross sections. Neighborhood streets (collector and local) in the VR sub-district are intended to be low-speed streets for local use that discourage through movement and are safe for pedestrians and bicyclists. Dimensions for public collector and local streets shall be as set forth in Tables 9-3 and 9-4, and Figures 9-8 and 9-9 below. (2) Sidewalks (a) Sidewalks must be a minimum of five feet (5’) in width with an additional minimum five-foot planting strip (greenspace) separating the sidewalk from the street. (b) Sidewalks are required on one side of the street, and must be connected in a pattern that promotes walkability throughout the development. The DRB may in its discretion require supplemental sidewalk segments to achieve this purpose. (3) Street Trees; see Section 9.08(B)(3) (4) On-street parking; see Section 9.08(B)(4). (5) Intersection design. Intersections shall be designed to reduce pedestrian crossing distances and to slow traffic; see Figure 9-6 and Section 9.08(B)(5). (6) Street and sidewalk lighting. Pedestrian-scaled light fixtures (e.g., 12’ to 14’) shall be provided sufficient to ensure pedestrian safety traveling to and from public spaces. Overall illumination levels should be consistent with the lower-intensity development patterns and character of the SEQ, with lower, smoother levels of illumination (rather than hot-spots) and trespass minimized to the lowest level consistent with public safety. All of these details will be addressed in preliminary and final plat review. C. Residential Design (1) Building Orientation. Residential buildings must be oriented to the street. Primary entries for single family and multi-family buildings must face the street. Secondary building entries may open onto garages and/or parking areas. (Special design guidelines apply to arterial streets). (2) Building Façades. Building facades are encouraged to employ a theme and variation approach. Buildings should include common elements to appear unified, but façades should be CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 11 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD-14-01_WillowbrookHomesLLC_1675DorsetSt_sketch varied from one building to the next to avoid monotony. Front porches, stoops, and balconies that create semi-private space and are oriented to the street are encouraged. (3) Front Building Setbacks. In pedestrian districts, a close relationship between the building and the street is critical to the ambiance of the street environment. (a) Buildings should be set back fifteen feet (15’) from the back of sidewalk. (b) Porches, stoops, and balconies may project up to eight feet (8’) into the front setbacks. Porch, stoop and balcony areas within the front setback shall not be enclosed or weatherized with glazing or other solid materials. (4) Placement of Garages and Parking. See Section 9.08(C)(4) and Figure 9-7. (5) Mix of Housing Styles. A mix of housing styles (i.e. ranch, cape cod, colonial, etc.), sizes, and affordability is encouraged within neighborhoods and developments. These should be mixed within blocks, along the street and within neighborhoods rather than compartmentalized into sections of near-identical units. This matter should be reviewed in detail during preliminary plat review, including a discussion of how the required “mix” of housing styles will be addressed. Staff also recommends that the first buildings have facades that address Dorset Street and the new street. All of these key details of roadway/sidewalk design, street trees, street lighting, and house design will be addressed fully in preliminary and final plat design. That said, and as always, it is worth exploring these at this early stage for informational purposes. OTHER Utility cabinets- The sketch plan does not yet show this level of detail. As with other site elements noted above, these will be addressed in preliminary and final plat review. NOTICE OF CONDITIONS There are “footprint” lots proposed around several of the units. For purposes of planning and zoning, all lots will be considered one lot. Eventually, as part of final plat review, the applicant will be required to record a “Notice of Condition” to this effect which has been approved by the City Attorney prior to recording the final plat plans. RECOMMENDATION The Board should work through all of these at this sketch plan stage, in order to provide clear and helpful guidance to the applicant in preparing preliminary and final plans for subsequent review. Respectfully submitted, ________________________________ Ray Belair, Administrative Officer CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_14_04_135HinesburgRd_BlackbayVentures_sketch DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: February 28, 2014 Plans received: January 24, 2014 BLACKBAY VENTURES PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION #SD 14-04 Agenda #6 Meeting date: March 4, 2014 Applicant/Owner Blackbay Ventures VIII, LLC 226 Ridgefield Road Shelburne, VT 05482 Contact Person David Shenk PO Box 4132 Burlington, VT 05406 Property Information Tax Parcel Volume 1192, Page 45-47 CD3 and Design Review Districts 0.76 Acres PROJECT DESCRIPTION Sketch plan application #SD-14-04 of Blackbay Ventures VIII, LLC for a planned unit development to: 1) remove an existing single family dwelling, 2) construct four (4) three (3) unit multi-family dwellings, and 3) establish disputed boundary line with adjoining property, 135 Hinesburg Road. COMMENTS Administrative Officer Ray Belair and Planner Temporary Assignment Lee Krohn, AICP, referred to herein as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted on January 24, 2014 and offer the following comments. There is an existing house and garage on this 0.76 acre parcel located at the corner of Hinesburg Road and Market Street, in the Central District 3 (CD-3) zoning district. The application proposes to remove or demolish this existing home and replace it with four two-story, three-unit multi-family dwellings. Each unit would have a footprint of 660 sq ft, for a total building footprint upon the lot of 7920 sq ft. At this Sketch Plan stage, Staff comments and Board review are focused on the zoning and site plan related issues for this proposed project. However, we note for the record that this property also lies within the City Center Design Review Overlay District 3. Presuming successful completion of sketch plan review, and that the applicant proceeds from here to Preliminary Plat review, then architectural designs can be submitted and reviewed at that time. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_04_135HinesburgRd_BlackbayVentures_sketch Dimensional Requirements Table 1. Dimensional Requirements CD3 Zoning District Required Existing Proposed Min. Lot Size N/A 33,105.6 ft.2 No change Max. Building Coverage 50% 14.2% 23.9% Max. Total Coverage 80% 19.4% 68.4% Min. Front Setback 20 ft. 9 ft. 0 ft. Min. Side Setback (multi-family) 5 ft. 299.8 ft. 19.4 ft. Min. Rear Setback 5 ft. 29.9 56.4 ft. Max. Building Height 35 ft. ? 30 ft. Max. Density 25 units/acre 1.3 units/acre 15.79 units/acre Floor Area Ratio 0.5 ? 0.48* zoning compliance Building coverage is for the overall PUD. * Includes only finished area; this is consistent with the LDRs. SECTION 8: CENTRAL DISTRICT (CD) 8.01 General Purpose of the Central District 8.02 Establishment of Sub-Districts 8.03 Prohibited Uses – All Districts 8.04 Dimensional Requirements in All Districts 8.05 Specific Sub-District Regulations 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. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_04_135HinesburgRd_BlackbayVentures_sketch The subject parcel is located in the CD 3 District. 8.03 Prohibited Uses - All Districts As the proposed use is for multi-family dwellings, none of these prohibitions applies. 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. 1. The Board should confirm that the front of these buildings face Market Street. What about the side wall of the end unit facing Hinesburg Road? Is this of concern? Parking spaces are internal to the site. Some form of landscaping is proposed to help screen the dumpster and parking lot from Hinesburg Road. 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. Buildings appear to be within the 80 foot depth measured from Market Street. (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. This standard is being met. Staff is recommending that the buildings be separated further apart resulting in a building not meeting the 57 ft. setback requirement from Hinesburg Road. 2. The Board should discuss this setback waiver. (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. N/A 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. The proposed plan meets this standard. (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 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_04_135HinesburgRd_BlackbayVentures_sketch (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). N/A 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. Parking is proposed behind the buildings fronting on Market Street, and some form of screening is proposed on the Hinesburg Road end. 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. According to Table 13-1 of the LDRs, 24 parking spaces are required where the parking spaces are to be in common with no reserved spaces and 25 spaces are provided. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_04_135HinesburgRd_BlackbayVentures_sketch 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. For example, a 5,000 square foot building on a 5,000 square foot lot has an F.A.R. of 1.0. A 2,500 square foot building footprint on 2 floors (5,000 square feet total) on a 5,000 square foot lot also has an F.A.R. of 1.0. A one story 2,500 square foot building on a 5,000 square foot lot has an F.A.R. of 0.5. According to the applicant, this project has a floor area ratio of 0.48, just under the 0.5 limit in this zoning district. However, the stated caveat is that this “includes only finished area”. This begs the question of what constitutes finished area in these buildings, how large those areas are, whether unfinished area should be included in the FAR calculation, and if accepted now, what happens if in the future, those unfinished areas become finished space? This is a key issue to address at sketch plan stage. 8.05 Specific Sub-District Regulations C. Central District 3 and 4 (1) Allowable Building Envelopes in Central District 3 and 4: Allowable building envelopes shall be in accordance with Section 8.04(B), with the exception of Dorset Street, Brookwood Drive and Sherry Road. Along Dorset Street, the envelope is measured from a point ten (10) feet west of the right-of-way line, thereby creating a minimum ten (10) foot front yard setback from Dorset Street. Along Brookwood Drive and Sherry Road, the envelope is measured from a point thirty- two (32) feet from the centerline of the roadway right-of-way. Please see notes above. (2) Lot Coverage in Central District 3 and 4: The maximum coverage of commercial development and mixed residential/commercial development shall be forty percent (40%) for buildings and ninety percent (90%) overall (including buildings, parking, walks, plazas, garages, etc.). The maximum coverage for residential development shall be fifty percent (50%) for buildings only and eighty percent (80%) overall. Where a multi-level parking structure is to be constructed on a lot, the maximum allowable coverage for buildings shall be ninety percent (90%). Satisfied. (3) Density in Central District 3 and 4: The base maximum density of development shall not exceed an F.A.R. of 0.5. The Development Review Board may explicitly approve development up to an F.A.R. of 0.7 as a bonus for the provision of special, public-oriented amenities such as parks, courtyards, pedestrian ways, etc. The maximum residential density shall be twenty-five (25) units per acre (minimum unit size of five hundred (500) square feet). Please see notes above on this topic. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_14_04_135HinesburgRd_BlackbayVentures_sketch Figure 8-3, Allowable Building Envelope (Typical), CD-3 OTHER Other site elements to review include dumpster location (very close to the neighbor’ house), type of fence and any requirements that apply, wetlands (none are shown on the site plan; if there were, this plan could not be built out as proposed), and plans for Market Street, which must be reviewed by Public Works. RECOMMENDATION As noted above, there are several questions still to be answered before the Board can give clear guidance to the applicant on how to proceed with preliminary plat review. As noted above, we should also remind the applicant that any preliminary plat application should include architectural elevations, materials list, and color palette for purposes of design review; planting list/plan and landscaping budget; and any other information typically needed for review by the DRB or other City Staff (Fire Chief, DPW Director, stormwater…). Respectfully submitted, ______________________________ Raymond Belair, Administrative Officer Copy to: David Shenk SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Pending Applications ___________________________________________ - 1 - - Last updated – February 28, 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. MARCH 4, 2014 1. Sketch plan application #SD-14-01 of Willowbrook Homes, LLC for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) the subdivision of a 29.39 acre parcel developed with one (1) single family dwelling into two (2) lots of 5.3 acres and 24.09 acres and, 2) developing the 5.3 acre parcel with nine (9) single family dwellings, 1675 Dorset Street. 2. Sketch plan application #SD-14-03 of Thomas & Pamela Meeker to resubdivide two (2) adjoining lots such that one lot will be reduced in area and the other lot will be increased in area, 21 & 25 Gilbert Street. 3. Sketch plan application #SD-14-04 of Blackbay Ventures VIII, LLC for a planned unit development to: 1) remove an existing single family dwelling, 2) construct four (4) three (3) unit multi-family dwellings, and 3) establish disputed boundary line with adjoining property, 135 Hinesburg Road. 4. Conditional use application #CU-14-01 & site plan review application #SP-14-04 of Mt. Mansfield Television, Inc. to amend a previously approved plan for a television studio. The amendment consists of relocating an eight (8) foot diameter microwave dish (antenna) from the roof of the building to an existing monopole tower at 65 feet in height, 30 Joy Drive. 5. Preliminary & final plant application #SD-14-05 of Greenfield Capital, LLC to amend a previously approved 14,878 sq. ft. light manufacturing facility. The amendment consists of constructing a 25,840 sq. ft. addition, 35 Thompson Street. 6. Continued 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 unit congregate housing building into a 54 unit multi-family dwelling, 80 Eastwood Drive & 30 Joy Drive. 7. Deliberations: SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Pending Applications ___________________________________________ - 2 - a. 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 (closed on 2/04, deadline is 3/21). b. Continued preliminary plat application #SD-13-22 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 (closed on 2/04, deadline is 3/21). c. Continued 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. 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. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. Continued 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. SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Pending Applications ___________________________________________ - 3 - 5. Conditional use application #CU-14-02 of Hillview Design Collaborative, LLP to: 1) demolish the single family dwelling at 3 Cedar Court, 2) construct a 1,201 sq. ft. addition to the existing 1,700 sq. ft. single family dwelling at 88 Central Avenue, 3) create a 431 sq. ft. accessory residential unit in the expanded home, and 4) merge the two (2) lots at 88 Central Avenue & 3 Cedar Court. APRIL 1, 2014 1. Sketch plan application #SD-14-06 of F + M Development Co., LLC to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of: 1) 425 residential units in eight (8) buildings, 2) a 91 unit congregate housing facility, and 3) a 4,430 sq. ft. expansion of an indoor recreation facility. The amendment consists of: 1) resubdividing lots #1 & #10 to reduce the size of lot #10 and increase the size of lot #1, 2) removal of a four (4) foot fence on lot #10, 3) after-the-fact reduction in the size of the community gardens on lot #1, and 4) revising the landscaping on lot #10, 25 Bacon Street. 2. Site plan application #SP-14-05 of Kingdom Ventures, LLC to amend a previously approved plan for a multi-building and mixed-use complex. The amendment consists of converting 2,750 sq. ft. of child care facility use to a tavern/night club use, 7 Fayette Road. 3. Preliminary & final plat application #SD-14-07 of O’Brien Brothers Agency, Inc. for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) razing an existing single family dwelling, 2) constructing a three (3) unit multi-family dwelling, and 3) constructing a four (4) unit multi-family dwelling, 636 Hinesburg Road. 4. Continued preliminary & final plant application #SD-14-05 of Greenfield Capital, LLC to amend a previously approved 14,878 sq. ft. light manufacturing facility. The amendment consists of constructing a 25,840 sq. ft. addition, 35 Thompson Street.