Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Development Review Board - 07/07/2015 SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES 7 JULY 2015 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 7 July 2015, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: T. Barritt, Chair; M. Behr, B. Miller, J. Smith, D. Parsons, J. Wilking ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; D. Bell, L. Murphy, T. Vincent, B. Oxender, K. Patten, D. Marshall, C. Snyder, A. Rowe, T. & M. Ward, M. Dugan, P. O’Leary, R. Jeffers, M. Dugan, R. Roesler, D. & R. Smith, T. Burke, M. Bettenhausen, T. More, J. Halvorsen, B. Frisbie 1. Additions, deletions, or changes in order of agenda items: No changes were made to the Agenda. 2. Comments & Questions from the public not related to the Agenda: No issues were raised. 3. Announcements: There were no announcements. 4. Reopened final plat application #SD-15-02 of Halvorsen Development to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of: 1) a 9,356 q. ft. 275 seat standard restaurant, 2) a 71 room hotel (Comfort Suites), and 3) an 89 room hotel. The amendment consists of: 1) razing the 275 seat restaurant building, 2) constructing 11,242 sq. ft. retail building, and 3) constructing a 10’x55’ detached accessory structure, 1 Dorset Street: Mr. Vincent said the goal of reopening the application is to resolve any issues in the previous decision. He said they have made a lot of changes and drew attention to the packet provided to members which, he said, addresses the 11 points in the denial. Mr. Murphy then reviewed these points: a. Setbacks from Williston Rd. and Dorset Street: Mr. Murphy said they made no changes from what was approved in the preliminary plat approval. b. Mr. Murphy noted they were encouraged to keep the building close to Williston Road and Dorset Street to comply with Form Based Code. c. Compatibility with development plans in the area: Mr. Murphy said they have put in a staircase between the pergola and retail building and added a sidewalk near the hotel for a better connection. He also indicated the old design with a flat roof. The new proposal is for a mansard roof similar to the hotel with similar stone siding, substantial stone pillars, and paneling below the roof around the building. The stone will be similar to that used in the hotel. Regarding the façade facing the Interstate, Mr. Murphy noted the old plan was very plain. They have changed that to have some visual interest, while still maintaining the needed security. Mr. Murphy added that there was also concern regarding the pergola relating to the site. To address this, they have increased the height and “beefed up” the columns to be compatible with the hotel and the larger building. They have used the same brackets as the hotel and added 4 benches inside the pergola. They believe all of these changes make for a “connectedness” among the 3 buildings. d. Fire Chief’s concerns: The Chief was concerned with access from the north. To address this, they looked at the turning radius and re-aligned the sidewalk connection onto the site. Ms. Bell showed how a fire truck would enter and stage. She indicated 2 dropped curbs that the trucks could drive over. To accomplish this, one parking space was relocated. There is no net loss of parking. e. Transition from the structure to the site: Ms. Bell indicated that there is no change in the position of the retail building at the edge of the site which they were encouraged to do at preliminary plat. Ms. Bell acknowledged that the transition from the accessory structure to the retail building had been awkward. She indicated a new sidewalk connection and pedestrian accesses to the building as well as a sidewalk connection to the hotel for pedestrian access. Ms. Bell also showed the location of the bus stop and felt there is connectivity from there onto the site. Mr. Vincent said they now feel the pergola functions within the pedestrian system and helps unity the site. f. Re: the issue of whether the pergola is a “building”: Mr. Vincent said it was approved as a building at preliminary plat. g. Harmony of building materials: Mr. Patten, the architect, said they have chosen the stone element and metal roof and the architectural forms/brackets of the other building on the site. They also redesigned the pergola with a curving roof to mimic that on the port couchere of the hotel for cohesiveness. h. Continuity of landscaping: Mr. Oxender, the landscape architect, showed the changes along Dorset Street, noting the use of similar plant species as those used by the hotel. He identified the changes in species and showed areas with lower and taller plantings of the same species (taller plants to screen parking and shorted ones to allow for visibility). There will also be very low plants to line the walkways. 8 of the 17 species they are using are already occurring on the site. i. Confusion re: lighting: Mr. Murphy said lighting is now shown on the details plan and Exhibit #1. j. Confusion as to whether the main building is in the IHC District: Mr. Murphy said it is on the edge of the district. Mr. Barritt asked if the building will be 2 stories. Mr. Patten said there is a mezzanine for storage. He added that all the windows are clear glass; the lower windows have an interior “shutter” for privacy. He showed members a picture of this. Mr. Barritt said he likes the new steps and the curved roof on the pergola. Ms. Smith said she felt the building is 200% better, but she still felt it is too close to the road. Mr. Wilking said it was a positive step. Mr. Murphy stressed that the building location is what is required by the Form Based Code. Mr. Belair noted the preliminary plat had the pergola at 9.5 ft. The denied plan was 6 feet. He asked the exact setback waiver. Mr. Murphy said it is 6.3 feet. Mr. Belair also noted the preliminary plat front yard coverage was 40.3%; the denied plan was 44.3%. He asked if that has changed. Ms. Bell said it has changed negligibly. Members felt they wanted to get a legal opinion regarding the points in the letter that was submitted with the plan. Mr. Murphy said they are hoping for a decision as soon as possible. Mr. Miller then moved to close #SD-15-02. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Final Plat Application #SD-15-19 of South Village Communities, LLC, to amend a previously approved planned unit development of Phase II consisting of 99 residential units of a 334 residential unit project. The amendment is to reduce the required side and rear yard setback to five feet, Preserve Road: Members briefly reviewed the draft decision. No issues were raised. Mr. Miller moved to close #SD-15-19. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Final Plat Application #SD-15-18 of Snyder Residential Building Company, LLC, for a planned unit development on two parcels totaling 13.25 acres with lot #1 developed with a 55,230 sq. ft. general office building. The project consists of: 1) re-subdividing lot #2 to increase its size to 10.12 acres, 2) decreasing the size of lot #1 to 3.13 acres, and 3) developing lot #1 with a four story, 65 unit multi-family dwelling, 25 & 27 Green Mountain Drive: Mr. Behr noted that the owner of Stonehedge Investment Co. is his landlord. Members did not feel this represented a conflict of interest. Mr. Snyder reviewed the modifications made to the plan. He noted there is a common fitness room for all tenants in the building. There is also a walking trail loop on the property and a connection to an adjoining trail. They added a more defined grilling area with tables on the eastern portion of the lot. On the northeast corner of the building, they added some gardening space adjacent to walking paths for access. They have also added parking as the commercial tenants feel that they will be adding staff. The plan still requests a shared parking waiver. A majority of members were OK with the added parking. Mr. Behr suggested parking be phased in and only built if needed. Mr. Snyder agreed to this and showed what would be built today and what would be available if needed in the future. Mr. Wilking stressed that if the tenant needs parking, the applicant has to provide it. He also noted that the numbers of people in office buildings is increasing, not decreasing. Mr. Behr asked if units would be rented or purchased. Mr. Snyder said they would be rented. Members were OK with the height waiver. Mr. Rowe said they are proposing the pedestrian and sewer easements be concurrent. With regard to allowing vehicles on the easement, Mr. Snyder said the landlord would rather that not occur. Mr. Belair said the city has the adjacent easement and would like to continue it. Mr. Rowe said it doesn’t seem it would be used. Mr. Barritt said this would be years in the future. Mr. Belair said he will go back to staff and see what they want. Mr. Snyder said he would talk to the landlord again about this. Mr. & Mrs. Ward expressed concern with maintaining the path around the building as it is much used by people in the area. They are also concerned with maintaining the character of the park and with screening. No other issues were raised. Mr. Miller moved to close #SD-15-18. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Site Plan Application #SP-15-37 and Conditional Use Application #CU-15-03 of Super-Temp Realty Company, Inc., for after-the-fact approval to amend a previously approved plan for a 27,500 sq. ft. light manufacturing facility. The amendment consists of installing a 2.5 ft. vent stack requiring a height waiver, 104 Bowdoin Street: Mr. Marshall reviewed the history and noted they did everything the architect called for. Air pollution rules require that vents protrude from the highest point of a building, so putting it in the back of the building didn’t work. He then showed where they have put it and how it meets the state regulations. He added that they worked as hard as possible to reduce the height. He said it is actually 4.1 ft. high. Mr. Belair said the height waiver is still the same. No other issues were raised. Mr. Miller moved to close #SP-15-37. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Site Plan Application #SP-15-36 of Arlo Cota to amend a previously approved plan for an 11,074 sq. ft. boat, recreational vehicle and auto sales and service facility. The amendment consists of: 1) removing a large tree in the front yard, 2) adding four light poles, and 3) filling in a stormwater pond and constructing a new dry detention swale in front of auto display area, 3017 Williston Road: Mr. O’Leary said they would cut down a big spruce tree in the front yard. It gets pitch all over the display cars. The City Arborist has said there are some health issues with the tree. He recommends planting 3 additional trees. No other landscaping will be removed. Mr. O’Leary then showed the pond area.  He said it doesn’t get much water because of the location of the culvert. They propose to replace it with a new swale in front. It would hold the same volume as the pond. They also propose to relocate 4 new light poles around the perimeter and remove the 2 existing poles. Mr. Barritt noted the site is out of compliance due to an area covered with hard pack. Mr. Dugan said they didn’t know it wasn’t pervious. He said the area had become a mud hole. Mr. Barritt questioned the accessibility of 9 parking spaces. Mr. O’Leary said people have always parked there and he felt they are viable. Mr. Belair said the space behind those parking spaces is filled with boat display. He added that the applicant does not have a history of compliance. Mr. O’Leary understood the concern and said they can indicate a 24-foot aisle width behind the parking area. Mr. Belair said there is an issue of front yard coverage because of the hard pack. The requirement is 50 feet plus 12 feet. He also noted the tree that is being removed has to be replaced on a “caliper by caliper” basis. Mr. Barritt noted that the Fire Chief wants signage indicating a fire lane and that violators will be towed. Mr. Belair said there have to be signs to discourage people from exiting the “enter only” access. Mr. Dugan said there already are signs, but people don’t obey them. Mr. Barritt said the wetland buffers need to be shown on the plan. Mr. Miller then moved to continue #SP-15-35 to 18 August. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Minutes of 16 June 2015: Mr. Behr moved to approve the Minutes of 16 June 2015 as written. Mr. Parsons seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 10. Other Business: There was no other business. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 9:30 p.m. , Clerk ___________7-21-2015________________, Date Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com TO: South Burlington Development Review Board FROM: Raymond J. Belair, Administrative Officer SUBJECT: SD-15-02 1 Dorset Street - Halvorsen Development DATE: July 2, 2015 Development Review Board meeting Reopened final plat application #SD-15-02 of Halvorsen Development to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of: 1) a 9,356 sq. ft. 275 seat standard restaurant, 2) a 71 room hotel (Comfort Suites), and 3) an 89 room hotel. The amendment consists of; 1) razing the 275 seat restaurant building, 2) constructing 11,242 sq. ft. retail building, and 3) constructing a 10’ X 55’ detached accessory structure, 1 Dorset Street. The following is a list of changes to the project plans from the approved preliminary plat plans and the plans denied by the Board on 5/6/15. This list is being provided as a context element for discussion. 1. The pergola was relocated to the north. 2. The setback for the pergola was decreased from 9.5 ft. to 6 ft. along Dorset Street. 3. Front yard coverage along Williston Road was increased from 40.3% to 44.3%. 4. Added a bike access path from Williston Road along the west side of the building to the parking area. 5. Relocated the lease line to avoid crossing the porte-cochere of the Comfort Inn. 6. Removed any new landscaping southerly of the lease line and the pergola along Dorset Street. 7. Altered the architecture of the pergola. 8. Altered the west elevation of the principal building by adding two (2) additional piers. 9. Additional details which were not part of the required changes. 12-052HalvorsenDevelopmentOne Dorset StreetSouth Burlington, VTOverall Site PlanC2-0108/22/141" = 30'14-091RMP/NPCSMM0FeetGraphic Scale30 30 60 90 120ZONING INFORMATION:1. ZONING: COMMERCIAL 1/INTERSTATE HIGHWAY OVERLAY 22. COVERAGE CALCULATIONS: TOTAL PARCEL AREA: 244,503 SF (5.61 AC.)LEASE AREA: 53,144 SF (1.22 AC.)EXISTINGBUILDING 41,450 SF 17.0%PAVEMENT 110,319 SF 45.1%SIDEWALKS 16,363 SF 6.7%TOTAL IMPACTS168,131 SF68.8%FRONT YARD (WILLISTON RD.) 7,900 SFTOTAL IMPACT 7,035 SF 89.0%FRONT YARD (DORSET ST.) 26,870 SFTOTAL IMPACT 14,740 SF 54.9%PROPOSED (BASED ON PUD TOTAL PARCEL AREA)BUILDING 42,341 SF 17.3%PAVEMENT 109,961 SF 45.0%SIDEWALKS 19,935 SF 8.2%TOTAL IMPACTS172,237 SF70.5%FRONT YARD (WILLISTON RD.) 7,900 SFTOTAL IMPACT 3,508 SF 44.4%FRONT YARD (DORSET ST.) 26,870 SFTOTAL IMPACT 13,066 SF 48.6%FRONT YARD WAIVER REQUESTED FOR DORSET & WILLISTON ROAD3. PARKING REQUIRED: 89 ROOM HOTEL 89 SPACES8 EMPLOYEES 8 SPACES71 ROOM HOTEL 71 SPACES8 EMPLOYEES 8 SPACESRETAIL 57 SPACES 233 SPACES CURRENT EXISTING PARKING SD #12-33 267 SPACES (80 SPACES ON SITE) PROPOSED PARKING (THIS APPLICATION) 233 SPACES 57 SPACES ON SITE)EXISTING HOTEL71 ROOMS50' BUILDINGSETBACKMALL ACCESS50' IHO 2U.S. ROUTE 2DORSET STREETWILLISTON ROADINTERSTATE 89 OFF RAMP GROUND LEASE LINEZONE: INTERSTATE HIGHWAYOVERLAY 2 (IHO2)ZONE: COMMERCIAL 1PREVIOUSLY APPROVED HOTEL89 ROOMS#SD 12-331 DAB09/29/14PROPOSED COMMERCIAL BUILDING9,750 S.F.1,492 S.F. MEZZANINESheet TitleProject TitleUse of These DrawingsProject Reference:Scale:Project Number:Date:Drawn By:Project Engineer:Approved By:No. Description Date ByRevisions478 BLAIR PARK ROAD | WILLISTON, VERMONT 05495802 879 6331 | WWW.TCEVT.COMTRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERSNo. 8104CIVILJOHN P. PITROW ISKISTATE OF VERMONT PROFE SSIONAL ENGINEERLI CENSEDField Book:1. Unless otherwise noted, these Drawings are intended forpreliminary planning, coordination with other disciplines orutilities, and/or approval from the regulatory authorities.They are not intended as construction drawings unless notedas such or marked approved by a regulatory authority.2. By use of these drawings for construction of the Project,the Owner represents that they have reviewed, approved,and accepted the drawings, obtained all necessarypermits, and have met with all applicable parties/disciplines,including but not limited to, the Engineer and the Architect,to insure these plans are properly coordinated including, butnot limited to, contract documents, specifications,owner/contractor agreements, building and mechanicalplans, private and public utilities, and other pertinent permitsfor construction.3. Owner and Architect, are responsible for final design andlocation of buildings shown, including an area measured aminimum five (5) feet around any building and coordinatingfinal utility connections shown on these plans.4. Prior to using these plans for construction layout, the usershall contact TCE to ensure the plan contains the mostcurrent revisions.5. These Drawings are specific to the Project and are nottransferable. As instruments of service, these drawings, andcopies thereof, furnished by TCE are its exclusive property.Changes to the drawings may only be made by TCE. Iferrors or omissions are discovered, they shall be brought tothe attention of TCE immediately.6. It is the User's responsibility to ensure this copy contains themost current revisions. If unsure, please contact TCE.15°±TrueMagneticSNOWSTORAGE23.2'Entrance & Building Dist. toProperty Line2 DAB11/18/14Entrance & Sidewalks3 DAB11/26/14Response to City Staff Comments4SMM12/22/14Revisions for Final Plat5SMM01/19/15Updated Coverage CalcsNOTE:"WAYFINDING AND/OR INTERPRETIVE INFORMATION" MAYBE INSTALLED WITHIN OR ON THE PERGOLA STRUCTURE.6SMM01/22/15Add "WAYFINDING" Note7DAB03/06/15Relocated, Water Line, MoveStructure Within Lease Line, AddProposed Lease LineModification & Update ZoningInformation8DAB04/17/15Add Future Charging Stations& Conduit50' BUILDINGSETBACK50' BUILDINGSETBACK9DAB06/23/15Firechief / Lighting10DAB06/25/15Final Plan Submission17.3'9.5'SNOWSTORAGESNOWSTORAGE6.3 12-052Sheet TitleProject TitleUse of These DrawingsProject Reference:Scale:Project Number:Date:Drawn By:Project Engineer:Approved By:No. Description Date ByRevisions478 BLAIR PARK ROAD | WILLISTON, VERMONT 05495802 879 6331 | WWW.TCEVT.COMTRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERSNo. 8104CIVILJOHN P. PITROW ISKISTATE OF VERMONT PROFE SSIONAL ENGINEERLI CENSEDField Book:1. Unless otherwise noted, these Drawings are intended forpreliminary planning, coordination with other disciplines orutilities, and/or approval from the regulatory authorities.They are not intended as construction drawings unless notedas such or marked approved by a regulatory authority.2. By use of these drawings for construction of the Project,the Owner represents that they have reviewed, approved,and accepted the drawings, obtained all necessarypermits, and have met with all applicable parties/disciplines,including but not limited to, the Engineer and the Architect,to insure these plans are properly coordinated including, butnot limited to, contract documents, specifications,owner/contractor agreements, building and mechanicalplans, private and public utilities, and other pertinent permitsfor construction.3. Owner and Architect, are responsible for final design andlocation of buildings shown, including an area measured aminimum five (5) feet around any building and coordinatingfinal utility connections shown on these plans.4. Prior to using these plans for construction layout, the usershall contact TCE to ensure the plan contains the mostcurrent revisions.5. These Drawings are specific to the Project and are nottransferable. As instruments of service, these drawings, andcopies thereof, furnished by TCE are its exclusive property.Changes to the drawings may only be made by TCE. Iferrors or omissions are discovered, they shall be brought tothe attention of TCE immediately.6. It is the User's responsibility to ensure this copy contains themost current revisions. If unsure, please contact TCE.HalvorsenDevelopmentOne Dorset StreetSouth Burlington, VTSite PlanC2-0208/22/141" = 20'14-091RMP/NPCSMM0FeetGraphic Scale20 20 40 60 80PREVIOUSLYAPPROVED HOTELNOTES:1. NO LARGE SNOW LOADING IS SHOWN ONSITE.MANAGEMENT COMPANY WILL BE REQUIRED TOREMOVE SNOW FROM SITE AFTER SIGNIFICANTSNOW EVENTS.2. INSTALL NEW TRANSFORMER AND CONDUITSUCH THAT ELECTRICAL SERVICE IS NOTINTERRUPTED.3. DISINFECT WATER SERVICE PER VT WATER SUPPLYRULE APPENDIX A PART 11.8.02.4. NO FLOODWAY ON SITE PER AVAILABLE FIRMMAPS.5. TEST BORING REQUIRED TO DETERMINELOCATION OF 12" DI AND 12" AC CONNECTION.REPORT TO ENGINEER WITH FINDINGS TODETERMINE IF THERE ARE ANY CONFLICTS WITHSTRUCTURE.EXISTINGPROPOSEDEXISTINGMUTCD R10-730"24"1 DAB09/29/14Entrance & Signage2 DAB11/18/14Entrance & Sidewalks GROUND LEASE LINENEW "DO NOT ENTER" SIGNMUTCD R5-1 30"x30" WITH"ONE WAY" MUCTD SIGN R6-1RBREAKAWAY POST3 DAB11/26/14Response to City Staff Comments4SMM12/22/14Changes for Final PlatMinor Revisions for WW5SMM01/28/156DAB03/06/15Move Structure Within LeaseLine, Add Proposed Lease LineModification, Relocated WaterLine & Flush Island Curb67DAB04/17/15Add Future Charging Stations& Conduit8DAB06/23/15Firechief / Lighting9DAB06/25/15Final Plan Submission 12-052Sheet TitleProject TitleUse of These DrawingsProject Reference:Scale:Project Number:Date:Drawn By:Project Engineer:Approved By:No. Description Date ByRevisions478 BLAIR PARK ROAD | WILLISTON, VERMONT 05495802 879 6331 | WWW.TCEVT.COMTRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERSField Book:1. Unless otherwise noted, these Drawings are intended forpreliminary planning, coordination with other disciplines orutilities, and/or approval from the regulatory authorities.They are not intended as construction drawings unless notedas such or marked approved by a regulatory authority.2. By use of these drawings for construction of the Project,the Owner represents that they have reviewed, approved,and accepted the drawings, obtained all necessarypermits, and have met with all applicable parties/disciplines,including but not limited to, the Engineer and the Architect,to insure these plans are properly coordinated including, butnot limited to, contract documents, specifications,owner/contractor agreements, building and mechanicalplans, private and public utilities, and other pertinent permitsfor construction.3. Owner and Architect, are responsible for final design andlocation of buildings shown, including an area measured aminimum five (5) feet around any building and coordinatingfinal utility connections shown on these plans.4. Prior to using these plans for construction layout, the usershall contact TCE to ensure the plan contains the mostcurrent revisions.5. These Drawings are specific to the Project and are nottransferable. As instruments of service, these drawings, andcopies thereof, furnished by TCE are its exclusive property.Changes to the drawings may only be made by TCE. Iferrors or omissions are discovered, they shall be brought tothe attention of TCE immediately.6. It is the User's responsibility to ensure this copy contains themost current revisions. If unsure, please contact TCE.HalvorsenDevelopmentSouth Burlington, VTLandscaping PlanL1-011" = 20'14-091NPCSMM0FeetGraphic Scale20 20 40 60 80PLANT LISTNOTES:1. PARKING AREA AND DRIVE 25,000 SFLANDSCAPE ISLANDS 2,500 SF (10%) - 10 % REQUIRED57 PARKING SPACES, INCLUDING 4 ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES - 3REQUIRED13 DECIDUOUS TREES WITHIN OR NEAR PERIMETER OF PARKING AREAS -11 REQUIRED2. ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE EXCAVATED TO A DEPTH OF 3' OR DEPTHOF LARGEST ROOT BALL, WHICHEVER IS DEEPER.BACKFILL WITH BLEND OF CLEAN FILL AND ORGANIC MATERIAL ASAPPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.NO COARSE GRAVEL OR PAVEMENT BASE MATERIAL SHALL BE USED ASBACKFILL IN PLANTING AREAS.3. ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BE ESTABLISHED AS TURF SHALL RECEIVE 4" OFCLEAN TOPSOIL PRIOR TO SEEDING AND MULCHING.LANDSCAPING NARRATIVE:THE CONCEPT FOR THE LANDSCAPING PLAN AROUND THE RECONSTRUCTEDBUILDING INCLUDES THE GENERATION OF A NUMBER LANDSCAPE ISLANDS ADJACENTTO THE BUILDING AND PARKING LOT WHERE LITTLE LANDSCAPING CURRENTLY EXISTS.PLANTS SPECIES ARE SELECTED TO PROVIDE BOTH A VISUAL BUFFER FOR THE PARKINGAREA, TO ADD TO THE VISUAL INTEREST OF THE SITE AND COMPLIMENT THE BUILDINGARCHITECTURE. THE PROPOSED PLANTS INCLUDE A MIX OF DECIDUOUS ANDEVERGREENS VEGETATION, INCLUDING DECIDUOUS SHADE TREES AND SHRUBS,EVERGREEN SHRUBS AND GROUNDCOVER, PERENNIAL PLANTS AND GRASSES. INADDITION TO THEIR SELECTION FOR VISUAL INTEREST, DIVERSITY AND SHADE, ONLYSALT TOLERANT PLANTS ARE BEING PROPOSED.THERE ARE A NUMBER OF TREES ADJACENT TO THE SITE, THAT ARE PRESENT ALONG THEHIGHWAY EXIT RAMP AND ALONG BOTH WILLISTON RD. AND DORSET ST., WHICHHAVE BEEN PLANTED AS PART OF RECENT ROAD IMPROVEMENTS. TREES BEINGPLACED AT THE PERIMETER OF THE PARKING AREA ARE INTENDED TO COMPLEMENTTHE EXISTING VEGETATION TO REMAIN. IN ADDITION, EMPHASIS HAS BEEN PLACEDON SCREENING BUILT ELEMENTS IN THE IHO OVERLAY DISTRICT FROM THE INTERSTATE.THE LANDSCAPING THAT IS OCCURRING AROUND THE EXISTING BUILDING WILL BEREMOVED WHEN THE BUILDING IS DEMOLISHED AND REPLACED WITH PLANTS SHOWNON THE LANDSCAPING PLAN, INSTALLED IN A COHESIVE MANNER WITH SIZES ANDQUANTITIES APPROPRIATE FOR THE SITE'S SCALE.08/22/14L-001LAST REVISED 03/15/20132013 TRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERSTREE PLANTING DETAIL4" SAUCER RIMBACKFILL WITH EXCAVATEDMATERIAL. IF SOIL ISPREDOMINATELYCLAY OR GRAVELINCORPORATEORGANIC MATERIAL ASDIRECTED AND APPROVEDBY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTPLANT PIT WIDTH3X BALL DIA.NOTES:* STAKE ONLY IN EXTREMELY WINDY CONDITIONS AS APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT * IF KNOWN, PLANT THIN BARKED TREES WITH THE SAME SUN ORIENTATION OR WRAP WITH WHITE POLYPROPYLENE WRAP * BURLAP: LOOSEN, CUT, & REMOVE NATURAL BURLAP FROM TOP 1/2 OF ROOT BALL. REMOVE SYNTHETIC BURLAP * WIRE BASKETS: CUT AWAY BOTTOM RINGS. PARTIALLY BACKFILL THEN REMOVE REMAINING WIRE. * PLANT TREE TO EXPOSE ROOT FLARE, MAIN ORDER ROOT, AND IN SAME ORIENTATION AS TREE WAS GROWN. DO NOT PLANT TOO DEEP * 3" LAYER SHREDDED BARK MULCH (TO BE APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT) OVER PERMEABLE WEED FABRIC. DO NOT PLACE NEXT TO TREE TRUNK6" CLEARANCE2' DIA.MULCH RINGSLOPE GROUNDTO DRAINDIG TREE PIT ONLY ASDEEP AS ROOT BALLL-002LAST REVISED 03/15/20132013 TRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERSBALL AND BURLAP SHRUBFROM TOP 1/3 OF ROOT BALL*LOOSEN, CUT, & REMOVE BURLAPCONTINUOUS WHEN USED IN BEDS.WEED BARRIER FABRIC TO BE*SHREDDED BARK MULCH ANDGROWNWHICH SHRUB HAD PREVIOUSLY*PLANT SHRUB AT SAME DEPTH ATARCHITECT) OVER PERMEABLE WEED(TO BE APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE3" LAYER SHREDDED BARK MULCH3" SAUCER RIMFABRIC. DO NOT PLACE CLOSE TOMAIN STEM.PLANT PIT WIDTH 3XBALL DIA.NOTES:BACKFILL WITH EXCAVATEDMATERIAL. IF SOIL IS PREDOMINATELYCLAY OR GRAVEL INCORPORATEORGANIC MATERIAL AS DIRECTEDAND APPROVED BY LANDSCAPEARCHITECT1 BJO09/29/14Add Plantings &Update Plant List2 BJO11/18/14Update Plantings &Plant ListAA'SECTION A-A'SEE DETAIL SHEET C8-013 BJO03/06/15Update Plantings &Plant List403/20/15Update PlantingLocationsBJO506/15/15Update Plantings &Plant ListBJO6DAB06/23/15Firechief / Lighting7DAB06/25/15Final Plan Submission * Z = LUMINAIRE MOUNTING HEIGHT A.F.G.*HUBBELL IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PERFORMANCEOF LUMINAIRE MANUFACTURED BY OTHERSNOT TO SCALECORNICE DETAILFOR PRICING CONTACTNESCO40 Hudson RdCanton, MA 02021Tel: 781-828-9494Fax: 781-575-1398E-Mail: CVSplans@nescoweb.comPOLE SPEC FOR CIMARRON:SINGLE FIXTURESSS-XX-XX-X-A2-XXTWIN FIXTURE 180 DEGREE APARTSSS-XX-XX-X-C2-XX****GREENVILLE, SC29607Graphic Scale01. THIS LIGHTING DESIGN IS BASED ON LIMITED INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY OTHERS TO HUBBELL LIGHTING. SITE DETAILS PROVIDED HEREON ARE REPRODUCED ONLY AS A VISUALIZATION AID. FIELD DEVIATIONS MAY SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECT PREDICTEDPERFORMANCE. PRIOR TO INSTALLATION, CRITICAL SITE INFORMATION (POLE LOCATIONS, ORIENTATION, MOUNTING HEIGHT, ETC.) SHOULD BE COORDINATED WITH THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR SPECIFIER RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROJECT.2. LUMINAIRE DATA IS TESTED TO INDUSTRY STANDARDS UNDER LABORATORY CONDITIONS. OPERATING VOLTAGE AND NORMAL MANUFACTURING TOLERANCES OF LAMP, BALLAST, AND LUMINAIRE MAY AFFECT FIELD RESULTS.3. CONFORMANCE TO FACILITY CODE AND OTHER LOCAL REQUIREMENTS IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OWNER AND/OR THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE.ADCNORTHPLANRREVISED FROM DRAWING NUMBER(S):DRAWING NO.SCALEDATEAP'VDDW'NTITLEANGLE(S)REFERENCEHUBBELLHubbell Lighting, Inc.701 MILLENNIUM BLVD180 02704/14/2015NOT A CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT - FOR DESIGN PURPOSES ONLYX0,0Y40 20 40 801" = 40'CVS #10690SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT1471241147165315743591574457xINTERSTATE89OFFRAMP4"WILLISTONROAD(ROUTE2)DORSETSTREET1CD902D903D904OC5OC67OCOC89OCS210S411S412S613S61415S616S617S618S619S6S62021S6S622S62324S625S6S62627S60.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.9 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.7 1.0 1.2 1.1 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.7 1.5 1.1 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.8 1.2 1.9 1.4 1.6 1.3 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 1.0 1.3 1.7 2.0 1.9 1.5 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.1 0.9 0.6 0.6 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.1 1.7 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.0 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.8 2.2 1.8 1.2 1.1 1.4 2.0 2.1 2.0 2.1 1.9 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.0 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.6 1.6 2.5 3.3 3.2 2.7 2.3 2.1 2.0 2.4 2.7 2.3 1.6 1.6 1.9 2.5 2.8 2.9 3.0 2.6 2.0 1.7 1.6 1.4 1.0 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 1.3 2.3 2.9 3.0 2.6 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.5 2.6 2.5 2.2 2.1 2.3 2.8 3.2 3.4 3.1 2.6 2.1 1.8 1.8 1.4 1.0 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 1.0 2.0 2.7 2.5 2.0 2.0 1.8 2.2 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.2 2.0 2.4 2.9 3.3 3.4 2.8 2.3 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.8 1.7 2.1 2.1 1.8 1.6 1.7 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.6 2.2 1.8 2.0 2.5 3.2 3.4 3.0 2.3 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.4 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.7 1.4 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.6 1.6 2.1 2.5 2.6 2.5 2.2 1.9 2.0 2.5 3.3 3.4 2.9 2.3 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.8 1.3 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.5 2.7 2.7 2.4 2.0 2.2 2.6 3.2 3.6 3.1 2.7 2.2 1.8 1.8 1.4 1.0 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.8 1.3 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.8 2.1 2.2 2.7 2.8 2.8 2.5 2.3 2.6 3.1 3.4 3.6 3.2 2.7 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.5 1.0 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.8 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.6 3.3 3.2 2.7 2.6 2.9 3.5 3.6 3.4 3.0 2.4 1.8 1.5 1.3 1.4 1.1 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.6 2.4 3.1 3.9 3.7 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.7 3.8 3.2 2.6 2.1 1.3 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.8 1.9 5.3 5.9 6.4 6.4 6.3 6.2 6.2 6.3 6.1 5.1 2.1 1.6 1.0 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.6 3.2 18.2 18.8 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 18.8 19.0 18.6 17.1 26.8 30.3 17.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.10.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 4.6 3.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.03CL1-90L-4K-5M (Hubbell Ltg)SINGLE207.8185220.9500.9501.0000.903Luminaire ScheduleSymbolLabelOC5EVO 41/29 8AR 120SINGLE48.931080.9500.9501.0000.903S21ECVLXWET-2-120-4K-2780GROUPN.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.0.903QtyDescriptionArrangementLuminaire Location SummaryLumNoLabelXYZS42ECVLXWET-4-120-4K-2780GROUPN.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.0.903Lum. WattsLum. LumensLMFLDDBFOrientTilt1LLFC45618428332.10302D9051622128003D90Calculation SummaryLabelDescriptionUnitsAvgS615ECVLXWET-6-120-4K-2780GROUPN.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.0.9036502202889.10504D90599.52282890023S6593.973295.09213.660024S6616.0085OC637.007292.70610.590MaxMinAvg/Min06Max/MinCVS PARKING1.0 FC MINIMUMOC645.007292.70610.59007OC653.007292.70610.59013S6587.844295.09313.660014S6581.844295.09313.660015S6575.844295.09313.660016S6569.844295.09313.660017S6563.844295.09313.660018S6557.844295.09313.660019S6551.844295.09313.660008OC648Fc20S6545.844295.09313.660021S6539.844295.09313.660022S6533.844295.09313.6600295.09213.660025S6622.008295.09213.660026S6600.042295.09213.660027S6606.042295.09213.66002.576.41.02.576.40C1CL1-60L-4K-4-BC (Hubbell Ltg)37210.50SINGLE140.396560.9500.9501.0000.90309OC65437210.50010S2529.839295.11113.660011S4627.004295.09213.66D900012S4611.038295.09213.6600CVS PAR K I N G 1.0 FC M I N I M U M Illuminan c e ( F c ) Average = 2 . 5 7 Maximum = 6 . 4 Minimum = 1.0Avg/Min Ratio = 2.57Max/Min Ratio = 6.40 CCTA BUS STOP LOCATION #SD-15-19 1 SD_15_19_MarshRoad_South Village Communities_LLC_Phase2_reduce_setbacks_FinalPlat_ffd.doc CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING SOUTH VILLAGE COMMUNITIES, LLC – 1840 SPEAR STREET FINAL PLAT APPLICATION #SD-15-19 FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION South Village Communities, LLC, hereinafter referred to as the applicant, seeks Final Plat approval to amend a previously approved planned unit development of Phase II consisting of 99 residential units of a 334 residential unit project. The amendment is to reduce the required side and rear yard setback to five (5) feet, Preserve Road. The Development Review Board held a public hearing on July 7, 2015. Robin Jeffers represented the applicant. Based on testimony provided at the above mentioned public hearing and the plans and supporting materials contained in the document file for this application, the Development Review Board finds, concludes, and decides the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The applicant seeks Final Plat approval to amend a previously approved planned unit development of Phase II consisting of 99 residential units of a 334 residential unit project. The amendment is to reduce the required side and rear yard setback to five (5) feet, Preserve Road. 2. The owner of record of the subject property is South Village Communities, LLC. 3. The subject property is located in the Southeast Quadrant (SEQ) Zoning District. 4. The plan submitted consist of one (1) page entitled “Phase 2 Lotting Plat South Village Communities, LLC Spear Street South Burlington, Vermont”, prepared by Civil Engineering Associates, Inc., dated 10/31/13 and last revised on 12/8/14. 5. The Board granted a similar request for a reduction in side yard and rear yard setbacks from 10 ft. to 5 ft. for Phase I of South Village on January 9, 2008 (#SD-7-74 and #SD-7-75). DECISION Motion by __________________ seconded by _________________, to approve final plat application #SD-15-19 of South Village Communities, LLC subject to the following stipulations: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations shall remain in full effect except as amended herein. 2. This project shall be completed as shown on the plat submitted by the applicant and on file in the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning. 3. The Board approves the following waivers: a. The side yard setback and rear yard setbacks are reduced from 10 ft. to 5 ft. for lots #38-70. #SD-15-19 2 SD_15_19_MarshRoad_South Village Communities_LLC_Phase2_reduce_setbacks_FinalPlat_ffd.doc 4. The final plat plans shall be revised to show the changes below and shall require approval of the Administrative Officer. Three (3) copies of the approved revised plans shall be submitted to the Administrative Officer prior to recording the final plat plans: a. The plans shall be revised to show side yard setback and rear yard setbacks as 5 ft. for lots #38-70. 5. Any changes to the final plat plan shall require approval of the South Burlington Development Review Board. 6. The mylars shall be recorded prior to any zoning permit issuance. 7. The final plat plans shall be recorded in the land records within 180 days or this approval is null and void. The plans shall be signed by the Board Chair or Clerk prior to recording. Prior to recording the final plat plan, the applicant shall submit a copy of the survey plats in digital format. The format of the digital information shall require approval of the South Burlington GIS Coordinator. Tim Barritt Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Mark Behr Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Brian Breslend Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Bill Miller Yea Nay Abstain Not Present David Parsons Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Jennifer Smith Yea Nay Abstain Not Present John Wilking Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Motion carried by a vote of X– 0 – 0. Signed this ____ day of __________________ 2015, by _____________________________________ Tim Barritt, Chair Please note: You have the right to appeal this decision to the Vermont Environmental Court, pursuant to 24 VSA 4471 and VRCP 76 in writing, within 30 days of the date this decision is issued. The fee is $225.00. If you fail to appeal this decision, your right to challenge this decision at some future time may be lost because you waited too long. You will be bound by the decision, pursuant to 24 VSA 4472 (d) (exclusivity of remedy; finality). CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_15_18_25&27GreenMountainDrive_SnyderConstruc tionCompany_apartment_building_FINAL DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: July 2, 2015 Application received: May 8, 2015 FINAL PLAT PLAN REVIEW #SD-15-18 THE SNYDER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, LLC – 25-27 GREEN MOUNTAIN DRIVE Meeting Date: July 6, 2015 Applicant The Snyder Construction Company, LLC 4076 Shelburne Road, Suite 6 Shelburne, VT 05482 Contact Person Andrew Rowe Lamoreux & Dickinson Engineers 14 Morse Drive Essex, VT 05452 Owners The Stonehenge Investment Corporation, Inc. 1 Lawson Lane Burlington, VT 05402 Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_18_25&27GreenMountainDrive_SnyderConstructionCompany_apartment_building_FINAL.doc PROJECT DESCRIPTION Final plat application #SD-15-18 of Snyder Residential Building Company, LLC for a planned unit development on two (2) parcels totaling 13.25 acres with lot #1 developed with a 55,230 sq. ft. general office building. The project consists of: 1) resubdividing lot #2 to increase its size to 10.12 acres, 2) decreasing the size of lot #1 to 3.13 acres, and 3) developing lot #1 with a four (4) story 65 unit multi- family dwelling, 25 & 27 Green Mountain Drive. COMMENTS Administrative Officer Ray Belair, and Planner Temporary Assignment Dan Albrecht, referred to herein as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted on May 8, 2015 and offer the following comments: DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS: Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements: C – 2 Zoning District Required Existing Lot #1/Lot #2 Proposed Lot #1 Proposed Lot #2 *Min. Lot Size 6000 sq. ft./unit residential, 40,000 sq. ft. other 3.70 / 9.55 acres 3.13 acres 10.12  Max. Front Yard Coverage 30% n.a. / 9.2% n.a. 11.2%  Max. Building Coverage 40% 0% / 4.3% 19.6% (18.6% approved at Prelim) 4.1% (4.2% approved at Prelim)  Max. Overall Coverage 70% 18.0% / 22.9% 42.6% (40.7% approved at Prelim) 28.0% (24.8% approved at Prelim)  Min. Front Setback 30 ft. >30 ft. >50 ft. No change  Min. Side Setback 10 ft. >10 ft. >10 ft. No change  Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. >30 ft. 47 ft. No change  Max. Building Height 40ft. (pitched roof) unknown 52 ft. No change  Zoning compliance  Requires a height waiver of 12 feet * The two (2) lots are being combined for purposes of the LDRs (i.e., density) and function as a single Planned Unit Development. Staff remains comfortable with the proposed height waiver which the Board approved at Preliminary Plat. The building will be located on the uphill side of the parcel adjacent to the woods and will not obscure any views. The proposed height waiver also facilitates a higher density of housing units on the parcel, lower overall lot coverage, and maintaining greater wooded areas. 1. The Board should discuss whether to grant the requested height waiver of 12 ft. for a final building height of 52 ft. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_18_25&27GreenMountainDrive_SnyderConstructionCompany_apartment_building_FINAL.doc Density In the C-2 District, up to seven (7) housing units per acre are permitted. The City does not allocate land area/development density for commercial buildings, and as a PUD, the entire 13.25 acres are allocable toward the residential density. This would allow a theoretical maximum of 92.75 dwelling units; 65 are proposed, well under that limit. Staff considers this criterion to be met. 5.08 Supplemental Standards for All Commercial Districts A. Development according to commercial district regulations and multifamily development at the residential density specified for the applicable district shall be subject to site plan review, as set forth in Article 14, the purpose of which shall be to encourage innovation of design and layout, encourage more efficient use of land for commercial development, promote mixed-use development and shared parking opportunities, provide coordinated access to and from commercial developments via public roadways, and maintain service levels on public roadways with a minimum of publicly financed roadway improvements. The proposed development is an “in-fill” type of development that makes use of the land which is currently being used for parking and some undeveloped land. It is also a mixed-use development that includes a shared parking arrangement, and a coordinated access with the adjacent office building. Staff considers this criterion to be met. B. Multiple structures, multiple uses within structures, and multiple uses on a subject site may be allowed, if the Development Review Board determines that the subject site has sufficient frontage, lot size, and lot depth. Area requirements and frontage needs may be met by the consolidation of contiguous lots under separate ownership. Construction of a new public street may serve as the minimum frontage needs. Where multiple structures are proposed, maximum lot coverage shall be the normal maximum for the applicable district. The lot onto which this new building will be constructed does not have frontage on a public street but will be served by a private right-of-way from Green Mountain Drive. The Public Works Director reviewed this access at sketch and found it to be acceptable. No new public street is recommended. C. Parking, Access, and Internal Circulation (1) Parking requirements may be modified, depending in the extent of shared parking, the presence of sidewalks or recreation paths, and residences lying within walking distance (defined as no further than one-quarter (¼) mile for purposes of commercial zoning districts). Any requirements for shared access and/or parking must be secured by permanent legal agreements acceptable to the City Attorney. (2) Parking areas shall be designed for efficient internal circulation and the minimum number of curb cuts onto the public roadway. (3) Access improvements and curb cut consolidation may be required. The existing private drive serving the existing office building will be shared with the new residential building; a new spur drive leads to the new building. Parking would be both new and revised to be shared between these lots and uses. The applicant has provided information calculating the legal CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_18_25&27GreenMountainDrive_SnyderConstructionCompany_apartment_building_FINAL.doc requirements for parking under the LDRs for both uses; a shared parking analysis showing a reduced requirement based upon information from the Urban Land Institute The basics are as follows: Required parking per LDRs: 147 spaces for 65 dwelling units + 170 spaces for 48,578 sq. ft. of office space = 317 parking spaces Shared parking analysis: indicates a maximum need for 282 parking spaces At Preliminary Plat, as part of the PUD approval process, the Board approved the following: A total of 118 spaces (64 garage spaces plus 54 surface spaces) for the multi-family building plus 125 spaces for the existing commercial building for a total of 243 spaces. Staff was comfortable with the proposed waiver as 37 of the 65 units will be one-bedroom units and the project is located near employment opportunities and the CCTA bus route on U.S. Route 7. The total proposed parking at Preliminary Plat was therefore 243 spaces a shortage of 39 spaces or 14% for which the Board approved a waiver. At Final Plat, the applicant requests the following: A total of 118 spaces (64 garage spaces plus 54 surface spaces) for the residential apartment building plus 170 spaces for the existing commercial building for a total of 288 spaces. The total proposed parking at Final Plat is 288 spaces Staff is comfortable with the allocation of 118 spaces for the apartment building residents as 37 of the 65 units will be one-bedroom units and the project is located near employment opportunities and the CCTA bus route on U.S. Route 7. However, staff has concerns about the proposed expansion of the parking area to service the existing general office building. At Preliminary Plat, the design was assessed under PUD principles and the use of shared parking was found to be innovative and the granting of a waiver was therefore justified. The proposed expansion of the parking area for the general office building defeats the purpose of the original design approved at Preliminary Plat. 2. The Board should discuss in detail with the applicant why they feel the original parking layout and number of spaces approved at Preliminary is no longer warranted. The Board and the applicant should discuss ways that the original innovative parking concept approved at Preliminary can be retained while addressing the desire of general office to increase their parking spaces. Commercial properties that abut residential districts shall provide a screen or buffer along the abutting line in accordance with Section 3.06(I) of these Regulations. This criterion is not applicable. SITE PLAN REVIEW 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 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_18_25&27GreenMountainDrive_SnyderConstructionCompany_apartment_building_FINAL.doc 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. Staff considers the applicant’s proposal to be consistent with the goals, objectives and stated land use policies 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. (2) Parking: (a) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings. Any side of a building facing a public street shall be considered a front side of a building for the purposes of this subsection. Staff believes that no parking is proposed to the front of the building as the front lot line faces west and the overall property’s public road frontage is on a separate lot and facing north. (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. There are other similarly large and tall structures in the vicinity. The applicant is seeking a 12 ft. height waiver from the 40 ft. height limit as noted on page 2. (4) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansion shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. The applicant has submitted plans detailing how they propose to meet this criterion. The Department of Public Works has reviewed and accepted these plans. This criterion is met. 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. The applicant has submitted plans detailing how they propose to meet this criterion. Staff considers this criterion to be met. 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 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_18_25&27GreenMountainDrive_SnyderConstructionCompany_apartment_building_FINAL.doc other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. A new 20 ft.-wide utility easement to the City is proposed. This easement serves only a new water service to the new building. This easement is not necessary because it is for a private water service and should be removed from the plan. Several other easements are already in place and new sidewalk is proposed along the northern perimeter of the parcel as well as extensions of and connections to a nearby walking trail. As noted in the applicant’s letter dated November 13, 2014, an easement plan will be prepared prior to construction to note easements and reciprocal rights between Lots 1 and 2. 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. Noted above. This criterion is met. C. Disposal of Wastes. All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling or other requirements, shall be accessible, secure and properly screened with opaque fencing to ensure that trash and debris do not escape the enclosure(s). Small receptacles intended for use by households or the public (i.e., non-dumpster, non-large drum) shall not be required to be fenced or screened. The applicant has provided detailed plans and elevations for a fully enclosed dumpster building. Staff considers this criterion to be met. D. Landscaping and Screening Requirements. See Article 13, Section 13.06 Landscaping, Screening, and Street Trees. The applicant has submitted a detailed landscaping plan and budget. The City Arborist provided the following comments in an email to staff dated 6/23/15: “The final landscape plan for 25 & 27 Green Mountain Dr. is acceptable. The total construction cost for the building is $6,050,000. The minimum landscaping requirement is calculated as follows: Total Building Construction or Building Improvement Cost % of Total Construction/ Improvement Cost Cost of proposed project $0 - $250,000 3% $7,500 Next $250,000 2% $5,000 Additional over $500,000 1% (of $5,550,000) $55,500 Minimum Landscaping $ >> $68,000 At Preliminary Plat, there was a shortfall of approximately $34,000 in the value of landscaping proposed. Note however, that that shortfall was based incorrectly on an assumption of $6,500,000 in building costs not $6,050 which is the correct amount In addition at Preliminary Plat: -the applicant noted that that they were retaining existing vegetation valued in excess of CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_18_25&27GreenMountainDrive_SnyderConstructionCompany_apartment_building_FINAL.doc $80,000 on the property. The Board discussed the request and stated that while it supported the retention of the vegetation, given that it is a forested area to the rear of the property, the granting of a credit would not be appropriate. -The Board and applicant discussed overall project need. The Board agreed with the applicant that the installation of additional landscaping beyond that proposed is not needed nor would significantly benefit the project, especially given the large forested area on the property. -The Board noted that the project area is, however, in need of a sidewalk extension along Green Mountain Drive to the west of the project site. No sidewalk presently exists in that area. With this project being the first residential development in the area, a demand for such a sidewalk is anticipated in the future. -In lieu of installing additional landscaping beyond the $38,100 proposed the Board and the applicant agreed that the applicant would make a contribution of $34,400 to the City towards design and construction of a sidewalk along the south side Green Mountain Drive extending west beyond the boundaries of the project parcel. -In recognition of this $34,400 contribution, the Board granted a waiver of $34,400 to the required minimum landscaping budget of $72,500. 3. For Final Plat, the applicant is proposing approval of a similar arrangement. Based upon a corrected required landscaping budget of $68,000 and a new proposed landscaping amount of $43,160 and a recalculated contribution of $24,840 to the City towards design and construction of a sidewalk along the south side Green Mountain Drive extending west beyond the boundaries of the project parcel, the Board should decide whether to grant a credit of $24,840 to the required minimum landscaping budget of $68,000. 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. As noted above, one modification requested is a height waiver of 12 feet. 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. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 8 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_18_25&27GreenMountainDrive_SnyderConstructionCompany_apartment_building_FINAL.doc 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. The applicant has obtained a Water Allocation from the Champlain Water District via letter dated April 6, 2015. The applicant has obtained a preliminary Wastewater Allocation from the City of South Burlington dated February 9, 2015. Staff considers these criteria to be met. (A)(2)Sufficient grading and erosion controls will be utilized during and after construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties. The proposed project shall adhere to standards for erosion control as set forth in Section 16.03 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. In addition, the grading plan shall meet the standards set forth in Section 16.04 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. Erosion control specifications and grading plans have been submitted with the application. Staff considers this criterion to be met. (A)(3)The project incorporates access, circulation, and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unreasonable congestion of adjacent roads. The applicant is proposing to use an existing curb cut and driveway. The applicant has submitted a Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by Lamoureux & Dickinson dated November 6, 2014. The result for the year 2022 (five years after the anticipated 2017 construction) show an incremental increase in traffic between the build and no-build scenario with the overall Level of Service remaining at a “B.” The Department of Public Work found the Assessment acceptable at Preliminary. Staff considers this criterion to be met. The relevant portion of Section 15 of the LDRs is as follows: (4) Connections to adjacent parcels. If the DRB finds that a roadway extension or connection to an adjacent property may or could occur in the future, whether through City action or development of an adjacent parcel, the DRB shall require the applicant to construct the connector roadway to the property line or contribute to the cost of completing the roadway connection. (a) In any such application, the DRB shall require sufficient right-of-way to be dedicated to accommodate two (2) lanes of vehicle travel, City utilities, and a ten-foot wide grade-separated recreation path. No roadway extensions or connections are anticipated. (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. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 9 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_18_25&27GreenMountainDrive_SnyderConstructionCompany_apartment_building_FINAL.doc Most of the project area is already cleared. Selective clearing of understory growth will occur near the proposed common grill & picnic area. The project area will not intrude into the 50 ft. Surface Water Protection Buffer for Bartlett Brook, as noted above in Section 14.07 D. However, in light of the proposed increased in parking areas, staff recommends additional shrub plantings along the sloped hillside on the south side of the proposed building and to the south of the parking areas. Staff is concerned over several aspects of the proposed common grill area, namely: --the plan lacks sufficient detail as to the location of the amenities; --the proposed area is neither communal nor private. The area should be improved via screening, fencing or other landscaping elements so that residents feel comfortable using the space and that they are not intruding on the privacy of the residents of the units in the northeast corner of the building. --the building will have 65 units and the amount of amenities should be substantial and not an afterthought. Options beyond a few picnic tables include: a small dog run, a fire pit area with gravel and surrounded by seating, some raised garden beds, etc. 4. The Board and the applicant should discuss ways the project can provide common areas for use by the multi-family building residents and what types of amenities could be provided. (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 5.05 COMMERCIAL 2 DISTRICT C2 A. Purpose. A Commercial 2 District is hereby formed in order to encourage general commercial activity. In addition to uses permitted in the C1 District, large lot-retail uses, such as sale of motor vehicles and building materials, may be permitted. A range of industrial uses as well as clustered residential development may be permitted in locations that are mutually compatible with general commercial activity. Development shall be subject to site plan review to coordinate traffic movements, encourage mixed-use developments, to provide shared parking opportunities and to provide a potential location for high-traffic generation commercial uses. Any uses not expressly permitted are prohibited except those that are allowed as conditional uses. The proposed project will create a new mixed use area in this portion of the District. This project is consistent with the standards of the Commercial 2 District. Staff considers this criterion to have been met. (A)(6)Open space areas on the site have been located in such a way as to maximize opportunities for creating contiguous open spaces between adjoining parcels and/or stream buffer areas. The project will not intrude into stream buffer areas or impact. Some wooded area along the eastern edge of the parcel (which abuts a wooded area on the adjacent parcel) will be maintained. Staff considers this criterion to have been met. (A)(7)The layout of a subdivision or PUD has been reviewed by the Fire Chief or (designee) to ensure that adequate fire protection can be provided. In an email to staff dated June 30, 2015, the Fire Department commented as follows: CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 10 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_18_25&27GreenMountainDrive_SnyderConstructionCompany_apartment_building_FINAL.doc Ray: We have had the opportunity to meet with the client on this project at the TRC and have addressed access and fire protection with them. We do not see any significant issues with the project at this time. DC Terence Francis, CFI Fire Marshal Staff considers this criterion to be met. (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. The presence of Bartlett Brook to the south and the UVM Horticultural Farms likely precludes extension of such services. An existing sidewalk connecting to the Berman property to the north is proposed to remain. Staff considers this criterion to have been met. At Preliminary Plat, the Board directed and the applicant concurred that in lieu of a future street right-of- way (ROW) connecting the adjacent property to the west (recently approved) to Green Mountain Drive, that the applicant provide a pedestrian ROW through lot #2, which would then connect the property to the west to Green Mountain Drive. The applicant has provided a draft “Pedestrian Path Easement Deed” document. Staff considers this criterion to be met. Staff has discussed the possibility of adding a vehicular access easement over the same area with the applicant. This is not currently shown on the plans submitted. 5. The Board should discuss with the applicant the need for a vehicular access easement connecting the property to the west with Green Mountain Drive. (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. As noted above in (A) (3), the proposed sidewalk is a welcomed improvement. The plans submitted indicate that this criterion has been met. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines shall be underground. The plans submitted indicate that new utility lines will be underground. (A)(10)The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s). The applicant is proposing to maintain the connectivity of existing trail loops and proposing to designate an area to the rear of the building as a “common grill & picnic area”. Staff considers the project to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 11 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_18_25&27GreenMountainDrive_SnyderConstructionCompany_apartment_building_FINAL.doc 12.03 Stormwater Management Overlay District (SMO) This property is located within the Stormwater Management Overlay District, and as such, must comply with relevant standards. The applicant has submitted a “Stormwater Management Narrative” prepared by Lamoureux & Dickinson. Comments from the Public Works Dept. are as follows: The Stormwater Section has reviewed the plans for the “25 & 27 Green Mountain Drive” prepared by Lamoureux & Dickinson Consulting Engineers, LLC, dated 11/1/14 and last revised on 6/17/15. We would like to offer the following comments: 1. This project is located in the Bartlett Brook watershed, which is listed as stormwater impaired by the State of Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). Also, the property is already subject to a State of Vermont stormwater discharge permit (3017-9010.R). Since the project proposes to expand upon the existing impervious area the existing State permit must be revised before construction begins. 2. The project proposes to disturb greater than 1 acre of land. It will therefore require a stormwater construction permit from the Vermont DEC Stormwater Division. The applicant should acquire this permit before starting construction. 3. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance infrastructure. 4. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to provide record drawings per the requirements of section 12.03F. Thanks for the opportunity to comment, Dave OTHER Since this project is a PUD and the lots involved cannot stand alone and meet the area and dimension requirements (i.e. density) that a “Notice of Conditions” legal document should be recorded in the land records that indicates that for the purposes of the LDRs, both lots are to be treated as one (1) lot. RECOMMENDATION Seek clarification on the questions raised above. Respectfully submitted, Raymond J. Belair, Administrative Officer Copy to: Andy Rowe PROPOSED MULTI-FAMILY BUILDINGNEW5'WIDECONCRETESIDEWALKE3E5E5E5E5E5E5TYPICAL NEW POLEMOUNTED LIGHT FIXTUREREMOVE EXISTING LIGHT POLE ANDMH FIXTURES (2) AND REPLACEWITH POLE AND NEW LED FIXTUREREMOVE EXISTING LIGHT POLE ANDMH FIXTURES (2) AND REPLACEWITH POLE AND NEW LED FIXTURETYPICAL PROPOSED LIGHTLEVEL IN FOOTCANDLESCUTOFF LIGHT ON TRASH/RECYCLINGSTORAGE BUILDING TO BE MOTIONSENSOR ACTIVATED (LIGHT LEVELSNOT SHOWN)E5E5E5E3L1 inch = 50 ft.(in feet)GRAPHIC SCALE50 0 25 50 100 200LIGHTING PLAN25 & 27 Green Mountain DriveSouth Burlington, VermontDateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurveyProject No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450www.LDengineering.comDate RevisionByThese plans shall only be used for the purpose shown below:Sketch/ConceptPreliminaryFinal Local ReviewAct 250 ReviewConstructionRecord Drawing11-01-14DJGABRABRJMR14001XXXXXXXXXXX03-27-15 ADD COMMERCIAL PARKING & LIGHTING ABR #SP-15-37 and #CU-15-03 SP_15_37_and_CU_15_03_104 Bowdoin Street_Super-Temp Realty Company, Inc_vent_stack_ffd.doc 1 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING SUPER-TEMP REALTY COMPANY, INC. – 104 BOWDOIN STREET SITE PLAN APPLICATION #SP-15-37 and CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION #CU-15-03 FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION The applicant, Super-Temp Realty Company, Inc., is seeking after-the-fact approval to amend a previously approved plan for a 27,500 sq. ft. light manufacturing facility. The amendment consists of installing a 2.5 ft. vent stack requiring a height waiver, 104 Bowdoin Street. The Development Review Board held a public hearing on July 7, 2015. Dave Marshall represented the applicant. Based on the plans and materials contained in the document file for this application, the Board finds, concludes, and decides the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Super-Temp Realty Company, Inc., is seeking after-the-fact approval to amend a previously approved plan for a 27,500 sq. ft. light manufacturing facility. The amendment consists of installing a 2.5 ft. vent stack requiring a height waiver, 104 Bowdoin Street. 2. The owner of record of the subject property is Super-Temp Realty Company, Inc. 3. The subject property is located in the Industrial & Open Space Zoning District. 4. The application was received on June 2, 2015. 5. The plan submitted consists of one (1) page entitled, “New Manufacturing Facility Bowdoin Street South Burlington Vermont Site Location Plan”, prepared by Civil Engineering Associates, dated November 2013, and last revised on 5/28/15. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements Table 1. Dimensional Requirements IO Zoning District Required Existing Proposed  Min. Lot Size 3 Acres 3.29 acres No change  Max. Building Coverage 30% 19.2% No change  Max. Overall Coverage 50% 42 % No change √ Front Yard Coverage (Bowdoin Street) 30% 11.1 % No change  Min. Front Setback (Bowdoin Street) 50 ft. ~225 ft. No change  Min. Side Setback 35 ft. ~37 ft. No change  Min. Rear Setback 50 ft. ~115 ft. No change #SP-15-37 and #CU-15-03 SP_15_37_and_CU_15_03_104 Bowdoin Street_Super-Temp Realty Company, Inc_vent_stack_ffd.doc 2  Hinesburg East View Protection Zone (max. height) 413.5 ft. elevation 400ft. elevation 403.8 ft. ** Building Height 35 ft. 42.5 ft. 46.3 ft. √ Zoning Compliance ** Waiver of 7.5 ft. approved on 2/20/14. Current application requesting increase in waiver to 11.3 feet. See discussion under Conditional Use Section for Board action on the requested waiver. Pursuant to Sections 14.06 and 14.07 of the Land Development Regulations, the following review standards shall apply to site plan applications: (a) The relationship of the proposed development to goals and objectives set forth in the City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. This criterion will continue to be met following the proposed site plan amendments. (b) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and adequate parking areas. This criterion will continue to be met following the proposed site plan amendments. (c) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings. All existing parking is located to the rear or side of the building. No changes proposed. Section 13.01 of the Land Development Regulations requires that bicycle parking or storage facilities be provided for employees, residents, and visitors to the site. A bike rack is shown on the plans. (d) Without restricting the permissible limits of the applicable zoning district, the height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and existing or adjoining buildings. The vent stack represents only a negligible change to the building. No significant changes to buildings or structures are proposed. This criterion will continue to be met. (e) Newly installed utility service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. No such service modifications are proposed. This criterion will continue to be met. (f) The combination of common materials and architectural characteristics, landscaping, buffers, screens, and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings or different architectural styles shall be encouraged. #SP-15-37 and #CU-15-03 SP_15_37_and_CU_15_03_104 Bowdoin Street_Super-Temp Realty Company, Inc_vent_stack_ffd.doc 3 The vent stack represents only a negligible change to the building. No significant changes to buildings are proposed. This criterion will continue to be met. (g) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. No new structures proposed. This criterion will continue to be met. In addition to the above general review standards, site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards set forth in Section 14.07 of the Land Development Regulations: (a) The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial or collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. The reservation of land is not necessary; no adjacent lots require connections at this time. This criterion will continue to be met. (b) Electric, telephone, and other wire-served utility lines and service connections shall be underground. Any utility installations remaining above ground shall be located so as to have a harmonious relation to neighboring properties and to the site. No new utility lines are proposed. This criterion will continue to be met. (c) All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling or other requirements, shall be accessible, secure, and properly screened with opaque fencing to ensure that trash and debris do not escape the enclosure(s). The dumpster is enclosed. This criterion will continue to be met. (d) Landscaping and screening requirements No new landscaping required or proposed. Pursuant to Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations, snow storage areas must be specified and located in an area that will minimize the potential for run-off. The plans depict adequate snow storage areas. Lighting Pursuant to Section 13.07(A) of the Land Development Regulations, all exterior lighting shall be shielded and downcasting to prevent light from spilling onto adjacent properties and rights-of-way. No new lighting proposed. This criterion will be met. Access/Circulation #SP-15-37 and #CU-15-03 SP_15_37_and_CU_15_03_104 Bowdoin Street_Super-Temp Realty Company, Inc_vent_stack_ffd.doc 4 No changes to access or circulation proposed. Traffic No changes are proposed that will result in any increase in traffic volumes. Parking No changes to parking proposed. CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA Pursuant to Section 14.10(E) of the Land Development Regulations, 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. The vent stack will cause no undue adverse effect on the capacity of existing or planned community facilities. (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. The vent stack is quite small and in keeping with the architecture of the existing building, so therefore the improvements will not have any undue adverse effect on this criterion. (3) Traffic on roads and highways in the vicinity. No additional traffic is expected as a result of the project, therefore the vent stack will not have any undue adverse effect on this criterion. (4) Bylaws and ordinances then in effect. The requested height waiver of 11.3 feet for the rooftop apparatus is subject to Section 3.07 Height of Structures which reads in part as follows: D. Waiver of Height Requirements (1) Rooftop Apparatus. Rooftop apparatus, as defined under Heights in these Regulations, and steeples for places of worship that are taller than normal height limitations established in Table C-2 above may be approved by the Development Review Board as a conditional use subject to the provisions of Article 14, Conditional Uses. The Board grants the requested height waiver of 11.3 feet to accommodate a final height of 46.3 feet for the vent stack which is considered rooftop apparatus. The project is therefore in compliance with the Bylaws and Ordinances in effect. #SP-15-37 and #CU-15-03 SP_15_37_and_CU_15_03_104 Bowdoin Street_Super-Temp Realty Company, Inc_vent_stack_ffd.doc 5 (5) Utilization of renewable energy resources. There is no utilization of renewable energy resources in the vicinity, so therefore the improvements will not have any undue adverse effect on this criterion. DECISION Based on the above Findings of Fact, the Board hereby approves site plan application #SP-15-37 and #CU-15-03 of Super-Temp Realty Company, Inc., subject to the following stipulations: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not superseded by this approval shall remain in effect. 2. This project shall be completed as shown on the plan and shall be on file in the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning. 3. 4. The Board grants the requested height waiver of 11.3 feet to accommodate a final height of 46.3 feet for the vent stack. 5. The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months pursuant to Section 17.04 of the Land Development Regulations or this approval is null and void. 6. The applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy from the Board prior to use of the building and vent stack. 7. Any change to the site plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Development Review Board or the Board. Tim Barritt Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Mark Behr Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Brian Breslend Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Bill Miller Yea Nay Abstain Not Present David Parsons Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Jennifer Smith Yea Nay Abstain Not Present John Wilking Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Motion carried by a vote of X– 0 – 0. Signed this ____ day of __________________ 2015, by _____________________________________ Tim Barritt, Chair Please note: An appeal of this decision may be taken by filing, within 30 days of the date of this decision, a notice of appeal and the required fee by certified mail to the Superior Court, Environmental Division. See V.R.E.C.P. 5(b). A copy of the notice of appeal must also be mailed to the City of South Burlington Planning and Zoning Department at 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, VT 05403. See V.R.E.C.P. 5(b) (4)(A). Please contact the Environmental Division at 802-828-1660 or #SP-15-37 and #CU-15-03 SP_15_37_and_CU_15_03_104 Bowdoin Street_Super-Temp Realty Company, Inc_vent_stack_ffd.doc 6 http://vermontjudiciary.org/GTC/environmental/default.aspx for more information on filing requirements, deadlines, fees and mailing address. The applicant or permittee retains the obligation to identify, apply for, and obtain relevant state permits for this project. Call 802.879.5676 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist. 340350360370380390100+00 101+00 102+00 103+00 104+00 105+00345.1343.7349.9350.5350.3351.5353.3355.1356.7357.8358.4359.6SOUTH ELEVATION400SCALE 1" = 20'360380400340VIEW PROTECTION ZONE ELEVATIONSCALE 1" = 125'DSMDSMPBSSOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTFACILITYMANUFACTURINGNEWBUILDINGPROPOSEDAS SHOWN06113C2.1BOWDOIN STREETELEVATIONVIEWSPROJECTLOCATION11689LOCATION MAP1" = 2000'SUPER-TEMPREALTY, LLCNOV., 2013ACE7/2/14 SAL LOWERED BUILDING 1 FOOT5/28/15 DSM/GAC ADD HIGH VENT STACK CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SP_15_36_3017_Williston_Rd_Cota_ImportedCarCenter_a mend DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: July 2, 2015 Plans received: May 15, 2015 Arlo Cota - 3017 Williston Road SITE PLAN APPLICATION #SP-15-36 Meeting date: July 7, 2015 Owner/Applicant Arlo Cota 3017 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Property Information Tax Parcel 1810-03017-C Industrial-Commercial Zoning District CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING PROJECT DESCRIPTION Site plan application #SP-15-36 of Arlo Cota to amend a previously approved plan for an 11,074 sq. ft. boat, recreational vehicle and auto sales and service facility. The amendment consists of: 1) removing a large tree in the front yard, 2) adding four (4) light poles, and 3) filling in a stormwater pond and constructing a new dry detention swale in front of auto display area, 3017 Williston Road. COMMENTS Administrative Officer Ray Belair and Planner Temporary Assignment Dan Albrecht, referred to herein as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted on May 15, 2015 and have the following comments. This property has been in violation of its approved site plan for a long time. Staff tried to obtain compliance for months and when that failed, issued a Notice of Violation on 9/23/13. This application is an attempt to bring the property into compliance. The applicant further violated the site plan a few weeks ago, after this application was submitted, by covering display lawn space in the front yard with a hard pack material which is not reflected on the current site plan. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements: Industrial-Commercial Zoning District Required Existing Proposed  Min. Lot Size 40,000 S.F. 166,300 sf No change  Max. Building Coverage 40% 5.6 % No change  Max. Overall Coverage 70% 66.5 % 67.3% * Max. Front Yard Coverage 30% 29.0 % No change  Min. Front Setback 30 ft > 30 ft No change  Min. Side Setback 10 ft. > 10 ft. No change  Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. > 30 ft. No change  Max. Building Height 35 ft. (flat) < 35 ft. No change  Zoning Compliance * Front yard coverage may have been increased by the placing of the hard pack in the front yard. Applicant should provide the front yard coverage for each front yard taking into account the new hard surface. Site Plan Review Standards 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. Staff considers the proposed building and uses to be consistent with 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. 2) Parking: CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING (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) ………………………….. (c) ………………………….. (d) …………………………… Based upon a 9,300 SF building, the property requires parking as follows: 2 spaces per 1,000 SF GFA for a total of 19 (18.6) spaces. The property currently has twenty-seven (27) spaces with one delineated as handicap-accessible: fifteen (15) spaces are located to the rear of the lot and thirteen (12) spaces are located in front of the building. The proposed project will reduce the overall number of spaces to twenty-three (23) spaces with only 5 spaces in front of the building. The parking located in the front is pre-existing. Staff is comfortable with some parking remaining in the front as the overall size of this parking area is going down as is the total number of spaces. Staff considers this criterion to be met. The nine (9) parking spaces immediately behind the building are completely surrounded by display area. How are customers to access these spaces if the area designated for display is being used as shown on the plan? 1. The Board should discuss these nine (9) spaces and their accessibility as shown on the plan. (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. No changes are proposed to the buildings. Staff considers this criterion to be met. (4) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansion shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. The plans indicate that such services are located underground. Staff considers this criterion to be met. 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. No changes are proposed to the structures. No formal landscaping is proposed. Staff considers this criterion to be met. (2) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. No changes are proposed to the structures. Staff considers this criterion to be met. 14.07 Specific Review Standards A. Access to Abutting Properties. The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING 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 reservation of land is required. B. Utility Services. Electric, telephone and other wire-served utility lines and service connections shall be underground insofar as feasible and subject to state public utilities regulations. Any utility installations remaining above ground shall be located so as to have a harmonious relation to neighboring properties and to the site. The plans indicate that such services are located underground. Staff considers this criterion to be met. C. Disposal of Wastes. All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling or other requirements, shall be accessible, secure and properly screened with opaque fencing to ensure that trash and debris do not escape the enclosure(s). Small receptacles intended for use by households or the public (ie, non-dumpster, non-large drum) shall not be required to be fenced or screened. The plans shows a dumpster. It is not clear from the plan whether the dumpster is enclosed or not. The plan should be revised to indicate that the dumpster is enclosed on all four (4) sides. D. Landscaping and Screening Requirements. See Article 13, Section 13.06 Landscaping, Screening, and Street Trees. The applicant did not submit a formal landscape plan. The plan submitted illustrates the location of existing landscaping and proposes removal of an existing large spruce. The plan details the location of a snow storage area with a notation that excess snow is to be trucked off-site. In an email staff dated June 30, 2015, the City Arborist provided the following comments: The spruce in question shows some signs of needle cast disease but still appears to be a viable tree. If they are parking vehicles under the tree I can understand why they would want to remove it since it most likely drips pitch on the vehicles. If they want to remove it I’d suggest requiring them to replace with several 3 inch caliper trees. Craig Lambert South Burlington City Arborist Staff is concerned about the proposed removal of the existing large spruce. The tree is part of previously approved landscaping for the property and there are relatively few such mature trees along this portion of Williston Road. The proposed plan shows an area behind the southeast corner of the building for display when the last approved plan showed the area landscaped with six (6) Austrian Pines. This area should remain landscaped and the trees replaced. The proposed plan also shows a new display area to the south of lot #2 where on the last approved plan it was a landscaped area with 13 ten (10) foot high White Pine trees. This area should remain landscaped and these trees replaced. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING 2. The Board should discuss whether to allow removal of the existing spruce and if so, what landscaping should be required to replace it. The Board should also discuss the proposed removal of other trees and conversion of landscaped space to display areas. The plan submitted does not show all the landscaping as originally approved on 7/15/13. The plan should be revised to show all existing and approved plantings. 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. No waivers are required. STORMWATER The Public Works Department provided the following comments to staff via email on June 29, 2015: The Stormwater Section has reviewed the “Imported Car Center & The Marine Collection” site plan prepared by O’Leary-Burke, dated 10/25/13 and last updated on 3/30/15. We would like to offer the following comments: 1. The proposed project is located in the Muddy Brook watershed. 2. The site plan must show all impervious area on the site. For example, it appears that an area south of the proposed dry swale has been turned into parking and that the remainder is being used for vehicle display. The parking area is considered an impervious surface. The vehicle display area may also be considered impervious surface. The applicant must review the definition of impervious surface in Article 2 of the LDRs when making this determination. The site plan and calculations (lot coverage, etc) must be updated accordingly. Also, when reporting new impervious area the applicant must include all impervious area that has been added since the property’s last site plan approval. 3. After comment #2 has been addressed, the applicant should confirm that a State stormwater permit is not needed for the property in its current condition, or after the proposed site modifications have been constructed. As currently presented, the parcel contains over 1 acre of impervious area and the stated impervious area expansion is very near the threshold for requiring a permit from the Vermont DEC. 4. The applicant should provide a delineated drainage area map for the proposed stormwater treatment practices. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING 5. In order to confirm compliance with section 14.05.D(4)(j), the applicant must submit supporting design data and copies of computations used as a basis for the design capacities and performance of proposed stormwater management facilities. 6. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance infrastructure. 7. In the Legend of Sheet 1 add “Existing” and “Proposed New” to the two respective Display Areas. 8. On Sheet 1 indicate if removal of additional trees is necessary to construct the detention swale. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. -Tom Thomas J. DiPietro Jr. Deputy Director, Department of Public Works 3. The Board should direct the applicant to comply with the recommendations of the Public Works department. FIRE DEPARTMENT COMMENTS In an email to staff dated June 30, 2015 the Fire Department provided the following comments: Ray: A review of the submittal for 3017 Williston Rd. As the access road is shown as 22 feet there shall be no parking allowed on this access road. The Owner shall install signage indicating that this is a required fire lane and that parked vehicles will be towed. DC Terence Francis, CFI Fire Marshal, South Burlington Fire Department 4. The Board should direct the applicant to comply with the recommendations of the Fire Department. COMPLIANCE WITH V.S.A. § 4416 The applicant has submitted a Jurisdictional Opinion from the Vermont Agency of Transportation dated April 16, 2015 that a State of Vermont 19 V.S.A. § 1111 Permit is not required for the modification of the display area. OTHER CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING The previously approved plan indicates a wetland and wetland buffer along the southerly portion of the property and this is not shown on the plan submitted. The plan should be revised to show any wetland or wetland buffer on the property. The application lists “Arlo Cota” as the record owner. City land records indicate that the record owner is “Imported Car Center, Inc.”. The application should be revised to note the correct record owner. RECOMMENDATION Seek clarification on the questions raised above. Respectfully submitted, ________________________________ Ray Belair, Administrative Officer Copy to: Paul O’Leary Jr., O’Leary-Burke Civil Engineering Associates