Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Minutes - Development Review Board - 11/17/2015
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES 17 NOVEMBER 2015 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 17 November 2015, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: T. Barritt, Chair; B. Miller, J. Smith, J. Wilking, M. Cota ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; D. Albrecht, D. Marshall, D. Burke, P. O’Leary, R. Jeffers, P. O’Brien, M. Cypes, A. Peterson, R. Horn, N. Andrews, A. Patterson, 1. Additions, deletions, or changes in order of agenda items: Mr. Barritt advised that items #7, 8, and 9 on the Agenda will be continued to a later date. 2. Comments & Questions from the public not related to the Agenda: No issues were raised. 3. Announcements: There were no announcements. 4. Preliminary and Final Plat Application #SD-15-36 of South Village Communities, LLC, to amend a previously approved 334 unit planned unit development in three phases. The amendment consists of constructing the first 500 feet of East Jefferson Avenue and the parallel recreation path in phase 3 of the development, 1840 Spear Street: Mr. Marshall noted that South Village has Master Plan approval. Phase 1 is almost built out. Phase 2 is being worked on. Phase 3 has an east-west connector through Phase 1, across some streams and out to Dorset Farms. This application represents the first part of that connector, the first 500 feet and a bridge over one of the streams. There are no residences involved. They would like to construct the bridge under frozen conditions as it would have less of an impact on the stream. Mr. Marshall said they met with Public Works to review the road and the bridge. He then showed a plan of the southern half of South Village, including Phase 1. He noted an area of future residential development, still to be worked out. The road at this time will be identified as East Jefferson. Mr. Marshall showed the route of the existing water main and future connector. Mr. Barritt noted that Public Works had no comments. Mr. Marshall then indicated a round-about that was approved by the DRB 10 years ago. It is fully mountable by the Fire Department. He indicated what has been constructed and identified mounted dividers that direct traffic into the round-about. They will meet with the Fire Department to be sure they are happy with this. Mr. Barritt noted this is South Burlington’s first round‐about. Mr. Cypes of Dorset Farms expressed concern with the east-west road. He said the goal of round-about is to convey traffic, and this will be a preferred path for a lot of traffic. He was concerned with putting that traffic on Midland Avenue. Mr. Barritt noted the road has been on the Official City Map for a long time. Mr. Marshall added that once they reach 210 units, the road connection to Midland Avenue will be completed. Ms. Jeffers said that will probably happen in 2 or 3 years. Mr. Andrews said he would be happier if the connector didn’t happen. Mr. Wilking said he was sympathetic, but on the other hand, in his area the amount of cross traffic is much less than had been anticipated. They had thought it would be devastating; it is not. Mr. Miller then moved to close #SD-15-36. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 5. Continued site plan application #SP-15-60 of South Village Communities, LLC, to construct two 12-unit, multi-family dwellings, 109 & 127 Churchill Street: Mr. Burke reviewed what had previously been presented. He noted an added snow storage area west of the above-ground parking. The plan also now includes the location of air conditioning compressors under the second floor balconies and plantings around them for screening. Mr. Burke showed the location on the plans and noted that Craig Lambert has approved this. There will be a mix of styles. They have also added one parking light at pedestrian scale. No issues were raised. Mr. Miller moved to close #SP-15-60. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 6. Continued Final Plat Application #SD-15-32 of South Village Communities, LLC, to amend a previously approved 334 unit planned unit development. The amendment consists of revising the plans for Phase II of the development to: 1) add curbs along the roads, 2) add sidewalks along the north side of Preserve Road and the southerly sections of North Jefferson Road, 3) revise the lot layout between Churchill Street, North Jefferson Road and Preserve Road, 4) add new single family lots on lot #48, and 5) reduce the number of units in this phase from 99 to 96 units, 1840 Spear Street: Mr. Burke said the changes are being made to be more consistent with Phase I. There will be 2 sections of split rail fencing behind units 26N to 36N. Street trees have been revised to be 32 feet on center. Craig Lambert is OK with this. Units #92-96N are being removed from this proposal to simplify things. This results in 91 units. The Fire Chief had comments on some driveways, so they have put in a fire hydrant that would serve the one home in that area. Mr. Belair noted that with 32-foot spacing, there are some trees missing. Mr. Burke said there are 51 additional apple trees outside the right-of-way which they would like to have accepted to offset the 32-foot spacing. Mr. Barritt asked if they would plant the additional trees somewhere. Mr. Burke said they already have. He noted significant plantings at the exit. Members were OK with the trees. Mr. Barritt noted some 12-foot expanse of buildings with nothing on it. He felt it is mostly a garage problem. Mr. Burke said there are no windows in the back of the garages. Mr. Barritt suggested a condition that any exterior garage wall in the back 50% that is greater than 12 feet must have a window. Mr. Albrecht asked if the proposal tonight includes anything on lot #48, specifically a rec path. Mr. Burke said it does not. It is still open space. No other issues were raised. Mr. Miller moved to close #SD-15-32. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 7. Sketch Plan Application #SD-15-37 of 900 Dorset Street, LLC, to construct a three-unit multi-family dwelling on a 2-acre lot +/- lot developed with a single family dwelling, 900 Dorset Street: Mr. Belair advised that the applicant had asked to continue. He suggested 15 December. Mr. Miller moved to continue #SD-15-37 to 15 December 2015. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 8. Sketch Plan Application #SD-15-38 of City of Burlington/Burlington International Airport to amend a previously approved Planned Unit Development for an airport complex. The amendment consists of relocating taxiways A and G, 1200 Airport Drive: and, 9. Sketch Plan Application #SD-15-39 of City of Burlington/Burlington International Airport to amend a previously approved Planned Unit Development for an airport complex. The amendment consists of installing 10,000 above-ground aviation fuel tank, 1200 Airport Drive: Mr. Belair noted that the applicant had failed to pick up the placards for posting, so the two applications must be continued. He suggested 15 December as a date. Mr. Miller moved to continue #SD-15-38 and #SD-15-39 until 15 December 2015. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 10. Continued 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. Mr. O’Leary indicated the 4 trees to be planted. Mr. Belair said the Arborist is OK with these. Mr. O’Leary also noted that Public Works is OK with the stormwater pond. There is now a split rail fence on the property. Mr. Cota would like to change this to “concrete wheel stops” instead of a fence. Mr. Belair noted the rail fence has been gone for years. Mr. O’Leary showed the location. Members were OK with the “concrete wheel stops” as long as the intent is not a “Jersey barrier.” Mr. O’Leary noted the display area will move back about 5 feet from where it is today to meet with coverage requirement. Mr. Barritt stressed that cars are not to be parked on the roadways. No other issues were raised. Mr. Miller moved to close #SP-15-36. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 11. Minutes of 4 March 2014, 20 October and 3 November 2015: Mr. Miller moved to approve the Minutes of 4 March 2014, 20 October and 3 November 2015 as written. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 12. 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 8:15 p.m. , Clerk 12-15-2015 , 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-15-36 South Village Communities, LLC – Phase III Road & Path Construction DATE: November 17, 2015 Development Review Board meeting Preliminary and final plat application #SD-15-36 of South Village Communities, LLC to amend a previously approved 334 unit planned unit development in three (3) phases. The amendment consists of constructing the first 500 feet of East Jefferson Avenue and the parallel recreation path in phase 3 of the development, 1840 Spear Street. As no construction of homes or structures is proposed nor changes in lot subdivisions and the proposed road and path construction is consistent with the previously approved Master Plan, staff will not undertake a full analysis in its comments of compliance with the various Subdivision standards. The Department of Public Works provided no comments to staff for the Board’s consideration. The Fire Department provided comments on November 6, 2015 regarding the round-about which the street extension is connected to. Since the round-about is not part of this application, staff is not including them here. To address the Fire Department’s concerns with the round-about, staff has had discussions with the applicant on this matter and they have agreed to meet with staff to review the current design and see if modifications can be made which would still meet the objective of a functioning round-about and also address the concerns of the Fire Department. If an agreement can be reached which accommodates all parties, an application to the DRB would be made seeking approval. The applicant has submitted details of the round-about which is included in your packet. The four (4) Channelization Islands (fins) shown on the detail have yet to be installed. These fins would be “mountable”. EAST J E F F E R S O N BIKE PA T H DEWEY PLACEFLANDERS LANEFLANDERS LANEALLEN ROAD EASTAIKEN ST. SOUTH JEFFERSON R O A D STREETSLADE STREET ALLE N R OAD EA S T NORTH J E F F E R S O N R D . SO U T H J E F F E R S O N R O A D ALLEN RD.W. FISHER LANECATKIN DR.MADISON LANEE. FISHER LANEMADISON LANECHIPMAN STREET SOUTH J E F F E R S O N R O A D SOUTH JEFFERSON RO AD FROST STREET SPEAR STREETCHIPMAN D D DDSMDSMACL 1" = 150'01243.14C1.0SEPT., 2015LOCATION MAP1" = 2000'S.D. IRELANDCOMPANIES193 INDUSTRIAL AVENUEWILIISTON, VERMONT 05495OVERALLPROPOSEDCONDITIONS SITEPLANACEPROGRESS PLANSSPEAR STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT9/21/2015Dorset StreetSpear StreetAllen RoadNowlandFarm RoadU.V.M.FarmsSOUTH BURLINGTONSHELBURNESITEPHASE 3SECTION 1SOUTH VILLAGECOMMUNITIES,LLCPHASE III,SECTION 1P:\AutoCADD Projects\2001\01243.14 Phase 3\1-CADD Files-01243.14\Dwg\01243-Phase 3 to Bridge.dwg, 9/21/2015 1:03:11 PM NEW BRIDGE WITH30' CLEAR SPANNEW 20' WIDE PAVED ROADWITH CONC. CURBFROM STATION 1+06 TO STATION 4+40EAS T J E F F E R S O N BIKE P A T H STORM WATER PONDNEW 26' WIDE PAVED ROADWITH CONC. CURB(SECTION 1 ENDS AT STATION5+77)NEW BRIDGE ABUTMENTSROAD TAPERS FROM 20' WIDE,AT STA. 4+40, TO 26' WIDE,AT STA. 4+90484' WIDE DRAINAGESWALE W/ STONECHECK DAMS4' WIDE DRAINAGESWALE W/ STONECHECK DAMSTAPER NEW PAVED ROAD WITH CONC. CURBTO MATCH EXISTINGNEW GUARDRAIL SYSTEMNEW 10' RECREATION PATHDDDSTORM WATER POND(NOT PART OF THIS CONTRACT)DSMDSMACL1" = 30'01243.14C1.2SEPT., 2015LOCATION MAP1" = 2000'S.D. IRELANDCOMPANIES193 INDUSTRIAL AVENUEWILIISTON, VERMONT 05495PROPOSED SITEIMPROVEMENTSPLANACEPROGRESS PLANS9/21/2015Dorset StreetSpear StreetAllen RoadNowlandFarm RoadU.V.M.FarmsSOUTH BURLINGTONSHELBURNESITESPEAR STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VTSOUTH VILLAGECOMMUNITIES,LLCPHASE III,SECTION 1P:\AutoCADD Projects\2001\01243.14 Phase 3\1-CADD Files-01243.14\Dwg\01243-Phase 3 to Bridge.dwg, 9/22/2015 11:28:14 AM +357.24 +357. 2 4+354.2±+354.8±4' WIDE GRASS LINED DRAINAGE SWALE AT LESSTHAN 1% SLOPENEW BRIDGE WITH30' CLEAR SPANNEW 20' WIDE PAVED ROADWITH CONC. CURBFROM STATION 1+06 TO STATION 4+40EAS T J E F F E R S O N BIKE P A T H STORM WATER PONDNEW 26' WIDE PAVED ROADWITH CONC. CURB(SECTION 1 ENDS AT STATION5+77)NEW BRIDGE ABUTMENTSROAD TAPERS FROM 20' WIDE,AT STA. 4+40, TO 26' WIDE,AT STA. 4+90R O A D 484' WIDE DRAINAGESWALE W/ STONECHECK DAMS4' WIDE DRAINAGESWALE W/ STONECHECK DAMSTAPER NEW PAVED ROAD WITH CONC. CURBTO MATCH EXISTINGNEW GUARDRAIL SYSTEMNEW 10' RECREATION PATHDST STDOUTLET STRUCTURE(NOT PART OF THIS CONTRACT)DMH #1RIM=359.0INV. IN.=354.5INV. OUT=354.4119 L.F. - 15" HDPE @ 1.0%FUTURE SEWER (NOTPART OF THIS CONTRACT)DST123 L.F. -15" HDPE @ 1.0%DMH #2RIM=358.0INV. IN.=355.8INV. OUT=355.7STORM WATER POND(NOT PART OF THIS CONTRACT)EXISTING SEWER TRENCHDRAIN - INV. 353.0±DSMDSMACL1" = 30'01243.14C2.0SEPT., 2015LOCATION MAP1" = 2000'S.D. IRELANDCOMPANIES193 INDUSTRIAL AVENUEWILIISTON, VERMONT 05495GRADING &DRAINAGEPLANACEPROGRESS PLANS9/21/2015Dorset StreetSpear StreetAllen RoadNowlandFarm RoadU.V.M.FarmsSOUTH BURLINGTONSHELBURNESITESPEAR STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VTSOUTH VILLAGECOMMUNITIES,LLCPHASE III,SECTION 1P:\AutoCADD Projects\2001\01243.14 Phase 3\1-CADD Files-01243.14\Dwg\01243-Phase 3 to Bridge.dwg, 9/21/2015 1:03:26 PM CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SP_15_60_109_and_127_ChurchillStreet_SouthVillage_two_multi familydwellings_Nov17_mtg DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: November 13, 2015 Plans received: July 17, 2015 SOUTH VILLAGE COMMUNITIES, LLC – 109 & 127 CHURCHILL STREET SITE PLAN APPLICATION #SP-15-60 Meeting Date: November 17, 2015 Owner/Applicant South Village Communities, LLC PO Box 2286 South Burlington, VT 05403 Property Information Tax Parcel 1640-01840 SEQ-Neighborhood Residential-Zoning District Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Site plan application #SP-15-60 of South Village Communities, LLC to construct two (2) 12-unit multi- family dwellings, 109 & 127 Churchill Street. The Final Plat application (#SD-14-33) for Phase 2 of this project was approved by the Board on December 17, 2014. COMMENTS Administrative Officer Ray Belair and Planner, Temporary Assistant Dan Albrecht (“Staff”) have reviewed the original plans submitted on July 17, 2015 and the revised plans submitted on November 6, 2015 and offer the following comments. Numbered items for the Board’s attention are in red and italicized. ZONING DISTRICT & DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS The subject lot is part of a previously approved master plan for the entire Planned Unit Development known as South Village. As discussed during the Master Plan approval, the applicant had asked that the preliminary and final plat reviews of each of the three phases be limited to single-family, two-family, and three-family dwelling units. Thus, any buildings with greater than three dwelling units, in addition to the school, will be reviewed under separate Site Plan reviews. The DRB approved this Master Plan approach. The dimensional standards outlined in Table C-2 of the Land Development Regulations were altered though the Master Plan approval process for the subject property. The proposed project will meet all dimensional requirements and limits which had been approved as part of the Master Plan approval (MP-04-01 and the amendment MP-05-02). Building coverage is calculated at 37.3% (maximum approved per MP is 50%) and the overall coverage is proposed to be 63.1% (maximum approved per the MP is 65%). Waivers were previously granted for the front yard setback from 20 ft. to 10 ft. and for the rear yard setback from 30 ft. to 5 ft. SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Section 14.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations establishes the following general review standards for all site plan applications: (a) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and adequate parking areas. The 24 units of housing will require 54 spaces calculated as 2 spaces per unit plus 1 additional space for every 4 dwelling units. The applicant proposes a total of 57 spaces on the property itself: 48 underground spaces and 9 surface parking spaces. This standard is being met. (b) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings. Parking is proposed to be located to the side and underneath of the buildings. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING 3 Section 13.01(G) (5) requires that bicycle parking or storage facilities are provided for employees, residents, and visitors to the site. Bicycle racks are shown on the plans (one (1) for each building). (c) 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 proposed buildings are a pitched roof type structure with a maximum height of 40 ft. The maximum allowable height in the district is currently 28 feet for a pitched roof, however Section 3.07 (C) (1) LDRs applies, which reads as follows: “Where a structure has been approved as part of a Master Plan prior to January 9, 2012 with a height greater than that permitted in these Regulations, such approved maximum height shall remain in effect”. The standard in effect then was a 40 ft. maximum for a pitched roofed structure. C. Maximum Height. Except as allowed below in this section 3.07, the requirements of Table C-2, Dimensional Standards, shall apply. (1) Where a structure has been approved as part of a Master Plan prior to January 9, 2012 with a height greater than that permitted in these Regulations, such approved maximum height shall remain in effect. See discussion above. The proposed buildings are 40 ft. high at the midpoint of the sloped roof. Therefore no height waiver is requested or required. (d) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. 1. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. The South Burlington Water Department has no comments. (e) The DRB shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural characteristics, landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of different architectural styles. The applicant has submitted elevations of the proposed buildings. Staff considers the proposed buildings to be in compliance with this criterion. (f) 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 elevations of the proposed buildings. Staff considers the proposed buildings to be in compliance with this criterion. Site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING 4 (a) The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial of collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. The proposed buildings are accessed via two curb cuts leading to the parking garages underneath each building and a third curb cut to access the above ground parking lot. Furthermore, the overall layout of the subdivision has been reviewed as part of Master Plan review and as a 3-step PUD. Staff considers this criterion 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. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. (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 applicants are proposing to locate the trash and recycling facilities in two enclosed areas, one on the northwest portion of the lot and one near the eastern portion of the lot. A rendering of the proposed dumpster fencing is shown. Staff considers this criterion to have been met. (d) Landscaping and Screening Requirements Pursuant to Section 13.06(A) of the proposed Land Development Regulations, landscaping and screening shall be required for all uses subject to planned unit development review. The minimum landscape requirement for this project is determined by Table 13-9 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. The costs of street trees are above and beyond this minimum landscape requirement. The total construction cost for the buildings are $1,730,000. 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% $12,300 Minimum Landscaping $ >> $24,800 The applicant is proposing plantings of shrubs, shade and flowering trees, evergreen trees and ground cover. The value of these plantings, exclusive of the groundcover is $32,521. Staff considers this standard to be met. Pursuant to Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations, the plans shall depict snow storage CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING 5 areas that will minimize the potential for run-off. In its revised plan and accompanying letter submitted on November 6, 2015 a large snow storage area is shown to the west of the surface parking lot and the applicant has indicated that excess snow would be trucked off site if necessary. 9.08 SEQ-NR &NRT Sub-District; Specific Standards The SEQ-NRT sub-district has additional dimensional and design requirements, as enumerated in this Section. A……. B……… C. Residential Design (1) Building Orientation. Residential buildings must be oriented to the street. Primary entries for single family and multi-family buildings must face the street. Secondary building entries may open onto garages and/or parking areas. (Special design guidelines apply to arterial streets). The primary entries to both buildings face Churchill Street. Staff considers this standard to be met. (2) Building Façades. Building facades are encouraged to employ a theme and variation approach. Buildings should include common elements to appear unified, but façades should be varied from one building to the next to avoid monotony. Front porches, stoops, and balconies that create semi-private space and are oriented to the street are encouraged. The proposed facades incorporate the recommended approach. Staff considers this standard to be met. While the two (2) buildings will have identical styles and architecture, they are intermixed with other housing. If/when additional multi-family buildings are proposed in Phase II, the Board should revisit this issue. (3) Front Building Setbacks. In pedestrian districts, a close relationship between the building and the street is critical to the ambiance of the street environment. Buildings should be set back twenty-five feet (25’) from the back of sidewalk. As part of its Master Plan approval the front setback multi-family units was reduced from 20 ft. to 10 ft. Staff notes that setback requirements for these two proposed buildings are met. (4) Porches, stoops, and balconies may project up to eight feet (8’) into the front setbacks. Porch, stoop and balcony areas within the front setback shall not be enclosed or weatherized with glazing or other solid materials. As part of its Master Plan approval the front setback for multi-family units was reduced from 20 ft. to 10 ft. None of the porches, stoops or balconies project into this setback. Staff considers this criterion to be met. (5) Placement of Garages and Parking. See Section 9.08(C)(4) and Figure 9-7. The front building line of the garage must be set behind the front building line of the house by a minimum of eight feet. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING 6 These units are serviced by underground parking and a small surface lot. Staff considers this criterion to be not applicable. (6) Mix of Housing Styles. A mix of housing styles (i.e. ranch, cape cod, colonial, etc.), sizes, and affordability is encouraged within neighborhoods and developments. These should be mixed within blocks, along the street and within neighborhoods rather than compartmentalized into sections of near-identical units. Staff notes that the two proposed buildings are similar in design to each other as well as somewhat similar to the multi-family units constructed at 47, 110 and 144 South Jefferson Avenue. The applicant’s letter of July 17, 2015 also indicates that the two proposed buildings may be the same color scheme; however the applicant is incorrect to request an exception to the approved South Village Residential Design Standards Guidelines as these do not apply to multi-family buildings 2. The Board should confirm that the two proposed buildings are consistent with Standard (6) Mix of Housing Styles. 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. The applicant has submitted a lighting plan and associated specification sheets. With its November 6, 2015 revisions (cf. Plan Sheet 3), the applicant added a Parking Lot (Pole Mounted) Light. Staff considers this criterion to be met. Other – Units in a Structure Section 9.05(B) of the LDRs limits the number of units in a building to four (4), and provides the following: “Where a structure has been approved as part of a Master Plan prior to January 9, 2012 with a greater number of dwelling units than those permitted in these Regulations, such approved number of units in a structure shall remain in effect”. The proposed two (2) 12 unit buildings were approved as part of the South Village Master Plan on this lot and are therefore in compliance. Other - Fire Chief’s Comments In an email to staff dated October 8, 2015 the Fire Department commented as follows: 109-127 Churchill- Twins to the south Jefferson 12 plexs- require a fire sprinkler and fire alarm system DC Terence Francis, CFI Fire Marshal South Burlington Fire Department The applicant submitted a revised Plan Sheet 11 on November 9, 2015 via email to show the “Multi- CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING 7 Family Buildings Water/Sprinkler Connection” detail while the revised plans submitted on November 6, 2015 include detail on installation of smoke detectors and carbon monoxide detectors. Staff understands that the applicant will consult with the Fire Department to confirm proper installation and testing of a fire sprinkler and fire alarm system prior to receipt of an occupancy permit. Other - Stormwater In an email to staff dated October 6, 2015 the Public Works Department commented as follows: Our comments have been sufficiently addressed. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain the stormwater treatment practice. Thanks, Dave David P. Wheeler Assistant Stormwater Superintendent Other – Utility Cabinets The applicant’s engineer has indicated that these buildings are to be substantially identical to those constructed on South Jefferson Road and therefore would have exterior located HVAC units. With regards to the City’s Performance Standards concerning noise, the applicant’s representative indicated in testimony at the October 20, 2015 meeting that these are heat pump units are extremely quiet. The applicant’s revised plans submitted on November 6, 2015 indicate the location of the units and associated landscaping. Staff considers this criterion to be met. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board close the hearing following any discussion or questions to the applicant. Respectfully submitted, ______________________________ Raymond Belair, Administrative Officer Copy to: Peter Heil, O'Leary-Burke Civil Associates CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_15_32_1840_SpearStreet_SouthVillage_PhaseII_PUD_Amend_ curbs_sidewalks_lots_Final_Nov17_mtg DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: November 13, 2015 Plans received: July 17, 2015 SOUTH VILLAGE COMMUNITIES, LLC – 1840 SPEAR STREET FINAL PLAT APPLICATION #SD-15-32 Meeting Date: November 17, 2015 Owner/Applicant South Village Communities, LLC PO Box 2286 South Burlington, VT 05403 Property Information Tax Parcel 1640-01840 SEQ-Neighborhood Residential-Zoning District Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_32_1840_SpearStreet_SouthVillage_PhaseII_PUD_Amend_curbs_sidewalks_lots_Final_Nov17_mtg.doc 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Final plat application #SD-15-32 of South Village Communities, LLC to amend a previously approved 334 unit planned unit development. The amendment consists of revising the plans for Phase II of the development to: 1) add curbs along the roads, 2) add sidewalks along the north side of Preserve Road and the southerly sections of North Jefferson Road, 3) revise the lot layout between Churchill Street, North Jefferson Road and Preserve Road, 4) add new single family lots on lot #48, and 5) reduce the number of units in this phase from 99 to 96 units, 1840 Spear Street. The Final Plat application (#SD-14-33) for this project was approved by the Board on December 17, 2014. COMMENTS Administrative Officer Ray Belair and Planner, Temporary Assistant Dan Albrecht (“Staff”) have reviewed the plans submitted on July 17, 2015 and revised plans submitted on November 6, 2015 and offer the following comments. Numbered items for the Board’s attention are in red. Staff comments have also been updated since the October 20, 2015 meeting in light of the following recent communication received from the applicant: Thank you for your time this morning. Upon further consideration of zoning requirements for proposed units 92N-96N of our current application, we would like to request these units be withdrawn from consideration at this time from our application. We prefer to take more time to review this section of homes and come in with a separate application for their review. We will consider the acreage where there are currently identified as a reserved area ‘future development’. Thanks again. Robin Robin Jeffers S D Ireland ZONING DISTRICT & DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS The dimensional standards outlined in Table C-2 of the Land Development Regulations were altered through the Master Plan approval process for the subject property. The approved waivers are outlined in the decision and findings of fact for Master Plan #MP-05-02. The proposed project (Phase 2) meets all of the dimensional standards approved in the Master Plan. As discussed during the Master Plan approval, the applicant had asked that the preliminary and final plat reviews of each of the three phases be limited to single-family, two-family, and three-family dwelling units. Thus, any buildings with greater than three dwelling units, in addition to the school, will be reviewed under separate Site Plan reviews. The DRB approved this Master Plan approach. MASTER PLAN Pursuant to Section 15.07 D (3), the following applies: Any application for amendment of the master plan, preliminary site plan or preliminary plat that CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_32_1840_SpearStreet_SouthVillage_PhaseII_PUD_Amend_curbs_sidewalks_lots_Final_Nov17_mtg.doc 3 deviates from the master plan in any one or more of the following respects, shall be considered a new application for the property and shall require sketch plan review as well as approval of an amended master plan: a) An increase in the total FAR or number of residential dwelling units for the property subject to the master plan; b) An increase in the total site coverage of the property subject to the master plan; c) A change in the location, layout, capacity or number of collector roadways on the property subject to the master plan; d) Land development proposed in any area previously identified as permanent open space in the approved master plan application; and/or e) A change that will result in an increase in the number of PM peak hour vehicle trip ends projected for total build-out of the property subject to the master plan. No changes with respect to the five items noted above are proposed. Therefore, an amendment to the Master Plan is not required. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Pursuant to Section 15.18 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, PUDs shall comply with the following standards and conditions: (A)(1) Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity is available to meet the needs of the project. According to Section 15.13(B)(1) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, the existing public utility system shall be extended to provide the necessary quantity of water, at an acceptable pressure, to the proposed dwelling units. According to Section 15.13 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, the subdivider or developer shall connect to the public sewer system or provide a community wastewater system approved by the City and the State in any subdivision where off-lot wastewater is proposed. No changes from what was previously approved in #SD-14-33 are proposed. (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. No changes from what was previously approved in #SD-14-33 are proposed. (A)(3) The project incorporates access, circulation, and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unreasonable congestion of adjacent roads. No changes from what was previously approved in #SD-14-33 are proposed that would impact access, circulation and traffic management strategies. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_32_1840_SpearStreet_SouthVillage_PhaseII_PUD_Amend_curbs_sidewalks_lots_Final_Nov17_mtg.doc 4 Staff reminds the applicant and the Board that as part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board established Condition #9 that “(p)rior to the issuance of the zoning permit for the 50th unit within Phase Two, the “ Marsh Road” connection to Spear Street shall be constructed.” (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. The applicant previously applied for and obtained a state wetland permit which was approved on September 10, 2014. Staff considers that the applicant has satisfied this condition and that this criterion is met. 9.06(B) (5) also requires that wetlands and buffers, streams, and natural communities be visually delineated in some way in order to prevent creep from private parcels into the wetland. As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board found this criterion to be met and established several conditions to protect the wetland and associated buffer areas and to require delineation of open space areas from single family and multi family housing. As evidence of meeting this condition, the applicant previously submitted the existing Land Management Plan that is recorded within the City Land Records which applies to the entire development. See discussion on page 12 with regards to 9.06 (D) Parks Design and Development. (A)(5) The project is designed to be visually compatible with the planned development patterns in the area, as specified in the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose of the zoning district(s) in which it is located. Pursuant to Section 9.01 of the Land Development Regulations, the Southeast Quadrant District (SEQ) is hereby formed in order to encourage open space preservation, scenic view and natural resource protection, wildlife habitat preservation, continued agricultural use, and well as planned residential use in the largely undeveloped area of the City known as the Southeast Quadrant. The open character and scenic views offered in this area have long been recognized as very special and unique resources in the City and worthy of protection. The location and clustering of buildings and lots in a manner that in the judgment of the Development Review Board will best preserve the open space character of this area shall be encouraged. As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board found this criterion to be met. Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. (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. As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board found this criterion to be met. Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. (A)(7) The layout of a subdivision or PUD has been reviewed by the Fire Chief or (designee) to ensure that CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_32_1840_SpearStreet_SouthVillage_PhaseII_PUD_Amend_curbs_sidewalks_lots_Final_Nov17_mtg.doc 5 adequate fire protection can be provided. In an email to staff dated October 8, 2015 the Fire Department commented as follows: Just wanted to give you written comments on the projects due 10/09. South Village phase II changes look good, with a couple of comments: Lots 40, 41 and 67 are greater than 150’ off the public way and shall be sprinkled. All hydrants shall be tested and approved by the water folks BEFORE construction is started. There is a single family home under construction that has no hydrant closer than 1200’ away (residential std is 500’ spacing). I have called Robin about this very issue and SDI is working quickly to resolve same as they are wholly liable if the building is lost. DC Terence Francis, CFI Fire Marshal South Burlington Fire Department The Board should be aware that as part of the approval for phase 2, the Board made a finding that lot #40, #41 & #67 do not need to include residential sprinkler systems. 2. The Board should discuss the Fire Chief’s recommendations with the applicant to assure clarity on the issues identified and also discuss appropriate conditions to be established. (A)(8) Roads, recreation paths, stormwater facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility lines and lighting have been designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent landowners. (A)(9) Roads, utilities, sidewalks, recreation paths, and lighting are designed in a manner that is consistent with City utility and roadway plans and maintenance standards. The applicant, at the request of South Village Phase I residents, is requesting to add a second sidewalk on the opposite sides of select streets for which sidewalks on only one side had been previously approved. Staff has no concerns with this request. 3. The Board should decide whether or not to approve this request for additional sidewalks. Lighting is discussed under Section 9.08, SEQ Neighborhood Residential. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines shall be underground. (A)(10) The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s). As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board found this criterion to be met. Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_32_1840_SpearStreet_SouthVillage_PhaseII_PUD_Amend_curbs_sidewalks_lots_Final_Nov17_mtg.doc 6 SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Pursuant to Section 14.03(A)(6) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any PUD shall require site plan approval. Section 14.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations establishes the following general review standards for all site plan applications: (A) Relationship of the proposed development to the City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board found this criterion to be met. Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. (B)(1) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and adequate parking areas. As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board found this criterion to be met. Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. (B)(2) Parking: a. Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings. Any side of a building facing a public street shall be considered a front side of a building for the purposes of this subsection. b. The Development Review Board may approve parking between a public street and one or more buildings if the Board finds that one or more of the following criteria are met. The Board shall approve only the minimum necessary to overcome the conditions below. c. … (iii) The parking area will serve a single or two-family home; Single and two-family homes in the proposed Phase II are not subject to this standard. Although 3-unit structures are not exempt from the above standard, the Board has previously found that with the Master Plan having granted a waiver for 3-unit buildings to be approved without site plan approval, this standard related to parking location requirements does apply here. (B)(3) Without restricting the permissible limits of the applicable zoning district, the height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and existing or adjoining buildings. As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board found that the homes proposed here satisfy the standards within the Land Development Regulations, and that the elevations for the multi-family buildings shall be reviewed as part of the site plan review for each multi-family building. Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. (B)(4) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines shall be underground. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_32_1840_SpearStreet_SouthVillage_PhaseII_PUD_Amend_curbs_sidewalks_lots_Final_Nov17_mtg.doc 7 As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board found this criterion to be met. Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. (C)(1) The Board shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural characteristics, landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of different architectural styles. As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board found this criterion to be met. Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. (C)(2) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain, and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board found this criterion to be met. Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. Site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: (A) The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial of collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board found that no additional easements are needed for this project (Phase 2 of the Master Plan). Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. (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. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines shall be underground. As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board found this criterion to be met. Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. (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). No dumpsters are currently shown. Dumpsters and other facilities serving the proposed multi-family buildings will be addressed at their Site Plan review. (D) Landscaping and Screening Requirements Pursuant to Section 13.06(A) of the proposed Land Development Regulations, landscaping and screening CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 8 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_32_1840_SpearStreet_SouthVillage_PhaseII_PUD_Amend_curbs_sidewalks_lots_Final_Nov17_mtg.doc 8 shall be required for all uses subject to planned unit development review. The minimum landscape requirement for this project is determined by Table 13-9 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. The costs of street trees are above and beyond this minimum landscape requirement. The total construction cost for the single family homes and duplexes located on footprint lots is estimated at $7,000,000. The minimum landscaping requirement is calculated as follows: Total Building Construction or Building Improvement Cost % of Total Construction/ Improvement Cost Cost of proposed project $7,000,000 $0 - $250,000 3% $7,500 Next $250,000 2% $5,000 Additional over $500,000 1% $65,000 Minimum Landscaping $ >> $77,500 The applicant has provided detailed landscaping plans for the pollinator row (aka “Edible Farm Planting”) at the northwest portion of the property and for the foundation plantings around the 40 units located on footprint lots. The value of these plantings exclusive of the groundcover is $32,090. As noted in the applicant’s letter of November 6, 2015 the Board (cf. #SD-14-33) previously granted a credit of $51,520 for installation of the split rail fencing along the edge of the wetlands to the east of the project. This results in a total landscaping proposed of $83,520 ($32,090 + $51,520) which exceeds the minimum requirement. Staff considers the minimum landscaping requirement as being met. SOUTHEAST QUADRANT DISTRICT This proposed subdivision is located in the southeast quadrant district. Therefore it is subject to the provisions of Section 9 of the SBLDR. 9.06 Dimensional and Design Requirements Applicable to All Sub-Districts The following standards shall apply to development and improvements within the entire SEQ: A. Height. (1) The maximum height of any occupied structure in the SEQ-NRP, SEQ-NRT, or SEQ-NR sub-district shall not exceed forty-five feet (45’); the waiver provisions of Section 3.07(E) shall not apply to occupied structures in these sub-districts. (2) The maximum height of any occupied structure in the SEQ-VR or SEQ-VC sub-district shall not exceed fifty feet (50’); the waiver provisions of Section 3.07(E) shall not apply to occupied structures in these sub-districts. In addition, the standards set forth in C-2 – Dimensional Standards Applicable in All Districts shall apply. The most restrictive limitations shall apply at the time a zoning application is submitted. And shall apply to the single, two (2) and three (3) unit buildings. Note that for the multi-family (4+ unit) structures, section 3.07(C) & 9.05 (B) provides specific provisions for projects with Master Plan approval. The construction of two proposed 12-unit multi- family structures is being considered under Site Plan application #SP-15-60. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 9 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_32_1840_SpearStreet_SouthVillage_PhaseII_PUD_Amend_curbs_sidewalks_lots_Final_Nov17_mtg.doc 9 B. Open Space and Resource Protection. (1) Open space areas on the site shall be located in such a way as to maximize opportunities for creating usable, contiguous open spaces between adjoining parcels This standard is satisfied, as discussed above from master plan approval. (2) Building lots, streets and other structures shall be located in a manner consistent with the Regulating Plan for the applicable sub-district allowing carefully planned development at the average densities provided in this bylaw. As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33 the Board found this criterion satisfied with respect to the block length below. The average density remains below that which is permitted in the sub- district. Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. (3) A plan for the proposed open spaces and/or natural areas and their ongoing management shall be established by the applicant. As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board set forth Condition #14 which stated that “(l)egal documents shall be worked out prior to final plat approval and recorded prior to issuance of a zoning permit to reflect any portion of the subject area not addressed in the Master Plan or Phase I approval. The applicant has submitted the proposed legal documents as part of the preliminary plat. These will be reviewed by the City Attorney.” Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. (4) Sufficient grading and erosion controls shall be employed during construction and after construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties. In making this finding, the Development Review Board may rely on evidence that the project will be covered under the General Permit for Construction issued by the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. The applicant has submitted an Erosion and Sediment Control plan. Staff considers this criterion to be met. (5) Sufficient suitable landscaping and fencing shall be provided to protect wetland, stream, or primary or natural community areas and buffers in a manner that is aesthetically compatible with the surrounding landscape. Chain link fencing other than for agricultural purposes shall be prohibited within PUDs; the use of split rail or other fencing made of natural materials is encouraged. As noted in the Findings for #SD-14-33, there are small encroachments into a Class II wetland buffer and what appears to be an isolated class III wetland on the site. See the discussion above in A (4) of the PUD compliance analysis. Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. C. Agriculture. The conservation of existing agricultural production values is encouraged through development planning that supports agricultural uses (including but not limited to development plans that create contiguous areas of agricultural use), provides buffer areas between existing agricultural operations and new development, roads, and infrastructure, or creates new opportunities for CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 10 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_32_1840_SpearStreet_SouthVillage_PhaseII_PUD_Amend_curbs_sidewalks_lots_Final_Nov17_mtg.doc 10 agricultural use (on any soil group) such as but not limited to community-supported agriculture. This standard is satisfied from master plan approval. Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. D. Public Services and Facilities. In the absence of a specific finding by the Development Review Board that an alternative location and/or provision is approved for a specific development, the location of buildings, lots, streets and utilities shall conform with the location of planned public facilities as depicted on the Official Map, including but not limited to recreation paths, streets, park land, schools, and sewer and water facilities. Staff considers the proposal to comply with the Official Map, which proposes a road and a recreation path or trail connection in the vicinity of those proposed on the Phase 2 plan. (2) Recreation paths, storm water facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility lines, and lighting shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. (3) Recreation paths, utilities, sidewalks, and lighting shall be designed in a manner that is consistent with City utility plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. See the staff comments and recommended items for Board review under PUD standards for a discussion of recreation paths and sidewalks. (4) The plan shall be reviewed by the Fire Chief or his designee to insure that adequate fire protection can be provided, with the standards for evaluation including, but not limited to, minimum distance between structures, street width, vehicular access from two directions where possible, looping of water lines, water flow and pressure, and number and location of hydrants. See above discussion under PUD standards. E. Circulation. The project shall incorporate access, circulation and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unsafe conditions on adjacent roads and sufficient to create connectivity for pedestrians, bicycles, vehicles, school transportation, and emergency service vehicles between neighborhoods. In making this finding the Development Review Board may rely on the findings of a traffic study submitted by the applicant, and the findings of any technical review by City staff or consultants. (1) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. (2) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is consistent with City roadway plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. (3) The provisions of Section 15.12(D)(4) related to connections between adjacent streets and neighborhoods shall apply. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 11 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_32_1840_SpearStreet_SouthVillage_PhaseII_PUD_Amend_curbs_sidewalks_lots_Final_Nov17_mtg.doc 11 See discussion above in the PUD section of this report. D. Parks Design and Development. (1) General standards. The SEQ has an existing large community park, the Dorset Street Park Complex. Parks in the SEQ may be programmed as neighborhood parks or mini-parks as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. Mini parks in the SEQ should be a minimum of 10,000 square feet, with programming approved by the South Burlington Recreation Department. Such parks are to be located through the neighborhoods in order to provide a car-free destination for children and adults alike, and to enhance each neighborhood’s quality of life. They shall be knitted into the neighborhood fabric as a focal point in the neighborhood, to add vitality and allow for greater surveillance by surrounding homes, local streets and visitors. Each park should be accessible by vehicle, foot, and bicycle and there should be a park within a quarter-mile of every home. (2) Specific Standards. The following park development guidelines are applicable in the SEQ- NRT, SEQ-NR, SEQ-VR, and SEQ-VC districts: (a) Distribution and Amount of Parks: (i) A range of parks and open space should be distributed through the SEQ to meet a variety of needs including children’s play, passive enjoyment of the outdoors, and active recreation. (ii) Parks should serve as the focus for neighborhoods and be located at the heart of residential areas, served by public streets and fronted by development. (iii) Parks should be provided at a rate of 7.5 acres of developed parkland per 1,000 population per the South Burlington Capital Budget and Program. (iv) A neighborhood or mini park of 10,000 square feet or more should be provided within a one-quarter mile walk of every home not so served by an existing City park or other publicly-owned developed recreation area. (b) Dedication of Parks and Open Space: Parks and protected open space must be approved by City Council for public ownership or management, or maintained permanently by a homeowners’ association in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. (c) Design Guidelines (i) Parks should be fronted by homes and/or retail development in order to make them sociable, safe and attractive places. (ii) Parks should be located along prominent pedestrian and bicycle connections. (iii) To the extent feasible, single-loaded roads should be utilized adjacent to natural open spaces to define a clear transition between the private and public realm, and to reinforce dedicated open space as a natural resource and not extended yard areas. Several parcels of open space are proposed on the project with a substantial network of trails. In addition, as part of the Master Plan, a future public recreation field was approved near the intersection of Allen Road and Spear Street. Staff considers this criterion to be met. 9.08 SEQ-NR &NRT Sub-District; Specific Standards CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 12 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_32_1840_SpearStreet_SouthVillage_PhaseII_PUD_Amend_curbs_sidewalks_lots_Final_Nov17_mtg.doc 12 The SEQ-NRT sub-district has additional dimensional and design requirements, as enumerated in this Section. A. Street, block and lot pattern. (1) Development blocks. ……….. (2) Interconnection of Streets ……………… (3) Street Connection to Adjoining Parcels. Street stubs are required to be built to the property line and connected to adjacent parcels per section 15.12(D)(4) of these Regulations. Posting signs with a notice of intent to construct future streets is strongly encouraged. The only street stub proposed as part of this application is at the north end of North Jefferson Road. It is proposed to be constructed to the property line. (4) Lot ratios. Lots shall maintain a minimum lot width to depth ratio of 1:2, with a ratio of 1:2.5 to 1:5 recommended. The proposed development includes both individual lots for buildings as well as PUD sections with shared lots. As part of its Findings for #SD-14-33, the Board granted waivers to allow the minimum lot width to depth ratio of 1:2 for Lots 39-47, 48a, 49a, and 50-55. Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. B. Street, Sidewalk & Parking Standards (1) Street dimensions and cross sections. Neighborhood streets (collector and local) in the NR sub- district are intended to be low-speed streets for local use that discourage through movement and are safe for pedestrians and bicyclists. Dimensions for public collector and local streets shall be as set forth in Tables 9-1 and 9-2, and Figures 9-4 and 9-5 of the SBLDR. The Board has already commented on the roadway, sidewalk, and recreation path design. (2) Sidewalks. Sidewalks must be a minimum of five feet (5’) in width with an additional minimum five-foot planting strip (greenspace) separating the sidewalk from the street. Sidewalks are required on one side of the street, and must be connected in a pattern that promotes walkability throughout the development. The DRB may in its discretion require supplemental sidewalk segments to achieve this purpose. As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board previously approved the construction of sidewalks on just one side of the street. (3) Street Trees; see Section 9.08(B)(3) Street trees are required along all streets in a planting strip a minimum of five feet wide. Street tress CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 13 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_32_1840_SpearStreet_SouthVillage_PhaseII_PUD_Amend_curbs_sidewalks_lots_Final_Nov17_mtg.doc 13 shall be large, deciduous shade trees with species satisfactory to the City Arborist. Street trees to be planted must have a minimum caliper size of 2.5 to 3 inches DBH, and shall be planted no greater than thirty feet (30’) on center. The applicant is requesting a waiver to allow street trees to be planted more than 30 ft. on center along North Jefferson Road. The trees along North Jefferson Road have an average spacing of 32 feet on center due to the constraints imposed by driveways while those on other roads will meet the requirement. Staff suggests that the trees that are not able to be planted along North Jefferson Road be added to the open space area. The City Arborist’s comments are expected to be received in time for the meeting. 6. The Board should direct the applicant to comply with the City Arborist’s recommendations, if any, and decide if the applicant should add the missing trees to the open space area. (4) On-street parking; see Section 9.08(B)(4). On street parking is appropriate in a small neighborhood. The roadway is of sufficient width and well- planned to accommodate such. (5) Intersection design. Intersections shall be designed to reduce pedestrian crossing distances and to slow traffic; see Figure 9-6 and Section 9.08(B)(5). See discussion on page 7. Staff considers this criterion to be met. (6) Street and sidewalk lighting. Pedestrian-scaled light fixtures (e.g., 12’ to 14’) shall be provided sufficient to ensure pedestrian safety traveling to and from public spaces. Overall illumination levels should be consistent with the lower-intensity development patterns and character of the SEQ, with lower, smoother levels of illumination (rather than hot-spots) and trespass minimized to the lowest level consistent with public safety. As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board established Condition #8-d which stated that “(t)he final plat plans shall be revised to propose pedestrian-scaled light fixtures (e.g., 12’ to 14’). The applicant has submitted Lighting Detail as well as cut-sheets of proposed LED luminaries that are 14’ high. Staff considers that the applicant has satisfied this condition and this criterion is met. C. Residential Design The applicant is proposing minor changes to the “South Village Residential Design Standards” to address “Street Visible Elevations.”, i.e. the Board’s concern of blank walls from a street view. See the bottom of page 1 in the revised South Village Residential Design Guidelines (in packet). 7. The Board should discuss the proposed changes and decide if these are acceptable. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 14 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_32_1840_SpearStreet_SouthVillage_PhaseII_PUD_Amend_curbs_sidewalks_lots_Final_Nov17_mtg.doc 14 (1) Building Orientation. Residential buildings must be oriented to the street. Primary entries for single family and multi-family buildings must face the street. Secondary building entries may open onto garages and/or parking areas. (Special design guidelines apply to arterial streets). All proposed buildings are oriented to streets. Staff considers this criterion to be met. (2) Building Façades. Building facades are encouraged to employ a theme and variation approach. Buildings should include common elements to appear unified, but façades should be varied from one building to the next to avoid monotony. Front porches, stoops, and balconies that create semi-private space and are oriented to the street are encouraged. See discussion below under Mix of Housing Styles. (3) Front Building Setbacks. In pedestrian districts, a close relationship between the building and the street is critical to the ambiance of the street environment. Buildings should be set back twenty-five feet (25’) from the back of sidewalk. As part of its Master Plan approval the front setback for both single family homes and multi-family units was reduced from 20 ft. to 10 ft. As part of the Findings of Fact & Decision for #SD-14-33, the Board found this criterion to be met. Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. (4) Porches, stoops, and balconies may project up to eight feet (8’) into the front setbacks. Porch, stoop and balcony areas within the front setback shall not be enclosed or weatherized with glazing or other solid materials. As part of its Master Plan approval the front setback for both single family homes and multi-family units was reduced from 20 ft. to 10 ft. None of the porches, stoops or balconies project into this setback. Staff considers this criterion to be met. (5) Placement of Garages and Parking. See Section 9.08(C)(4) and Figure 9-7. The front building line of the garage must be set behind the front building line of the house by a minimum of eight feet. As part of its Findings for #SD-14-33, the Board established condition 34 which stated that “(t)he garages on lots #40, 41 and 60 shall be side loaded.” Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. (6) Mix of Housing Styles. A mix of housing styles (i.e. ranch, cape cod, colonial, etc.), sizes, and affordability is encouraged within neighborhoods and developments. These should be mixed within blocks, along the street and within neighborhoods rather than compartmentalized into sections of near-identical units. As part of its Findings for #SD-14-33, the Board established condition 10 which stated “South Village Residential Design Standards Guidelines; For Residential Homes (Single Family, Duplex and Triplex, Carriage Home)” on December 2, 2014” which sets forth the method by which the applicant will comply with the residential design guidelines. Staff’s position is that none of changes proposed as part of this application affect this finding. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 15 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_15_32_1840_SpearStreet_SouthVillage_PhaseII_PUD_Amend_curbs_sidewalks_lots_Final_Nov17_mtg.doc 15 OTHER ISSUES Stormwater In an email to staff dated October 6, 2015, the Department of Public Works commented as follows: Our comments have been sufficiently addressed. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain the stormwater treatment practice. Thanks, Dave David P. Wheeler Assistant Stormwater Superintendent Landscaping around utility cabinets Sheet #13 details all utility cabinets for compliance with Section 13.18 of the Land Development Regulations. The applicant’s revised plans submitted on November 6, 2015 provide details on locations of transformer cabinets and utility pedestals and associated landscaping. Staff considers this criterion to be met. Notice of Conditions There are “footprint” lots proposed around several of the new units. For purposes of the Land Development Regulations, all footprint lots within a cluster will be considered one lot. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board seek clarification from the applicant on the issues identified above. Respectfully submitted, ______________________________ Raymond Belair, Administrative Officer Copy to: Robin Jeffers and Patrick O’Brien, SD Ireland Company CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_15_37_900DorsetSt_900DorsetStreetLLC_3_unit_town house_sketch DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: November 13, 2015 Plans received: October 5, 2015 SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION #SD-15-37 900 Dorset Street, LLC - 900 Dorset Street Meeting date: November 17, 2015 Owner/Applicant 900 Dorset Street, LLC 168 Summit Street Burlington, VT 05401 Contact Person Steve Vock Civil Engineering Associates 10 Mansfield View Lane South Burlington VT 05403 Property Information Residential 2 Zoning District- Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING PROJECT DESCRIPTION Sketch plan application #SD-15-37 of 900 Dorset Street, LLC to construct a three (3) unit multi-family dwelling on a 2 acre +/- lot developed with a single family dwelling, 900 Dorset Street. COMMENTS Administrative Office Ray Belair and Dan Albrecht, Planner Temporary Assignment referred to herein as staff, have reviewed the plans submitted on October 5, 2015 and have the following comments. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements Table 1. Dimensional Requirements R-2 Zoning District Required Existing Proposed Min. Lot Size 44,000 SF 86,982 SF 86,982 SF Max. Density 2 units/acre 1 unit on 2 acres 4 units on 2 acres Max. Building Coverage 20% 4,9 % 10.2 % Max. Overall Coverage 40% 14.3 % 24.0 % Min. Front Setback 30 ft. 43 43 ft. Min. Side Setback 10 ft. 10 10 ft. Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. 46 46 ft. ♠ Max. Building Height 28 ft. 25 ft. / 35 ft. 25 ft. / 35 ft. √ Zoning Compliance ♠ Pre-existing non-conforming. The existing farmhouse and proposed Townhouse are approximately 25 ft. in height. The existing barn, a non-conforming structure, is 35 feet high and is to remain. SUBDIVISION CRITERIA Pursuant to Section 15.18 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, subdivisions shall comply with the following standards and conditions: (1) Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity is available to meet the needs of the project. According to Section 15.13 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, the existing public water system shall be extended so as to provide the necessary quantity of water, at acceptable pressure. 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 City Engineer has not yet reviewed the plans and has stated that they will do so at the preliminary plat level when more details are available. 1. The City Engineer shall review the plans prior to preliminary plat approval. The applicant shall obtain preliminary wastewater allocation prior to preliminary plat approval and final wastewater allocation prior to issuance of a zoning permit. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING 2. The applicant shall obtain preliminary wastewater allocation prior to preliminary plat approval and final wastewater allocation prior to issuance of a zoning permit. (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 applicant has included an erosion control plan which appears at this sketch stage to be sufficient. Full compliance with this standard will be determined at Preliminary and Final Plat review. 3. 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. (3) The project incorporates access, circulation, and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unreasonable congestion of adjacent roads. The applicant proposes closing the existing curb cut and creating a new one to serve the existing home and the new, proposed multi-family dwelling. Staff notes that the new curb cut is not located directly across from the curb cut for the property located directly across Dorset Street and that this might lead to an unsafe condition if cars are turning left simultaneously from both properties. The City Engineer should comment on this matter. 4. The applicant should consult with City Engineer prior to submission of a Preliminary Plat application. (4) The project’s design respects and will provide suitable protection to wetlands, streams, wildlife habitat as identified in the Open Space Strategy, and any unique natural features on the site. There are no wetlands, streams, or wildlife habitat on the site. The subject property is located in a developed area and is not identified on the Open Space Strategy. (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. See below under Section 14.06 (B) (1). (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 location of the proposed multi-family dwelling results in the building being sited in the middle of largest open area on the site. It might be better if it were sited either closer to the street or further away as this would create a larger continuous open area. Staff has concerns about the large size of the parking area abutting the barn and the intended use of the barn. At the April 16, 2013 hearing for an earlier version of this sketch (#SD-13-08), the following exchange took place: Mr. Belair asked about the use of the existing barn. Mr. Olesky said it is for the current owner’s use. Mr. Belair said that would be a zoning violation unless the owner is living on the property. It can be used only for residents on the site. Mr. Olesky said he would discuss this with the owner. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING 5. The Board should ask the applicant to discuss why they need such a large parking area abutting the barn and remind the applicant that the barn may only be for the use of residents on the property and may not be used as ad hoc storage facility by the owner unless the owner is living on the property. (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 a letter to staff dated November 6, 2015 the Fire Chief commented as follows: We have reviewed the plans for the proposed construction of a 3 unit townhouse off from Dorset Street. We have the following recommendations: Compliance with all requirements of the Vermont Fire Building and Safety Code for any applicable structures. All turning radii shall be compatible with a WB-40 straight profile. On page C5.3 there is discussion about fire hydrant installation. Nothing was shown on the plan relative to fire hydrant installation so we will need clarification. Trees, fences and floral outcroppings should be placed so as not to interfere with the deployment of the aerial ladder, hoselines, portable ladders and other firefighting equipment. At this point these seem to be the major issues which present themselves. As this project moves forward additional items may surface which could be dealt with as needed with the assistance of the developer and the South Burlington Fire Marshal. Should you need any further assistance on this project please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Douglas S. Brent Fire Chief 6. The Board should direct the applicant to comply with the Chief’s comments. (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 applicant has agreed to the City’s request made at a prior sketch application (#SD-13-08) to relocate the municipal bike path slightly to the east and to install a 5 wide grass median between the path and Dorset Street. Full compliance with this standard will be determined at Preliminary and Final Plat review. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING See below for comments regarding Stormwater. (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. Staff has already noted that the City Engineer shall review the preliminary plat plans and provide comments prior to approval of the preliminary plat application. 7. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. (10) The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s). The proposed project represents an in-fill project. Staff feels the proposed project and PUD is in conformance with the South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. Full compliance with this standard will be determined at Preliminary and Final Plat review. SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Pursuant to Section 14.03(A)(6) of the Land Development Regulations, any PUD shall require site plan approval. Section 14.06 establishes the following general review standards for all site plan applications: 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 project to be generally consistent with this standard. 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. The applicant is proposing to close one existing curb cut and replace it with a new one located slightly to the north of the existing cut. The cut will serve the existing house and barn as well as the new multi-family dwelling. Staff has already noted that the new cut is not located directly across the street from the curb cut serving the property directly across on Spear Street. Staff recommends that the applicant confer with the Director of Public Works on the location of the curb cut. The location of the proposed multi-family dwelling results in the building being sited in the middle of largest open area on the site without having yet seen elevations for the new building, it is difficult to access compliance with this criteria. However, staff is concerned about the new building relationship to the site and established buildings. All other buildings in the area face Dorset Street, for example, and most have porches. 8. The Board should discuss siting of the new building, its relationship to the existing house and barn, and how the architecture of the new building can complement that of the historic house and barn. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING Chapter 14.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations states the following: (2) Parking: (a) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings. Any side of a building facing a public street shall be considered a front side of a building for the purposes of this subsection. (b) The Development Review Board may approve parking between a public street and one or more buildings if the Board finds that one or more of the following criteria are met. The Board shall approve only the minimum necessary to overcome the conditions below. (i) The parking area is necessary to meet minimum requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act; (ii) The parking area will serve a single or two-family home; (iii) The lot has unique site conditions such as a utility easement or unstable soils that allow for parking, but not a building, to be located adjacent to the public street; (iv) The lot contains one or more existing buildings that are to be re- used and parking needs cannot be accommodated to the rear and sides of the existing building(s); or, (v) The principal use of the lot is for public recreation. (c) Where more than one building exists or is proposed on a lot, the total width of all parking areas located to the side of building(s) at the building line shall not exceed one half of the width of all building(s) located at the building line. Parking approved pursuant to 14.06(B)(2)(b) shall be exempt from this subsection. (d) For through lots, parking shall be located to the side of the building(s) or to the front of the building adjacent to the public street with the lowest average daily volume of traffic. Where a lot abuts an Interstate or its interchanges, parking shall be located to the side of the building(s) or to the front adjacent to the Interstate. Parking areas adjacent to the Interstate shall be screened with sufficient landscaping to screen the parking from view of the Interstate. Parking for the barn property is proposed to be screened with vegetation. Parking for the multi-family dwelling is proposed to be within garages associated with each unit. Full compliance with this standard will be determined at Preliminary and Final Plat review. (3) Without restricting the permissible limits of the applicable zoning district, the height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and existing or adjoining buildings. The existing farmhouse and proposed townhouse are approximately 25 ft. in height. The existing barn, a non-conforming structure, is 35 feet high and is to remain. Full compliance with this standard will be determined at Preliminary and Final Plat review. (4) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. Full compliance with this standard will be determined at Preliminary and Final Plat review. 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 Elevations of the proposed 3-unit townhouse as well as photos of the existing home and barn. Staff recommends that the unit closest to the street have a street presence similar to the existing single family dwelling. 9. The Board should review the Elevations and provide guidance to the applicant on changes, if needed, to the design of the new building. In addition to the above general review standards, site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the Land Development Regulations: A. Access to Abutting Properties. The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial or collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. Staff does not feel the reservation of land is necessary. B. Utility Services. Electric, telephone and other wire-served utility lines and service connections shall be underground. Any utility installations remaining above ground shall be located so as to have a harmonious relation to neighboring properties and to the site. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. 10. The preliminary plat plans shall show all ground mounted HVAC units, generators, and utility cabinets. 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). 11. The preliminary plat plan should depict proposed dumpsters and recycling facilities, adequately screened. D. Landscaping and Screening Requirements. (See Article 13, Section 13.06) CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 8 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING Pursuant to Section 13.06(A) of the Land Development Regulations, landscaping and screening shall be required for all uses subject to site plan and PUD review. Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations requires parking facilities to be curbed and landscaped with appropriate trees, shrubs, and other plants including ground covers. Pursuant to Section 13.06(B) (4) of the Land Development Regulations, snow storage areas must be shown on the plans. The plans should show snow storage areas for the subject property. 12. The plans should depict snow storage areas as part of the preliminary plat plan application. Landscaping budget requirements are to be determined pursuant to Section 13.06(G) (2) of the SBLDR. The landscape plan and landscape budget shall be prepared by a landscape architect or professional landscape designer. Staff is concerned that the buildings are very close to City owned land to the north and this may result in encroachments into the City land by the residents. The applicant should consider some type of barrier along the north boundary to prevent any encroachments by the residents. 13. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan and budget in compliance with Section 13.06 of the SBLDR as part of the preliminary plat plan application. 14. The applicant should submit estimated construction costs with the preliminary plat application, so that the exact minimum landscaping requirement can be determined. 15. The Board should discuss how to delineate the north boundary in such a manner as to prevent encroachment by the residents. Staff has concerns about the proposed location of the Community Garden. While the provision of this amenity is to be applauded, it is located almost 200 ft. distant from the new townhouses as well as out of site from the townhouses. A better location would be in the center of the property to the west of the barn. This would make it more of a true “community asset”, make it more usable to all residents of the property, place it in a quieter location away from the traffic noise of Dorset Street and make it closer to the barn where garden tools could be stored. Another consideration to be considered is access to water. The applicant could also consider planting fruit trees and/or placing a bench or two in this area to enhance this central area. 16. The Board and the applicant should discuss the proposed location of the community garden as well the overall landscaping plan for the property. Lighting Pursuant to Appendix A.9 of the Land Development Regulations, luminaries shall not be placed more than 30’ above ground level and the maximum illumination at ground level shall not exceed an average of three (3) foot candles. Pursuant to Appendix A.10 (b) of the Land Development Regulations, indirect glare produced by illumination at ground level shall not exceed 0.3 foot candles maximum, and an average of 0.1 foot candles average. All lighting shall be shielded and downcast. 17. The applicant should submit a lighting point by point plan and lighting cut-sheets with CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 9 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING submission of the preliminary plat plan application. Stormwater In an email to staff dated November 4, 2015, the Department of Public Works commented as follows: Ray, The Stormwater Section has reviewed the “900 Dorset Street Planned Residential Development” site plan prepared by Civil Engineering Associates, dated May 8, 2012 and last revised 9/16/15. We would like to offer the following comments: 1. The proposed project is located in the Potash Brook watershed. This watershed is listed as stormwater impaired by the State of Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). 2. The applicant should show snow storage locations on the submitted site plan. 3. On Sheet C3.0, specify a minimum rigid insulation thickness of 2”. 4. On Sheet C3.1, the proposed pump station design does not meet City requirements as indicated on the City’s website: http://www.sburl.com/vertical/sites/%7BD1A8A14E-F9A2-40BE-A701- 417111F9426B%7D/uploads/%7B2E091A86-BF03-41DD-B505-2B962883AFDC%7D.PDF 5. On Sheet C3.1, Note 7, the project is located in the City of South Burlington, not Town of Shelburne. Water Supply System notes shall be in accordance with Champlain Water District specifications and details. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. -Dave David P. Wheeler Assistant Stormwater Superintendent 18. The Board should direct the applicant to comply with the Department’s comments prior to submission of a Preliminary Plat Application. OTHER The applicant should be aware that Veterans Memorial Park is immediately adjacent to this development. Frequent activities at the park include live music performances, City wide celebrations/events and athletic events, all which can generate lots of noise which might be deemed objectionable by the residents of the proposed multi-family dwelling. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the applicant address the numbered items in the “Comments Section” of this CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 10 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING document before proceeding to any further plan review. Respectfully submitted, ________________________________ Raymond J. Belair, Administrative Officer cc: Steve Vock, Civil Engineering Associates SAVJSOACL/JSO1" = 30'12165C1.0MAY 8, 2012LOCATION MAP1" = 2000'ECAEXISTINGCONDITIONSSITE PLANPLANNEDRESIDENTIALDEVELOPMENT900 DORSETSTREETSOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONT 05403900 DORSETSTREETSOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONT 05403900DORSETST., LLCLOCATIONPROJECT89P:\AutoCADD Projects\2012\12165\1-CADD Files-12165\Dwg\12165-Site Plan.dwg, 9/30/2015 4:00:08 PM, DWG To PDF.pc3 +SAVJSOACL/JSO1" = 20'12165C2.0MAY 8, 2012LOCATION MAP1" = 2000'ECAPROPOSEDCONDITIONSSITE PLANPLANNEDRESIDENTIALDEVELOPMENT900 DORSETSTREETSOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONT 05403900 DORSETSTREETSOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONT 05403900DORSETST., LLCLOCATIONPROJECT89P:\AutoCADD Projects\2012\12165\1-CADD Files-12165\Dwg\12165-Site Plan.dwg, 9/30/2015 4:00:15 PM, DWG To PDF.pc3 +SAVSAVACL1" = 20'12165C4.0SEPT., 2015LOCATION MAP1" = 2000'ECAEROSIONCONTROLPLANPLANNEDRESIDENTIALDEVELOPMENT900 DORSETSTREETSOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONT 05403900 DORSETSTREETSOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONT 05403900DORSETST., LLCLOCATIONPROJECT89P:\AutoCADD Projects\2012\12165\1-CADD Files-12165\Dwg\12165-Site Plan.dwg, 9/30/2015 4:00:30 PM, DWG To PDF.pc3 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-15-38 1200 Airport Drive – City of Burlington / Burlington International Airport DATE: November 17, 2015 Development Review Board meeting Sketch plan application #SD-15-38 of City of Burlington/Burlington International Airport to amend a previously approved Planned Unit Development for an airport complex. The amendment consists of relocating taxiways A and G, 1200 Airport Drive. The applicant failed to obtain and display the placard as required by State law. The Board’s past practice when this occurs is to continue the application to a future meeting so that the placard can be displayed as required. 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-15-39 1200 Airport Drive – City of Burlington / Burlington International Airport DATE: November 17, 2015 Development Review Board meeting Sketch plan application #SD-15-39 of City of Burlington/Burlington International Airport to amend a previously approved Planned Unit Development for an airport complex. The amendment consists of installing 10,000 above-ground aviation fuel tank, 1200 Airport Drive. The applicant failed to obtain and display the placard as required by State law. The Board’s past practice when this occurs is to continue the application to a future meeting so that the placard can be displayed as required. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SP_15_36_3017_Williston_Rd_Cota_ImportedCarCenter_a mend_Aug18mtg DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: August 14, 2015 Plans received: May 15, 2015 Arlo Cota - 3017 Williston Road SITE PLAN APPLICATION #SP-15-36 Meeting date: November 17, 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 initial plans submitted on May 15, 2015 and revised plans submitted on August 13, 2015, November 9, 2015 and November 13, 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 while ago, after this application was submitted, by covering display lawn space in the front yard with a hard pack material which is now 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 %-including grassed display areas/ 42.4% - excluding 65.0% including grassed display areas/ 45.3% - excluding Max. Front Yard Coverage (Williston Rd.) 30% 27.4 % 30.0 % Max. Front Yard Coverage (Shunpike Rd.) 30% 7.1 % 12.1 % 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 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. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING 2) Parking: (a) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings. Any side of a building facing a public street shall be considered a front side of a building for the purposes of this subsection. (b) ………………………….. (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 five (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. (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 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. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING 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. As noted in its August 12, 2015 letter, the applicant has revised the plans 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 At its July 7th meeting, the Board was comfortable with the removal of this large spruce but directed the applicant to replace it with several 3 inch caliper trees per the Arborist’s recommendations. The applicant submitted a revised landscaping plan on November 13, 2015 that added four (4) Gingko sentry trees with a 3-inch caliper and a total value of $2,500. The City Arborist will be submitting comments on the tree planting proposal for review at the meeting. 1. The Board should determine if this standard is met. 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 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING 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. 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 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING Thomas J. DiPietro Jr. Deputy Director, Department of Public Works As noted in its August 12, 2015 letter, the applicant has revised the plans as follows: The Department of Public Works is waiting for comments from the State on a determination of impervious coverage. These comments are expected to be received prior to the meeting on Tuesday. Once these comments are received, the Department of Public Works will submit comments for review at the meeting. FIRE DEPARTMENT COMMENTS CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING In an email to staff dated June 30, 2015 the Fire Department provided the following comments: 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 As noted in its August 12, 2015 letter, the applicant has revised the plans and indicated that they will install signage indicating the area as a required fire lane. 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 The previously approved plan indicates a wetland and wetland buffer along the southerly portion of the property and which is shown on the plan submitted. No wetland or wetland buffer impacts are proposed. 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. A number of years ago, in response to the property owner exceeding the limits for display and storage as shown on their approved site plan, required the owner to install a split rail fence surrounding the storage/display areas to prevent spillage onto the green spaces. This application proposes to eliminate this fence located in front of the building and replace it with concrete parking barriers. 2. The Board should discuss and determine whether this change will accomplish the same thing as the fence and what the visual effect would be of eliminating the fence and whether this change is desirable or not. 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 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MARCH 04, 2014 PAGE 1 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 04 March 2014, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: T. Barritt, Chair; M. Behr, B. Miller, Art Klugo, D. Parsons, J. Smith ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; D. Burke, J. Caffrey, J. & E. Bradley, P. Sheppard, P. Brogna, T. Sheppard 1. Sketch plan application #SD-14-03 of Thomas & Pamela Meaker to resubdivide two (2) adjoining lots such that one lot will be reduced in area and the other lot will be increased in area, 21 & 25 Gilbert Street. The Chair opened the hearing. The Board and the applicant discussed the project. The public was invited to comment on the application. No further action was taken. 2. Continued preliminary & final plat application #SD-13-43 F + M Development Co., LLC to amend a previously approved planned unit development (PUD) consisting of: 1) a 41,000 sq. ft. general office building, 2) a 30 unit multi-family dwelling & 3,700 sq. ft. of light manufacturing use, 3) a 63 unit multi-family dwelling, and 4) a 47 unit congregate housing facility (not yet constructed). The amendment consists of: 1) subdividing an adjacent 5.20 acre parcel developed with a television studio into two (2) lots of 4.02 acres & 1.18 acres, 2) incorporating the 1.18 acre parcel into the existing PUD, and 3) converting the approved but not constructed 47 unit congregate housing building into a 54 unit multi-family dwelling, 80 Eastwood Drive & 30 Joy Drive. The Chair opened the hearing. The Board and the applicant discussed the project. The public was invited to comment on the application. A motion was made, seconded and approved to close #SD-13-43. 3. Conditional use application #CU-14-01 & site plan review application #SP-14-04 of Mt. Mansfield Television, Inc. to amend a previously approved plan for a television studio. The amendment consists of relocating an eight (8) foot diameter microwave dish (antenna) from the roof of the building to an existing monopole tower at 65 feet in height, 30 Joy Drive. The Chair opened the hearing. The Board and the applicant discussed the project. The public was invited to comment on the application. A motion was made, seconded and approved to close #CU-14-01 & #SP-14-04. 4. Sketch plan application #SD-14-01 of Willowbrook Homes, LLC for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) the subdivision of a 29.39 acre parcel developed with one (1) single family dwelling into two (2) lots of 5.3 acres and 24.09 acres and, 2) developing the 5.3 acre parcel with nine (9) single family dwellings, 1675 Dorset Street. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MARCH 04, 2014 PAGE 2 The Chair opened the hearing. The Board and the applicant discussed the project. The public was invited to comment on the application. No further action was taken. 5. Sketch plan application #SD-14-04 of Blackbay Ventures VIII, LLC for a planned unit development to: 1) remove an existing single family dwelling, 2) construct four (4) three (3) unit multi-family dwellings, and 3) establish disputed boundary line with adjoining property, 135 Hinesburg Road. The Chair opened the hearing. The Board and the applicant discussed the project. The public was invited to comment on the application. No further action was taken. 6. Preliminary & final plat application #SD-14-05 of Greenfield Capital, LLC to amend a previously approved 14,878 sq. ft. light manufacturing facility. The amendment consists of constructing a 25,840 sq. ft. addition, 35 Thompson Street (the applicant has requested that this item be continued to a future meeting). The Chair opened the hearing. The Board and the applicant discussed the project. The public was invited to comment on the application. A motion was made, seconded and approved to continue #SD-14-05 to 15 April 2014. 7. Other Business: No issues were raised. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m. ___________________________________ Clerk __________________________________ Date City of South Burlington Development Review Board Meeting Minutes 20 October 2015 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 20 October 2015, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: T. Barritt, Chair; B. Miller, J. Smith, D. Parsons, J. Wilking, M. Cota ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; D. Burke, N. Gueman, J. Priest, B. Pollica, T. Lai, H. Tran, R. Jeffers, S. Pouliot, P. Heil, M. Goldfield, S. Guild, H. & N. Knasnak, J. Kelley, R. Butler, J. & N. Calcagni, K. & K. Clarke, R. Hill, J. Leinwohl 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. Preliminary & Final Plat Application #SD-15-33 of City of Burlington/Burlington International Airport for a planned unit development to amend a previously approved plan for a 65,150 sq. ft. aircraft maintenance hangar. The amendment consists of: 1) expanding the parking area to add 14 spaces, and 2) adding two infiltration basins for stormwater treatment, 228 Aviation Avenue: Mr. Leinwohl said they had reviewed the Fire Department recommendations to verify that the site will accommodate vehicles of the size the Chief had asked about. Mr. Leinwohl also noted that Public Works is satisfied with responses to their questions. He indicated the location of the 2 infiltration ponds at the bottom of the drive. No issues were raised. Mr. Miller moved to close #SD-15-33. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 2 5. Design review application #DR-15-05 of Goldfield Construction Management to replace wooden siding with vinyl siding and add metal accent siding (former Sports Shoe Store), 150 Dorset Street: Mr. Wilking stepped down from the Board during this hearing due to a potential conflict of interest. Mr. Goldfield said they felt the building needed modernizing, so they will be tearing down the entry and will replace it. He showed a rendering of what they are proposing. Mr. Barritt said there is an issue with whether the gabled roof is in compliance with standards, but since it is already existing, he had no problem with it. He then asked about the columns and whether they would be updated. The project architect said they will encase the columns in wood and paint them to match the gable. Ms. Smith questioned that color and felt that “orange sort of sticks out at the Blue Mall.” The architect said this building is not attached to the Blue Mall, and they wanted something different. He added that they are actually recreating the color of the copper that is there now, and they will try to get closer to the copper color. The applicant agreed to come back with a plan showing what they intend to do with the columns. Mr. Miller moved to continue #DR-15-05 to 3 November 2015. Mr. Cota seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Wilking rejoined the Board. 6. Site Plan Application #SP-15-60 of South Village Communities, LLC, to construct two 12-unit multi-family dwellings, 109 & 127 Churchill Street: Mr. Burke reviewed the history and noted they were in with Phase 2 for 99 units in November and December of last year. The multi-family units were not part of that approval. Mr. Burke then said they will be curbing the roads and providing a second sidewalk to be consistent with Phase I. They have revised the north end layout a bit, providing more duplexes than multi-family buildings. There will now be just 2 multi-family buildings. This results in a reduction of 8 multi-family units. They will be similar to the multi-unit buildings in Phase I. 3 There will be underground parking in each building with extra above-ground parking. There will be a light for the above-ground parking. There will also be retaining walls in front and back of the units so there is no “spillage” onto common land. Mr. Burke indicated areas for snow storage. Ms. Jeffers pointed out the balconies on the elevations. Mr. Barritt asked whether the plan reflects the new Act 250 codes for energy efficiency. Ms. Jeffers said it does. Mr. Burke said they may actually exceed the minimum. Members were OK with the building design. Regarding the HVAC units, Mr. Burke showed the location of these for each building unit. They are low-noise and will be screened with landscaping. Mr. Barritt asked about the utility cabinets. Mr. Burke said nothing has changed from the Phase 2 approval. The utility cabinets are on the landscape plan and are not part of the lots under consideration. Public comment was then solicited. Mr. Clark was concerned that these would be rental units. He said South Village was supposed to be all “owner occupied,” and residents don’t want another apartment complex. He noted that homeowners have very little say because the owner of the apartment buildings votes on behalf of all the units and outvotes the homeowners. In addition, the Stewardship Fund gets no funds from the rentals toward the accomplishment of its mission, and there will be no funds to maintain the farm and keep up the natural area. Mr. Barritt said there is nothing in the regulations to prevent these from being rental units. He said the homeowners have no recourse with the DRB, though he understood the concerns. Another South Village resident said it was part of the Master Plan that the natural area had to be preserved and maintained. Mr. Burke said funding for preservation was not in the Master Plan. He added that there is nothing to prevent the single family homes from being rented. Mr. Heil said that they felt that the offering statement issued when they bought their homes meant that the multi-family units would be owned units, not rentals. 4 Mr. Andrews asked if the 8 units of multi-family housing would be given up. Mr. Burke said they would not. The developer will add five of them in Phase 2 and still has the rights to the other three. Another resident noted that people in the other multi-family buildings are always parking on the street and he hoped there was adequate parking for these units. Mr. Barritt noted there is an on-street parking ban in the winter. Mr. Hill said he was concerned that the rental units will devalue their homes and destroy what they have. Mr. Barritt noted that the word “community” means all types of housing, (single family, duplexes, multi-family, owned, rentals, etc.). Mr. Miller then moved to continue #SP-15-60 to 17 November 2015. Mr. Parsons seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Final Plat Application #SD-15-32 of South Village Communities, LLC, to amend a previously approved 334 unit planned unit development. The amendment consists of revising the plans for Phase II of the development to: 1) add curbs along the roads, 2) add sidewalks along the north side of Preserve Road and the southerly sections of North Jefferson Road, 3) revise the layout between Churchill Street, North Jefferson Road and Preserve Road, 3) add new single family lots on lot #48, and 5) reduce the number of units in this phase from 99 to 96 units, 1840 Spear St.: Mr. Burke indicated the road network and noted the attempt is to integrate the roads with Phase I by adding curbs and sidewalks. He also indicated the area that is changing from 99 to 96 units. Two single family lots were changed to duplex lots so they can meet the private road standards. He also noted that what is indicated as “Marsh Road” should read “Preserve Road.” Mr. Burke noted the Fire Chief has recommended sprinklering the 2 buildings, but last year the DRB said it wasn’t necessary. They have put a hydrant where the Chief was concerned. The landscape figure should read $77,500, but they will be above that when the fencing is counted in. The landscape architect needs to provide revised plans. There is a need to delineate an open space area near the multi-use path. This creates a small ‘pocket park,’ which is staff’s concern. They are contemplating a section of split rail fencing to delineate that area and possibly some cedars. Mr. Barritt questioned whether these might eventually block some views, and they don’t want to screen good views from people’s 5 properties. He was OK with the split rail fence, if it is natural wood. Mr. Burke suggested a little of each, as these are people’s backyards. Members were OK with that. Mr. Burke reminded the Board that they had been OK with not having the 2 to 1 ratio because it would be stealing from open space. He felt that should carry over to these lots as well. They will, however, meet the 8 foot setback. The issue of street tree spacing was then raised. Mr. Burke explained the issue of 30-foot spacing which would affect driveways. He said they are proposing a compromise which would average spacing at 48 feet with some additional fruit trees further back. Mr. Barritt said they would need to show a plan with those. Mr. Belair said the Board has never granted such a waiver. Since this is a new development, he felt it could be designed to meet the 30-foot tree spacing. The applicant explained the issue and said they felt they could come back with something better than the 48 feet. Mr. Burke added they would go with the 30-foot spacing where possible. Mr. Barritt said he was willing to look at it, but wasn’t sure if it would meet the requirement. Mr. Burke said in the “purple section” they are asking for design changes to allow for walk-in closets and bathrooms. Mr. Barritt stressed the Board does not want any “blank walls.” Ms. Jeffers said they wouldn’t have a window on the back half of the house. Mr. Burke said they would meet the requirement on the front and sides. Mr. Belair asked the Board’s position on the dead end street. Regulations say it should be no longer than 200 feet and this is proposed at more than 450 feet. Mr. Burke said this has been waived in the past. He said there is not a good way to connect without a loss of units, and it would break up the continuity of the path. In addition, the 2 units that would be lost are already bound under contract to a developer and were approved by the DRB. Mr. Barritt said that is the applicant’s problem, not the Board’s. He wanted the standard to be met. A resident asked if the street lamps would be the same. Ms. Jeffers said they will. A resident cited the issue of on-street parking and said the road is only 26 feet wide which hampers through traffic. Mr. Miller then moved to continue #SD-15-32 to 17 November 2015. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 6 8. Preliminary and final plat application #SD-15-34 of Brian Pollica & Hannah Tran for a planned unit development to amend a previously approved plan for a building consisting of 1,378 sq. ft. of medical office use and 200 sq. ft. of general office use. The application is to construct an 896 sq. ft. addition resulting in the following breakdown of uses for the entire building: 822.5 sq. ft. for personal service use, 629 sq. ft. of medical office use & 1035 sq. ft. of general office use, 22 Patchen Rd.: Mr. Pollica showed the location for the addition. He noted an added walkway to the front entrance with plantings. Mr. Wilking noted this is similar to what was approved for the Pomerleau property nearby. He was OK with the setback waiver. Mr. Pollica noted they will need a water allocation permit. They are asking for a parking waiver, but the applicant noted that the 2 people who will run the business (his wife and another person) will be parking at his nearby home. Lighting information will be added to the plan. They are planning to use trash can rollouts and there will be no dumpsters on the site. Disposal will be done daily. Mr. Belair said totes don’t have to be enclosed. Regarding lighting, there will be light shield so light doesn’t leave the property. They propose a 12-foot pole, and the light path won’t go past the parking lot. Mr. Pollica showed a drawing of the stormwater path and explained how it will be handled. Some trees in the back will have to be cut to create the swale. Members were OK with this. Mr. Miller moved to close #SD-15-34. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Continued 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: 7 Mr. Belair advised that the applicant had asked for a continuance to 17 November. Mr. Miller moved to continue #SP-15-36 to 17 November 2015. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 10. Minutes of 6 October 2015: Mr. Miller moved to approve the Minutes of 6 October 2015 as written. Mr. Cota seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 11. 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 9:23 p.m. ` ____________________________, Clerk ____________________________, Date CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES 3 NOVEMBER 2015 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 3 November 2015, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: T. Barritt, Chair; J. Smith, D. Parsons, J. Wilking, M. Cota ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; G. Rabideau, G. Beaudoin, D. Zajchowski, C. Espe, S. Baker, T. Tavares, N. Beck, S. Jolles, G. Ham, J. Dzwonczyk, K. Cady, S. Lefebvre, B. Bertsch, A. & N. Senecal, M. Thibault, P. Kelley, J. Larkin, D. Sherman, D. St. Jean, J. Dougherty, A. Byrnes, K. Murphy, D. Lovering, J. Foster, P. Gallwan, D. Fisette, T. Chittenden, P. Bouchard, M. Goldfield, L. Kilcoyne, M. Courcelle, B. Rushford 1. Additions, deletions, or changes in order of agenda items: No changes were made to the Agenda. 2. Comments & Questions from the public not related to the Agenda: No issues were raised. 3. Announcements: Mr. Barritt noted that he, Mr. Miller and Mr. Belair attended the planning forum hosted by the Vermont League of Cities and Towns. One focus was on the Public Service Board with special attention to the siting of solar installations. 4. Continued conditional use application #CU-15-05 of Nina Beck & Stacy Jolles for after-the-fact approval to construct a 56 sq. ft. deck to a non-conforming single family dwelling structure, 88 Central Avenue: Members had no issues with the changes made to the site plan. Mr. Wilking moved to close #CU-15-05. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Continued design review application #DR-15-05 of Goldfield Construction Management to replace wooden siding and add fiber cement siding (former Sports Shoe Store), 150 Dorset Street: 2 Mr. Wilking recused himself due to a potential conflict of interest. Mr. Barritt noted that there had been discussion about the posts, and he now saw trim on the top cap and the base. Mr. Goldfield said it is wood trim, and the posts will be painted. They have also added some earth tones to the paint color. No issues were raised. Mr. Cota moved to close #DR-15-05. Mr. Parsons seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Continued sketch plan application #SD-15-28 of Saxon Partners, LLC, for a planned unit development consisting of: (as proposed by the applicant), 1) two boundary line adjustments with adjoining properties, and 2) construction of 88,548 sq. ft. retail store which will include a 3,348 sq. ft. tire center and a 3,360 receiving area (BJ’s Wholesale Club), 65 Shunpike Road: Mr. Barritt noted receipt of a note from staff that the plans were brought in too late for a full evaluation, so this presentation will be just a brief overview as there are a number of major issues to be ironed out. Mr. Beaudoin said that the store will be for BJ’s Wholesale Club. He also introduced the project team. Mr. Courcelle then reviewed the site. He showed the main access off Comcast Way and a right turn in only from Shunpike Road. All traffic will exit through Comcast Way. He also showed the boundary of the existing parcel and where the boundary adjustments will happen. Some lots will be given to adjoining homeowners to enlarge their lots; smaller pieces will go to Comcast, PJ’s and the Imported Car Center. The project will be served by municipal water and sewer. An infiltration study was done, and it was found that infiltration is not feasible. They will, therefore, be using a wet pond and other means to treat stormwater including landscaped islands and underground treatment. Mr. Courcelle then showed an overhead view of the site and proposed views from Kimball Avenue and Williston Road. 3 Mr. Ham then addressed traffic and noted there will be a very detailed traffic analysis done. He showed some daily traffic figures for Williston Road, Kimball Ave. and Shunpike Road and a trip generation summary. They are estimating 3,000 vehicles per day coming to the site with an evening peak of 378 and a midday peak of 576. Saturdays would see about 4800 cars coming to the site. They will be proposing a widening of Williston Road to include a dedicated turn lane. There would be no signal because this would be only for entering traffic. Mr. Ham then showed a conceptual “dogbone” roundabout on Kimball Avenue at Comcast Way and Community Drive. He said that Public Works liked that concept. Landscaping was then addressed with a planting plan. They are planning a mix of tree types, including some flowering and oriental trees. All plantings will meet South Burlington standards. There will also be some plantings to screen neighbors. Mr. Rushford then reviewed some of the issues from staff notes: There is a question as to whether this is an allowable use in this area. Mr. Rushford noted that “retail sales” is a permitted use with a caveat that excludes “general merchandise sales.” However, the regulations have no definition for “general merchandise”; it just reads “See Retail.” The previously proposed service station (gas pumps) has been removed as it is not an allowable use in this zone. Supermarkets are not permitted in this zone, but retail food sales are permitted as an accessory use. Supermarkets generally carry over 42,000 different products; BJ’s carries only 6,189. Prepared food is only 15-19% of the total items being sold. BJ’s will not have a dedicated entrance for food sales. A previous siting of the road that encroached on a residential lot has been redone so the road now goes over only commercially zoned lands. A proposed sign on Williston Road has been removed. A question was raised about the “creativity” of design. Mr. Rushford said the design would be very creative. 4 They have put in a lot of effort to address height and the massing of the building so as to be more in relationship to structures in the adjacent areas. Ms. Kilcoyne said they are taking their cues from office buildings on Kimball Avenue and have made tweaks on the façade so as to fit in better. The building is also set back from the road, which also helps address massing. Mr. Barritt then reviewed the issues that will need to be addressed by the Board, including: Proposed uses, access/circulation/traffic, lot layout/PUD status/relationship to other buildings, related necessary applications, lot survey, stormwater, Fire Department comments (no issues noted so far). Mr. Cota asked about the propane storage. Mr. Benoit said there would be 2 propane tanks. Mr. Wilking commented that for him the use and traffic concerns are too major issues. He felt Kimball Ave. has problems with today’s traffic. Public input was then solicited. Ms. Fissette, a resident on Shunpike Road, said she would like to be on record as having participated in the process. Mr. Tavares questioned how close the drive is to residential property because there is a side lot setback. The applicant said it varies from 2 feet to 5 feet from the edge of the road to the property line. Mr. Belair noted that the setback mentioned by Mr. Tavares is for buildings. A resident asked how traffic would be directed to the exit. Mr. Benoit said they would have a monument sign. Mr. Zajchowski was very concerned with traffic and wasn’t sure the one-way in would work. He was also concerned with noise from delivery trucks. He noted the applicant is giving away land so they can stay under 10 acres and thus avoid an Act 250 process. Ms. Lovering felt this is a very large development for Shunpike Road and will change the character of the neighborhood. She noted the number of children on the street. Following the discussion, Mr. Cota moved to continue #SD-15-28 to 15 December 2015. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5 7. Sketch plan application #SD-15-35 of John Larkin, Inc., to amend a previously approved plan for a 69 unit congregate care facility in two buildings. The amendment consists of constructing a 26 unit congregate care facility, 1510 & 1530 Williston Road: Mr. Rabideau noted they have scaled down the project from the previous sketch plan to something smaller and less ambitious. He then showed an overhead view of the properties belonging to the applicant. The proposed project will include 26 new units in 2 stories (Mr. Rabideau showed the location for this building). The building will allow for an enclosed outdoor space for use by residents. There would also be a small one-story structure for dining/kitchen facilities. Architectural cues would come from the existing neighborhoods. Nothing would be over 2 stories tall. Mr. Rabideau showed the existing street level entrance with a rendering of the scale of the new buildings. The building would have porches, which may require a small modification to the setbacks. Mr. Rabideau then directed attention to the vegetation, indicating how the area is landscaped and shielded from properties to the north. Parking for the building would be to the rear of the lot. Traffic would not be routed into the residential neighborhood. Mr. Rabideau said Public Works and the Fire Department have no major issues. The building will be fully sprinklered. It will not be a major generator of traffic. Members felt the new proposal was more in keeping with the scale of the surrounding homes. Mr. Barritt asked if there would be any different uses from what is there today. Ms. Espy said this would still be a Level 3 facility. Mr. Rabideau said they could provide a second access to the site, if required; however the Fire Department felt that with the non-combustible construction, the one access was OK. Mr. Barritt also asked about stormwater. Mr. Rabideau showed the existing pond which could be tweaked. They could also incorporate something like a rain garden, which would be an asset to the area. 6 Ms. Smith appreciated the diminished design but felt the colors “popped” a little much. Mr. Wilking agreed but liked the brick and colonial blue that was integrated. Mr. Rabideau said they will come back with a more refined look. They will also do something within the 50 foot setback to make it more appealing. Public comment was then solicited: Ms. Byrnes was concerned that as an abutting neighbor she was never notified of the first sketch plan hearing. She also noted she has ingress/egress on the property’s right-of-way (the west side of the drive). She then cited the Comprehensive Plan which says this is an area for low intensity residential use, which she did not feel this is. She was concerned with noise from delivery trucks and frequent fire/ambulance calls. Mr. Rabideau said the lack of notification was a clerical error, but Ms. Byrnes was notified of this hearing, which is for a totally new application. Ms. Murphy, a neighbor, felt this plan was more appealing; however, she noted the Chamberlin/Airport Study Committee is saying “keep it residential,” especially in light of the loss of homes near the Airport. Ms. Cady also cited the frequency of emergency vehicles opposite her residence. She felt that no matter how you disguise it, this is an institution. Mr. Barritt suggested the applicant continue to work with neighbors. Mr. Rabideau noted that many residents of Pillsbury Manor originally lived in this neighborhood. 8. Minutes of 20 October 2015: The minutes were not presented for approval. 9. 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 8:40 p.m. 7 ___________________________________ Clerk ___________________________________ Date