Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Development Review Board - 06/07/2016 SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES 7 JUNE 2016 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 7 June 2016, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: B. Miller, Acting Chair; J. Smith, D. J. Wilking, M. Cota, F. Kochman ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; L. Britt, Planning Department; J. Leinwohl, R. Davis, G. Davis, J. Painter, J. Goodwin, E. & C. Steele, E. Langfeldt, A. Gill, T. Barritt, L. O’Brien, Jr., M. O’Brien, E. Lesser‐Goldsmith, W. Chesbrough, V. Lambert 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. Continued sketch plan application #SD-15-40 of John P. Larkin for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) razing a 54-unit hotel (Larkin Terrace), 2) constructing a 100-room hotel, 3) constructing a 51 room extended stay hotel, 4) constructing 77 residential units, and 5) constructing 9,000 sq. ft. of commercial space, 1185 & 1195 Shelburne Road: As the applicant had requested a continuance, Mr. Wilking moved to continue SD-15-40 until 5 July 2016. Mr. Behr seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Preliminary and final plat application #SD-16-10 of City of Burlington/Burlington International Airport to amend a previously approved plan for an airport complex. The amendment consists of: 1) razing an existing car wash facility, 2) constructing a new 11,665 sq. ft. auto rental car wash facility, 3) constructing a 5,970 sq. ft. 12-position fueling canopy, 4) constructing a new access drive to the FAA Air Traffic Control Facility, and 5) a subdivision to create two lease parcels, 1200 Airport Drive: Mr. Leinwohl explained that there is an existing car wash facility on site where rental cars are washed and serviced. It is shared by 2 rental companies. That building will be taken down and replaced with a larger one which will serve 3 rental car agencies. The lot is 3 acres and is entirely paved. There will be no impervious area. There is a stormwater system and there will be a large pre-engineered infiltration system. Because of fueling, this is considered a “hot spot,” and in the event of a spill, there is an oil/water separator. Mr. Leinwohl then showed the renderings. He noted they have tried to replicate the architecture of the parking garage. He showed a perspective looking toward the Airport and indicated the wash bays and 3 maintenance bays. He also noted that the way the road curves, a driver on Kirby Road would have to look sharply to the right to see the building. It is not really in a line of sight. There will be a good looking fence that will provide some screening. This is a secure facility, and there will be no public allowed there. Mr. Leinwohl indicated the location of a new 20,000 gallon fuel tank. The 2 older 10,000 gallon tanks will be removed. Mr. Miller read the Fire Chief’s review which indicated he had no issue with the plan. No issues were raised regarding the relationship of the project to the site. Regarding landscaping, Mr. Leinwohl indicated the location of trees that will be relocated. Because there is no space on this site for landscaping, they will put additional plantings on the west side of Airport Drive where houses have been removed and in an area of overflow parking. He then showed a concept of what it will look like with the additional landscaping. Mr. Wilking said there is a positive improvement at the corner of White Street. He was concerned with landscaping vacant lots when the city has yet to determine what will become of those properties, and the landscaping may end up being removed. Mr. Belair explained that there is no option of putting money in escrow instead of providing the landscaping. Mr. Behr felt that situation should be reviewed. Mr. Barritt said he appreciated those comments and noted there is a design process going on in the Chamberlin-Airport neighborhood now. He asked if it is possible to have plantings other than on Airport property. Mr. Belair said plantings must be on Airport property. No traffic issues were raised. Mr. Leinwohl said all lighting will be downcast LEDs. He noted there is an FAA concern here as well as a public concern. Mr. Kochman then moved to close SD-16-10. Mr. Behr seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Continued Site Plan Application #SP-16-22 of Ten Farrell Street, LLC, to amend a previously approved plan for a 26,125 sq. ft. mixed use building. The amendment is for an umbrella approval to allow for additional uses, 10 Farrell Street: Mr. Davis, owner of the building, said there have been a number of renovations to the building. In additional, some large cedar trees were removed and replaced. He showed the locations. They have a permit to divide the building into 3 spaces for office and retail uses. They are asking to include other uses under an umbrella permit. Mr. McCormick, the landscape architect, said the planting design is intended to match that on the south side of the building. This will involve removing 4 more cedar trees. Parking lot circulation remains the same. They could restripe for additional spaces for new tenants. Mr. Behr asked if there is enough parking for the worst case scenario. Mr. McCormick said some uses are out of the question (e.g., restaurant). Mr. Davis said they are not planning to change any pavement for circulation. They will be careful to lease to businesses that are OK with the parking. Mr. Miller asked the value of the new landscaping. Mr. McCormick said it matches the south side of the building. Mr. Kochman suggested adding some trees to screen the parking lot. Mr. Davis said he would be open to that. Mr. Belair said the Board needs to see a new full landscaping plan, including street trees. The question of front yard coverage should also be looked into (Ms. Britt said the numbers provided don’t seem to go along with what is shown.) Mr. Davis was concerned that they are now at a point where work would have to stop until they get an approval. Mr. Belair said they can be on the next agenda. It was also noted that some lighting is non-compliant (not shielded). The Board did not voice any objections to the umbrella permit. Mr. Wilking moved to continue SP-16-22 to 21 June 2016. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Sketch Plan Application #SD-16-11 of O’Brien Farm Road, LLC, for a planned unit development to develop 50 acres with a maximum of 360 dwelling units and an unspecified square footage of commercial space, 255 Kimball Avenue: Mr. Langfeldt said they have put together a Master Plan and a sketch plan. They want to know whether they are moving in the right direction. He stressed that no specific buildings or site plan is being presented. He then showed the Master Plan for 30 acres divided in to different phases. He indicated a proposed new city road which will intersect with Kennedy Drive (with a traffic light). He also indicated the different areas for development and noted existing sidewalk, rec paths, etc. He stressed that they layout is conceptual. Mr. Behr commented that the plan has lost some of the “flavor” it had before and appears too mechanical. Previously there was connectivity between zones, and there were more breaks between houses. The open space for residents to access now seems to be closed off. Mr. Wilking agreed. Mr. Langfeldt said one problem they have is with the city’s parking requirement. This is now being considered at the Planning Commission. With regard to proposed parks, Mr. Langfeldt said there wouldn’t be walking trails in “zone 4,” but there is a possibility for this in “zone 5.” Mr. Behr noted you can’t get from zone 4 to zone 5 because of the houses there. He felt they will have to lose some houses to be a successful project. Mr. Langfeldt said there is a lot of green space and recreation space. Mr. Kochman said he was concerned there appears to be no play area for kids with something like a ballfield. Mr. Miller noted that staff supports some encroachment into a wetland area. Mr. Gill said this is a Class 3 wetland, really no more than a ditch. The state has no issue with it. The state is also OK with a few other small wetland areas. The applicant will be requesting waivers, including setback waivers as follows: a. 10 foot rear yards setback (instead of 30) b. 5 yard side yard setback (instead of 10) c. 5 yard front yard setback (instead of 30) It was noted that staff is generally OK with the waivers, but asks that they not be granted on a development-wide basis. Mr. Behr agreed there should not be a blanket waiver. Mr. Langfeldt noted 2 small sections in the Master Plan where lots back up to a cliff and also where buildings A, B, and C are located and back up to condominiums that are protected by steep land and landscaping. Mr. Kochman was concerned with buildings “lining up like soldiers.” Regarding height waivers, Mr. Wilking said he would want to see how they relate and how they would work specifically. Mr. Langfeldt showed a concept of what it could look like in Zone 3 leading to the 5 and 6 story buildings in zone 2 (these could be a mix of residential and commercial). He also showed what you would see from Kennedy Drive and a view from Old Farm Road. Mr. Kochman said the greater the setback from Kennedy Drive, the more OK he is. Mr. Gill said they will save as many trees on Kennedy Drive as they can. Ms. Davis, who lives on Eldridge St., was concerned with waivers that would bring townhouses a few feet away from her back porch. She said there is an incline but didn’t feel it was as bad as the applicant says. Mr. Behr agreed with Ms. Davis and said he wouldn’t support that, especially as the new buildings would be above the existing buildings. Mr. Steer, who also lives on Eldridge Street, raised questions of drainage once trees are removed. He said there is also a major difference between a 10 foot and a 30 foot setback. He added that the buildings appear so close, if there is a fire, the fire would spread from building to building quickly. Mr. Behr said the applicant will have to abide by state building codes. Mr. Steel said he is also concerned with traffic which already speeds through Eldridge Street, even though it is a winding street. Mr. Miller said there will have to be a thorough traffic study. Ms. Painter was also concerned with traffic and noted there are a lot of people who walk there. Mr. Langfeldt said they are intending a “neighborhood street” not a thoroughfare or a cut‐through. No other issues were raised. 8. Sketch Plan Application #SD-16-12 of Veronica Lambert to subdivide a 4.11 acre parcel developed with a single family dwelling and a two-family dwelling into two lots of 1.44 acres (lot #1) and 2.67 acres (lot #2), 1405 Hinesburg Road: Mr. Chesbrough said the parcel used to belong to Ms. Lambert’s mother. There is an existing 3-bedrooml house and north of that a duplex rental unit. There is also a shop that the Dubois Company used in the past. They are requesting the subdivision to make it easier to sell both pieces. Mr. Miller noted that existing easements should be indicated on the plan. Mr. Chesbrough said the easements were granted to Brad Gardner in order to access his landlocked property. No other issues were raised. 9. Design Review Application #DR-16-03 of Healthy Living Market & Café to amend a previously approved Master Signage Permit to allow for new logo designs, 222 Dorset Street: Mr. Lesser-Goldsmith said they are changing their logo. He showed the concepts for the new logo. No issues were raised. Mr. Kochman moved to close DR-16-03. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 10. Minutes of 17 May 2016: Members agreed to delete the line at the bottom of p. 2 indicating all members were OK with the date. Mr. Wilking then moved to approve the Minutes of 17 May 2016 as amended. Mr. Behr seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 11. Other Business: There was no other business discussed. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 9:42 p.m. , Clerk 07/19/2016 , Date Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_16_10_1200AirportDrive_BurlingtonIntlAirport_car_r ental_car_wash_and_fuel_canopy_prelimiinary & final_ DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: January 29, 2016 Plans received: December 31, 2015 PRELIMINARY & FINAL PLAT REVIEW #SD-16-10 CITY OF BURLINGTON / BURLINGTON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT – 1200 AIRPORT DRIVE Meeting Date: June 7, 2016 Applicant /Owner Burlington International Airport/City of Burlington 1200 Airport Drive, #1 South Burlington, VT 05403 Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_16_10_1200 Airport Drive_Burlington International lAirport_car_rental_car_wash_and_fuel_canopy_preliminary & final_.doc PROJECT DESCRIPTION Preliminary & final plat application #SD-16-10 of City of Burlington/Burlington International Airport to amend a previously approved plan for an airport complex. The amendment consists of: 1) razing an existing car wash facility, 2) constructing a new 11,665 sq. ft. auto rental car wash facility, 3) constructing a 5,970 sq. ft. 12 position fueling canopy, 4) constructing a new access drive to the FAA Air Traffic Control Facility, and 5) a subdivision to create two (2) lease parcels, 1200 Airport Drive. COMMENTS Administrative Officer Ray Belair, and Lindsey Britt, Development Review Planner referred to herein as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted on June 1, 2016 and offer the following comments: Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements: The property is located in the Airport District. Table 1. Dimensional Requirements The current 770 acre parcel is in compliance with these requirements. Due to the vast area of the airport property, coverages have not been calculated. Staff is confident, based on prior projects that the coverages are well below maximums. 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. The project appears to have minimal impacts on existing water and wastewater use. The car wash facility will replace an existing one on the site. The applicant will have to obtain final wastewater and water allocation prior to the issuance of the zoning permit. (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. An erosion control plan has been submitted. Staff considers that this requirement is met. (A)(3)The project incorporates access, circulation, and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unreasonable congestion of adjacent roads. The project will have no impact on vehicular traffic. Staff considers that this requirement is met. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_16_10_1200 Airport Drive_Burlington International lAirport_car_rental_car_wash_and_fuel_canopy_preliminary & final_.doc (A)(4)The project’s design respects and will provide suitable protection to wetlands, streams, wildlife habitat as identified in the Open Space Strategy, and any unique natural features on the site. There are no wetlands, streams, wildlife habitat as identified in the Open Space Strategy nor unique natural features on the area of the airport’s taxiways and runways that would be affected by this project. (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. The applicant has provided renderings of the buildings. 1. Staff recommends that the Board review the renderings and provide feedback on whether they are comfortable with the proposed designs submitted. (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. There are no open space areas on this portion of the property that would be affected by this project. (A)(7)The layout of a subdivision or PUD has been reviewed by the Fire Chief or (designee) to ensure that adequate fire protection can be provided. Staff expects the Fire Department to provide comments in time for the meeting. (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. Staff considers the project to be compatible with the extension of such services. See comments on Stormwater below. (A)(10)The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s). Staff considers that the proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the Airport Zoning District. SUBDIVISION This proposal includes the creation of two (2) leased parcels, leased area “A” will be leased to the rental car company, and leased area “B” will be leased to the FAA for the Air Traffic Control Facility. Since these lots do not meet the frontage on a public street requirement and parcel “B” is too small to meet the minimum lot size requirement, staff recommends that these lot be approved with a condition that we do not recognize their existence for the purposes of the Land Development Regulations. The remaining parcel is labeled “C” and includes all the remaining lands of the airport property. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_16_10_1200 Airport Drive_Burlington International lAirport_car_rental_car_wash_and_fuel_canopy_preliminary & final_.doc 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 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 that this criterion is being met. B. Relationship of Proposed Structures to the Site. (1) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and adequate parking areas. 2. The Board should review the renderings and provide feedback on whether they are comfortable with the proposed designs being submitted at with this application. (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. Parking is located to the side of the parking garage building which forms the primary building line facing Airport Drive. Staff considers this criterion to be met. (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. Not applicable. (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. 3. The Board should review the renderings and provide feedback on whether they are comfortable with the proposed designs being submitted with this application. The proposed buildings would be 20 ft. for the administrative building and 17 ft. for the fuel canopy. (4) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansion shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. Staff considers this criterion to be met as the plans show the utility services to be underground. 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. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_16_10_1200 Airport Drive_Burlington International lAirport_car_rental_car_wash_and_fuel_canopy_preliminary & final_.doc (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. 4. The Board should review the renderings and provide feedback on whether they are comfortable with the proposed designs being submitted with this application. In addition to the above general review standards, site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the Land Development Regulations: 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 consider that 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. 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). The project will be served by a new dumpster enclosure. Staff considers this criterion to be met. D. Landscaping and Screening Requirements. (See Article 13, Section 13.06) 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 two (2) buildings is $3,148,125. The minimum landscaping requirement would be calculated as follows: Total Building Construction or Building Improvement Cost % of Total Construction/ Improvement Cost Cost of proposed project $0 - $250,000 3% $7500 Next $250,000 2% $5000 Additional over $500,000 1% of $2,648,125 $26,481 Minimum Landscaping $ >> $38,981 Proposed Landscaping $39,410 The minimum landscaping requirement is being met. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_16_10_1200 Airport Drive_Burlington International lAirport_car_rental_car_wash_and_fuel_canopy_preliminary & final_.doc In an email to staff dated 6/3/16, the City Arborist made the following comments: Planting details should be included in the plans. The spacing on some of the trees seems pretty tight which will increase maintenance as the trees grow. As long as they understand the maintenance implications I’m OK with it but I wouldn’t want to maintain it. Pursuant to Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations, the plans should depict snow storage areas that will minimize the potential for run-off or indicate that snow will be trucked off site. The applicant is proposing to locate most of the landscaping for the project on the west side of Airport Drive to maximize the impact of the plantings. Placing it in this location would be more beneficial as the development site is a distance from the public street whereas placing this amount of landscaping in the vicinity of the new buildings would not enhance the area’s aesthetics. 5. The Board should discuss the location of the proposed landscaping as it relates to the project’s location.. Stormwater In an email to staff dated June 3, 2016, the Department of Public Works commented as follows: The Stormwater Section has reviewed the “Burlington International Airport Rental Car QTA Facility” plan prepared by PGAL/Stantec, dated 4/25/16, we would like to offer the following comments: 1. The project proposed to redevelop greater than 1 total acre of impervious area on the parcel. Therefore, the project will require a stormwater permit from the Vermont DEC Stormwater Division. The applicant should acquire this permit before starting construction. 2. The project proposes to disturb greater than 1 acre of area. It will therefore require a construction stormwater permit from the Vermont DEC Stormwater Division. The applicant should acquire this permit before starting construction. 3. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance infrastructure. Thank you for the opportunity to comment, Dave Wheeler TRAFFIC The applicant submitted a memo from Stantec dated March 22, 2016 entitled “BTV-Car Rental Quick Turnaround Facility Traffic Impact Assessment” whereby the consultant concludes the following: “With information from 7 of the 8 rental car companies at BTV, Stantec concludes that there will be fewer Evening peak hour shuttle trips through the Airport Drive and Williston Road intersection and therefore the proposed QTA will not have a negative traffic impact”. LIGHTING The applicant submitted a point by point lighting plan and details of the lighting fixtures. Staff considers CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_16_10_1200 Airport Drive_Burlington International lAirport_car_rental_car_wash_and_fuel_canopy_preliminary & final_.doc the lighting requirements to be met. RECOMMENDATION Seek clarification on the questions raised above, and close the hearing. Respectfully submitted, ________________________________ Raymond J. Belair, Administrative Officer Copy to: Gene Richards, applicant 4,513 229.3 Natural Resources Atlas Vermont Agency of Natural Resources 3,159 © Vermont Agency of Natural Resources 160.0 1: WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Meters160.00 NOTES Map created using ANR's Natural Resources Atlas LEGEND 80.00 vermont.gov DISCLAIMER: This map is for general reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. ANR and the State of Vermont make no representations of any kind, including but not limited to, the warranties of merchantability, or fitness for a particular use, nor are any such warranties to be implied with respect to the data on this map. April 13, 2016 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 1" = 263 1cm = 32Ft.Meters Town Boundary XX X X X X X X X UGE UGE UGEUGEUGEUGEUGEUGEUGEUGE UGEUGEUGEUGEUGEUGERDRDUGT UGTUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTGAS STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP21 3 4 5 6 7 8 12 13 1491011 UGTUGTUGTUGT UGT UGTBBBBBBBBB301503060120BASIS OF BEARINGS & COORDINATES&CVWO*QTK\QPVCNÄ0#&  52% 86 U(6PRELIMINARY www.pgal.comPGAL TBPE REG. No. F-2742#151425 ELLWORTH INDUSTRIAL DR.ATLANTA, GA 30318[T] 404 602 3800[F] 404 602 3810CIVILSTANTEC55 GREEN MOUNTAIN DRIVESOUTH BURLINGTON, VT[F] (802) 864-016505403[T] (802) 497-6410STRUCTURALKNIGHT CONSULTING51 KNIGHT LANEWILLISTON, VT 05495[T] (802) 879-6343[F] FaxFUELINGSTANTEC5 DARTMOUTH DRIVESUITE 101[F] (603) 669-7636AUBURN, NH 03032[T] (603) 206-7559MEPHALLAM ICS38 EASTWOOD DR., STE 200SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT[F] Fax05403[T] (802) 658-4891CARWASHN/S CORPORATION235 W. FLORENCE AVE.INGLEWOOD, CA 90301[T] (310) 330-1204[F] (310) 412-1196Pierce Goodwin Alexander & Linville C:\@RevitLocal\ARCH-BTV-QTA-R2016_rtownson.rvt2/29/2016 10:57:57 AM AIRPORT DR IVE WHITE STREETV:\1953\active\195311193\transportation\drawing\Landscape\PLANTING PLAN2.dwg, L1.1 PLANTING, 4/7/2016 8:03:42 AM, hharrington, DWG To PDF (600 dpi).pc3 SC I E N T I F I C N AM E Q T Y . KE Y C OM M ON N AM E SI Z E SP A C I NG Pi c e a g l a u c a 5 P G WHI T E S P R U C E 8- 1 0 ' HG T . as s h o w n Pi n u s s t r o b u s 5 PS WHI T E P IN E 8- 1 0 ' H G T . as s h o w n EX I S T ING T R E E TO B E R EMO V EDX E V E RG R E EN T R E E TO R EM A IN AND B E P RO T EC T EDDUR ING CON S T RUC T IONXXXXXXXXXX XEXISTING EVERGREEN TOBE REMOVEDEVERGREEN TREE TOREMAIN AND BE PROTECTEDDURING CONSTRUCTIONPROPOSED EVERGREENTO REPLACE THOSEREMOVEDEXISTING TREE TO BERELOCATEDRELOCATED TREEPLANT KEY1-PS2-PG3-PS3-PG1-PSRELOCATED CRABAPPLERELOCATED CRABAPPLESCIENTIFIC NAMEQTY.KEYCOMMON NAMESIZESPACINGPicea glauca5PGWHITE SPRUCE8-10' HGT.as shownPinus strobus5PSWHITE PINE8-10' HGT.as shown2002040SCALE OF FEETwww.pgal.comPGAL TBPE REG. No. F-2742#151425 ELLWORTH INDUSTRIAL DR.ATLANTA, GA 30318[T] 404 602 3800[F] 404 602 3810Pierce Goodwin Alexander & Linville CIVILSTANTEC55 GREEN MOUNTAIN DRIVESOUTH BURLINGTON, VT[F] (802) 864-016505403[T] (802) 497-6410STRUCTURALKNIGHT CONSULTING51 KNIGHT LANEWILLISTON, VT 05495[T] (802) 879-6343[F] FaxFUELINGSTANTEC5 DARTMOUTH DRIVESUITE 101[F] (603) 669-7636AUBURN, NH 03032[T] (603) 206-7559MEPHALLAM ICS38 EASTWOOD DR., STE 200SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT[F] Fax05403[T] (802) 658-4891CARWASHN/S CORPORATION235 W. FLORENCE AVE.INGLEWOOD, CA 90301[T] (310) 330-1204[F] (310) 412-1196C:\@RevitLocal\ARCH-BTV-QTA-R2016_rtownson.rvt2/29/2016 10:57:57 AMV:\1953\active\195311193\transportation\drawing\Landscape\PLANTING PLAN2.dwg, L1.3 PLANTING, 4/7/2016 8:14:42 AM, hharrington, DWG To PDF (600 dpi).pc3 AIRPORTZONINGDISTRICTAIRPORT INDUSTRIALZONING DISTRICTMIXED INDUSTRIAL -COMMERCIALZONING DISTRICTwww.pgal.comPGAL TBPE REG. No. F-2742#151425 ELLWORTH INDUSTRIAL DR.ATLANTA, GA 30318[T] 404 602 3800[F] 404 602 3810Pierce Goodwin Alexander & Linville CIVILSTANTEC55 GREEN MOUNTAIN DRIVESOUTH BURLINGTON, VT[F] (802) 864-016505403[T] (802) 497-6410STRUCTURALKNIGHT CONSULTING51 KNIGHT LANEWILLISTON, VT 05495[T] (802) 879-6343[F] FaxFUELINGSTANTEC5 DARTMOUTH DRIVESUITE 101[F] (603) 669-7636AUBURN, NH 03032[T] (603) 206-7559MEPHALLAM ICS38 EASTWOOD DR., STE 200SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT[F] Fax05403[T] (802) 658-4891CARWASHN/S CORPORATION235 W. FLORENCE AVE.INGLEWOOD, CA 90301[T] (310) 330-1204[F] (310) 412-1196C:\@RevitLocal\ARCH-BTV-QTA-R2016_rtownson.rvt2/29/2016 10:57:57 AMV:\1953\active\195311019\transportation\permits\So Burlington\Preliminary Plat\Drawings\Locationplan.dwg, QTA Facility, 3/31/2016 10:38:00 AM, hharrington, DWG To PDF (600 dpi).pc3 March 31, 2016 GATE10"MAPLE10"MAPLEPULLBOXENTRY SCANNER8"PINE8"PINE8"PINEGATESL 15GAS PUMPEND ORANGE MARKOUT5"APPLESTEEL DOORSLANE MERGE6"PINEEL BOX8"PINE8"PINE8"PINE8"PINE6"PINE8"PINE4"PINEGATEEL BOX5"APPLE12"DIA12"DIA3.7'DIA1.4'DIA1.5'DIA2.0'DIA12"DIA12"DIA3.7'DIA12"DIA12"DIA 3.5'AGGAS PUMP8"PINE5"SPRUCEGAS METERGATERIM 324.86COULD NOT OPENPULLBOX(4)CONC WALKCONC CURBCONCSHEDERIM 328.57COULD NOT OPENPULLBOXPAVED WALKPAVED WALKCONC CURBC O N C C U R B C O N C C U R B CONC CURBCONC CURBCONC CURBCONCCONCCONCCONCCONC CURBCONCCONCCONCPULLBOXEMPLOYEEPARKINGONLYTO I89RTE 2 LTPULLBOXPAVED WALKCONC CURB100K/7475033/7475033 6DROPSCONC CURBCONC CURB8"MAPLE8"MAPLE8"MAPLENO DUICELL PHONELOT LTDEADENDSTOPAIRPORTPARK/SHUTTLECLOSEDEMPLOYEEPARKINGONLY10"MAPLE14"LOCUSTPULLBOX8"MAPLE6"APPLE6"APPLE6"APPLE6"APPLE6"APPLE6"APPLELANEDIRECTIONSCELLPHONELOTTO I89TO RTE 2NOIDLEINGEXPECTANTMOTHERSPARKINGPAVED WALKCONC CURBCONC CURB6"PINE10"PINESTOPONE WAYSTOPONE WAYIRON FENCEGATE12"CEDAROLD SIGNBASEELBOXACUNITELBOXX XXXXXX X X X UEUEUEXXXXXXXXXXXXUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEUEXXGGGGG8"AC8"AC2"2"2"8"DI8"DI8"DI8"DI8"DIACUNITUEUEUEELBOXELBOXGATEBOXELBOXELBOXELBOXELBOXGATEIRON FENCEGATEGATEXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX GATEIRON FENCEGATEGATEXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX GGGGGGX XXXXX X X X RDRDUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTGAS2 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 1 3 14 9 10 1 1 UGTUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTUGTU G T UGTAIRPORT CIRCLEAIRPORT CIRCLEBURLINGTONINTERNATIONALAIRPORTAIRPORT DRIVEAFAA FACILITYAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCAEDBBBBBBBBCHEGFGBAFGGCDITHHJKQQCOTRROSTMVWCUMEPSLOCNABCDEwww.pgal.comPGAL TBPE REG. No. F-2742#151425 ELLWORTH INDUSTRIAL DR.ATLANTA, GA 30318[T] 404 602 3800[F] 404 602 3810Pierce Goodwin Alexander & Linville CIVILSTANTEC55 GREEN MOUNTAIN DRIVESOUTH BURLINGTON, VT[F] (802) 864-016505403[T] (802) 497-6410STRUCTURALKNIGHT CONSULTING51 KNIGHT LANEWILLISTON, VT 05495[T] (802) 879-6343[F] FaxFUELINGSTANTEC5 DARTMOUTH DRIVESUITE 101[F] (603) 669-7636AUBURN, NH 03032[T] (603) 206-7559MEPHALLAM ICS38 EASTWOOD DR., STE 200SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT[F] Fax05403[T] (802) 658-4891CARWASHN/S CORPORATION235 W. FLORENCE AVE.INGLEWOOD, CA 90301[T] (310) 330-1204[F] (310) 412-1196C:\@RevitLocal\ARCH-BTV-QTA-R2016_rtownson.rvt2/29/2016 10:57:57 AMV:\1953\active\195311019\transportation\permits\So Burlington\Preliminary Plat\Drawings\Site Plan.dwg, Layout1, 5/31/2016 10:25:26 AM, hharrington, DWG To PDF (600 dpi).pc3 REF.REF.REF.STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPCACEC1C2C5C4C3C7FAFBFCFDF1F2F3F4F5F7F6153'-2"A6.001A6.003A6.0042A7.003A7.00A6.014A6.012A6.013C8C9F827'-2" 27'-0" 27'-0" 18'-0" 18'-0" 18'-0" 18'-0"CCCAR WASHEQUIPMENT100100ELEC./MECH.ROOM101101STORAGE103103CAR WASH106106CAR WASH107107CAR WASH108108MAINTENANCEBAY109109OPEN WORKAREA110110OFFICE111111STORAGE112112VESTIBULE113113RR114114I.T.115115BREAK AREA116116MAINTENANCEBAY117117OPEN WORKAREA118118OFFICE119119STORAGE120120VESTIBULE121121RR122122I.T.123123BREAK AREA124124MAINTENANCEBAY125125OPEN WORKAREA126126OFFICE127127STORAGE128128VESTIBULE129129RR130130I.T.131131BREAK AREA132132CARWASHVESTIBULE105105FUELINGEQUIPMENT134134A2.0211A7.00RR104104100A101103104105B106A107A108A106B107B108B109A109B117A117B125A125B126128130129B127129A118120122123131121B121A119113A113B115114112111110134AIRPORT IT1021024A7.00A2.0231172'-0"30'-0"23242121212121215A7.00CBCD9774'-0"40'-0"40'-0"5'-0" 13'-7"R.O.8'-0" 3'-1" 12'-11 1/2"R.O.3'-5" 8'-3 1/2" 2'-4 1/2"R.O.3'-5" 3'-4"R.O.6'-5" 2'-7"R.O.3'-5" 3'-1 1/2"FUELINGCANOPY1331336'-2"R.O.12'-0"2'-8 1/2"R.O.3'-5"2'-10 1/2"6'-0"R.O.12'-0"2'-8 1/2"R.O.3'-5"2'-10 1/2"6'-0"R.O.12'-0"2'-8 1/2"R.O.3'-5"2'-10 1/2"3'-0"R.O.12'-0"3'-0"3'-0"R.O.12'-0"3'-0"3'-0"R.O.12'-0"3'-0"5'-0"8'-6"63'-6"81'-2"8'-10"5'-0"3'-10"3'-8 1/2"R.O.5'-6"2'-2 1/2"R.O.4'-6"2'-2 1/2"R.O.5'-6"3'-6 1/2"3'-6 1/2"R.O.5'-6"2'-2 1/2"R.O.4'-6"2'-2 1/2"R.O.5'-6"3'-6 1/2"3'-6 1/2"R.O.5'-6"2'-2 1/2"R.O.4'-6"2'-2 1/2"R.O.5'-6"3'-6 1/2"3'-0"R.O.12'-0"3'-0"3'-0"R.O.12'-0"3'-0"3'-0"R.O.12'-0"3'-0"18'-0"5'-0"2'-6 1/4"19'-6 3/4" 5'-2" 19'-6" 5'-2" 19'-6 3/4"2'-6 1/4"5'-0"10'-0"152'-0"12'-0"25'-0"25'-0"25'-0"25'-0"25'-0"15'-0"1'-6"16'-9 1/2"R.O.6'-5" 16'-9 1/2"1'-6"1'-6"24'-8" 17'-6" 7'-2" 24'-8" 7'-0" 33'-0" 10'-0" 24'-0" 6'-0"7'-0" 31'-6"15'-0"102181956666255BBBBBB3A7.502216204435'-10" 10'-7" 9'-6" 10'-1"8'-0"8'-0"8'-8"10"8'-6"EQ. EQ.EQ.EQ.2727WATERSERVICE105A100B1'-3"1'-3"2'-1" 2'-1"2'-1" 2'-1"9 3/4" 2'-0 1/4"2'-0 1/4"9 3/4"2'-0 1/4"9 3/4"9 3/4"2'-0 1/4"2'-1"2'-1"2'-1"2'-1"2'-1"2'-1"2'-1"2'-1"2'-0 1/4"9 3/4"2'-0 1/4"9 3/4"6" 4'-2" 6"6" 4'-2" 6"9 3/4"2'-0 1/4"6"9 3/4"2'-0 1/4"2'-1"2'-1"2'-1"2'-1"2'-1"2'-1"2'-1"2'-1"M182M182M182M182M182M18266666666TYP.TYP.TYP.726TYP.444116A2.0224752521A7.51A4.0111.6" CONCRETE CURB - RE: CIVIL2.OVERHEAD REELS, RE: FS DRAWINGS3.HOSE BIB, RE: PLUMBING4.ADA ACCESS RAMP - RE: CIVIL5.TRENCH DRAIN, RE: PLUMBING6.6" CONCRETE FILLED STEEL BOLLARD - RE: CIVIL7.FLOOR DRAIN, RE: PLUMBING8.SEMI-RECESSED FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINET9.WALL-MOUNTED FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINET - UL RATING:4A:80B:C10.SERVICE SINK, RE: PLUMBING11.EYE WASH, RE: PLUMBING12.TIRE CHANGER AND BALANCER, RE: FS DRAWINGS13.LUBE CUBE, RE: FS DRAWINGS14.CAR LIFT, RE: FS DRAWINGS15.SAFETY AISLE16.CANOPY ABOVE17.VACUUM, RE: FS DRAWINGS18.AIR COMPRESSOR, RE: FS DRAWINGS19.PRESSURE WASHER, RE: CAR WASH DRAWINGS20.AREA DRAIN, RE: PLUMBING21.EXTERIOR FREEZE RESISTANT WALL HYDRANT, RE: PLUMBING22.CARWASH EQUIPMENT, RE: CAR WASH DRAWINGS23.15'-0" X 63'-6" HEATED SLAB24.30'-0" X 72'-0" HEATED SLAB25.WALL LADDER & ROOF HATCH, RE: 6/A7.7026.FREEZE RESISTANT ADA COMPLIANT WATER FOUNTAIN - RE:PLUMBING27.OVERHEAD DOOR WALL MOUNTED CONTROL BOX28.WALK-OFF MAT29.FURNITURE - TENANT PROVIDED, TENANT INSTALLED30.3/4" PAINTED FRT PLYWOOD OVER 2-1/2" METL. STUD AT IT CLOSETNEAR REAR WALL31.TIME CLOCK - TENANT PROVIDED, TENANT INSATLLED - RE:ELECTRICAL FOR POWER AND DATA32.MAIL/COPY/FAX - TENANT PROVIDED, TENANT INSTALLED - RE:ELECTRICAL FOR POWER AND DATA33.REFRIGERATOR - WHIRLPOOL WRT311FZDM - RE: ELECTRICAL FORPOWER AND PLUMBING FOR WATER34.MILLWORK35.BREAK AREA SINK, RE: PLUMBING36.U-SHAPED CONCRETE FILLED STEEL BOLLARD - RE: CIVIL37.COLUMN FOR PRE-FABRICATED CANOPY38.FUEL DISPENSER ON CONCRETE CURB - RE: FS DRAWINGS39.VACUUM DROPS - RE: FS DRAWINGS40.CORNER GUARD, CG-141.EXTERIOR SURFACE-MOUNTED FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINET - ULRATING: 4A:80B:C42.PAPER SHREDDER - TENANT PROVIDED, TENANT INSTALLED - RE:ELECTRICAL FOR POWER43.FUEL DISPENSER EMERGENCY STOP DISCONNECT - RE: FSDRAWINGS44.VAC SEPARATOR - RE: FS DRAWINGS45.USED OIL EVACUATION STATION - RE: FS DRAWINGS46.FUEL ISLAND MANAGEMENT TERMINAL - RE: FS DRAWINGS47.EMERGENCY SHUT-OFF - RE: FS DRAWINGS48.DRYER - RE: FS DRAWINGS49.FUEL SYSTEM CONTROL PANEL - RE: FS DRAWINGS50.WINDSHIELD WASHER FLUID STORAGE TANK - RE: FS DRAWINGS51.TRANSFORMER - RE: ELEC, FS DRAWINGS52.TRENCH DRAIN - RE: CIVIL DRAWINGS53.SOLID SURFACE SILL WITH 1/2" BULLNOSE54.DESK GROMMET IN COUNTER CENTERED OVER OUTLETS BELOW,RE: ELECT. FOR MOUNTING HEIGHTS55.VERTICAL BLINDS, VB-156.MICROWAVE - WHIRLPOOL WMC30516AS - RE: ELECTRICAL FORPOWERNOTE: KEYNOTES NOT USED ON EVERY SHEETwww.pgal.comPGAL TBPE REG. No. F-2742#151425 ELLWORTH INDUSTRIAL DR.ATLANTA, GA 30318[T] 404 602 3800[F] 404 602 3810FILE NAME:DATE STAMP:Pierce Goodwin Alexander & LinvilleAlexandriaAtlanta Boca Raton BostonAustin Dallas Houston Las Vegas Los Angeles New OrleansPROJECT NUMBERPROJECT LOCATIONCURRENT DOCUMENT STAGEREVISIONSPROJECT TITLEREGISTRATIONCOPYRIGHT ©SHEET TITLESHEET NUMBERCONSULTANTARCHITECTOWNERORIGINAL ISSUE DATECURRENT ISSUE DATEMexico CityCIVILSTANTEC55 GREEN MOUNTAIN DRIVESOUTH BURLINGTON, VT[F] (802) 864-016505403[T] (802) 497-6410STRUCTURALKNIGHT CONSULTING51 KNIGHT LANEWILLISTON, VT 05495[T] (802) 879-6343[F] FaxFUELINGSTANTEC5 DARTMOUTH DRIVESUITE 101[F] (603) 669-7636AUBURN, NH 03032[T] (603) 206-7559MEPHALLAM ICS38 EASTWOOD DR., STE 200SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT[F] Fax05403[T] (802) 658-4891CARWASHN/S CORPORATION235 W. FLORENCE AVE.INGLEWOOD, CA 90301[T] (310) 330-1204[F] (310) 412-1196C:\@RevitLocal\ARCH-BTV-QTA-R2016_rtownson.rvt4/22/2016 5:09:16 PMA2.01100% FOR BID/PERMITFLOOR PLAN - CAR WASH& FUELING BUILDINGBURLINGTONINTERNATIONALAIRPORT RENTAL CARQTA FACILITY1200 AIRPORT DRIVESOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403BURLINGTONINTERNATIONALAIRPORT[T] (802) 863-2874[F]100230404/25/16201604/25/16 1/8" = 1'-0"1FLOOR PLAN - CAR WASH & FUELING BUILDINGNO SCALEQTA FACILITY PLAN KEYNOTES EMERGENCYFUELSHUT OFFT.O. DRIVE0"T.O. CONC. PANEL20'-0"T.O. SLAB6"CACECC1A7.00CBCDA5.001SimA5.021SimTYP.18TYP.6TYP.2TYP.3TYP.177TYP.199TYP.171514141414REQUIRED - (3.33 SF FREE AREA)GIVEN - (3.61 SF FREE AREA)8'-0 1/2"1'-3 1/4"R.O.1'-6 1/4"R.O.5'-6 1/4"2222222223T.O. DRIVE0"T.O. CONC. PANEL20'-0"T.O. SLAB6"CACECC1A7.00CBCD74'-0"A5.001SimA5.021SimTYP.18TYP.6TYP.2TYP.3TYP.177TYP.1993'-6"4'-6"8"7'-4"3'-6"6"20'-0"T.O. DRIVE0"T.O. CONC. PANEL20'-0"T.O. SLAB6"C1C2C5C4C3C72A7.003A7.00C8C9BBBAAAAAA3A7.50A5.001SimA5.021SimTYP.6TYP.1131515TYP.4TYP.10TYP.1TYP.912TYP.11T.O. DRIVE0' - 0"cccTYP.2TYP.377157TYP.17TYP.18TYP.1920T.O. DRIVE0"T.O. CONC. PANEL20'-0"T.O. SLAB6"C1C2C5C4C3C72A7.003A7.00C8C9BBBBBB153'-2"A5.021A5.001TYP.6TYP.1TYP.2TYP.3TYP.1815TYP.4TYP.107157157167167167131313TYP.1TYP.17TYP.19TYP.81A7.51REQUIRED - (3.33 SF FREE AREA)GIVEN - (3.63 SF FREE AREA)R.O.2'-6 1/4"6'-11 3/4"EQ.R.O.3'-0 1/4" EQ.TYP.21TYP.21TYP.21231.PRE-CAST CONCRETE BASE2.RUNNING BOND BRICK3.PRE-CAST CONCRETE BAND, PAINTED EPT-14.PRE-CASE CONCRETE BAND5.PRE-CAST CONCRETE CAP, PAINTED EPT-46.FLUTED PRE-CAST CONCRETE PANEL, PAINTED EPT-47.6" CONCRETE FILLED STEEL BOLLARD, PAINTED EPT-2 - RE: CIVIL8.PRE-FINISHED SCUPPER9.CURVED CANOPY, RE: A7.7010.ALUMINUM CLERESTORY WINDOW11.ALUMINUM WINDOW SYSTEM12.ALUMINUM DOOR & WINDOW SYSTEM13.HOLLOW METAL DOOR WITH VISION PANEL, PAINTED EPT-314.HOLLOW METAL DOOR, PAINTED EPT-315.HIGH-SPEED OVERHEAD COILING DOOR16.MOTORIZED OVERHEAD COILING DOOR17.PILASTER18.PILASTER AT CORNER19.EXTERIOR WALL WASH LIGHTING, RE: ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS20.EMERGENCY SHUT-OFF - RE: FS DRAWINGS21.VERTICAL PANEL JOINT, TYP., RE: STRUCT.22.HORIZONTAL PANEL JOINT, RE: STRUCT.23.PRE-FINISHED METAL LOUVER, GREENHECK ESJ-401 BASIS OF DESIGN, RE: SPEC.www.pgal.comPGAL TBPE REG. No. F-2742#151425 ELLWORTH INDUSTRIAL DR.ATLANTA, GA 30318[T] 404 602 3800[F] 404 602 3810FILE NAME:DATE STAMP:Pierce Goodwin Alexander & LinvilleAlexandriaAtlanta Boca Raton BostonAustin Dallas Houston Las Vegas Los Angeles New OrleansPROJECT NUMBERPROJECT LOCATIONCURRENT DOCUMENT STAGEREVISIONSPROJECT TITLEREGISTRATIONCOPYRIGHT ©SHEET TITLESHEET NUMBERCONSULTANTARCHITECTOWNERORIGINAL ISSUE DATECURRENT ISSUE DATEMexico CityCIVILSTANTEC55 GREEN MOUNTAIN DRIVESOUTH BURLINGTON, VT[F] (802) 864-016505403[T] (802) 497-6410STRUCTURALKNIGHT CONSULTING51 KNIGHT LANEWILLISTON, VT 05495[T] (802) 879-6343[F] FaxFUELINGSTANTEC5 DARTMOUTH DRIVESUITE 101[F] (603) 669-7636AUBURN, NH 03032[T] (603) 206-7559MEPHALLAM ICS38 EASTWOOD DR., STE 200SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT[F] Fax05403[T] (802) 658-4891CARWASHN/S CORPORATION235 W. FLORENCE AVE.INGLEWOOD, CA 90301[T] (310) 330-1204[F] (310) 412-1196C:\@RevitLocal\ARCH-BTV-QTA-R2016_rtownson.rvt4/22/2016 5:11:02 PMA6.00100% FOR BID/PERMITEXTERIOR ELEVATIONS -CAR WASH BUILDINGBURLINGTONINTERNATIONALAIRPORT RENTAL CARQTA FACILITY1200 AIRPORT DRIVESOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403BURLINGTONINTERNATIONALAIRPORT[T] (802) 863-2874[F]100230404/25/16201604/25/16 1/8" = 1'-0"3NORTH ELEVATION - CAR WASH BUILDING 1/8" = 1'-0"4SOUTH ELEVATION - CAR WASH BUILDING 1/8" = 1'-0"1EAST ELEVATION - CAR WASH BUILDING 1/8" = 1'-0"2WEST ELEVATION - CAR WASH BUILDINGNO SCALECAR WASH BUILDING ELEVATION KEYNOTES DDDDDDDDDHHHHDJ4J4J4J4J4J4J4J4J4J4J4J4J4J4K4-HSK5W-K5W-K5W-K5W-K4 HS-K4 HS-K4 HS-K4 HS-K5W-K4 HS-K4 HS-K4 HS-K4 HS-K4 HS-K4 HS-K3 HS-K3 HS-K4 HS-J2J2J2J4LLLLLLLLLLLL0.2 0.42.0 1.9 1.7 0.1 1.02.8 4.2 6.4 6.2 2.6 1.3 0.9 0.82.5 3.3 4.3 6.0 6.5 4.7 3.5 2.0 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.02.5 3.5 4.4 5.1 5.0 4.2 3.5 2.9 2.6 2.1 1.8 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.82.1 2.8 4.1 4.6 4.8 4.3 3.6 3.2 2.9 2.5 2.3 1.9 0.3 1.5 1.3 1.1 0.81.1 1.6 3.2 3.4 3.7 4.1 3.9 3.4 3.2 3.1 2.8 2.6 0.3 2.3 2.2 1.9 1.51.1 0.83.2 3.8 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.3 3.4 3.2 3.2 3.1 2.9 2.9 2.8 2.8 2.7 2.2 1.81.5 1.0 0.65.5 6.9 4.8 3.9 3.7 3.1 2.9 2.9 3.0 3.2 3.2 3.4 3.8 3.2 3.2 3.2 2.72.3 1.9 1.2 0.7 0.43.6 6.0 6.4 5.1 4.6 4.1 3.4 2.8 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.6 3.5 3.4 3.43.0 2.5 2.0 1.3 0.8 0.5 0.32.6 3.4 4.6 5.2 4.8 4.3 3.7 3.1 2.7 2.7 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.63.6 3.1 2.7 2.1 1.4 1.0 0.6 0.42.5 3.0 3.7 4.2 4.7 4.2 3.5 2.8 2.7 2.7 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.5 3.7 3.83.9 3.6 3.3 2.9 2.2 0.2 1.2 0.9 0.6 0.41.9 3.3 3.0 3.3 3.8 4.2 4.2 3.7 2.7 2.5 2.7 2.9 3.0 2.9 2.9 3.0 3.33.7 3.9 4.0 3.8 3.5 2.9 2.5 2.1 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.5 0.34.0 5.0 3.7 3.8 3.7 3.6 3.7 3.6 3.1 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.9 3.0 2.9 3.0 3.03.3 3.6 3.7 3.9 4.0 4.2 3.1 2.6 2.1 1.6 1.2 0.9 0.64.8 7.6 6.0 4.7 4.3 3.8 3.5 3.2 2.8 2.8 2.9 2.9 2.9 3.2 3.1 3.0 3.03.0 3.2 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.2 2.5 2.1 1.6 1.2 0.80.0 0.02.9 5.2 5.9 5.3 5.0 4.5 3.8 3.2 2.8 2.7 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.5 3.0 2.92.7 2.5 2.7 3.0 3.3 3.6 3.8 3.5 2.9 2.3 1.9 1.50.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.12.3 3.8 4.4 5.1 5.0 4.3 3.7 3.0 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.3 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.0 2.72.6 2.4 2.3 2.4 3.1 3.6 3.8 3.8 3.3 2.8 2.0 1.40.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.22.7 3.6 3.9 4.7 5.0 4.7 3.7 2.9 2.4 2.6 2.9 3.0 3.2 3.0 3.1 3.1 2.92.7 0.5 2.0 2.2 2.7 3.8 4.3 4.3 3.8 3.1 2.6 1.70.5 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.45.1 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.5 4.0 3.1 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.9 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.22.9 2.7 2.2 2.1 2.6 3.5 4.4 4.8 4.5 3.7 2.9 2.01.0 1.5 1.8 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.5 2.1 3.1 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.9 7.47.0 5.1 4.6 4.5 3.9 3.7 3.1 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.8 3.1 3.4 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.02.6 2.5 2.5 2.9 3.7 4.3 4.8 5.2 4.8 3.7 1.91.4 2.1 2.8 3.4 5.1 6.0 2.5 1.6 1.5 2.2 3.1 2.6 3.2 2.8 2.3 2.7 5.16.4 5.9 5.5 5.0 4.3 3.7 3.1 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.0 2.9 3.5 3.2 2.8 2.9 2.82.6 2.4 2.6 3.0 3.6 4.4 4.8 5.4 6.8 5.8 2.80.9 2.0 2.8 3.7 4.4 5.7 7.2 6.0 4.2 3.1 2.8 3.6 2.9 3.2 2.8 2.8 4.24.1 5.0 5.3 4.7 4.2 3.5 3.0 2.9 2.9 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.0 2.9 2.8 2.7 2.72.6 2.5 2.7 3.3 3.4 3.7 4.3 4.3 5.6 7.4 3.51.1 2.5 3.3 4.2 4.8 5.4 5.3 4.9 4.7 6.3 6.0 0.0 0.0 4.9 3.4 3.5 3.44.0 4.4 4.7 3.9 3.1 2.5 2.5 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.8 2.5 2.32.3 2.6 3.6 4.1 4.0 3.9 3.8 3.7 4.3 2.41.7 2.9 3.4 3.9 4.3 4.4 4.7 5.0 5.3 7.1 0.0 0.0 14.6 8.6 5.4 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.5 3.6 2.9 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.2 2.9 2.8 2.5 0.9 2.4 3.2 4.2 4.7 4.4 3.8 3.3 3.11.1 3.2 3.5 3.1 2.9 3.0 3.2 3.5 3.8 3.5 0.0 14.6 21.8 21.1 16.1 9.0 4.4 2.7 2.5 2.5 2.4 2.0 2.1 2.4 2.6 3.0 3.3 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.1 2.8 2.7 2.5 2.5 3.2 4.0 4.7 5.0 4.5 3.7 2.72.5 4.9 4.6 3.3 2.6 2.2 2.5 3.2 2.7 3.4 6.9 14.4 21.9 25.1 21.1 14.6 7.4 4.6 2.5 2.0 1.8 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.6 3.2 0.3 2.8 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.7 2.7 2.8 3.1 3.9 4.6 5.1 5.9 5.3 3.41.5 6.6 5.7 5.0 3.4 2.7 2.2 2.6 2.5 2.2 2.3 4.5 10.3 18.5 23.8 24.7 19.6 13.9 8.0 3.7 2.0 1.8 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.5 2.6 2.6 0.4 2.9 3.2 3.23.0 2.9 2.8 3.0 3.6 4.0 5.3 7.5 5.51.7 6.7 5.4 4.3 3.5 3.1 3.8 4.0 1.5 2.1 2.1 2.7 6.7 12.1 18.5 23.923.4 19.6 13.4 7.0 3.4 1.8 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.2 2.5 2.5 2.6 1.2 3.6 3.63.3 3.1 2.8 2.7 3.0 3.2 4.1 4.21.7 4.4 5.0 4.2 4.6 3.4 3.9 0.1 0.0 2.1 2.3 2.1 3.1 5.6 13.0 19.0 23.4 23.9 19.3 12.4 5.9 2.7 1.7 1.6 1.7 2.1 2.2 2.4 3.0 3.6 4.3 4.13.6 2.9 2.6 2.3 2.0 2.5 1.60.3 2.5 3.6 4.4 4.2 4.9 2.9 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 2.3 2.4 2.1 3.4 7.1 12.5 18.7 24.0 23.1 17.8 10.9 6.3 2.6 1.6 1.6 1.9 2.1 2.7 3.7 4.3 4.94.4 3.6 2.8 2.0 1.2 1.3 0.50.7 2.2 3.1 5.0 5.3 8.6 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.0 2.3 2.2 2.0 3.2 6.413.8 20.2 24.8 22.7 18.2 11.2 4.8 2.3 1.7 1.9 2.4 3.5 4.5 4.9 5.35.2 3.9 2.31.5 2.4 3.2 5.0 4.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.0 2.2 2.1 1.9 3.97.9 14.8 20.8 24.8 22.8 16.7 9.8 5.4 2.2 2.1 2.6 3.6 4.4 5.0 6.4 7.1 4.01.3 1.8 2.6 2.8 6.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 1.9 1.71.8 3.6 8.7 15.9 21.0 25.1 21.7 16.1 8.5 3.9 2.4 2.5 3.1 3.7 4.3 5.8 4.81.8 2.4 2.8 2.7 1.7 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.3 1.31.4 1.8 4.9 8.5 15.8 21.6 24.0 20.0 13.4 6.0 3.1 2.2 2.4 2.6 3.1 2.32.4 3.2 3.7 3.6 3.4 3.2 7.9 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 1.01.1 1.2 1.7 4.2 9.8 17.1 21.7 21.7 15.8 7.0 3.1 1.8 1.7 1.91.7 2.8 3.7 4.4 4.3 3.7 2.8 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.10.0 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.9 5.3 10.2 15.3 15.8 11.5 5.8 3.0 1.5 1.20.6 3.4 5.0 5.3 4.9 4.5 4.1 4.5 3.7 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.10.1 0.0 0.6 0.8 1.1 2.6 5.6 8.7 7.7 6.1 3.2 2.0 1.01.8 6.8 7.1 5.0 4.7 4.2 3.5 2.9 2.5 0.0 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.10.1 0.0 0.7 1.4 2.6 4.1 5.5 4.7 3.9 2.5 1.12.5 6.0 4.8 4.5 4.2 3.5 3.7 4.0 3.3 0.0 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.10.1 0.0 2.2 3.3 4.1 5.3 5.3 3.6 1.12.2 4.2 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.1 3.4 3.0 2.9 0.2 0.8 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.00.0 3.3 3.9 5.6 5.7 5.8 1.91.6 4.0 4.4 4.6 4.7 3.8 4.0 3.9 5.3 1.3 1.0 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 3.84.1 4.4 5.1 7.5 3.20.6 3.0 4.7 5.2 5.2 4.3 3.6 3.6 4.6 1.4 2.5 0.4 0.1 0.1 2.7 4.1 3.13.4 3.6 4.11.7 5.8 7.5 5.8 4.7 3.9 3.3 4.0 4.3 7.3 0.3 0.1 8.1 3.8 4.0 2.4 2.32.51.9 3.3 7.7 6.1 4.3 3.5 2.7 2.6 3.6 4.4 0.1 2.0 3.3 2.1 1.9 1.5 1.31.4 2.2 3.0 4.0 5.4 3.6 3.0 2.3 2.1 3.0 3.8 2.4 2.0 2.5 1.5 1.1 0.80.8 1.6 2.5 3.4 4.0 3.7 4.0 2.6 2.3 2.6 3.4 3.9 3.1 2.3 1.7 1.3 0.71.7 2.8 3.9 4.4 4.1 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.5 4.2 4.3 3.5 2.7 1.9 0.73.6 5.2 5.2 4.8 4.4 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.3 3.1 0.81.8 6.7 7.0 4.9 4.8 4.9 5.0 4.9 5.1 7.0 6.12.4 5.6 4.5 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.9 6.52.0 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.61.0 2.4 2.3 2.5 2.11.0 1.6 1.30.6Luminaire ScheduleSymbolQtyLabelArrangementTotal Lamp LumensLLFDescriptionTotal Watts3J2SINGLEN.A.1.000Lithonia WST LED 1 10A700_40K SR2 MVOLT ELCW75.315J4SINGLEN.A.1.000Lithonia WST LED 1 10A700_40K SR4 MVOLT3601K4-HSSINGLEN.A.1.000Lithonia DSX1 LED 30C 1000 40K T4M MVOLT HS1055K5W-SINGLEN.A.1.000Lithonia DSX1 LED 60C 1000 40K T5W MVOLT104512K4 HS-SINGLEN.A.1.000Lithonia DSX1 LED 60C 1000 40K T4M MVOLT HS25082K3 HS-SINGLEN.A.1.000Lithonia DSX1 LED 60C 1000 40K T3M MVOLT HS41812LSINGLEN.A.1.000Cree CAN-304-SL-xx-06-E-UL-700-40K or BXCPxE06E-UD7 (700mA)1587.6Area = 70752 Sq.ftTotal Watts = 2404Lighting Power Density = 0.034 Watts/Sq.ftParking Area Pwr DenistyLighting Power Density = 0.054 Watts/Sq.ftService AreaArea = 32784 Sq.ftTotal Watts = 1775Fuel CanopyArea = 6257 Sq.ftTotal Watts = 1611.6Lighting Power Density = 0.258 Watts/Sq.ft 1 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SP_16_22_10FarrellSt_TenFarrell_umbrella_June_7_2016_ mtg DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: June 3, 2016 Plans received: March 18, 2016 10 Farrell St. Site Plan Application #SP-16-22 Meeting date: June 7, 2016 Owner/Applicant Ten Farrell Street, LLC 69 College St. Burlington, VT 05401 Architect Smith Buckley Architects 431 Pine St. Burlington, VT 05401 Property Information Parcel #0670-00010 Swift Street Zoning District Location CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SP_16_22_10FarrellSt_TenFarrell_umbrella_June_7_2016_mtg 2 Project Description Continued site plan application #SP-16-22 of Ten Farrell Street, LLC to amend a previously approved plan for a 26,125 sq. ft. mixed use building. The amendment is for an umbrella approval to allow for additional permitted uses, 10 Farrell Street. Comments Development Review Planner Lindsey Britt and Administrative Officer Ray Belair, herein referred to as Staff, have reviewed the submitted plans and have the following comments to offer. Zoning District and Dimensional Requirements Commercial 2 Required Existing Proposed Min. Lot Size 20,000 sq. ft. 102,450 sq. ft. No change Max. Building Coverage 40% 26% 26% Max. Overall Coverage 70% 60% 59% *Max. Front Yard Coverage (Swift St.) 30% ? ? *Max. Front Yard Coverage (Farrell St.) 30% ? ? Min. Front Setback (Swift St.) 30 ft. 55 ft. No change ~Min. Front Setback (Farrell St.) 30 ft. 29 ft. No change Min. Side Setback 10 ft. >10 ft. No change Max. Building Height (pitched) 40 ft. Unknown No change  Zoning Compliance ~Pre-existing non-conformity *The calculations provided by the applicant do not appear accurate to staff. 1. Staff recommends the Board request the applicant verify the front yard coverage calculations to have been calculated based on the requirements of Section 3.06(H) of the Land Development Regulations. Umbrella Approval The applicant is proposing the following uses be permitted on the property: Personal Instruction Facility, Place of Worship, Artist Production Studio, Child Care Facility, Convenience Store less than 3,000 square feet, Cannabis Dispensary (dispensing only), General Office, Medical Office, Personal or Business Service, Pet Grooming, Photocopy & Printing Shops with accessory retail, Radio/TV Studio, Indoor Recreation Facility, Research facility or laboratory, Restaurant standard, Retail sales, Seasonal Mobile Food Unit, Taverns, Nightclubs, &Private Club. Staff has reviewed the Land Development Regulations and all of the requested uses are permitted in the Swift Street Zoning District. Site Plan Review Standards Section 14 of the Land Development Regulations establish the following general review standards for 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 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SP_16_22_10FarrellSt_TenFarrell_umbrella_June_7_2016_mtg 3 land use policies for the City of South Burlington as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. This application for umbrella approval is aligned with the Comprehensive Plan because allowing a breadth of uses at the site encourages shared parking opportunities and mixed retail/office/restaurant uses. B. Relationship of Proposed Structures to the Site. 1) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and adequate parking areas. 2) Parking The number of parking spaces will increase from 78 to 82 by re-striping the parking lot and will not change access or circulation patterns or create new impervious area. The combined uses on the property will need to be kept to those which can fit within the limits of the available parking. 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. The applicant is undertaking façade improvements, especially along Farrell Street (west façade) and the building’s north side. These improvements will create a more unified look for the building by making the appearance of the north facade more similar to the appearance of the west and south façades. Pedestrian movement around the building will be improved by extending the sidewalk along the west façade and adding a new sidewalk along the north façade. Bicycle parking is provided with a rack close to Farrell Street. C. Relationship of Structure 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. No new buildings are proposed on the site and the proposed façade improvements are aligned with existing façade details. 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 necessary. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SP_16_22_10FarrellSt_TenFarrell_umbrella_June_7_2016_mtg 4 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. No new utilities are proposed. C. Disposal of Wastes. All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling or other requirements, shall be accessible, secure and properly screened with opaque fencing to ensure that trash and debris do not escape the enclosure(s). Small receptacles intended for use by households or the public (i.e., non-dumpster, non-large drum) shall not be required to be fenced or screened. No new dumpsters, recycling, or composting areas are proposed. The plan shows an existing dumpster storage area which is enclosed on all sides. D. Landscaping and Screening Requirements. See Article 13, Section 13.06 Landscaping, Screening, and Street Trees. The property is heavily screened along the north and east sides by forested land. Two (2) additional trees are proposed along Farrell Street as part of this application. During a visit to the site staff noticed several trees along Swift Street that are not shown on the applicant’s plans, but which do provide some screening to the property. Existing dumpsters and ground-level utility boxes/HVAC equipment are screened with fencing. 2. Staff recommends the Board request the applicant update the site plan to show trees along Swift Street or explain the reasoning for why these trees should not be shown on the plan. The site plan indicates the proposed removal of landscaping valued at $57,500, including five (5) cedars of approximately 30 feet in height and five (5) yews of six (6) to eight (8) feet in height. The applicant has suggested that the landscaping proposed to be removed is overgrown and conflicts with the building. The applicant is proposing new shrubs and trees valued at approximately $7,800. Staff appreciates the landscaping which is proposed and its relationship to the proposed façade improvements; however, the removal of four (4) large cedars along one side of the building is a considerable change in the value of the onsite landscaping and staff considers this replacement value to be insufficient. Hardscaping elements, such as benches and artwork, could be appropriate amenities that would enhance the onsite landscaping and positively contribute to the appearance and usability of the property by employees and visitors. 3. Staff recommends the Board discuss with the applicant whether the landscaping being proposed is sufficient to replace the existing trees and shrubs selected for removal and whether there are locations onsite that could incorporate additional trees and shrubs or hardscape aspects that would enhance the property. The City Arborist provided the following comments on May 31, 2016: CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SP_16_22_10FarrellSt_TenFarrell_umbrella_June_7_2016_mtg 5 The plan looks OK. The only missing component are Tree and Shrub Planting Details. 4. Staff recommends the Board request the applicant add the Tree and Shrub Planting Details to the plans. 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. During a site visit staff observed lighting mounted to the building which would not meet the lighting standards. 5. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to remove lighting not in compliance with Section 13.07 as a condition of approval. Traffic Generation In the South Burlington Planning Commission’s Findings of Fact & Decision (decision signed August 8, 1995) the Board approved 123 Peak Hour Trip Ends for the site. If the current or future uses exceed 123 PM peak hour vehicle trip ends on the subject property, the applicant will be responsible for seeking Board approval for such and paying any resulting traffic impact fees. Any changes proposed to category of use and resulting traffic will be reviewed under the umbrella permit, and limited to the maximums set herein. Access/Circulation Access to and circulation on the site is not proposed to change and is adequate. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the applicant work with Staff and the Development Review Board to address the issues herein. Respectfully submitted, ________________________________ Ray Belair, Administrative Officer CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_16_11_255KennedyDrive_O'BrienFamilyLtd_sketch_Ju ne_7_2016_mtg DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: June 3, 2016 Application received: May 15, 2016 255 KENNEDY DRIVE SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION #SD-16-11 Meeting date: June 7, 2016 Owners/Applicants O’Brien Family Limited Partnership & O’Brien Home Farm, LLC 1855 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Contact Andrew Gill, Project Coordinator (802) 658-5000 Project Engineer Krebs & Lansing Consulting Engineers, Inc. 164 Main Street Colchester, VT 05446 Property Information Tax Parcels 1260-0200 and 0970-00255 R-12 and C1-LR Zoning Districts ~50 acres total Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_16_11_255KennedyDrive_OBrien_PUD_sketch_June_7_2016_mtg.doc 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Sketch plan application #SD-16-11 of O’Brien Farm Road, LLC for a planned unit development to develop 50 acres with a maximum of 360 dwelling units and an unspecified square footage of commercial space, 255 Kennedy Drive. ZONING DISTRICT TABLES Residential 12 Required Requested (and discussed herein) Min. Lot Size Single Family 6,000 sq. ft. Min. Lot Size Two-Family 8,000 sq. ft. Min. Lot Size Multi-Family 3,500 sq. ft./unit Min. Lot Size Non-Residential Uses 40,000 sq. ft. Max. Building Coverage Single and Two-Family 30% Max. Overall Coverage Single and Two-Family 40% Max. Building Coverage Multi-Family and Non-Residential 40% Max. Overall Coverage Multi-Family and Non-Residential 60% Min. Front Setback 30 ft. 5 ft. Min. Side Setback 10 ft. 5 ft. Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. 10 ft. Max. Building Height Single or Two-Family (pitched) 28 ft. 34 ft. Max. Building Height Multiple Family or Non-Residential (pitched) 40 ft. 80 ft. C1-LR Required Min. Lot Size Single Family 6,000 sq. ft. Min. Lot Size Two-Family 8,000 sq. ft. Min. Lot Size Multi-Family 3,500 sq. ft./unit Min. Lot Size Retail and Other Non-Residential Uses 20,000 sq. ft. Max. Building Coverage Single and Two-Family 30% Max. Overall Coverage Single and Two-Family 40% Max. Building Coverage Multi-Family, Retail, and Other Non- Residential Uses 40% Max. Overall Coverage Multi-Family, Retail, and Other Non- Residential Uses 70% Min. Front Setback 30 ft. Min. Side Setback 10 ft. Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. Max. Building Height Single or Two-Family (pitched) 28 ft. Max. Building Height Multiple Family, Retail, and Other Non- Residential (pitched) 40 ft. COMMENTS CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_16_11_255KennedyDrive_OBrien_PUD_sketch_June_7_2016_mtg.doc 3 The staff notes herein reflect a review of the major topics for review and are, at this stage, intended to review the basic concept and site design, as well as to advise the applicant as to any potential problems and concerns relating to those major issues. Staff notes are relatively limited in this situation, because staff is aware the applicant will be returning in the near future for Master Plan review. This sketch plan review process in this case is more of an opportunity for the applicant to re-introduce the project and present their ideas and questions to the Development Review Board prior to the Master Plan review. Administrative Officer Ray Belair and Development Review Planner Lindsey Britt, herein after referred to as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted by the applicant and have the following comments with respect to these issues: OVERVIEW The applicant’s letter of April 20, 2016 provides the details of their proposal. In summary, the applicant is seeking approval for a PUD to construct:  360 dwelling units on acreage in the R-12 Zoning District  Unknown commercial uses also in the R-12 Zoning District and C1-LR Zoning District  Parking, included structured parking in the C1-LR Zoning District The applicant intends to ask for a variety of waivers and considerations in later review stages, some of which will be addressed in these notes. A) PUD The LDRs concerning PUDs state in part as follows: 15.01 Purpose It is the purpose of the provisions for subdivision and Planned Unit Development (PUD) review to provide for relief from the strict dimensional standards for individual lots in these Regulations in order to encourage innovation in design and layout, efficient use of land, and the viability of infill development and re-development in the City’s Core Area, as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. It is the further purpose of this Article to coordinate site plan, conditional use and subdivision review into a unified process. The Development Review Board shall administer these regulations for the purpose of assuring orderly growth and coordinated development in the City of South Burlington and to assure the comfort, convenience, safety, health and welfare of its citizens. 15.02 Authority and Required Review A. Authority (1) Pursuant to Section 4413 through Section 4421 of 24 VSA Chapter 117, as amended, the Development Review Board shall have the authority to review and approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for subdivision of land pursuant to the standards in these Regulations. (2) In accordance with the provisions of Subsections (3) and (12) of Section 4407 of Title 24 VSA Chapter 117, the Development Review Board shall have the authority to review and approve, CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_16_11_255KennedyDrive_OBrien_PUD_sketch_June_7_2016_mtg.doc 4 approve with modifications, or deny Planned Unit Developments and Planned Residential Developments (PUDs). (3) In conjunction with PUD review, the modification of these Land Development Regulations is permitted subject to the conditions and standards in this Article and other applicable provisions of these Regulations. (4) Notwithstanding section 15.02(A)(3), however, the following standards shall apply to all PUDs: (a) with the exception of side yard setbacks in the Central District 1, in no case shall the DRB permit the location of a new structure less than five (5) feet from any property boundary, and, in no case shall the DRB permit the location of a structure not in compliance with Section 15.03(D). (b) 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. (c) In no case shall the DRB permit the location of parking not in compliance with Section 14.06 (B) (2). (5) Pursuant to this Article, the South Burlington Development Review Board shall have the further authority to review and approve, approve with modifications, or deny a Master Plan reviewed in conjunction with a PUD. A Master Plan shall be a binding sub-part of a PUD approval and shall not be construed as a separate land development review procedure from the PUD procedures set forth in this Article. (6) The modification of the maximum residential density for a zoning district shall be permitted only as provided in the applicable district regulations and/or for the provision of affordable housing pursuant to Section 13.14 of these Regulations. B) Density The applicant is proposing 360 dwelling units be developed on 30 acres. That results in a density of 12 units per acre which is the maximum allowed density in the R-12 Zoning District. C) Access and Circulation Access to the project area is proposed via two routes as follows:  from the south via a new city road “A” intersecting with Eldredge Street  from the north-west via the creation of a new city road “B” intersecting with Kennedy Drive. The Circulation within the development would be via these two new city roads and two dead end private roads on the south end of the project (noted as Zone 1 according to the sketch plan submitted). Staff generally feels that the two proposed city roads are in keeping with the intent of the regulations; however, the number of units on the proposed private roads appears to exceed allowable limits. Staff would be interested in understanding why these two adjacent dead end roads could not be connected to one another and made public roadways. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_16_11_255KennedyDrive_OBrien_PUD_sketch_June_7_2016_mtg.doc 5 As to pedestrian access and circulation, sidewalks are shown throughout the development except along the private roadways. Staff would be interested in understanding the absence of sidewalks along those roads and how the applicant envisions those residences accessing neighboring areas. D) Parks & Recreation The applicant proposes two areas of common open space.  3.9 acres in the area denoted as Zone 4, which will include a park and more general open space with a system of trails  Two acres of stormwater area adjacent to wetland “E” in Zone 5 which will include walking paths Staff is interested in the applicant considering:  Opportunities to link this park to future phases of the development towards Old Farm Road and possible Open Spaces in that area  How to increase availability of Open Spaces to residents and employees overall, including creative and interactive design of the stormwater areas and enhancements to open spaces located on individual lots  Opportunities for the installation of walking paths to connect various parts of this phase of development to future phases and off-site paths  Overall sufficiency and character of open space 1. Staff recommends that the applicant meet with the City’s Recreation & Leisure Arts Committee to discuss the proposed parks in greater detail. E) Wetland Encroachment & Stormwater The project proposes encroachment into four, Class III wetland areas (labeled F & G on the sketch plan). The applicant asks to be allowed to develop wetland area “F” to convert it to a more effective stormwater management area. Three small wetland areas are also proposed to be encroached in Zone 1 (labeled “G”) by the building of a road and houses. The applicant argues that “(T)he wetlands have no functions and values that are of particular importance or which require protection.” Staff recommends that the Board consider this request, and supports an encroachment in wetland area “F” that would result in an enhancement to the water conveyance and ecological functions of the area, especially where such encroachment could be designed as an attractive, natural-feeling, interactive space. F) Project Phasing The applicant has made certain requests regarding phasing, including the stages in which road connections will be built and the applicability of the current LDRs to future applications within the Master Plan. These issues will be dealt with at future stages in the review process. G) Parking relationship to the site CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_16_11_255KennedyDrive_OBrien_PUD_sketch_June_7_2016_mtg.doc 6 Staff appreciates the provision of on-street parking along proposed city roads “A” and “B” and the rear alley access being provided to residences in some areas of Zone 3, which is a method of parking encouraged by the LDRs. Requested Waivers The applicant has submitted a series of waiver requests for the Board to consider and offer feedback. Several of these requests are related to road standards that pertain primarily to the functioning of the Public Works and Fire Departments and therefore the input of those departments on the requested waivers will be requested at a future stage in the review process, so that the Board can make an informed decision. H) Setback Waivers Page 13 of the applicant’s letter details the setback waivers requested.  Ten (10) foot rear yard setback instead of the 30 foot standard setback.  Five (5) foot side yard setback instead of the 10 foot standard setback.  Five (5) foot front yard setback instead of the standard 30 foot setback. Generally staff is amenable to the idea of smaller setbacks and could see these being appropriate in some neighborhood designs. Staff suggests the Board carefully consider the change to the front yard setback as this would be a large difference from the standard and also likely a more visible difference to homeowners and passerby than changes to the side and rear setbacks. Staff would recommend the Board consider giving guidance to the applicant on the Board’s general attitude towards smaller side, rear, and front setbacks and what types of design elements they would be looking for in situations with those proposed setbacks. Staff would also suggest the Board refrain from granting a development-wide waiver to the front setback request, but rather, as stated above give the applicant guidance on what situations would make them more likely to grant such a waiver in the future when more details in the various zones of the project are known. I) Height Waivers The applicant is asking for waivers to both the number of stories and the height of buildings in Zone 1 and Zone 3 of the project and to the height of buildings in Zone 2.  Zone 1 and Zone 3 allow structures to have three (3) stories facing the street with the option of an additional roof story instead of two (2) stories facing the street with a possible roof story, as in the regulations.  Zone 1 and Zone 3 allow single and two family houses that are up to 32 feet tall with a flat roof and 34 feet tall if the roof is pitched rather than 25 feet and 28 feet respectively as called for in the regulations.  Zone 2A allow structures up to 80 feet tall and six (6) stories including a basement story.  Zone 2B allow structures up to 67 feet tall and five (5) stories including a basement story. The applicant asserts that: CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_16_11_255KennedyDrive_OBrien_PUD_sketch_June_7_2016_mtg.doc 7  Certain areas of the project have steep slopes that make walkout basements and garages facing the proposed city road “A” necessary and desirable.  Grading may change as the development progresses, which make adhering to the definition of height as the “vertical distance of a building measured from the average preconstruction grade level at the base of the building to the…average level between the eaves and the highest point of the roof” difficult to do.  To make use of the zoning density allowed at the site and to preserve open space it makes sense to build upwards and, furthermore, that the site topography supports buildings being built into hillsides thus reducing their visual impact. Pursuant to Section 3.07(D)(2)(b) the Board may grant a waiver to building heights in the R-12 and C1-LR Districts as follows: (b) For structures proposed to exceed the maximum height for structures specified in Table C-2 as part of a planned unit development or master plan, the Development Review Board may waive the requirements of this section as long as the general objectives of the applicable zoning district are met. A request for approval of a taller structure shall include the submittal of a plan(s) showing the elevations and architectural design of the structure, pre-construction grade, post-construction grade, and height of the structure. Such plan shall demonstrate that the proposed building will not detract from scenic views from adjacent public roadways and other public rights-of-way. The Board should ask the applicant to provide the plan(s) as noted above. Photo simulations shown to staff as part of the already submitted Master Plan application are helpful in understanding how the height waivers could impact the landscape and views. Staff recommends the applicant discuss those images with the Board to help them get a clearer idea of the relationship between the proposed heights and the project area. 2. Staff recommends the Board discuss height waivers and any other waiver requests the applicant would like to address, but that the Board make no commitments regarding those requests at this point in the review process. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the applicant work with Staff and the Development Review Board to address the issues herein. Respectfully submitted, CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING SD_16_11_255KennedyDrive_OBrien_PUD_sketch_June_7_2016_mtg.doc 8 ________________________________ Ray Belair, Administrative Officer 1 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_16_12_1405HinesburgRoad_LambertParcel_2_lots_ske tch_June_7_2016_mtg DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: June 3, 2016 Plans received: May 5, 2016 1405 Hinesburg Road Sketch Plan Application #SD-16-12 Meeting date: June 7, 2016 Owner Marie Dubois (Estate) 1405 Hinesburg Rd. South Burlington, VT 05403 Applicant Veronica Lambert 5410 Vermont Rt. 116 St. George, VT 05495 Surveyor Richard W. Bell Land Surveying, Inc. 76 Ethan Allen Dr. South Burlington, VT 05403 Property Information Tax Parcel 0860-01405 SEQ Zoning District- Neighborhood Residential 4.11 acres Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_16_12_1405HinesburgRoad_LambertDuboisParcel_2_lot_sketch_June_7_2016.docx 2 PROJECT DESCRPTION Sketch plan application #SD-16-12 of Veronica Lambert to subdivide a 4.11 acre parcel developed with a single family dwelling and a two (2) family dwelling into two (2) lots of 1.44 acres (lot #1) and 2.67 acres (lot #2), 1405 Hinesburg Road. Zoning District and Dimensional Requirements: SEQ-Neighborhood Residential Required Existing Proposed Lot 1 Proposed Lot 2 Min. Lot Size 12,000 sq. ft./single family, 24,000 sq. ft./two family 179,032 sq. ft. 62,625 sq. ft. 116,327 sq. ft. Max. Building Coverage 15% 7% No proposed changes Max. Overall Coverage 30% 21% No proposed changes Max. Front Setback 25 ft. Lot 1=100 ft. Lot 2=5 ft. No proposed changes Min. Side Setback 10 ft. >10 ft. Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. >30 ft. Building Height (pitched roof) 28 ft. Unknown Density 1.2 units/acre 0.73 units/acre 0.69 unit/acre 0.75 unit/acre =In compliance COMMENTS Development Review Planner Lindsey Britt and Administrative Officer Ray Belair, hereafter referred to as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted by the applicant and have the following comments: Southeast Quandrant District (Article 9 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations) A. Density The SEQ-NR district allows 1.2 units per acre or four (4) units per acre with Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs). The applicant has proposed three (3) units (one existing single family and one existing duplex), which is within the density calculation for this parcel (4.11 acres). When the subdivision is complete the duplex will be on a parcel of 2.67 acres and the single family home will be on a parcel of 1.44 acres. The resulting densities will be below 1.2 units per acre, therefore no TDRs are required. B. Access and Circulation Access to Lot 1 from Hinesburg Road is provided by an existing driveway. Access to Lot 2 from Hinesburg Road is provided by an existing driveway. No changes to these access routes are proposed. The Department of Public Works will review this project at the Preliminary and Final Plat application stages. C. Building Orientation and Design CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_16_12_1405HinesburgRoad_LambertDuboisParcel_2_lot_sketch_June_7_2016.docx 3 Section 9.08 of the SBLDR lays out particular standards related to the orientation of housing, mix of housing styles, setbacks, and parking/garages. Staff found that the submitted sketch plan shows the housing units with entrances facing public roads—a requirement of the regulations. The duplex on Lot 2 has a front setback of less than 25 feet on Hinesburg Road, which is allowed by the current regulations. D. Lot Ratios Section 9.08.A.4 states that lots “shall maintain a minimum lot width to depth ratio of 1:2, with a ratio of 1:2.5 to 1:5 recommended.” Lot 1 has a ratio of approximately 1:0.78. Lot 2 has a ratio of approximately 3:5 or 1:1.67. The existing lot does not meet the standard of Section 9.08.A.4 (1:0.7) and it would not be possible to divide the lot into two (2) lots with ratios that meet the standard of Section 9.08.A.4. The proposed lots will not create a greater nonconformity with the standard than what currently exists. E. Other Issues The survey submitted as part of the application shows a portion of a driveway on Lot 2 being on an adjacent property. 1. Staff recommends the Board request the applicant clarify whether there is an easement that should be noted on the survey. F. Stormwater Comments Planning and Zoning staff will seek comments from Stormwater at the next stage in the review process. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the applicant work with Staff and the Development Review Board to address the issues herein. Respectfully submitted, ________________________________ Ray Belair, Administrative Officer x 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: Lindsey Britt, Development Review Planner SUBJECT: SP-16-03 222 Dorset St.—Healthy Living Market & Café DATE: June 7, 2016 Development Review Board meeting Site plan application #SP-16-03 of Healthy Living Market & Café to amend a previously approved Master Signage Permit to allow for new logo designs, 222 Dorset Street. The applicant has submitted a wide variety of color schemes for possible signs with the intent of getting the colors and design approved and choosing which color schemes to use at a later date. The applicant shared with staff in an email dated May 28, 2016 that they intend to use multiple color schemes in their temporary signage and one color scheme for their permanent sign. Since having so many possible color options could lead to a lack of consistency on the property, the draft decision includes a provision that no more than three color schemes be used on the property at any given time for signs that are under the jurisdiction of the Sign Ordinance. Staff considers that this provision will allow for the applicant to have choice while maintaining consistency. 1. Staff encourages the Board to discuss Healthy Living Market & Café’s proposal with the applicant. #DR-16-03 1 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING HEALTHY LIVING MARKET & CAFE—222 DORSET STREET MASTER SIGNAGE PLAN #DR-16-03 FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION Design review application #DR-16-03 of Healthy Living Market & Café to amend a previously approved Master Signage Permit to allow for new logo designs, 222 Dorset Street. The Development Review Board held a public hearing on June 7, 2016. The applicant was represented by Eli Lesser-Goldsmith. Based on the plans and materials contained in the document file for this application, the Development Review Board finds, concludes, and decides the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The applicant, Healthy Living Market & Cafe, seeks to revise a Master Signage Permit for logo designs, 222 Dorset Street. 2. The owner of record of the subject property is the Loja Burlington, LLC. 3. The application was received on May 19, 2016. 4. The applicant submitted renderings of the proposed logo in a variety of color and display options totaling six (6) pages. 5. The property lies within the Dorset Street/City Center Sign District 6. The applicant is seeking to amend the logo design and color choice and has not requested any changes regarding sign materials, sign placement, or other related matters. Sign Ordinance Section 6: Dorset Street/City Center Sign District of the South Burlington Sign Ordinance reads in part that the Development Review Board must consider the following standards: (1) Consistent Design: the design of a sign shall consider and be compatible and harmonious with the design of buildings on the property and nearby. The design of all signs on a property shall promote consistency in terms of color, graphic style, lighting, location, material and proportions. (2) Promote City Center Goals: signs shall be designed and located in a manner which reinforces and respects the overall stated goals of the sign district and City Center Plan, including a high aesthetic quality and pedestrian orientation. #DR-16-03 2 (3) Color and Texture: the color and texture of a sign shall be compatible and harmonious with buildings on the property and nearby. The use of a maximum of three (3) predominant colors is encouraged to provide consistent foreground, text and background color schemes. The applicant submitted materials showing two (2) configurations for the logo. The first configuration (horizontal) shows an artistic rendering of an apple with the words “Healthy Living Market & Café” to the right of the apple. The second configuration (vertical) shows the apple with the words below it. The applicant provided five (5) color schemes for the vertical configuration with four (4) of the schemes containing three (3) colors and one scheme containing two (2) colors on a white background. The applicant provided three (3) color schemes for the horizontal configuration and each scheme shows two (2) colors on a white background. There is consistent design in the two (2) configurations as both use the same fonts, use of upper and lower case letters, and the same rendering of an apple. Each color scheme uses between two (2) and (3) colors, which provides color consistency. The Board considers these criterion met. (4) Materials Used: signs shall be designed and constructed of high-quality materials complimentary to the materials used in the buildings to which the signs are related. Material use is not under consideration in this application. Section 8(d) reads in part that the board must consider the following: (1) The initial application for a Master Signage Permit shall establish a consistent set of parameters for the shapes, materials, foreground and background color schemes, typefaces, sizes, installations and sign types to be utilized for a property and shall include color illustrations thereof. (2) Applicants are strongly encouraged to specify parameters that will lead over time to creating a strong consistency of shape, foreground and background color scheme, typeface, size, and installation in order to ensure that all signage on a property is in accordance with the goals of the Dorset Street/City Center Sign District. (3) All Master Signage Permit applications shall specify how one or more of these graphic elements will be used to relate all of the signs to each other visually. (4) Applicants may request a review and approval of a range of potential sizes for individual signs, so that an application for an individual sign of approved materials, color and design that is within an approved size range will require only approval of the Code Officer. All the signs are related to each other visually, because each will use the same logo design. The variation among the signs will result from whether they use the horizontal or vertical arrangement of the logo and which color scheme set is used on each sign. The applicant has confirmed only one (1) color scheme and orientation (horizontal or vertical) will be used at a time for the freestanding sign. The applicant has confirmed that a variety of color schemes and orientations will be used in temporary signage. Installation and size of signs is not under consideration in this application. Section 9 addresses standards specifically for free-standing signs. #DR-16-03 3 (h) Dorset Street/City Center Sign District. Free-standing signs along Dorset Street are to be located in a sign corridor that begins adjacent to the road Right of Way and runs sixteen (16) feet from the edge of the Right of Way toward the building face. In those instances where dimensions do not provide for a two (2) foot setback from the Right of Way before a sign support post can be located, it is permitted to erect a centered single pole mounted sign of which the road side edge of the sign is directly outside the R.O.W. line. Free- standing signs in the Dorset Street/City Center District may not exceed thirty-two (32) square feet in overall dimensions and may be no higher than twelve (12) feet, measured from the average finished grade at the base of the sign to the highest point of any part of the sign structure. The location of freestanding signs is not under consideration in this application. DECISION Motion by ______________, seconded by _____________, to approve sign design review application #DR-16-03 of Healthy Living Market & Café subject to the following conditions: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not changed by this decision, will remain in full effect. 2. Three (3) color schemes with each using two colors on a white background are permitted for signs using the horizontal logo orientation. Four (4) color schemes with each using three (3) colors and one (1) color scheme using two (2) colors on a white background are permitted for signs using the vertical logo orientation. 3. No more than three (3) color schemes may be used simultaneously on the property for signs subject to the jurisdiction of the South Burlington Sign Ordinance. 4. This project must be completed as shown on the plans submitted by the applicant, and on file in the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning. 5. The applicant must obtain sign permits consistent with the master sign approval and specific standards of the Sign Ordinance in effect at the time of application from the Code Officer prior to any changes to signs on the property. 6. Any change to the approved sign design will require approval by the South Burlington Development Review Board. 7. Pursuant to Section 20 of the Sign Ordinance, all signs must be of substantial and sturdy construction, kept in good repair, and painted or cleaned as necessary to maintain a clean, safe, and orderly appearance. Mark Behr Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Matt Cota Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Frank Kochman Yea Nay Abstain Not present #DR-16-03 4 Bill Miller Yea Nay Abstain Not Present David Parsons Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Jennifer Smith Yea Nay Abstain Not Present John Wilking Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Motion carried by a vote of X– 0 – 0. Signed this ____ day of __________________ 2016, by _____________________________________ Bill Miller, Vice-Chair Please note: An appeal of this decision may be taken by filing, within 30 days of the date of this decision, a notice of appeal and the required fee by certified mail to the Superior Court, Environmental Division. See V.R.E.C.P. 5(b). A copy of the notice of appeal must also be mailed to the City of South Burlington Planning and Zoning Department at 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, VT 05403. See V.R.E.C.P. 5(b) (4)(A). Please contact the Environmental Division at 802-828-1660 or http://vermontjudiciary.org/GTC/environmental/default.aspx for more information on filing requirements, deadlines, fees and mailing address. The applicant or permittee retains the obligation to identify, apply for, and obtain relevant state permits for this project. Call 802.879.5676 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 17 MAY 2016 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 17 May 2016, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: B. Miller, Acting Chair; J. Smith, D. Parsons, J. Wilking, M. Cota, F. Kochman ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; L. Britt, Development Review Planner; D. Marshall, D. Sande, P. O’Leary, B. Currier, B. Bertsch, M. Mahoney, T. Barden, A. Senecal, R. Jeffers 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. Parsons noted that he has become a co-owner of a real estate agency. If conflicts of interest arise, he will recuse himself. 4. Continued sketch plan application #SD-15-28 of Saxon Partners, LLC, for a planned unit development consisting of: (as proposed by the applicant) 1) six boundary line adjustments with adjoining properties, and 2) construction of an 88,548 sq. ft. retail store which will include a 3,348 sq. ft. tire center and a 3,360 sq. ft. receiving area (BJ’s Wholesale Club), 65 Shunpike Road: It was noted that the applicant had requested a continuance. Mr. Kochman moved to continue #SD-15-28 to 21 June. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Conditional Use Application #CU-16-03 of J. Peter & Diane Sande to add a 30 sq. ft. deck to an existing 1,088 sq. ft. single family dwelling, 50 Bartlett Bay Road: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 17 MAY 2016 PAGE 2 Ms. Sande said the deck does not go outside the building envelope. She showed the location on the plan. No issues were raised by the Board or the public. Mr. Wilking moved to close #CU-16-03. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Continued Conditional Use Application #CU-16-01 and Site Plan Review Application #SP-16-11 of Rice Memorial High School for after-the-fact approval to amend a previously approved plan for a 126,875 sq. ft. educational facility. The amendment consists of adding two 8’x20’ detached accessory buildings, 99 Proctor Avenue: Mr. Wilking noted he had been approached by a City Council member who asked to talk about the problems at Rice High School. He had told the Council member he would not speak with him on that issue. Mr. Barden said Father Bernie couldn’t come to this meeting. His request is to leave the 2 units until August 2017, but he was willing to live with the Board’s decision. Mr. Barden said one unit has sports equipment in it and the other has things for the refreshment stand. Rice will have to build additional space for that storage. The units are 160 sq. ft. each. Mr. Miller said he could live with August 2016. Mr. Wilking said if Rice had a plan tonight, he would feel differently, but it feels like the Board is being ignored. These were not appropriate structures to begin with, and he felt they should be taken care of this summer. He said he could live with having them gone by the end of football season (November 30th). Other members were OK with that date. Mr. Mahoney said rice needs to be reminded that they can’t build without going through the DRB process. He cited 2 permanent dugouts that were being built without a permit. Mr. Barden said they have the information to apply for approval of the dugouts. They will also be DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 17 MAY 2016 PAGE 3 applying for a permit for the leveling off of an area. He added that when the new Principal comes on, he will suggest that there be someone at Rice to handle these situations. Mr. Wilking moved to close #CU-16-01 and #SP-16-11. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Continued Site Plan Application #SP-16-10 of Allen Brook Development, Inc., to construct a 50,155 sq. ft. building (now 39,535 sq. ft.) which will consist of: 1) 44,155 sq. ft. of warehouse and distribution use (now 35,535 sq. ft.) and 2) 6,000 sq. ft. of retail warehouse outlet use (now 4,000 sq. ft. ), 6 Ethan Allen Drive: Mr. O’Leary noted the reduction in building size. This is due in part to the location of a Town of Colchester force main where they cannot build. He showed the location of this. He also showed the location of outside storage areas. The building is set down into the ground and is only about 16 feet above the existing grade from one approach and 9 feet from the other. Windows are now 5 feet tall and 12 feet wide. The applicant will provide a composting bin within the trash enclosure. They are OK with stormwater requirements. Mr. Belair noted that staff received no additional comments on the new plan from the Fire Department. They were OK with the larger building. The City Arborist is OK with the landscaping. Mr. Miller asked if outside storage will be screened. Mr. O’Leary said it will be screened with landscaping. No other issues were raised. Mr. Wilking moved to close #SP-16-10. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 17 MAY 2016 PAGE 4 8. Site Plan Application #SP-16-22 of Ten Farrell Street, LLC, to amend a previously approved plan for a 26,125 sq. ft. mixed use building. The amendment is for an umbrella approval to allow for additional permitted uses, 10 Farrell Street: It was noted that the applicant has asked for a continuance until the next meeting. Mr. Wilking moved to continue #SP-16-22 until 7 June 2016. Mr. Parsons seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Final Plat Application #SD-16-08 of South Village Communities, LLC, to amend a previously approved planned unit development of Phase II consisting of 91 residential units of a 334 residential unit project. The amendment is to reduce the required side and rear yard setback to five feet, Preserve Road: Ms. Jeffers said this was approved 6 months ago, but they didn’t file the plat in time, and the approval expired. Mr. Miller noted receipt of an email from Nicholas Andrews asking a number of questions: a. Why the changes? Ms. Jeffers said the setbacks were originally 5 feet. Mr. Belair added that they were modified in Phase I. The applicant is asking for the same benefit in Phase 2. b. Are changes for front, rear and sides? Ms. Jeffers said just side and rear. c. What are the current setbacks? They are currently 10 ft. Side and rear will be 5 feet. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 17 MAY 2016 PAGE 5 d. Is this applicable to all lots? Ms. Jeffers said no, only to single family lots. Other lots have their own rules and are footprint lots. e. If approved, will future requests be prejudiced? Ms. Jeffers said there is a Master Plan. f. Have the lot boundaries changed? Ms. Jeffers said they have not. Mr. Wilking said there is a lot of open space. It was planned to have a “tighter village look.” Ms. Jeffers said all units can take advantage of the open space. No issues were raised by the Board or public. Mr. Wilking moved to close #SD-16-08. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 10. Continued preliminary and final plat application #SD-16-07 of Rye Associates, LLC, to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of 26 single family dwellings, four 4-unit multi-family dwellings, and a 5,100 sq. ft. general office building. The amendment consists of: 1) resubdividing lots 2-5 into three lots, 2) replacing granite posts with boulders to demarcate the neighborhood park, 3) reviewing the site plan for a new 4,726 sq. ft. general office building, and 4) revising landscaping for the general office building on lot #1, 1075 Hinesburg road: Mr. Marshall indicated the building being reviewed for this application. He noted that they originally had a “ring road” to connect the 4 lots, but the Board was not in favor of the additional impervious. The buildings will now be served by a frontage road. In addition, there were originally 5 commercial lots; they are requesting to resubdivide to have only a total of 4. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 17 MAY 2016 PAGE 6 Mr. Marshall showed the area for the park which will serve this development and the surrounding residential areas. The 3’x 3’ boulders that the Board requested are not shown on the plan but should be a condition of approval. The landscaping plan has been revised to reflect the revised value. In reviewing staff notes, Mr. Marshall noted that the trash enclosure will accommodate composting. They have modified stormwater design as requested. They are also OK with the Fire Department request. Lights will all be shielded. Mr. Wilking felt this was a much better parking arrangement, and he was glad the “ring road” was gone. Other members agreed. There were no staff or public issues raised. Mr. Wilking moved to close #SD-16-07. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 11. Minutes of 3 May 2016: Mr. Kochman moved to approve the Minutes of 3 May 2016 as written. Mr. Cota seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 12. Other Business: Members discussed when to hold their only August meeting. Mr. Wilking moved to hold the August meeting on 23 August. Mr. Cota seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 9:20 p.m. _____________________________________, Clerk _____________________________________, Date