HomeMy WebLinkAboutMP-24-02 - Supplemental - 0154 da Vinci Drive#MP-24-02
1
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
MP-24-02_154 DaVinci
Drive_BSD_amendment_SC_2024-06-18.docx
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
Report preparation date: June 12, 2024
Plans received: May 1, 2024
154 da Vinci Drive
Master Plan Application #MP-24-02
Meeting date: June 18, 2024
Owner
City of Burlington
Burlington International Airport
1200 Airport Drive
South Burlington, VT 05403
Applicant
Burlington School District
150 Colchester Avenue
Burlington, VT 05403
Property Info
Tax Parcel 2000-0000_C
Airport District
777.84 acres
Engineer
McFarland Johnson
426 Industrial Avenue
Williston, VT 05495
Location Map
#MP-24-02
2
PROJECT DESCRPTION
Master plan application #MP-24-02 of Burlington School District to amend a previously approved
master plan for a 344,000 sf manufacturing and office building, a 37,800 sf office and retail
building, a 15,600 sf commercial building, and a 85,000 sf flight instruction and airport use building
on 40.43 acres. The amendment consists of modifying the access and circulation to an adjacent
existing hangar, 154 Davinci Drive.
PERMIT HISTORY AND CONTEXT
In April 2022, the applicant obtained master plan approval #MP-21-02A for a four phase
development consisting of approximately 517,000 sf of commercial space in four buildings. This
application proposes to modify the access and circulation in the northwest corner of that approved
master plan area in order to serve a modified use in an existing building. The modified use, and
the site improvements associated with that modified use, is being reviewed concurrently as site
plan application #SP-24-20. Consequently, this report reflects only the standards of LDR Article
15.B pertaining to master plans.
Staff has also included recommended findings pertaining to the Board’s approval of site plan #SP-
24-02 for a tree replacement plan for improperly removed trees. That approval included some
minor modifications to the approved project phasing. Phasing is an element of master plan
approval and therefore Staff has included those updates herein as a “clean up” element.
COMMENTS
Development Review Planner Marla Keene and Director of Planning and Zoning Paul Conner
(“Staff”) have reviewed the plans submitted on May 1, 2024 and offer the following comments.
LEVEL OF REVIEW
15.B.06E(1) Minor Amendment. An approved Master Plan may be amended concurrently with the
application for preliminary or final subdivision or site plan review, without sketch plan review, if
the proposed amendment represents a material change that does not deviate significantly from the
Master Plan as approved, including the approved development plan and phasing schedule, and
does not alter the overall buildout budget. This may include the reallocation of budgeted
development parameters between development phases.
Staff considers the proposed amendment, to modify allowed uses within the Master Plan, to
qualify as a minor amendment.
15.B.04 MASTER PLAN COMPONENTS
A. Submission Requirements. In addition to submission requirements under Appendix E, a
Master Plan submitted for review under this Article must include each of the following listed
components and information, to be presented in narrative, graphic, and tabular form, unless
waived by the DRB as not applicable to a particular subdivision or development.
A Master Plan includes several categories of submission requirements that are used in the
application of standards of review. These include:
#MP-24-02
3
B. Project Description. A map, narrative, and accompanying table(s)
C. Context Report. A map and accompanying narrative that describe the area proposed for
subdivision, development, or redevelopment, in relation to the existing and planned pattern and
type of development in surrounding neighborhood, and to existing and planned City facilities,
services, and infrastructure in the vicinity of the project
D. Existing Conditions Report. A Site Conditions Map for the entire tract and accompanying
narrative, that depict and describe existing [conditions]:
E. Development Plan. One or more maps and an accompanying narrative that depict and describe
the overall pattern, type, and density of development proposed for the entire project, and for each
phase of development
F. Summary Statistics. The following project statistics or metrics, presented in an easy to reference
tabular format, must be provided for the entire tract or project area, and for each phase of
development, unless waived by the DRB as not relevant or applicable to a particular project [see
LDR 15.B.04F]
G. Buildout Analysis and Budget. Based on the statistics provided under (F) above, the applicant
must also provide an analysis for each of the following based on total forecasted demand at
buildout, and as allocated for each phase of development, for use in determining the project’s total
“Buildout Budget”: [See LDR 15.B.04G]
H. Design Standards. The application must include proposed standards, specifications,
illustrations, best management practices, or other forms of guidance for the following, consistent
with City regulations in effect at the time of Master Plan approval, as applicable to all subsequent
development under the Master Plan
I. Phasing Plan. The application must include a narrative or table and map that clearly identify,
describe and depict each phase of development, including properties included, designated
development areas by use type, major streets, supporting infrastructure and facility improvements,
civic spaces, and other public amenities to be provided prior to or in association with each phase;
and a schedule for the timing and sequence of development over the period covered by the Master
Plan, consistent with the City’s adopted Capital Improvement Program and Official Map.
J. Management Plan. A narrative description of the proposed management structure responsible
for project development, to include all principals or entities with direct control over and
responsibility for the financing, permitting, construction, and completion of development under the
Master Plan; and, following project completion, for long-term ownership, management, operation,
and maintenance of capital and community assets.
The applicant has provided a very brief response to these application requirements in their cover
memorandum. The purpose of these application requirements is to establish the framework for
review of the master plan and subsequent applications under the master plan. In this instance,
given the nature of the amendment to change the configuration of a parking area within the
existing approved Master Plan, Staff considers that the Board may accept the minimalistic
responses to the above submission requirements of 15.A.04B.
1. Staff recommends the Board affirm that it will accept the submission requirements as having
been adequately addressed.
#MP-24-02
4
15.B.05 REVIEW STANDARDS
(A) Findings. For Master Plan approval, the DRB must find that:
(1) The Master Plan includes all the components required under 15.B.04 above, in sufficient
detail to provide the framework and standards for future development under the plan, unless
specifically waived by the DRB as not applicable to the proposed subdivision or development;
The framework and standards for the master plan were established in MP-21-02A.
(2) The overall type, pattern, and density of development, and allocation of land uses, are
consistent with these Regulations and other City regulations in effect at the time of application,
including relevant subdivision, zoning district or planned unit development standards;
Staff considers the proposed amendment to be consistent with the approved overall type,
patterns, and density of development. The change is to access and circulation to support an
adjacent property change in use is from general aviation hangar to aircraft related instruction.
No changes to access points onto a public, or future public, street are proposed.
(3) The proposed Development Plan demonstrates the efficient, coordinated, and
integrated development and use of land which:
(a) Considers existing topography and physical site constraints;
(b) Avoids or minimizes and mitigates the impacts of future development on
environmental resources identified for protection, as enumerated in Article 12, and as
incorporated into the overall design;
(c) Defines an overall pattern of development, including proposed streets and blocks,
that is consistent with the zoning district or proposed type of planned unit development;
(d) Maintains street, pedestrian, and transit connectivity, and contiguous or accessible
open space with the adjoining neighborhood, and within and between each phase of
development;
(e) Avoids, or minimizes and mitigates the adverse impacts of development on adjacent
properties and uses, through the designation of transition areas or buffer areas along the
project perimeter; and
(f) Includes adequate standards specific to each type and phase of development, to
include guidance for the functional and aesthetic integration of development with the
surrounding neighborhood, and provisions for buffering or screening incompatible land
uses.
To the extent the proposed modification within the master plan area affects compliance with
these criteria, Staff considers these criteria to be met. Specific comments pertaining to required
buffering and screening are provided in association with concurrent site plan application #SP-
24-20.
(4) The Buildout Budget sets reasonable development parameters for the entire project,
and as allocated for each phase of development, for reference in subsequent regulatory reviews,
as necessary to identify and limit the cumulative and overall impacts of project development
on City infrastructure, facilities and services.
Buildout budget includes the following elements.
Land use and building acreage
Development density
Affordable housing units
#MP-24-02
5
Civic space area
Peak hour trip generation
Water supply and wastewater demand
Total impervious surface
This project affects peak hour trip generation, water supply and wastewater demand, and total
impervious. The master plan approved 538 PM peak hour vehicle trip ends, representing 513
trips the applicant calculated for their previously approved development program plus a small
cushion. No water and wastewater demands were allocated in association with the master plan.
Instead the respective authorities reserved approval for flows beyond the first phase until such
time as site plan approval for future phases was sought. The master plan approved 50% total
impervious coverage, representing 48% coverage calculated for the approved development
program plus a small cushion.
The applicant calculates the proposed project will generate 33 PM peak hour trips. The
previously approved phases of the master plan generated 226 trips, bringing the total trip
generation to 259 trips.
The applicant has indicated this project increases total impervious surface from 35% to 35.2%.
Staff considers the changes to be within the approved buildout budget.
(5) Proposed design standards and related guidance are sufficiently detailed to prescribe
and direct coordinated development, consistent with the Master Plan and regulations in effect
at the time of master plan approval, for the duration of the plan.
The design standards approved in MP-21-02A are generally complied with to the extent they are
applicable to the proposed modification.
(6) The Phasing Plan and Schedule:
(a) are consistent with the City’s adopted Capital Improvement Program;
(b) ensure that all phases of development will occur in an orderly fashion; and that
(c) infrastructure and facility improvements necessary to support each phase of
development will be provided concurrently with such development, as may be further
ensured through subsequent or separate regulatory review processes and development
agreements.
The initial master plan approval did not contemplate the proposed technical center project in the
approved phasing plan. Staff considers the proposed amendment not to have an impact on the
phasing plan or schedule.
As alluded to above, site plan approval #SP-24-02 consisting of a tree replacement plan for
improperly removed trees included some minor modifications to the approved phasing plan.
Specifically, the plans for #SP-24-02 included a temporary construction access road for the
purpose of accessing the airfield for construction of the expanded “South Apron,” approved by
the Board in site plan approval #SP-22-055. It also included retention of the existing “commercial
building” near the site driveway. That approval did not specify the timeline for these elements
to be permitted to exist, though they are clearly in conflict with the approved master plan, as
shown in the overlay plan the applicant has provided showing the construction access road and
the approved master plan. Therefore Staff recommends the Board include a condition that
provides a timeline and reasonable assurance that these elements will be removed.
Master plan approval MP-21-02A included the following discussion of phasing.
#MP-24-02
6
The applicant has provided a map that shows the geographic limit of each phase. The Board
finds that all elements within a geographic limit are to be included in that phase.
In terms of timing, the applicant has indicated they plan to construct the phases at the following
times.
Blue/orange phase – 2021 to 2023 for the rear of the building, 2024 – 2025 for the front of the
building and open space areas. It should be noted that the applicant has only obtained a zoning
permit for the blue phase at this time. The current LDR would not allow the blue phase to be
constructed without the orange phase because it does not include the required civic spaces.
Purple phase – 2021 – 2023 for the hangar, 2023 – 2025 for the cultural/training center
Green phase – 2024 – 2025. Since this phase is proposed to include childcare predominantly
benefitting Beta employees, Staff anticipates construction of this phase will be realistically tied
to construction of the above-mentioned phases.
Red phase – 2030 – 2031. The applicant has developed very little detail about this phase other
than to say it will replace the existing building at 3060 Williston Road.
2. The phasing plan must also identify “Any temporary or interim structures or uses (e.g.,
buildings, parking, construction, or staging areas) intended for conversion or redevelopment
in a subsequent phase.” Since the construction access road and existing commercial
building conflict with the approved site amenities, Staff recommends the Board include a
condition modifying the approved phasing to require the removal of those elements as part
of the orange phase, consisting of the second half of the manufacturing building.
(7) The Management Plan:
(a) defines a management structure for the duration of the Master Plan that supports
long-term project viability through project buildout;
(b) identifies those principals or entities responsible for securing necessary municipal
permits and approvals for development under the Master Plan; and
(c) clearly identifies proposed ownership and responsibilities for the long-term
management, maintenance and operation of capital and community assets, including any
proposed dedications of land, facilities and infrastructure to the City.
The master plan approved the airport to be responsible for management of the infrastructure
and site improvements, with Beta being responsible for management of the buildings within the
master plan area. Staff considers this application consistent with the master plan approval.
15.B.06 MASTER PLAN APPROVAL, EFFECT, DURATION, AMENDMENT
(B) Subsequent Regulatory Review. In its approval of a Master Plan, the DRB shall specify the level
of review and review processes required for subsequent applications filed under the Master Plan,
provided such procedure is consistent with the intent of these Regulations and the following:
(1) Sketch plan review is not required for any application for preliminary subdivision or site
plan review that complies with the approved Master Plan, and associated conditions of
approval.
(2) The DRB may waive preliminary subdivision or site plan review for specified phases or
portions of a project.
#MP-24-02
7
(3) The DRB may in its decision specify allowed modifications or changes under the Master
Plan which require only administrative review and approval by the Administrative Officer.
MP-21-02A established levels of review for subsequent applications filed under the Master Plan.
These remain in effect. There are no specific waivers affecting this application.
(C) Effect. Once a Master Plan has been approved, all subsequent land subdivision and
development must conform to the Master Plan as approved.
(1) The Development Review Board in issuing a decision shall make specific findings as to
which components of the Master Plan are vested, based on the type, level, and detail of
information provided in the Master Plan, and the amount of time the plan is intended to remain
in effect. The Board may approve components or elements of the Master Plan as applicable to
all subsequent applications; or determine those components or elements of the Master Plan
that are vested, or not vested, for the duration of the plan.
Vested elements of MP-21-02A included street layout, max peak hour trip generation, and
recreation path, sidewalk and transit route layout. The proposed modifications were not
included in the originally vested elements.
(2) Master Plan approval is binding upon the applicant, the owner(s), their agents, and
successors in interest.
(3) Once the Master Plan is approved, the applicant may apply for other permits and
approvals referenced in the conditions of Master Plan approval, as required prior to the start of
construction.
(4) Unless the applicant fails to comply with the conditions of Master Plan approval and
these Regulations, the Master Plan as approved shall not be modified, revoked, or otherwise
impaired by any action of the City without the consent of the applicant. For purposes of
subsequent regulatory reviews under the Master Plan, for the duration of the plan the
regulations in effect at the time of Master Plan approval shall apply to vested elements under
Subsection(C)(1). For vested elements, Regulations enacted following master plan approval
shall apply only as necessary to address public health and safety or, at the request of the
applicant, to incorporate types or forms of development allowed under more recently adopted
regulations, in conjunction with an application to amend the Master Plan.
Approved master plan #MP-21-02A remains in effect. Staff considers if the Board approves
this proposed amendment, the conditions will be incorporated into the approved master plan.
(D) Duration. The duration of the Master Plan, as specified in the conditions of DRB approval,
shall be determined by the DRB in consultation with the Planning Director and City Engineer.
(1) The Master Plan should be approved for a specified period of time, not to exceed six (6)
years, for which the impacts of proposed development can clearly be ascertained from the
quality and detail of the information provided; which allows sufficient time for project planning,
financing, permitting, and development, including required regulatory reviews; and which
accommodates full project buildout in relation to the timing of planned infrastructure and
facility improvements.
(2) The Master Plan shall remain in effect as approved until the development allowed by
the plan has been completed, the plan expires, or the plan is amended or superseded.
(3) Applicant shall submit a complete preliminary or final subdivision or site plan
application (as applicable) for at least one phase of the project within two (2) years of the date
of Master Plan approval. Concurrent review with Master Plan shall be deemed to have satisfied
#MP-24-02
8
this requirement. Failure to submit a complete application within two (2) years of the date of
approval shall result in expiration of the Master Plan.
(4) The duration of an approved Master Plan may be extended by the DRB for, for cause, if
the request and reasons for the extension are submitted in writing prior to the Master Plan
expiration date; however, in no event shall the duration of an approved Master Plan exceed ten
(10) years in total, to include all authorized extensions or amendments.
(5) An expired Master Plan may be extended, renewed, or amended only on submission as
a new Master Plan, subject to full DRB review under 15.B.03 and the Land Development
Regulations in effect at the time of application.
(6) A complete application for a Master Plan may be submitted at any time subject to the
rules in effect at the time of submission.
(7) Pursuant to 24 V.S.A. 4463, any site plan or subdivision plat, and associated conditions
of site plan, subdivision, or Planned Unit Development approval that are recorded in city land
records under an approved Master Plan, shall remain in effect as recorded following Master
Plan expiration.
Staff considers no changes to the timeline of MP-21-02A result from this proposed
modification.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board discuss the project with the applicant and close the hearing.
Respectfully submitted,
Marla Keene, Development Review Planner