HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 07_SD-24-12_500 Old Farm Road_O'Brien Eastview LLC_PP_FP #SD-24-12
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
O’BRIEN EASTVIEW, LLC
500 OLD FARM ROAD
PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT APPLICATION #SD-24-12
FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION
Preliminary and final plat application #SD-24-12 of O’Brien Eastview LLC to amend a previously
approved plan for a planned unit development of 155 homes in single family, duplex, and three-
family dwellings on eleven (11) lots totaling 23.9 acres, twenty-four (24) commercial development
lots totaling 39.8 acres, and 25.2 acres of undeveloped or recreational open spaces. The
amendment consists of subdividing a 0.17 acre lot for the purpose of a battery storage microgrid
in an area previously approved for open space, adding 14 units in two-family homes reserved in
the prior application and replacing two large single-family homes with four detached cottage style
units, modifying the approved phasing, and other minor amendments, 500 Old Farm Road.
The Development Review Board held a public hearing on July 2, 2024 and August 6, 2024. Andrew
Gill and Scott Homstead represented the applicant.
Based on testimony provided at the above-mentioned public hearings and the plans and
supporting materials contained in the document file for this application, the Development Review
Board finds, concludes, and decides the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Preliminary and final plat application #SD-24-12 of O’Brien Eastview LLC to amend a
previously approved plan for a planned unit development of 155 homes in single family,
duplex, and three-family dwellings on eleven (11) lots totaling 23.9 acres, twenty-four (24)
commercial development lots totaling 39.8 acres, and 25.2 acres of undeveloped or
recreational open spaces. The amendment consists of subdividing a 0.17 acre lot for the
purpose of a battery storage microgrid in an area previously approved for open space,
adding 14 units in two-family homes reserved in the prior application and replacing two
large single-family homes with four detached cottage style units, modifying the approved
phasing, and other minor amendments, 500 Old Farm Road.
2. The project is located in the Residential 1 – PRD (R1-PRD) Zoning District.
3. The owner of record of the subject property is O’Brien Eastview, LLC.
4. The application was received on June 5, 2024.
5. The sketch plan application for this amendment was reviewed by the Board on February 6,
2024.
6. The proposed amendments are subject to the current Land Development Regulations
adopted November 20, 2023, including zoning district and dimensional standards, General
PUD standards, the general regulations of Article 3 and the supplemental regulations of
Article 13.
7. The property received final plat approval #SD-22-10A for 155 homes and 24 future
development lots. During the DRB review process, the applicant removed 14 units in two-
family homes that were non-compliant with the Land Development Regulations in effect at
that time in terms of proposed height. The ensuring decision still referenced a total 155
homes, however. For clarity, this application will treat those 14 units as having been
“reserved” for a future application, which this now incorporates.
8. This applicant seeks to amend the previously approved PUD under the current Land
Development Regulations, which, through a General PUD, afford the Board the ability to
grant height waivers where they were prohibited before and also apply updated standards
#SD-24-12
applicable to changes to the project and new phases. The applicant has also incorporated
several additional requests into this PUD amendment. A summary of all proposed requests
is as follows.
a) Add 14 homes in two-family dwellings, applying the 14 previously reserved units. See
sheet C-6.
b) Subdivide previously approved open space on Lot 18 for the purpose of adding battery
storage on the new lot. See sheet C-2. This open space was intended for the City to
consider accepting ownership one year after substantial completion.
c) Re-subdivide Lots 36 & 37 for the purpose of removing two single family homes from
Lot 37 and adding four cottage homes (still single family) on Lot 36. See Sheet C-10
The applicant has withdrawn this request. Findings related to this request are
limited to a condition requiring the applicant to update the plans to revert to the
previously approved configuration in this location.
d) Change surface parking at barn from porous to standard pavement. See sheet C-9
e) Change parking for cottage homes on Lot 16. See sheet C-4
f) Permit administrative officer review of phase completion requirements. See cover
letter.
g) Shift walking loop trail on Lots 41, 45, 46, and 48 to avoid sensitive areas as identified
by Act 250.
9. The plans submitted consist of:
Sheet No: Plan Description: Prepared By: Last Revised
Date:
AGNO.1C1 Birch Townhome Plan (6 pages) BSB Design 03/21/2022
AGNO.1C2 Maple Townhome Plan (6 pages) BSB Design 03/21/2022
L100 Overall Site Plan Wagner Hodgson 03/28/2024
L101 Planting Plan Wagner Hodgson 04/08/2024
L102 Planting Plan Wagner Hodgson 04/08/2024
L104A Planting Plan Wagner Hodgson 04/08/2024
L106 Planting Plan Wagner Hodgson 04/08/2024
L107 Planting Plan Wagner Hodgson 03/28/2024
L109 Planting Plan Wagner Hodgson 03/28/2024
L119 Planting Plan Wagner Hodgson 03/28/2024
L120 Planting Plan Wagner Hodgson 03/28/2024
L207 Planting Plan Wagner Hodgson 03/28/2024
Cover Page and Index Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
Pl-1, Pl-2 Final Plat Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
E-1, E-2 Easement Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
PL-5 Final Plat Footprint Lots Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
PH-1 Phasing Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
C-1 Overall Site Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
C-1.1 Overall Zoning Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
C-2 Site Plan Leo Lane Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
C-4
Site Plan Leo Lane, Old Farm Road, Mabel
Way Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
C-6 Site Plan Old Farm Road East Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
C-6.1 Site Old Farm Road East & Park Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
C-9 Site Plan Historic Barn Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
C-10 Site Plan Mabel Way & Daniel Drive Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
C-16.1 Gravel Wetland #7 Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
C-18.2 Gravel Wetland #8 Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
#SD-24-12
C-20 Watershed Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
C-20.2 Soil Depth & Quality Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
C-20.3 Stormwater Maintenance Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
C-21 Amenity Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
Q-1 Crushing Area Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
D-12 EPSC & Tree Protection Details Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
EPSC 7 Construction Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
EPSC 7.1 Construction Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
EPSC 8 Construction Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
EPSC 11 Construction Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
EPSC 12 Construction Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
EPSC 13 Construction Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
EPSC 14 Construction Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
EPSC 16 Construction Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
EPSC 17 Construction Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
EPSC 21 Stabilization Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
EPSC 22 Stabilization Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
EPSC 23 Stabilization Plan Krebs & Lansing 06/05/2024
SF-10 Cottage Elevation Walkout BSB Design 12/11/2023
Overall Existing Site Conditions Krebs & Lansing 02/14/2023
A) PHASING
The applicants request (f) above is to permit administrative modification of the schedule for the
approved phasing plan to account for seasonal work requirements as they arise.
In final plat approval #SD-22-10A, the Board set the phase schedule to represent the latest possible
time the applicant must complete something. The Board and applicant agreed that the schedule
did not mean that the expectation was that the applicant would complete the agreed-upon trigger
immediately prior to beginning the next phase, but rather that the agreed-upon trigger would be
well under way long before the applicant was ready to begin the next phase and be complete no
later than the applicant beginning the next phase.
Completion is measured by issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. An applicant is eligible for a
temporary certificate of occupancy under the following circumstances.
17.03 D. Temporary Certificate of Occupancy.
Upon written request of the owner or his authorized representative, the Administrative Officer
may issue a temporary certificate of occupancy for the purposes described above provided the
owner or his authorized representative can demonstrate that any and all City approvals or
permits have been obtained and complied with to the fullest extent possible, barring
uncontrollable factors such as inclement weather that may have prevented final paving or
installation of required landscaping. The temporary certificate of occupancy shall remain in
effect for a period not to exceed six (6) months at which time the owner or his representative
must obtain a certificate of occupancy as provided in Sections 17.03(A) and (C) above. No more
than one (1) temporary certificate of occupancy may be issued per approval.
Functionally, the Administrative Officer testified that they interpret this provision strictly and issue
temporary certificates of occupancy only when winter conditions prevent installation of
landscaping or asphalt pavement, or when materials are delayed in shipment (with proof of
purchase). Rarely, the Administrative Officer has issued a temporary certificate in the case where
another entity has prevented the applicant from completing the work, such as a utility company or
construction on an adjacent site.
#SD-24-12
The applicant has refined their request in this preliminary and final plat application. The following
is a list of the project elements that are required to be complete before something else can begin
from final plat approval #SD-22-10A.
▪ Phase 2: Leo Lane and Associated Homes. Lot 18 open space to be complete by zoning
permit issuance for 30th unit. Lot 19 open space to be complete by zoning permit issuance
for 75th unit.
▪ Phase 7: Barn improvements and Old Farm Parallel Parking, Sidewalk. Barn lot amenity to
be complete prior to 125 unit zoning permit issuance.
▪ Phase 8: Relocated Old Farm Road, Stormwater and Rec Path from Old Farm Road to
Kennedy Drive. Complete "curb to curb" prior to unit 125 zoning permit issuance.
Elements of roadway outside of curb may be reserved for construction with adjacent
buildings. Applicant will provide a temporary rec path connection to Kimball Ave along the
alignment of the proposed road.
▪ Phase 9: O’Brien Farm Road Cul-De-Sac. Prior to construction on Lot 52 – 57, and prior to
occupancy of units 24-1 to 24-4, 41-11 to 31-26.
▪ Phase 10: O’Brien Farm Road Extension to Old Farm road. Complete prior to issuance of
zoning permit for 125th unit.
▪ Phase 11: Open Space Park Amenity. Complete prior to issuance of zoning permit for 125th
unit.
▪ Phase 12: Open Space Park Amenity and Playground (Lot 47) This is the phase which
includes the dog park. Complete prior to 50% projected PM Peak Hour Trips for C1-LR
Development area, as noted in project TIA, or the 250th home in the Eastview PUD.
▪ Phase 16: Open Space Amenity IC Trail Including Fitness Stations in Phase 11. Built
concurrently and complete prior to the certificate of occupancy for fourth principal
structure or the development which generates more than 575 PM Peak Hour Trips in the IC
Land, roughly 50% of anticipated IC Development Trip Ends, irrespective of C1-LR, R1 and
R12 Development.
▪ Phase 17: Old Farm Road Sidewalk to 116. Complete prior to issuance of zoning permit for
100th unit.
▪ Phase 18: Kimball Ave. Rec Path. Constructed simultaneous with Phase 12, or Phase 14,
whichever is first.
The applicant’s specific requests are as follows in blue. In general, the applicant’s request for “an
extension” means to ask for the AO to be permitted to allow work to be considered temporarily
complete and therefore allow the applicant to move on to the dependent phase.
a. Administrative Officer Phasing Authority: The Applicant requests that the Administrative
Officer be granted authority by the Board for the following:
i. Administrative officer may provide an extension on any phase duly commenced and
incomplete to allow for completion of seasonal items between May 1st and September 1st
of any given year.
Seasonal items may include:
(a) Paving
(b) Concrete curbing
(c) Concrete sidewalk
(d) Installation of water main
(e) Topsoil, seed, mulch
#SD-24-12
(f) Landscaping
(g) Any item where documentation can be provided demonstrating that best practice,
ordinance or manufacturer standards would prohibit installation.
Work where DPW would prefer it be completed in warmer weather if the City will adopt
it.
It is already the case that installation of nursery plants and asphalt paving are permitted to
be delayed by issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy. Other listed elements can
be installed in all weather with some minor precautions that are not expensive.
1. On July 2, the Board indicated they would consider “stretching” the definition of seasonality
to permit a temporary certificate of occupancy to be issued for more than is already
permitted. Staff considers they need more direction from the Board on what this finding
should say.
As noted above, the applicant is eligible for a temporary certificate of occupancy. The
Board finds the AO shall consider the requirement for completion as being met if a
temporary certificate of occupancy is issued. Furthermore, the Board finds the AO shall
consider right of way infrastructure to be considered complete if, were it any other type of
work, it were eligible for a temporary certificate of occupancy subject to the standard tests
pursuant to 17.03D.
ii. Administrative officer may provide an extension for any phase to account for unforeseen
circumstances, or items outside of Applicant’s control such as manufacturer delays,
shipping strikes, etc. An example could be if a bench is backordered, or a piece of
playground equipment arrives late.
The Board finds that the Administrative Officer has the authority to grant Temporary
Certificates of Occupancy and therefore no additional finding is necessary.
iii. Applicant to receive a one-time by-right extension on any phase which will be calculated
to be the number of days between the filing of a zoning permit to commence a phase, and
the issuance of that zoning permit. With a reduction of 21 days to account for a reasonable
timeframe to review and issue a zoning permit.
The applicant has withdrawn this request.
iv. Applicant to receive a by-right extension for Phase 8 to allow for at least three years to
complete the phase, from the date of execution of the development agreement between
the City Council and the Applicant.
The applicant and Staff testified no development agreement is presently in place. As such,
the Board finds this request to be unripe.
v. The applicant has also requested the Board affirm that the phase triggers that specify a
number of zoning permits refer to number of zoning permits for new residential unit
construction.
The Board affirms this to be true.
B) ZONING DISTRICT AND DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS
Dimensional standards affected by this application include density, lot coverage, building coverage,
and height.
Density
No vesting of density from the previous PUD approval is available to the applicant because there
was no approved master plan. The project proposes to add the 14 reserved homes to the
#SD-24-12
approved plan. Allowable density is calculated based on buildable area, which is defined to be the
total project area less any natural resources categorized as Hazards and Level I resources, existing
and planned street rights of way, and transmission line corridors or easements. The project area is
102.6 acres. The applicant has indicated there are approximately 1.25 acres of right of way. The
Board is not aware of any transmission corridors or easements. The area of Hazards and Level 1
resources within the 102.6 acre project has not been reported.
The applicant has provided a computation of buildable area, as follows.
Zoning District Buildable Acres
R1-PRD 33.06
C1-LR 19.62
IC 31.01
R12 1.04
Total 84.73
Lot Coverage
The LDR specifically prohibits the Board from increasing lot coverage above the allowable
maximum for any zoning district within a PUD. The fraction of the project in each of the applicable
zoning districts, the allowable coverage in each district, and the proposed lot coverage, is as
follows.
Zoning District
Fraction of Project
Area
Allowable Lot
Coverage
Proposed Lot
Coverage1
R1-PRD 38% 30% 28.1%
C1-LR 23% 70% 7.1%
R12 1% 60% 32.6%
IC 38% 70% 4.6%
1. Proposed lot coverage excludes lot coverage within proposed rights of way, as approved in
#SD-22-10A.
Building Coverage
With the proposed modifications, the building coverage is as follows.
Zoning District
Fraction of Project
Area
Allowable Building
Coverage
Proposed Lot Coverage
R1-PRD 38% 18% 16.7%
C1-LR 23% 40% 0.7%
R12 1% 40% 0%
IC 38% 40% 0%
Height of buildings – Old Farm Road Extension and Daniel Drive
The applicant is proposing to add 14 homes and is requesting modification of maximum height for
each of the new homes. The Board’s authority to grant modification of dimensional standards in
the case of a subdivision is defined in 15.A.01B and includes that the modification is necessary due
to physical site limitations or development constraints, is the minimum necessary to afford relief,
and does not otherwise nullify the intent and purpose of the regulations.
The Board’s authority to grant modifications of dimensional standards in the case of a general
PUD is defined in 15.C.07(G)(2) and is not limited to physical site limitations but includes that the
modification is to allow more creative and efficient subdivision and site layout to enhance the
purpose of the underlying zoning district and/or Comprehensive Plan.
#SD-24-12
O’Brien Farm Road Extension
Fourteen (14) homes are proposed to be along O’Brien Farm Road extension, and were
removed from the previous final plat approval because they did not meet the maximum
allowable height under the Regulations in effect at the time.
The proposed fourteen homes along O’Brien Farm Road extension are on the edge of R1-PRD
zoning district. Beyond these homes, across O’Brien Farm Road extension to the north, the
zoning is C1-LR, which, while it permits single family up to multifamily housing, the applicant
has subdivided in preparation for large lot multifamily and commercial development, and the
Board has conditioned on having at minimum two story buildings.
The height limit in the R1-PRD is 28 ft from average pre-construction grade to the midpoint of
the roof, and two stories facing the street. The applicant has provided a table indicating that
these fourteen homes are proposed to range from 27.9 to 31.6 ft high and all to have three
stories facing the street, therefore requiring a height waiver of 3.6 ft and one story1. The
applicant testified that the design is due to physical site limitations. This location is where C1-
LR is adjacent to the R1 zoning district. There will be two stories facing the R1 and three
stories facing the C1-LR to blend between the zoning districts. Compliance of the elevations
with the requirements of 13.17 pertaining to garage width and location is discussed below.
The Board approves the requested height modification for the duplex homes 31-13 through 31-
26 under their authority in 15.C.07(G)(2).
Daniel Drive
The applicant has withdrawn their request for four new alley-served homes on Daniel Drive.
The Board finds the applicant must update the plans to reflect the previously approved
configuration in the proximity of Daniel Drive.
C) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Under the current LDR, as a modification to an existing PUD, this project must be considered a
general PUD.
15.C.04 PUD Standards Applicable to All PUD Types
A. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed PUD must conform to the
City’s Comprehensive Plan in effect at the time of application. Conformance with the plan in this
context means that the proposed PUD must:
(1) Advance any clearly stated plan policies and objectives specific to the type and location of
the proposed development;
(2) Incorporate preferred settlement patterns, including future land uses, densities and
intensities of development referenced in the land use plan, as implemented through planned
unit development provisions specific to each PUD type.
(3) Incorporate, as applicable, planned facilities, services and infrastructure identified in the
utilities and facilities plan, as implemented under the City’s adopted Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) and Official Map.
The project is located within an area that intersects several future land use categories. The Board
finds proposed six amendments do not affect conformance with the comprehensive plan (Adopted
as City Plan in January 2024).
B. Conformance with the Master Plan. Each phase of a PUD developed in one or more
1 Relative to proposed grade, the homes on O’Brien Farm Road Extension are proposed to be
between 0.7 and 1.3 feet taller than the allowable 28 ft.
#SD-24-12
phases must conform to the PUD Master Plan, as approved or amended by the DRB under Article
15.B, including the approved development plan, phasing schedule, buildout budget, management
plan, and any associated development agreements or conditions of master plan approval.
There is no master plan for this project.
C. Compliance with Regulations. The provisions and standards specific to a PUD under this
Article supersede underlying zoning district, subdivision, and site plan standards. In no case,
however, shall the provisions or standards specific to a PUD supersede the Environmental
Protection Standards of Article 12. Notwithstanding the supersession of the underlying zoning
district, subdivision, and site plan standards, any application that indicates a density increase that
exceeds the Assigned Density of a parcel shall require a TDR under Article 19.
(1) A PUD must comply with any applicable provision or standard under these Regulations
that is not superseded, modified, or waived by the DRB in association with PUD review.
(2) A PUD must also comply with other applicable city ordinances and regulations listed
under Section 15.A.11(C) in effect at the time of application, including the following, unless
modified or waived by the DRB in consultation with city or state officials having shared
jurisdiction.
(a) Official Map. The PUD must incorporate planned public facilities and capital
improvements included in the City’s adopted Official Map and Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) in effect at the time of application, unless modified or waived by the DRB.
No relevant changes to the Official Map have occurred since the original final plat
approval.
(b) Impact Fees. Development within the PUD is also subject to impact fees enacted
and levied under the City’s impact fee ordinance; however, if the applicant or a
subsequent developer is required, in association with PUD approval, to provide land or to
construct a facility explicitly included in the calculation of an impact fee, they may then
receive credit against the impact fee in an amount equal to the value of the dedicated land
or cost of construction.
No changes to impact fee eligible projects have occurred since the original final plat
approval.
(3) Alternative Compliance. One or more PUD dimensional and design standards under this
Article may be modified at applicant request for an alternative form of compliance, subject to
separate DRB review and approval, to provide the flexibility necessary to address unique site
conditions or constraints; to enable compatibility with existing or planned development in the
vicinity; or to allow for exceptional and innovative design. Note that alternative compliance
does not constitute an exemption from a PUD standard. Allowed modifications include
proposed functional or design alternatives that may be considered in place of a specific
requirement under this Article, only if the intent of the requirement is met or exceeded. In
approving a request for alternative compliance, the DRB must find that the proposed
alternative:
(a) Conforms to the intent, description, and defining characteristics of the selected
PUD type(s);
(b) Achieves the intent of the PUD standard to be modified;
(c) Results in development that is equivalent or demonstrably superior in function,
design, and quality to that required under the standard to be modified; and
(d) Does not adversely impact properties, uses or facilities within, adjacent to, or in
the vicinity of the planned development (e.g., regarding walkability, traffic, parking,
drainage).
#SD-24-12
The DRB in approving an alternative form of compliance may attach conditions as necessary
to ensure compliance, or to mitigate any adverse impacts resulting from a proposed
alternative.
As discussed above, the Board has the authority to grant approval for the requested
modifications without requiring review under these standards for alternative compliance.
D. Development Density.
(1) Intent.
(2) Within a PUD, the overall density and intensity of development shall be determined based
on the total Buildable Area included within designated Development Areas, as shown on the
PUD Master Plan; and land use allocations, PUD density and dimensional standards, and
allowed building types and standards as specified by PUD type.
(3) Buildable Area.
Development density and how it relates to buildable area is discussed above under
dimensional standards.
(4) Land Use Allocations. The Land Use Allocation is defined as the minimum percentage of
Buildable Area within one or more designated Development Areas, that must be allocated to
a particular category of land use, as indicated on the PUD Master Plan and delineated on
preliminary and final subdivision plans.
Land use allocations are not required for a general PUD.
(5) Minimum (Base) Density. To ensure densities of development that support the
efficient use of land and infrastructure, walkability, and transit-supportive development
within a PUD, the following minimum residential densities of development (Base Density),
expressed as the minimum number of dwelling units per acre of Buildable Area, apply within
designated Development Areas proposed for residential or mixed-use development, unless
otherwise specified by PUD type:.
Minimum (base) density is not required for a general PUD.
(6) Nonresidential Base Density. There is no minimum (base) density or intensity
requirement for nonresidential development within a designated Development Area.
Not applicable.
(7) Maximum Development Density. The maximum development density allowed within any
PUD except a Conservation PUD shall be determined based on the total buildable area,
proposed land use allocations by use category, the allowed mix of building types, and
associated building lot standards as specified by PUD type.
Since neither land use allocations nor building types are required for a General PUD, the Board
finds this standard to be not applicable. If at a future time the applicant desires to obtain an
increase in the overall density, they may pursue approval under one of the provisions of this
criterion.
E. Transition Zone. A PUD may also incorporate one or more transition zones along PUD or
property boundaries, as indicated on the PUD Master Plan and delineated on preliminary and final
subdivision plans, to include the minimum land area necessary to either extend and integrate
compatible, complementary forms of planned development, or to separate and buffer conflicting,
incompatible forms of planned development, in relation to existing and planned development in
the vicinity of the PUD.
Some of the proposed modifications are along the perimeter of the approved PUD. Standards for
a transition area did not exist at the time of original PUD approval, therefore the Board finds
compliance to be required only to the extent that proposed modifications are within the transition
#SD-24-12
area. Modifications along the perimeter of the PUD include reduction in the open space area of Lot
18 and adding parking to the cottage homes on Lot 16.
(a) The “Transition Area” for purposes of analysis, must at minimum incorporate the
prevalent pattern of development directly adjacent to and within the vicinity of the PUD,
including the relative layout, type and density of existing and planned development (e.g.,
street, block and lot configurations, building placement and height); existing and planned
transportation and infrastructure connections; traffic patterns; public facilities and services;
and civic space, resource land and other designated open space areas located within one-
quarter to one-half mile of PUD boundaries, depending on the development context.
The prevalent pattern of development near the Lot 18 changes is that of large lots containing a
single family home each. The prevalent pattern of development near Lot 16 includes mixed
scale housing on shared lots.
(b) Acceptable design techniques and modifications applied within a Transition Zone, subject
to DRB review and approval, include but may not be limited to:
(i) Avoiding incompatible land uses along PUD boundaries, for example by ensuring
that similar, or compatible, complementary uses are located on facing blocks or lots, and
incompatible uses abut rear lot lines or are otherwise separated by buffers or open space.
(ii) Using existing natural features, such as changes in topography, waterways, or tree
stands to visually screen or functionally separate different forms and intensities of
development.
(iii) Modifying street and block dimensions and standards as necessary to connect
with or to extend adjoining street, block, and path networks.
(iv) Using streets and streetscape elements to visually define transitions and to
functionally integrate or separate different forms and intensities of development.
(v) Matching the relative density or intensity of adjoining development along PUD
boundaries by adjusting or averaging lot dimensions (frontage, depth); building
orientation and spacing (front, side setbacks); or building height (step downs, upper floor
step backs) within the transition zone.
(vi) Introducing and designing civic or other open space areas (e.g., greenbelts, parks,
greens, squares, or plazas) to visually define transition areas, and to functionally integrate
or separate different forms and intensities of development.
(vii) Incorporating greenbelts or vegetative buffers and screening of sufficient width
and density to visually and functionally separate incompatible forms and intensities of
development.
The Board finds the proposed pattern of development on Lot 16 to be compatible with existing
adjacent development. The applicant has proposed vegetative buffering along lot 18.
F. Allowed Uses. Allowed uses within a PUD, unless otherwise expressly allowed or
prohibited by PUD type, include any use listed in Appendix C as a permitted or conditional use in
the underlying zoning district(s) that can be accommodated within, or in association with,
designated land use allocations and allowed building types.
The proposed uses are allowed in the zoning district.
G. PUD Dimensional Standards. PUD dimensional standards, where applicable by PUD type,
define a range of block, lot, and building height dimensions which are intended to provide, within
defined parameters, some flexibility in the overall pattern of development specific to each type.
Where PUD standards vary from associated building type standards, the upper and lower PUD
dimensional limits (maximum and minimum) limits shall apply.
Not applicable.
#SD-24-12
H. Street, Building, and Civic Space Types. Where applicable, PUD types include a list of
allowed “types” of development, representing the key elements or components necessary to
support and achieve the desired form, density and mix of development specific to that PUD type.
These include allowed:
(1) Street Types, and associated street standards, under Article 11.A;
(2) Civic Space Types, and associated civic space and lot standards, under Article 11.B; and
(3) Building Types, and associated building and building lot standards, under Article 11.C.
No changes to street, civic space, or building types are proposed nor applicable to a general PUD.
I. Solar Siting Preferences. Applicants are encouraged to incorporate renewable energy
facilities, and in particular roof- or ground-mounted solar energy facilities that are compatible
with PUD layout and design, as specified by PUD type. Any areas reserved for ground mounted
solar installations serving the development must be indicated on the PUD Master Plan and
depicted on preliminary and final subdivision plans.
The applicant is proposing a renewable energy storage facility but not ground mounted solar
installation therefore this criterion is not applicable.
J. PUD Design Standards. A proposed PUD must also incorporate and comply with design
standards specific to that PUD type, except as allowed in association with a form of Alternate
Compliance approved by the DRB under 15.C.04(C).
General PUD standards follow immediately below.
15.C.07 General PUD
I. General PUD Design Standards.
(1) Design Standards. Generally. The design for a General PUD shall comply with existing Site
Plan, Subdivision, and Overlay District regulations and standards, but may allow for variations
from applicable regulations that respond to and incorporate the development context within
the Planning Area and under the specific circumstances listed in Section 15.C.07(G).
Building design standards are included in section 13.17C.
13.17C Standards
(1) Building Orientation. Residential buildings must be oriented to the street, civic space,
or courtyard.
The Board finds this criterion met for the proposed modifications.
(2) Building Facades. Building facades are encourage to employ a theme and variation
approach.
(3) Placement of Garages and Parking. For garages with a vehicle entrance that faces a
front lot line, the garage must be set back a minimum of eight feet beyond the front
façade.
(4) Garages as Percentage of Front Façade. Front-facing garages that are part of a
principal building shall not exceed 40% of the linear width of the building’s front façade.
The proposed buildings on Lot 31 do not meet either the standard pertaining to placement
of garages or percent of garage as a fraction of the front façade. The applicant testified
that the homes are designed to bridge the two zoning districts and match the existing
homes on O'Brien Farm Road. These homes are one of the lower priced models for this
PUD. Setting the garage back would require going into the hillside with cantilevered
homes, while reducing the proportion of the front that is garage would require either
#SD-24-12
removing it or making the unit wider, which would make it more expensive. The Board
finds the proposed elevations to be acceptable under the modification criterion of
15.C.07(G)(2).
(2) Streets. Streets within a General PUD must be compatible with and connect to existing and
planned public street, sidewalk, and path networks in the Planning Area.
(a) Street and block pattern requirements of the Subdivision regulations shall apply unless
waived by the DRB under Section 15C.09(G)(4).
No modifications to approved streets or sidewalks are proposed.
The applicant is proposing to modify the location of the approved walking path loop at the east
end of the project within the I/C zoning district. The proposed alignment now encroaches on a
Class III wetland greater than 5,000 sf in size therefore Article 12 standards pertaining to wetland
protection apply. The Board finds the remaining changes to the walking path alignment to not
affect compliance with this standard.
(3) Parking. Parking design and building location requirements applicable in all underlying zones
and districts apply to General PUDs, including all requirements in Section 14.06(A)(2).
The applicant is proposing to add a second parking space to the cottage homes on Lot 16.
Parking spaces are required to be 9’x18’. The Board finds this criterion met.
The applicant is also proposing to convert the surface parking lot at the Barn site amenity from
porous pavement to standard pavement. This affects stormwater but otherwise the Board finds
this change to have no impact on the overall function of the project.
(4) Buildings. Buildings and associated building lots within a General PUD must be compatible
with the development context in the Planning Area as described under Section 15.C.07(F) and
(G).
The Board finds this criterion met for the buildings on Lot 31.
(5) Civic Spaces and Site Amenities. Civic Spaces and/or Site Amenities must be compatible with
the existing or planned development context. General PUDs must comply with applicable
Civic Space and/or Site Amenity requirements in Subdivision (Section 15.A.16(C)(4)) and Site
Plan (Section 14.06(4)).
The applicant has submitted a site amenity plan showing the project civic spaces and site
amenities, though they were not classified as such at the time of original approval.
(a) Section 15.A.16(C)(4) requirement for minimum 10% of the total buildable area to be civic
space lots apply to General PUDs only for PUDs that involve subdivision of land resulting
in three (3) or more lots, not including the resulting lots that only contain civic space(s).
Buildable area is discussed above and totals 84.7 acres. The applicant has testified that civic
spaces make up 24.4 acres of buildable area. The PUD was approved prior to the
requirement for civic spaces to consist of one of the types in Article 11. The Board finds that
the only civic space proposed to be modified, and therefore the only one to require
classification as a specific type at this time, is that on Lot 18.
After the sketch plan meeting, the applicant met with Planning staff and the Recreation
Director to coordinate on the design of the open space. The design presented with this
application is consistent with that agreed upon during those meetings, which consists of a
large level area with a 3:1 slope at the perimeter, and a conceptual area for the City to add
parking if warranted and desired.
The Director of Public Works provided the following comments relative to the battery
storage area and adjacent Lot 18.
#SD-24-12
• The proposed project must be constructed in accordance with South Burlington DPW
Standards and Specifications.
• The applicant has a responsibility to review and understand City policy regarding
future transfer of infrastructure. At this stage in the review process, we can determine if
a piece of infrastructure could be eligible for transfer in the future, but this does not
guarantee that a transfer will take place, nor does it require the City to accept
infrastructure that does not meet our standards. Information regarding transfer of
infrastructure can be found in the DPW Standards and Specifications, and in City
ordinance related to stormwater and wastewater. Finally, we recommend that all
property covered by the State stormwater permit be part of a homeowners association
that has authority to make decisions and transfer land.
• Confirm that the HOA will retain ownership of the subdivided lot 18.
Functionally, an irrevocable offer for dedication to the previously approved Lot 18 has
already been provided. The Board finds the IOD and deed must be amended to reflect the
subdivision of Lot 18 prior to recording the plat.
The Board finds the Lot 18 civic space to qualify as a “Green,” and finds this criterion met.
(b) In a General PUD, Civic Spaces required under Subdivision Regulations (Section
15.A.16(C)(4)) and under Site Plan Regulations (Section 14.06(4)) can be satisfied by a
combination of Civic Spaces, Site Amenities, or a combination, applied across the PUD
area.
The Board finds this criterion met.
(6) Housing Mix. In a General PUD with more than four (4) residential dwelling units, a mix of two
or more dwelling unit types (as allowed within the applicable zoning district) must be provided
as described by Section 15.A.17. Types of dwelling units are differentiated by either housing
type under Article 11.C or, within multi-family structures with more than four (4) dwelling
units, by number of bedrooms per unit.
The applicant is proposing to add housing units, therefore this criterion applies. The Board
finds this criterion met.
D) SUBDIVISION STANDARDS
15.A.11 General Standards
A. Development Suitability.
The applicant must demonstrate that the land to be subdivided is physically suited for its intended
use and the proposed density or intensity of development, and that the proposed subdivision will
not result in undue adverse impacts to public health and safety, environmental resources as
identified and regulated under Article 12, neighboring properties and uses, or public facilities and
infrastructure located on or within the vicinity of the land to be subdivided.
No changes to the development areas are proposed, though the configuration of development
within those areas is proposed to be modified. Beyond the buildable area discussion above, the
Board finds these criteria met.
C. Development Context.
The applicant must demonstrate that the subdivision conforms to the planned pattern of
subdivision and development in the area, as defined by district purpose statements and standards,
or as specified for a type of Planned Unit Development (PUD) under Article 15.C.
Impacts to the development context are discussed above pertaining to PUD standards.
#SD-24-12
D. Development Connectivity.
The applicant must demonstrate that the subdivision, to the extent physically feasible, is
configured and laid out to maximize connections with adjoining parcels and neighborhoods, and
to avoid creating isolated and disconnected enclaves of development, except where necessary to
separate incompatible land uses, or to avoid undue adverse impacts to resources identified for
protection under Article 12. Accordingly, the applicant must demonstrate that the subdivision is
laid out to connect with and extend existing and planned streets, sidewalks, recreation paths,
transit routes, and utility and greenway corridors located adjacent to or within ½-mile of the
subdivision, or as indicated on the City’s Official Map. Off-site improvements necessary to serve
the proposed subdivision must be provided in accordance with 15.A.18.
No changes to connectivity between the project and adjoining areas are proposed.
15.A.12 Resource Protection Standards
The applicant is proposing to modify impacts to wetlands at the eastern end of the property in the
I/C zoning district. Specific impacts are discussed under Article 12 standards below. No proposed
changes to subdivision of land impact natural resources.
E) SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS
14.06 General Review Standards
Except within the City Center Form Based Code District, the following general criteria and
standards shall be used by the Development Review Board in reviewing applications for site plan
approval. They are intended to provide a framework within which the designer of the site
development is free to exercise creativity, invention, and innovation while improving the visual
appearance of the City of South Burlington. The Development Review Board shall not specify or
favor any particular architectural style or design or assist in the design of any of the buildings
submitted for approval. The Development Review Board shall restrict itself to a reasonable,
professional review, and, except as otherwise provided in the following subsections, the applicant
shall retain full responsibility for design.
A. Relationship of Proposed Structures to the Site.
(1) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from
structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and
adequate parking areas. The DRB shall consider the following:
(a) Street Frontage. Maintain internally-consistent building setbacks and landscaping
along the street.
(b) Building Placement, Orientation. Maintain or establish a consistent orientation to
the street and, where a prevalent pattern exists, shall continue the manner in which the
site’s existing building foundations relate to the site’s topography and grade.
(c) Transition Contrast in Scale. Minimize and mitigate abrupt contrasts in scale
between existing, planned or approved development, and proposed development.
(d) Pedestrian Orientation. Improve and enhance pedestrian connections and
walkability within the area proposed for development.
Discussion of the proposed six modifications’ impacts to compliance with these
considerations is woven into review of the other applicable standards.
(e) Solar Gain. Orient their rooflines to maximize solar gain potential, to the extent
#SD-24-12
possible within the context of the overall standards of these regulations.
The proposed fourteen homes on O’Brien Farm Road extension meet this criterion.
(2) Parking.
(a) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings. Any side of a building
facing a public street shall be considered a front side of a building for the purposes of this
subsection.
(b) The Development Review Board may approve parking between a public street and
one or more buildings if the Board finds that one or more of the following criteria are met.
The Board shall approve only the minimum necessary to overcome the conditions below.
(i) The parking area is necessary to meet minimum requirements of the Americans
with Disabilities Act;
(ii) The parking area will serve a single or two-family home;
The parking areas proposed for modification serve single family homes. The Board
finds this criterion met.
B. Relationship of Structures and Site to Adjoining Area.
(1) The Development Review Board shall encourage the use of a combination of common
materials and architectural characteristics (e.g., rhythm, color, texture, form or detailing),
landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between
buildings of different architectural styles.
(2) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain and to existing
buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures.
(3) To accomplish (1) and (2), the DRB shall consider:
(a) Pattern and Rhythm. Update or maintain or extend the overall pattern of development
defined by the planned or existing street grid, block configurations, position and
orientation of principal buildings, prevalence of attached or detached building types.
(b) Architectural Features. Respond to recurring or representative architectural features that
define neighborhood character, without adhering to a particular architectural style.
(c) Privacy. Limit impacts and intrusions to privacy on adjoining properties, including side
and back yard areas through context sensitive design.
The Board finds the approved height modification does not erode compliance with these criteria.
C. Site Amenity Requirement.
(1) Sites are required to include a specific minimum area for appropriate Site Amenities. This
section does not apply to projects within the City Center FBC District (which are governed by
Section 8.08).
(2) Applicability. Applications for the following shall be required to provide Site Amenities:
(a) Any non-residential development over 5,000 SF.
(b) Additions or expansions exceeding 5,000 SF for existing non-residential structures.
(c) Any residential development, including conversion of non-residential structures to
residential use.
This standard did not exist at the time of original final plat approval, however the Board finds
the proposed new homes to qualify under (c).
(3) The required area shall be:
#SD-24-12
(a) For Non-Residential development, a minimum of 6% of non-residential building gross floor
area.
(b) For Residential development, determined by number of units as:
(i) For fewer than 10 units, 100 square feet per unit;
(ii) For 10 to 19 units, 85 square feet per unit; or
(iii) For 20 or more units, 60 square feet per unit.
The applicant has provided passive and semi-passive recreation areas on the site which are more
than adequate for the proposed additional homes.
14.07 Specific Review Standards
In all Zoning Districts and the City Center Form Based Codes District, the following standards shall
apply:
A. Environmental Protection Standards
All proposed development shall be subject to the applicable requirements of Article 12,
Environmental Protection Standards.
The relevant provisions of Article 12 are discussed below.
B. Site Design Features.
All proposed development shall comply with standards for the placement of buildings, parking and
loading areas, landscaping and screening, open space, stormwater, lighting, and other applicable
standards related to site design pursuant to these Land Development Regulations.
These standards are largely in articles 3 and 13. The relevant provisions of these articles are
discussed below.
C. Access and Circulation.
All proposed development shall comply with site access and circulation standards of Section
15.A.14.
No modification to access and circulation are proposed.
D. [Reserved for Transportation Demand Management (TDM)]
E. Building Form.
Development within the City Center Form Based Code District, the Urban Design Overlay District,
and other districts with supplemental building form standards shall adhere to the standards
contained therein.
Not applicable.
F. Streetscape Improvements.
A proposed new construction or extension/expansion of an existing structure exceeding the
thresholds listed in either (a) Section 14.09(B) or (b) Section 8.11(D) within the City Center Form
Based Code, or Section 3.11(D) in all other zoning districts, shall be required to upgrade adjacent
sidewalks, greenbelts, and related street furniture (trees, benches, etc.) to the standards contained
within the applicable Street Type and Building Envelope Standard. Nothing in this subsection shall
be construed to limit requirements for additional upgrades as necessary to meet the requirements
of these Regulations.
No modifications requiring street upgrades are proposed.
G. Access to Abutting Properties.
#SD-24-12
The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting properties
whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial or collector street,
to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and
circulation in the area.
No changes affecting access to abutting properties are proposed.
H. 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. Standards of Section 15.A.18, Infrastructure, Utilities, and Services, shall
also be met.
No changes to utility services are proposed.
I. Disposal of Wastes.
All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling,
composting, 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 changes to waste disposal are proposed.
F) NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION STANDARDS
12.06 Wetland Protection Standards
As noted above, the applicant is proposing to locate the walking trail within the I/C zoning district
within the buffer of a regulated Class III wetland, defined as one over 5,000 sf in size.
E. Exemptions
(3) Trails. Establishment and maintenance of unpaved, non-motorized trails, and associated
puncheons and boardwalks, not to exceed ten (10) feet in width located within the buffer area of
a Class I, Class II, or Class III wetland. All trails located within this buffer area should be
constructed to meet the best practices outlined in the Recreational Trail Building Guidance
document developed by the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources.
The proposed impacts consist of installation of a 4-ft wide stone dust path and 5-ft mowed area on
either side, as well as installation of five trees. The Board finds that the relocated proposed path
qualifies for an exemption under this section. The Board finds the applicant must demonstrate that
the path meets the required best practices prior to issuance of a zoning permit for its construction.
The Director of Public Works provided the following comment pertaining to the trail.
Provide a detail for the circuit training path and any other paths that are proposed to be
located on property or in easements that may be transferred to the City.
The applicant provided the requested detail and the Director of Public Works indicated it was
acceptable on July 12, 2024.
G) PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
At the sketch plan review, the Board asked the applicant about the noise impacts of the proposed
battery storage area. The standards of article A.3 pertain to noise.
A.3 Noise
#SD-24-12
(a) The following acts are declared to be loud, disturbing and unnecessary noises and shall be
deemed detrimental to the health and safety of the residents of the City of South Burlington:
(vi) Noise in General. Any noise which is deemed objectionable because of volume, frequency
or beat and is not muffled or otherwise controlled.
(b) Specific Standards.
(i) The creation of, permitting or operation of any of the above sets, instruments, devices or
vehicles causing said noise in such a manner as to be plainly audible at a distance of fifty
feet (50’) from the building, structure or vehicle from which noise emanates shall be prima
facie evidence of a nuisance and a violation of these Regulations.
(ii) It shall be a violation of these Regulations for any property owner to create or allow the
creation of noise in excess of the following stated limits in the City during the hours of
12:00 AM and 8:00 AM:
a. 45 dBA based on a one-hour average measured at any point where the property on which
the noise emanates adjoins any property used for residential purposes.
b. 60 dBA based on a one-hour average measured at any point where the property on which
the noise emanates adjoins any property used for commercial purposes.
(iii) For purposes of this Appendix, the following terms shall be defined as stated below:
a. Decibel – a unit measure of sound level.
b. Sound level – in decibels measured by a sound meter, by using the “A” frequency
weighing, expressed in dBA.
c. Average sound level – a sound level during a given period of time (e.g. one hour) found
by the general rule of combination of sound levels. Also called “equivalent sound level.”
(c) Exemptions.
(i) Speakers, sound trucks, amplifiers, etc. used for commercial purposes as advertising for
which a proper permit has been issued are specifically exempt from the provisions of these
Regulations.
(ii) Emergency vehicles operated by fire, rescue and police agencies are specifically exempt
from the provisions of these Regulations.
(iii) Temporary actions benefiting the public, including but not limited to roadway
construction, sewer and water line construction, and special public events, are specifically
exempt from the provisions of these Regulations upon approval of such an exemption by
the City Manager.
(d) Sound Measurement Standards. Sound shall be measured in accordance with the
standards specified by the American National Standards Institute.
The Board finds the testimony provided at sketch that the noise level of 60 – 65 dba at the battery
decreases to ambient at the property line, which is located between four and 68 feet away, to be
adequate given that the Public Utility Commission will also be reviewing the application for battery
storage
The Board finds construction of the fourteen additional homes shall be subject to the blasting plan
approved in final plat approval #SD-22-10A.
H) SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS
13.04 Landscaping, Screening and Street Trees
The applicable section of 13.04 pertains to screening or buffering and requires landscaping,
#SD-24-12
fencing, land shaping and/or screening along property boundaries whenever the Board determines
that a) two adjacent sites are dissimilar and should be screened, b) a property’s appearance should
be improved, or c) a commercial, industrial, or multi-family use abuts a residential use, or d) a
parking or loading area is adjacent to or visible from a public street. The Board finds this
requirement applies to screening of the battery storage area. The applicant has provided multi-
story screening on three sides of the proposed battery storage. The fourth side is buffered by
existing trees. The Board finds the screening shall be installed as part of the proposed battery
storage but should the battery storage not move forward no screening will be required.
13.05 Stormwater Management
The Board finds the proposed modification from porous to standard pavement and the increase in
lot coverage to affect compliance with stormwater management criteria. The applicant provided
updated computations reflecting that the previously approved stormwater management system
can handle the increased impervious in compliance with the stormwater management standards.
The City Stormwater Section reviewed the updated computations on 7/26/2024 and indicated there
are no additional comments.
13.12 Utility Cabinets and Similar Structures
This section pertains to utility cabinets and similar structures on their own lots. The Board finds
the battery storage area to be subject to this section.
A. General Requirements.
In any district, the Development Review Board may grant site plan approval for the construction of
a utility cabinet or similar structure according to the following regulations.
B. Specific Standards for Utility Cabinets and Similar Structures.
(1) The facility shall serve the City of South Burlington and/or immediately adjacent communities.
The Board finds that the facility serves the neighborhood to be sufficiently compliant with this
criterion.
(2) The minimum required lot for a public utility cabinet, substation, or communication relay
station on its own parcel may be reduced from the zoning district requirements, at the
discretion of the Development Review Board. In the event that the facility shall be erected on
property not owned by the utility, the Development Review Board shall require that the facility
be located unobtrusively.
The Board finds this criterion met.
(3) If the parcel containing the facility is landlocked, there shall be a recorded easement or
permission granting access to the utility or owner of the facility.
The parcel is not landlocked.
(4) There shall be sufficient landscaping or fencing of sufficient height and opacity to screen
effectively the facility year-round from streets and abutting unaffiliated properties.
The Board finds this criterion met.
(5) The location of the facility shall be shown on all relevant site plans.
This criterion is met.
(6) Utility cabinets and similar structures shall be located a minimum of five (5) feet from all
existing or planned public roads or rights-of-way.
The enclosure for the battery storage is located within 4-ft of the property line. Since this
#SD-24-12
criterion applies to the cabinets for utilities, the Board finds that it also applies to the
enclosure for similar structures, and finds the applicant must relocate the battery storage to
be 5-ft from the property line facing the street. This criterion exists to protect utilities from
impacts of road and sidewalk maintenance.
13.17 Residential Design for New Homes
Compliance of the added homes with these criteria is discussed above.
DECISION
Motion by __, seconded by __, to approve final plat application #SD-24-12 of O’Brien Eastview, LLC,
subject to the following conditions:
1. All previous approvals and stipulations will remain in full effect except as amended herein.
2. 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.
3. Prior to recording the plat, the plans must be revised to show the changes below and shall
require approval of the Administrative Officer.
a. Revert the design of Lots 36 & 37, proximate to Daniel Drive, to the design
approved in SD-22-10A.
b. Amend the irrevocable offer of dedication and deed to reflect the subdivision of Lot
18
4. A digital PDF version of the full set of approved final plans as amended must be delivered to
the Administrative Officer before recording the mylar.
5. Prior to recording the plat, the previously submitted irrevocable offer of dedication and deed
for lot 18 must be amended to reflect the subdivision of Lot 18 into Lot 18 and Lot 59.
6. The final plat plans (sheets PL-1 and PL-2) shall be recorded in the land records within 180 days
or this approval is null and void. The plans shall be signed by the Board Chair or Clerk prior to
recording. Prior to recording the final plat plans, the applicant shall submit a copy of the
survey plat in digital format. The format of the digital information shall require approval of the
South Burlington GIS Coordinator.
7. The plats must be recorded prior to zoning permit issuance.
8. Prior to issuance of a zoning permit for its construction, the applicant must demonstrate that
the path within the regulated wetland buffer meets the best practices outlined in the
Recreational Trail Building Guidance document developed by the Vermont Agency of Natural
Resources.
9. The first zoning permit under this amended PUD must be obtained within six (6) months of this
decision with the option for requesting a one (1) year extension as allowed in LDR 17.04.
10. The applicant must receive final wastewater and water allocations prior to issuance of a zoning
permit.
11. The Administrative Officer shall consider the requirement for completion as being met if a
temporary certificate of occupancy is issued.
#SD-24-12
12. The Administrative Officer shall consider right of way infrastructure to be considered complete
if, were it any other type of work, it were eligible for a temporary certificate of occupancy
subject to the standard tests pursuant to 17.03D.
13. Construction of the fourteen additional homes shall be subject to the blasting plan approved in
final plat approval #SD-22-10A.
14. The applicant must regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance infrastructure.
15. The proposed project must adhere to standards for erosion control as set forth in Section 16.03
of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. In addition, the grading plan must
meet the standards set forth in Section 16.04 of the South Burlington Land Development
Regulations.
16. Any change to the plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Development Review
Board or the Administrative Officer as allowed by the Land Development Regulations.
Mark Behr Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Frank Kochman Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Quin Mann Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
John Moscatelli Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Dawn Philibert Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Charles Johnston Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Jody Lesko Yea Nay Abstain Not Present
Motion carried by a vote of _ - _ - _.
Signed this ____ day of August, 2024 by
_____________________________________
Dawn Philibert, 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 180 Market 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 802.477.2241 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist.
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
July 15, 2024
South Burlington Planning and Zoning
City of South Burlington
180 Market Street
South Burlington, VT 05403
Re: O’Brien Eastview Planned Unit Development Final Plat Amendment
South Burlington Development Review Board:
Further to the hearing on July 2, 2024, enclosed for your reference please find an updated lot coverage
table, Exhibit 005, which includes the lot coverage of the C1-LR buildings proposed/approved in the project.
In addition to this updated coverage Exhibit, it was requested that we provide a calculation of green
space relative to buildable acreage, as defined in the land development regulations. Please note that inclusive
of the change to Lot 18, Eastview is proposing 24.44 acres of open space. We believe that all of this space
qualifies as Civic space, in one form or another as contemplated in the zoning regulations. The entire land area
of the project is 102.7 acres. Therefore in excess of 10% civic space is being provided. As requested, the
information regarding what would be considered as buildable area in the project, under the current regulations,
is below. It appears as though this would reduce our required open space if applicable.
Our engineer has provided the requested path detail and stormwater calculations under separate cover.
We look forward to our next hearing. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Andrew Gill, Director of Development
Enclosures
Eastview Buildable Area Calculations
2024-07-15
Zone Area (SF)Area (Ac)Hazard Area Level 1 NR ROW Transmission Buildable (SF)Buildable (AC)
R1-PRD 1711908 39.30 44896 0 226941 0 1440070.99 33.06
C1-LR 1019304 23.40 68281 0 96576 0 854447 19.62
IC 1690128 38.80 136033 0 203191 0 1350904 31.01
R12 52272 1.20 0 0 7117 0 45155 1.04
TOTAL 102.70 84.72
Eastview at O'Brien Farm Master Plan and PUD Area and Coverage and Density
Zoning District Areas Per Sheet C‐1A
Updated 7/9/2024
Zoning District
Coverage Allowed in District Buildings
Only. Coverage Proposed Buildings
Coverage Allowed in District
Combined
Coverage Proposed All
Impervious
R1* 18% 16.68% 30% 28.09%
C1LR 40% 0.68% 70% 7.81%
R12 40% 0.00% 60% 32.64%
IC 40% 0.00% 70% 4.57%
Zoning District
Area of Land In Eastview Master Plan
(includes adjustments to district lines
shown at Sheet C‐1A) Area in Acres
Area of Land In Eastview Master Plan
(includes adjustments to district lines
shown at Sheet C‐1A) Area in Square
Feet Existing Building Coverage Existing All Impervious
Total
Coverage
Proposed
Buildings
Total Coverage
Proposed Roads
ROW Coverage
Removed from
Calculation
Combined
Coverage All
Impervious
Coverage
Allowed
Buildings
Coverage
Allowed All
R1 39.20 1707552 11900 27230 284813.4 251025 56213 479625.4 307359.36 512265.6
C1LR 23.40 1019304 6952 72688 79640 407721.6 713512.8
R12 1.20 52272 0 17063 17063 20908.8 31363.2
IC 38.80 1690128 0 77159 77159 676051.2 1183089.6
Total 102.60 4469256.00 11900.00 27230.00 291765.40 417935.00 56213.00 653487.40 1412040.96 2440231.20
Maximum Coverages Square Feet Acres Percentage
Maximum Building
Coverage Entire
PUD/Master Plan 1412040.96 32.416 31.59%
Maximum Total
Impervious PUD/Master
Plan 2440231.2 56.02 54.60%
*Our understanding is that the Incluzionary Oridnance in effect allows for a 20% increase in coverage for accomodation of offset units provided.
This coverage limit includes that 20% offset.