Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-24-12 - Supplemental - 0500 Old Farm Road #SD-24-12 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD-24-12_500 Old Farm Rd _OBrien Eastview_PPFP_2024-07- 02.docx DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: June 26, 2024 Application received: June 5, 2024 500 Old Farm Road – O’Brien Eastview, LLC Preliminary and Final Plat Application #SD-24-12 Meeting Date: July 2, 2024 Owner/Applicant O’Brien Eastview, LLC 1855 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Engineer Krebs & Lansing Consulting Engineers 164 Main Street Colchester, VT 05446 Property Information Tax Parcels 1260-0200F, 0970-00255.c, 0970-00255 Zoning District: R1-PRD Project Area: approximately 102 acres Location Map #SD-24-12 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 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, replacing two large single-family homes with four detached cottage style units, modifying the approved phasing, and other minor amendments, 500 Old Farm Road. PERMIT HISTORY The sketch plan application for this amendment was reviewed by the Board on February 6, 2024. 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. 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 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. 1. Add 14 homes in two-family dwellings. See sheet C-6. 2. 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. 3. 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. These are on Sheet C-10. 4. Change surface parking at barn from porous to standard pavement. See sheet C-9 5. Change parking for cottage homes on Lot 16. See sheet C-4 6. Permit administrative officer review of phase completion requirements. See cover letter. 7. Shift walking loop trail on Lots 41, 45, 46, and 48 to avoid sensitive areas as identified by Act 250. COMMENTS Development Review Planner Marla Keene and Director of Planning and Zoning Paul Conner, hereafter referred to as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted by the applicant and offer the following comments. Numbered items for the Board’s attention are in red. 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. Staff reminds the Board and applicant that as a combined preliminary and final plat application, the applicant has waived the opportunity for a separate, less detailed, preliminary plat review, and all details of the application must be finalized before the Board can issue a decision, therefore it would not be unexpected if a continuation is required. A) PHASING The applicants request #6 is to permit administrative modification of the schedule for the approved phasing plan to account for seasonal work requirements as they arise. #SD-24-12 Staff reminds the Board of their detailed discussion as part of the review of final plat approval SD- 22-10A that the phase schedule was set 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. At sketch, individual Board members indicated they would consider a modified request that took into account delayed completion due to seasonal factors, as well as uncontrollable factors. Staff reminds the Board that the 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 interprets this provision strictly and issues 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. The applicant has refined their request in this preliminary and final plat application. 1. In general, they are requesting that the AO be permitted to grant “an extension.” Since there is no duration associated with any phase, Staff assumes this 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. Staff recommends the Board confirm with the applicant this interpretation is correct. Assuming this is a correct interpretation, the following is a list of the project elements that are required to be complete before something else can begin.  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 125 unit. #SD-24-12  Phase 11: Open Space Park Amenity. Complete prior to issuance of zoning permit for 125 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. 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 (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. 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. Additionally, the applicant has had foreknowledge, since the issuance of decision SD-22-10A, of their obligations to complete the required infrastructure. Therefore they should be able to complete the necessary work so that they do not prevent themselves from moving the project forward by failing to complete required project elements. As noted above, the applicant is eligible for a temporary certificate of occupancy. Staff would consider the requirement for completion as being met if a temporary certificate of occupancy is issued. Some of the project elements that are required to be complete before something else can begin are completion of right of way infrastructure, which is not subject to a certificate of occupancy. 2. Staff recommends the Board permit right of way infrastructure to be considered complete if, were it any other type of work, were eligible for a temporary certificate of occupancy subject to the standard tests pursuant to 17.03D. #SD-24-12 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. As noted above, the AO already may and does grant temporary COs for shipping delays. While Staff considers the Board may grant this request, it is effectively null as this is already permitted. 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. Staff interprets the applicant to be saying that they would like to be issued a certificate of occupancy before the work is complete by an amount equal to the time it takes to issue a zoning permit. Staff does not understand how one could issue a certificate of occupancy before work is complete, since it is not knowable how long work will take to be completed. 3. Staff recommends the Board confirm this interpretation of the request is correct & if so, Staff considers the Board may not grant the request. If Staff’s interpretation is incorrect, Staff recommends the Board afford the applicant the opportunity to clarify. 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. Staff interprets this request to be to change the condition for relocating Old Farm Road to be associated with a three-year time frame after completion of the necessary Council actions pertaining to Right-of-Way instead of being associated with a number of units. There is no development agreement, the content of which would be wholly the authority of City Council to determine, therefore Staff considers the Board cannot condition an approval on an unknown agreement. 4. Without there being a development agreement in place, Staff recommends the Board issue a finding that the request is unripe. 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 a net of 16 homes to the approved 155 homes. 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. Staff 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. 5. Staff considers it likely that the project has additional available density for the proposed additional 16 homes, but recommends the Board require the applicant to calculate the allowable density based on buildable area as a condition of approval for project tracking purposes. Lot Coverage The LDR specifically prohibits the Board from increasing lot coverage above the allowable #SD-24-12 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 6. The applicant has reported that there is only building coverage within the R1-PRD zoning district, and that the proposed building coverage in that district is 16.7% (allowable maximum is 18%). However there are four homes within the C1-LR zoning district. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to update their building coverage chart to include the proposed homes within the C1-LR, and verify the accuracy of the value provided for the R1-PRD zoning district. Height The applicant is proposing to add 18 homes and remove two homes in two separate areas 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. The Board also has authority to grant alternative compliance in the case of a PUD as defined in 15.C.01A(2), which is broader than their authority to grant dimensional modifications. That authority extends to standards that are not dimensional standards, including building types, densities, and alternative compliance. Upon closer review of the Board’s authority, Staff considers the applicant’s request is to modify a dimensional standard, therefore the Board need not consider alternative compliance and should instead only evaluate whether the proposed modification is due to physical site limitations or allows more creative and efficient subdivision and site layout and is consistent with the intent and purpose of the regulations and Comprehensive Plan. 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 #SD-24-12 stories facing the street, for a maximum height waiver of 3.6 ft and one story1. The applicant has not provided any architectural elevations of these homes, though at sketch, the elevations provided demonstrated that the homes did not meet the requirements of 13.17 pertaining to garage width and location. 7. Since these homes are proposed to be located adjacent to an area that is only conditioned to have a minimum of two stories, Staff recommends the Board consider whether to require architectural elevations to evaluate whether granting the height waiver is contrary to the purpose of the height standards to create pedestrian scale, cohesive neighborhoods. Staff notes elevations will be necessary to demonstrate compliance with 13.17, discussed below. Daniel Drive The applicant has also requested a modification of height standards for the four new alley- served homes on Daniel Drive. These homes are located on the southern edge of the O’Brien Eastview development area, well within the R1-PRD zoning district. The Board provided the direction that these homes do not meet the building design standards of 13.17 at the sketch plan meeting. The applicant has not made any modification, therefore Staff considers the discussion of height waiver to be moot. Should the applicant modify their proposal so that the homes face on a street, approved civic space, or courtyard, Staff notes the proposed homes range from 30.9 to 31.0 feet high relative to pre-construction grade, and 28.4 to 29.3 feet high relative to proposed grade. 8. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to modify their proposal so that the proposed homes front on a street, an approved civic space, or a courtyard as required by LDR 13.17C(1) prior to considering the requested height waiver, or revert back to the previously approved configuration with two larger single family homes in this location. 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. Staff considers proposed seven modifications 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 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 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 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). 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. #SD-24-12 As discussed above, Staff considers 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, Staff considers 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 Staff considers the Board should require only compliance to the extent that proposed modifications are within the transition area. Modifications along the perimeter of the PUD include reduction in the open space area of Lot 18, removal of two large single family homes and replacement with four cottage style single family homes on Lot 36, and adding parking to the cottage homes on Lot 16. (a) The “Transition Area” for purposes of analysis, must at minimum incorporate the #SD-24-12 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 and Lot 36 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. Staff considers the proposed pattern of development on Lot 16 to be compatible with existing adjacent development. The applicant has proposed vegetative buffering along lot 18. On Lot 36, while Staff considers the applicant hasn’t specifically provided any of the above measures, the proposed modification is consistent with the already approved development on Lot 36, and therefore if the building design issues identified above can be addressed, Staff has no concerns with transitions in this location either. 5. Staff recommends the Board discuss whether they consider the proposed transitions acceptable, particularly on Lot 36. 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. #SD-24-12 Not applicable. 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. As discussed at sketch and alluded to under dimensional standards above, the proposed homes on Lot 36 do not meet the building orientation standard. These homes have one three story side with no sidewalk or walkway that faces onto an open lawn area followed by the side of a single family home. The other, two story, side, has few windows and faces onto the rear of the detached garage associated with that home. They do not front on a street, an approved civic space, or a courtyard as required by LDR 13.17C(1)2. 13.17C(1) Building Orientation. Residential buildings must be oriented to the street, to an approved civic space, or to a courtyard. Primary entries for single family and multi- 2 The applicant has argued in their cover memo that since 13.17B(3) exempts “buildings on lots that exceed one acres in size” from building design standards, these buildings are exempt. The applicant has proposed to locate these buildings on a 1.02 acre lot with five other homes and nine detached garages (for a total of nine homes). A full reading of 13.17 makes it clear that the intention is to exempt single buildings on large lots from building design standards, and the use of the plural “buildings” is a grammatical and not a policy choice. #SD-24-12 family buildings must face the street, civic space, or courtyard. Secondary building entries may open onto garages and/or parking areas. Buildings should be oriented to maximize living space and windows to the south, east and west. Residential buildings should orient their rooflines to maximize solar gain potential, to the extent possible within the context of the overall standards of the regulations. Therefore though Staff is generally in support of increasing the proportion of smaller homes relative to larger homes, Staff considers the proposed homes to not yet be approvable. 6. Staff recommends the Board direct the applicant to revise the design of Lot 36 to meet building orientation standards or revert to the previously approved large single family homes. (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. 7. The applicant has not provided elevations for the proposed homes on Lot 31. However, the elevation drawings provided at sketch did not meet either the standard pertaining to placement of garages or percent of garage as a fraction of the front façade. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to provide elevation drawings demonstrating this standard has been addressed prior to closing the hearing. (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. Staff considers 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’. Staff considers 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 Staff considers 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 applicant has not submitted drawings for the proposed buildings on O’Brien Farm Road Extension. The proposed cottage homes are consistent with the already-approved cottage homes except that they are three stories on one side. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant demonstrate compliance with this criterion by submitting elevation drawings for the proposed homes on O’Brien Farm Road. #SD-24-12 (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 unknown at this time and is discussed above. Computation of area of civic space lots should also exclude hazards, level 1 resources, and rights of way. 8. Since this proposed modification results in a slight reduction in civic spaces due to the proposed addition of a battery storage area on Lot 18, Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to provide a computation of both buildable area and civic space lots for recordkeeping purposes. At sketch, the Board discussed the design of the remaining lands of the civic space. 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. • 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. Staff has reviewed the process for amending such an offer and has confirmed it may take place after DRB approval. Staff recommends the Board condition the approval on amending the IOD and deed to reflect the revised Lot 18 prior to recording the plat. 9. Staff recommends the Board confirm that the HOA or O’Brien Brothers intends to retain ownership of the portion of Lot 18 to be subdivided and developed with battery storage (future Lot 59). (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. Provided the above-recommended computation demonstrates 10% of the buildable area consists of civic space and site amenities, Staff considers this criterion will be met. #SD-24-12 (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. Staff considers 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, Staff considers 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. 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 #SD-24-12 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 seven 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 possible within the context of the overall standards of these regulations. The proposed fourteen homes on O’Brien Farm Road extension meet this criterion. Staff considers the required reorientation of the additional cottage homes should take this criterion into consideration. (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. Staff considers 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. #SD-24-12 (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. As discussed above, the applicant has not provided elevation drawings for the proposed homes on O’Brien Farm Road. Demonstration that the requested height waiver does not erode compliance with these criteria is recommended. 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 Staff considers the proposed new homes to qualify under (c). (3) The required area shall be: (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. #SD-24-12 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. 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. #SD-24-12 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. Staff recommends the Board include a condition requiring demonstration that the trail meets the required best practices. 10. The Director of Public Works provided the following comment pertaining to the trail, which Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to address prior to closing the hearing. 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. 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 (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. #SD-24-12 (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. 11. Staff recommends the Board discuss whether they are satisfied with the informal 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, or whether they will require a more formal demonstration that the sound level is reduced to ambient at 50-ft away and does not exceed 45 dBA at the property line. H) SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS 13.04 Landscaping, Screening and Street Trees The applicable section of 13.04 pertains to screening or buffering and requires landscaping, 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. Staff considers 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. Staff considers this criterion met. 13.05 Stormwater Management Staff considers the proposed modification from porous to standard pavement and the increase in lot coverage to affect compliance with stormwater management criteria. The applicant has not provided updates or computations reflecting that the previously approved stormwater management system can handle the increased impervious in compliance with the stormwater management standards. 12. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to submit stormwater management system computations and documents demonstrating that the stormwater management criteria continue to be met for review and approval of the Stormwater section prior to closing the combined preliminary and final plat hearing. 13.12 Utility Cabinets and Similar Structures This section pertains to utility cabinets and similar structures on their own lots. Staff considers 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. #SD-24-12 Staff considers 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. Staff considers 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. Staff considers 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. 13. The enclosure for the battery storage is located within 4-ft of the property line. Since this criterion applies to the cabinets for utilities, Staff considers that it also applies to the enclosure for similar structures, and recommends the Board require the applicant to 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. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board work with the applicant to address the issues identified herein. Respectfully submitted, Marla Keene, Development Review Planner