HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-06-95 - Decision - 0222 Dorset Street#SD-06-95
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
PATRICK MALONE - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
222 DORSET STREET
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION #SD-06-95
FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION
Patrick Malone, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking preliminary plat review
for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) converting an existing 18,327 sq. ft.
building from auto sales & service to retail food establishment use, and 2) constructing a
15,406 sq. ft. gfa addition (including 5,071 sq. ft. of mezzanine space) for retail food
establishment use and 1760 sq. ft. of short-order restaurant use for a total GFA of
33,733 sq. ft., 222 Dorset Street. The Development Review Board held a public hearing
on November 21, 2006, January 2, 2007, and January 16, 2007. David G. White
represented the applicant at the January 2, 2007 and January 16, 2007 hearings. Patrick
Malone was present at the hearings.
Based on testimony provided at the above mentioned public hearing 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
The applicant is seeking preliminary plat review for a planned unit development
consisting of: 1) converting an existing 18,327 sq. ft. building from auto sales &
service to retail food establishment use, and 2) constructing a 15,406 sq. ft. gfa
addition (including 5,071 sq. ft. of mezzanine space) for retail food establishment
use and 1760 sq. ft. of short-order restaurant use for a total GFA of 33,733 sq. ft.,
222 Dorset Street.
2. The preliminary plat application was heard on November 21, 2006, continued to
December 19, 2006, again to January 2, 2007 and again to January 12, 2007. A
new site plan was submitted on December 28, 2006; new landscaping, lighting,
and design plans were submitted on January 11, 2007.
3. The owner of record of the subject property is Patrick Malone.
4. The subject property is located in the Central District 1 (CD1) Zoning District and
Design Review District 2.
5. The plans submitted consist of a 13 page set of plans, page one (1) entitled,
"Subdivision Plat Property of Patrick Malone No. 222 Dorset Street South
Burlington Vermont", prepared by Stuart Morrow, Consulting Land Surveyor,
dated Jan, 1998, last revised on 1/8/07.
- 1 -
#SD-06-95
ZONING DISTRICT & DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Section 8.05(A)(2) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations require a 20 foot
setback. The applicant is proposing that the addition will project 15 feet into the setback
and resulting in a five (5) foot front setback.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Pursuant to Section 15.18 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, PUDs
shall comply with the following standards and conditions:
(a) Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity is available to meet
the needs of the project.
The South Burlington Water Department is reviewing the plans and shall have comments
prior to the hearing. The applicant shall adhere to the comments.
The South Burlington City Engineer reviewed the plans and provided comments in memos
dated September 7, 2006 and November 2, 2006. The applicant's preliminary plans have
not addressed the issues commented on by the City Engineer at the sketch plan review.
The applicant shall adhere to the comments of the City Engineer, who shall continue to
review all future sets of plans.
(b) Sufficient grading and erosion controls will be utilized during and after
construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or
dangerous conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties.
The proposed project shall adhere to standards for erosion control as set forth in Section
16.03 and Section 16.04 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations.
(c) The project incorporates access, circulation, and traffic management
strategies sufficient to prevent unreasonable congestion of adjacent roads.
The Board had invoked technical review for traffic of this proposal. The consultant,
Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, referred to herein as VHB, has reviewed the plans and
provided comments in a memo dated December 13, 2006. Staff has been coordinating
discussions between the applicant and the consultant pursuant to items included in this
memo and will continue to do so.
Trip Generation: The report submitted is based on a combination of retail food use and
short order restaurant. The applicant's traffic report is basing traffic generation for the
short order restaurant on the number of seats and not square footage. This is acceptable
for this location. However, given that the vehicle trip ends are based on the number of
seats, the site is estimated to generate 391 vtes during the P.M. peak hour. The existing
use is estimated to generate 48.4 vtes for a total additional vtes of 342.6
The overall site circulation and the proposed continued use of the curb cut at the south
end of the property is acceptable; however this must be marked and limited exclusively
to EXIT ONLY with right turns, and must be for service vehicles only.
-2-
#S D-06-95
The driveway at the intersection is planned to be 40 feet wide, to accommodate two 12-
foot lanes exiting and a 16-foot lane entering when City Center is fully developed. This
wider section extends into the driveway for 75 feet. This full width is then tapered back.
The configuration of the driveway into the parking lot has the access to the parking lot as
far away from the intersection as possible and should work well. No changes are
recommended.
The raised center median on Dorset Street, north of the intersection needs to be
extended to the south to conform to the new intersection alignment. The plan notes that
the existing granite curb will be reused. Any modifications to the intersection should
conform to the future geometric requirements of the intersection.
(d) The project's design respects and will provide suitable protection to
wetlands, streams, wildlife habitat as identified in the Open Space Strategy,
and any unique natural features on the site.
The site plan has been reviewed for its consistency with the City's Official Map, the
Potash Brook Watershed Restoration Plan, the Army Corps of Engineers Preliminary
Restoration Plan (PRP) for Tributary 3, and the Tributary 3 Hydrologic Model. As
background, the Preliminary Restoration Plan is the background document for a $1.3
million construction and stream restoration program funded by the Lake Champlain
Basin Program. The recommended PRP actions do affect this property. These actions
are critical to development of the City Center and restoration of Potash Brook. The
property owner has been made aware of these plans and their impact on City Center.
The proposed restoration actions in the Preliminary Restoration Plan are:
a. Replacement and minor relocation of the existing culvert under Dorset Street and
under the Malone parcel with a wider concrete box culvert that will reduce flow
constriction and thus the amount of water that backs up onto the Malone, Munson, and
Orthopedic Associates parcels. The existing culvert is shown in the black dashed line;
the proposed culvert is shown in pink.
b. "Daylighting" (taking the stream out of the culvert and exposing it to natural light)
a small segment of the stream from the end of the existing culvert into the existing
channel. Daylighting at this point is essential for reducing flow constriction and
improving water quality. The daylighted/restored stream channel is shown in blue.
C. Creating a naturalized stream bank (purple) and riparian buffer area (green).
The City has secured funding for this work and does not expect the property owner to
contribute to these costs. The request is to remove physical impediments to the planned
restoration and take steps to ensure that use of the property is consistent with the
environmental restoration.
The stormwater management facility proposed for the east side of the property is
completely acceptable to the City and consistent with City Center and Tributary 3 plans.
All existing paved areas of the existing parking lot that are shown in green are
functionally part of the stream buffer area and should NOT be paved.
-3-
#SD-06-95
The applicant has considered these needs and has complied. The trash container bays
have been appropriately relocated to be in compliance with the wishes of the Board.
The present location of the transformer is acceptable for the time being. The applicant
should not be required to relocate the transformer. The City will be responsible for
moving the transformer to a new location when the restoration plan is carried out. The
Findings of Fact should reflect that the City should be responsible for the cost of
amending the site plan approval and record drawing for the property.
? It AR
. !:) A. ;'riN'r. WV
" f'�Ol't, — ') lip"iRMr!lS
7P11 qs ; C. RCTA11.
ou oo'V i
l�
�, � - i N 4a •: �ltse +�mt¢nw�n+aw-.
fro-.Stt*'E. Y-a4"hR.A+imi 59rJlFEk� i
{ i
1iNrr :$2o'../Lot14y C#t-rd�h't" (t
M -iL Or Y' [irOALxG
#S D-06-95
(e) The project is designed to be visually compatible with the planned
development patterns in the area, as specified in the Comprehensive Plan
and the purpose of the zoning district(s) in which it is located.
The applicant has submitted elevations and renderings of the proposed building and has
appeared before the Design Review Committee for review. After multiple meetings and
designs, the Design Review Committee recommended approval of the design aspects of
the project. However, the applicant has since submitted new renderings of the building
which include several changes. The Design Review Committee will review the revised
renderings at its meeting on January 22, 2007.
(fl Open space areas on the site have been located in such a way as to maximize
opportunities for creating contiguous open spaces between adjoining parcels
and/or stream buffer areas.
As discussed in the analysis of the Tributary 3 restoration and proposed impervious and
permeable surfaces above, the project has been revised to meet these needs.
(g) The layout of a subdivision or PUD has been reviewed by the Fire Chief or
(designee) to ensure that adequate fire protection can be provided.
The South Burlington Fire Chief shall review the plans at such a time as greater detail
regarding circulation and building height is available.
(h) Roads, recreation paths, stormwater facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility
lines and lighting have been designed in a manner that is compatible with the
extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent landowners.
An easement in the area along Tributary 3 as indicated is requested of the applicant in
order to carry out the restoration plans. In addition, the applicant must grant sufficient
right-of-way to accommodate the City Center entry road and Dorset Street intersection.
Staff has been working with counsel to identify where the right-of-way from Dorset Street
shall end in order to best accommodate the current and future plans for the area.
Counsel has since rendered an opinion that it will be appropriate to continue the ROW to
the property line.
(i) Roads, utilities, sidewalks, recreation paths, and lighting are designed in a
manner that is consistent with City utility and roadway plans and
maintenance standards.
The applicant has submitted revised exterior lighting details (cut -sheets) and a lighting plan
for the proposed project. The cut sheets for the proposed wall -mounted light, canopy light,
and pole light, meet the standards for shielded, down -cast lights.
The Design Review Committee shall discuss the revised lighting details as design
elements.
-5-
#S D-06-95
Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any
new utility lines shall be underground.
(j) The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive
Plan for the affected district(s).
So long as easements and rights -of -way are provided where requested, and the stream
channel protected as indicated in this memo, the Board believes that the proposed project
is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS
Pursuant to Section 14.03(A)(6) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations,
any PUD shall require site plan approval. Section 14.06 of the South Burlington Land
Development Regulations establishes the following general review standards for all site
plan applications:
(a) 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 proposed project is estimated to require 183 parking spaces. The applicant is
proposing to provide 146 parking spaces and is requesting a parking waiver of 37 spaces
or 20.2%
The applicant has submitted an analysis of natural food stores as well as parking counts on
public streets with parking within 800 feet of the proposed site. They argue, based on their
research, that the parking provided will be sufficient for the proposed use. Based on this
analysis, the Board supports the request for the parking waiver.
The Board supports the waiver requested for this proposal based on the analysis of other
natural food stores. The Board recognizes that this study is based on a very specific use. It
is unlikely that the analysis would apply to all grocery stores, which would likely require a
greater ratio of parking than natural food stores. Therefore, to prevent this problem, the
approval should be conditioned to require any change in use from a natural food store to
reapply to the Development Review Board.
The subject lot requires five (5) handicapped accessible parking spaces. Five are shown on
the plan.
The plans depict a bicycle rack.
(b) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings to the greatest extent
practicable.
This criterion is largely being met.
M
#SD-06-95
(c) Without restricting the permissible limits of the applicable zoning district, the
height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and
existing or adjoining buildings.
The highest point of the proposed building will be no higher than 25 feet, in compliance with
the South Burlington Land Development Regulations.
(d) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by
exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be
underground.
It has already been noted that new utility lines must be underground.
(e) The DRB shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and
architectural characteristics, landscaping, buffers, screens and visual
interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of different
architectural styles.
The Design Review Committee has previously reviewed the building elevations. However, it
has already been stated that the Design Review Committee should have additional
opportunity to review the revised plans.
(f) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain,
and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual
relationship to the proposed structures.
Again, as new elevations have been submitted which contain new design elements and
materials, the Design Review Committee should have additional opportunity to review the
revised plans.
Site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section
14.07 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations:
(a) The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to
abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce
curb cuts onto an arterial of collector street, to provide additional access for
emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation
in the area.
This criterion has already been commented on. The Right of Way shall be extended to the
eastern property line and an easement shall be granted to the City for the stream
restoration plans.
(b) Electric, telephone and other wire -served utility lines and service connections
shall be underground. Any utility installations remaining above ground shall
be located so as to have a harmonious relation to neighboring properties and
to the site.
It has already been indicated that new utility lines must be underground.
-7-
#SD-06-95
(c) All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance
with any recycling or other requirements, shall be accessible, secure and
properly screened with opaque fencing to ensure that trash and debris do not
escape the enclosure(s).
This criterion is being met.
(d) Landscaping and Screening Requirements.
Landscaping
Pursuant to Section 13.06(A) of the Land Development Regulations, landscaping and
screening shall be required for all uses subject to site plan and PUD review. Section
13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations requires parking facilities to be curbed and
landscaped with appropriate trees, shrubs, and other plants including ground covers.
Pursuant to Section 13.06(B)(4) of the Land Development Regulations, snow storage areas
must be shown on the plans and may not be within a stream buffer area. The applicant is
proposing snow storage areas on the northern parcel at this time. This is acceptable.
Landscaping budget requirements are to be determined pursuant to Section 13.06(G)(2) of
the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. The landscape plan and landscape
budget shall be prepared by a landscape architect or professional landscape designer.
Based on submitted building costs of $2,870,500, the minimum landscaping budget shall
be $36,205.
The location of this property presents unique challenges as it will serve as one of the main
gateways to the future South Burlington City Center. While landscaping is fundamental, the
site should also offer other design elements. Staff, on behalf of the Board, has been
working with the applicant towards a comprehensive landscape and hardscape plan. The
working concept is to provide funds for an urban art area, currently being labeled the `blue
zone' which extends along the new entrance road and a portion of Dorset Street. Funds for
this shall come in part from the landscaping budget and in part from the cost to construct a
sidewalk (at this time, the roadway details have not been finalized and so the sidewalk
should not yet be constructed). At this time, the Board and the applicant have agreed to the
following:
Minimum Required Landscaping Budget
$36,205
Cost of On -site Landscaping
-
$19,355
Remaining Funds for Urban Art Area
=
$16,850
Estimated Cost of Sidewalk
+
$18,900
Applicant's Commitment for Urban Art Design
Competition
=
$35,750
The proposed parking areas contain more than twenty (20) parking spaces, and therefore
should be landscaped in accordance with Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development
Regulations. The site plan shows some proposed landscaping on the interior of the
proposed parking area. It appears that the requirement that 10% of the interior of the lot be
9:2
#SD-06-95
landscaped islands is being met, but a note should be included on the plans detailing the
actual percentage of landscaped islands.
The City Arborist has reviewed the plans and issued comments in a memo dated
November 8, 2006. New landscaping plans have been submitted. However, given their late
date of submittal, the City Arborist has not yet had the opportunity to review them.
(e) Other
The actual delineation of the interior space for retail food and restaurant use need be
appropriately delineated so that traffic, parking, and other assessments can be best made.
The applicant has submitted one sketch of the interior which appears to delineate the uses.
However, the Board disagrees with the delineation. The kitchen area is not proposed as
part of the restaurant use; the Board finds that at least half the kitchen must be involved as
part of the restaurant for the parking calculation.
The maximum F.A.R. (Floor Area Ratio) allowed is 0.8. The applicant is proposing a F.A.R.
of 0.24.
DECISION ��^^
Motion by 6:7,AQu I M 13y , seconded by
to approve Preliminary Plat Application #SD-06-95 of Patrick Malone, subject to the
following conditions:
1) All previous approvals and stipulations shall remain in full effect, except as amended
herein.
2) This project shall be completed as shown on the plat submitted by the applicant, and
on file in the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning.
3) The plans shall be revised and submitted to staff prior to the end of the day (4:30
p.m.) on 1/18/07 as follows:
a) The plans shall be revised to reflect the comments (if any) of the South
Burlington Water Department.
b) The plans shall be revised to reflect the comments of the City Engineer as outlined
in his memorandums dated September 7, 2006 and November 6, 2006.
c) The plans shall be revised as needed to meet the recommendations of the traffic
consultant, VHB, as outlined in a memorandum dated December 13, 2006.
d) The survey plat shall be revised to show the 63' Right -of -Way to the City, for the
future city street, from Dorset Street to the eastern property line and show as one
(1) lot.
#S D-06-95
e) The plans shall include a note indicating the percentage of the parking lot which
consists of landscaped islands.
f) The plans shall be revised to show the reference to signage removed.
g) The plans shall be revised to reflect an accurate delineation of the retail and
restaurant spaces to include at least half of the kitchen area for the short-order
restaurant.
4) The applicant shall adhere to the comments of the South Burlington Water Department.
The South Burlington Water Department shall continue to review all future sets of plans.
5) The applicant shall adhere to the comments of the South Burlington City Engineer as
outlined in his memorandums dated September 7, 2006 and November 6, 2006. The
plans shall be revised accordingly as part of the final plat application.
6) The South Burlington Fire Department shall review all future sets of plans and provide
comments prior to final plat approval. The applicant shall adhere to the comments of
the Fire Chief.
7) The South Burlington City Arborist shall review the landscaping plans and provide
comments. The landscaping plan shall meet with his satisfaction prior to final plat
approval.
8) The Board grants a front setback waiver of fifteen (15) feet.
9) The applicant shall obtain preliminary wastewater allocation approval from the Director
of Planning and Zoning, Juli Beth Hinds, prior to final plat approval.
10) The proposed project shall adhere to standards for erosion control as set forth in
Section 16.03 and Section 16.04 of the South Burlington Land Development
Regulations.
11)The southern exit shall be limited exclusively to exit only with right turns. This exit
shall only be used by service vehicles. Vehicular access including employee access
and parking is not acceptable. This area shall be marked accordingly, including
signage which indicates exit only, one -directional travel, and no left turns.
12) The City of South Burlington shall be responsible for the cost of amending the site
plan approval and record drawing for the property at said time when the transformer
is moved to a new location.
13) The South Burlington Design Review Committee shall review the revised elevations
and provide a recommendation to the Development Review Board prior to final plat
approval.
14) Any changes to the materials, architecture, lighting, facades, or other design elements
shall require re -approval by the DRC and the DRB.
15) Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations,
any new utility lines shall be underground.
-10-
#S D-06-95
16) The property shall be limited to only a natural food market (with short order restaurant)
unless permitted by the Development Review Board under separate approval for other
uses, including grocery.
17) The Development Review Board approves $19,355 of on -site landscaping with the
$16,850 shortfall plus the $18,900 sidewalk cost, to be used for "urban art" in the "blue
zone". The "Blue Zone" development shall be completed prior to issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy.
18) The actual signage is not approved through this application. The applicant shall obtain
sign permits, from the Administrative Officer, for any alterations to the existing signs. All
references to signs shall be removed from all plans.
19) Prior to recording the final plat plans, the applicant shall submit legal documents,
approved by the City Attorney (e.g. irrevocable offer of dedication, warranty deeds
for public road, and stream buffer easement, etc.).
20) Prior to start of the improvements described in condition #19 above, the applicant
shall post a bond which covers the cost of said improvements.
21) In accordance with Section 15.14(E)(2) of the Land Development Regulations, within
14 days of completion of the required improvements, the developer shall submit to
the City Engineer "as -built" construction drawings certified by a licensed engineer.
22) The applicant shall submit a Certificate of Title, pursuant to Section 15.17 of the
Land Development Regulations, showing the ownership of all property and
easements to be dedicated or acquired by the City which shall be approved by the
City Attorney.
23) Any new exterior lighting shall consist of downcasting fixtures. Any change to
approved lights shall require approval of the Administrative Officer prior to
installation.
24) The Board approves a 42 space or 22.34% parking shortfall, for a total of 146 spaces
provided.
25) For the purpose of calculating road impact fees under the South Burlington Impact
Fee Ordinance, the Development Review Board estimates that the change in use
and addition will generate 342.6 additional vehicle trip ends during the P.M. peak
hour.
26) The applicant shall post a $36,205 landscaping bond. This bond shall remain in
effect for three (3) years to assure that the landscaping has taken root and has a
good chance of survival.
- 11 -
#SD-06-95
Mark Behr—�y�/nay/abst n/not present
Matthew Birmingham — enay/abstain/not present
John Dinklage — e /nay/abstain/not present
Roger Farley — ye nay/abstain/not present
Eric Knudsen — e ay/abstain/not present
Peter Plumeau — nay/abstain/not present
Gayle Quimby — ye /nay/abstain/not present
Motion carried by a vote of 3 - v
Signed this ! (U day of � 2007, by
John Dinklage, Ch
Please note: You have the right to appeal this decision to the Vermont Environmental
Court, pursuant to 24 VSA 4471 and VRCP 76 in writing, within 30 days of the date this
decision is issued. The fee is $225.00. If you fail to appeal this decision, your right to
challenge this decision at some future time may be lost because you waited too long.
You will be bound by the decision, pursuant to 24 VSA 4472 (d) (exclusivity of remedy;
finality).
-12-