Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-09-05 - Decision - 0232 Autumn Hill Road#SD-09-05 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING WEDGEWOOD DEVELOPMENT CORP. — 232 Autumn Hill Road PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION #SD-09-05 FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION Wedgewood Development Corp., hereafter referred to as the applicant, is requesting preliminary plat approval for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) six (6) two-family dwellings, and 2) three (3) single family lots, 232 Autumn Hill Road. The plans were reviewed on January 22, 2009 and continued at the request of the applicant through multiple succeeding hearings so that the applicant could work through outstanding issues. The Development Review Board held a public hearing on June 16, 2009. David Burke represented the applicant. 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 1. The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) six (6) two-family dwellings, and 2) three (3) single family lots, 232 Autumn Hill Road. 3. The owners of record of the subject property are Jeffrey and Elizabeth Goldberg. 3. The application was received on January 22, 2009 4. The subject property is located in the SEQ Zoning District- NRT and NRP Sub - districts. 5. The plans submitted consist of an eight (8) page set of plans, page one (1) entitled, "Goldberg Parcel Dorset Street South Burlington," prepared by O'Leary -Burke Civil Associates, PLC, dated 1/15/2009, last revised on 6/1/2009. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements SEQ-NRT Zoning District Requirement/Limitation Proposed Min. Lot Size 12,000 SF Units 1-12= Common land Lot 2= .99 acres Lot 3= .97 acres Max. Density 1.2 units/acre base density 1.2/acre Max. Building Coverage 15% 7.5% �l Max. Total Coverage 30% 12.3% Min. Front Setback 20 ft./50 ft. 25 ft.** PADevelopment Review Board\Findings_Decisions\2009\Wedgewood_SD0905_ffd.doc #SD-09-05 �l Min. Side Setback 10 ft. >10 ft. Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. >30 ft. zoning compliance The subject property is located in two sub -districts of the Southeast Quadrant Zoning District: the Neighborhood Residential Transition (NRT) and Natural Resource Protection (NRP) zones. SUBDIVISION CRITERIA Pursuant to Section 15.18 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, subdivisions shall comply with the following standards and conditions: 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 standards for this criterion are found below in a review of the regulations of the Southeast Quadrant. The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s). The proposed subdivision of this property is in conformance with the South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. Southeast Quadrant District This proposed subdivision is located in the southeast quadrant district. Therefore it is subject to the provisions of Section 9 of the SBLDR. 9.06 Dimensional and Design Requirements Applicable to All Sub -Districts The following standards shall apply to development and improvements within the entire Southeast Quadrant Zoning District. A. Height. (1) The maximum height of any occupied structure in the SEQ-NRP, SEQ-NRT, or SEQ-NR sub -district shall not exceed forty-five feet (45'); the waiver provisions of Section 3.07(E) shall not apply to occupied structures in these sub -districts. (2) The maximum height of any occupied structure in the SEQ-VR or SEQ-VC sub -district shall not exceed fifty feet (50'); the waiver provisions of Section 3.07(E) shall not apply to occupied structures in these sub -districts. Buildings are proposed as part of this application. The DRB shall ensure that this criterion is met when reviewing the elevations. The applicant has submitted building elevations but they do not indicate the proposed height of the buildings. 2 PADevelopment Review Boa rd\Findings_Decisions\2009\Wedgewood_SD0905_ffd.doc #SD-09-05 B. Open Space and Resource Protection. (1) Open space areas on the site shall be located in such a way as to maximize opportunities for creating usable, contiguous open spaces between adjoining parcels The layout of the proposed subdivision provides for open areas to be located between the western private drive and the eastern portion of the public road. Most of this land is a class II wetland and therefore will be not be usable. Given the size of the project, at 15 units, it is unclear if improved (i.e. - delineated fields, courts, or playgrounds) park areas would be appropriate. Staff and the Board previously recommended that the open area located between units labeled 1-6 and Dorset Street be set aside as common land for the PUD and that it be maintained as useable open space (i.e., mowed during the summer). The plans have been revised to denote this. The City Attorney should review the association documents for compliance prior to issuance of the first zoning permit for the property. (2) Building lots, streets and other structures shall be located in a manner consistent with the Regulating Plan for the applicable sub -district allowing carefully planned development at the average densities provided in this bylaw. The proposed development are largely consistent with the regulating plan. The street, block and lot pattern provides pedestrian -scaled development; sidewalks along the public road allow for direct walking and bicycling trips to the best of their ability, with consideration given to the wetlands which divide the site. (3) A plan for the proposed open spaces and/or natural areas and their ongoing management shall be established by the applicant. The proposed development essentially consists of three pods- the western duplexes, eastern duplexes, and the three single family lots. Open spaces and natural areas on the site exist within the significant wetlands and watercourse buffers on the site; a mature tree line exists along the northerly property boundary and between the eastern duplexes and single family house lots. (4) Sufficient grading and erosion controls shall be employed during construction and after construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties. In making this finding, the Development Review Board may rely on evidence that the project will be covered under the General Permit for Construction issued by the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. The proposed project shall 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 shall meet the standards set forth in Section 16.04 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. The applicant has submitted a grading and erosion control details for the construction of the road and buildings. The Stormwater Superintendent has reviewed these plans and provided comments in a memo dated June 5, 2009. 3 PADevelopment Review Board\Findings_Decisions\2009\Wedgewood_SD0905_ffd.doc #SD-09-05 (5) Sufficient suitable landscaping and fencing shall be provided to protect wetland, stream, or primary or natural community areas and buffers in a manner that is aesthetically compatible with the surrounding landscape. Chain link fencing other than for agricultural purposes shall be prohibited within PUDs; the use of split rail or other fencing made of natural materials is encouraged. The subject property contains identified Class II wetlands. While the buildings avoid contact with the wetlands, there is proposed grading and stormwater infrastructure within the buffers. The public road also crosses the wetland. Furthermore, the SBLDRs require that an applicant obtain a Conditional Use Determination prior to impact of any Class II wetland or buffers. Finally, the wetland buffers located very close to units labeled as 7 and 8 shall be ground - delineated so as to reduce impact by residents of those units. The applicant is proposing a line of planted cedars along the easterly edge of the storm channel to provide a visual and physical barrier between what is to be the grassed common areas and the more sensitive wetland buffer. The Board also suggests additional measures of protection, including limitations on fertilizers and mowing. C. Agriculture. The conservation of existing agricultural production values is encouraged through development planning that supports agricultural uses (including but not limited to development plans that create contiguous areas of agricultural use), provides buffer areas between existing agricultural operations and new development, roads, and infrastructure, or creates new opportunities for agricultural use (on any soil group) such as but not limited to community - supported agriculture. Provisions that enhance overall neighborhood and natural resource values rather than preservation of specific soil types are strongly encouraged. This criterion is not applicable to this application. D. Public Services and Facilities. In the absence of a specific finding by the Development Review Board that an alternative location and/or provision is approved for a specific development, the location of buildings, lots, streets and utilities shall conform with the location of planned public facilities as depicted on the Official Map, including but not limited to recreation paths, streets, park land, schools, and sewer and water facilities. (1) Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity shall be available to meet the needs of the project in conformance with applicable State and City requirements, as evidenced by a City water allocation, City wastewater allocation, and/or Vermont Water and Wastewater Permit from the Department of Environmental Conservation. The City of South Burlington Water Department has reviewed the plans and provided comments in a letter dated February 11, 2009. The applicant shall adhere to the comments. Where necessary, the plans shall be revised. C! PADevelopment Review Boa rd\Findings_Decisions\2009\Wedgewood_5D0905_ffd.doc #SD-09-05 The applicant has received preliminary wastewater allocation. The applicant should seek final wastewater allocation prior to issuance of the first zoning permit for the property. (2) Recreation paths, storm water facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility lines, and lighting shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. The applicant is proposing a 26 foot wide public road in a previously approved 60 foot right of way off of Dorset Street. The current standard is a 50 foot wide ROW for a local street. The applicant may decrease the ROW width to 50 feet if they choose. The public road is designed in a manner that would lend to a connection to the south. While the road only serves 6 units, a number generally allowed for a private drive, Section 15.12(D)(4) of the SBLDR also states that a public roadway shall be required if "the proposed roadway will or could provide a future extension to an adjoining property." It is very likely that this roadway will connect to the property to the south and therefore should be a public roadway. The plans depict a cul-de-sac at southeast property line. The applicant has been working with the Director of Public Works towards a road design. The Director of Public Works has issued a new set of comments dated June 11, 2009 in response to the latest set of plans. Plan revisions are still necessary. The City Engineer has reviewed the plans and provided comments in a memo dated June 11, 2009. Section 9.08B states that, "sufficient space for one lane of on -street parking shall be provided on all streets except for arterials outside of the SEQ-VC and SEQ-VR sub - districts." The proposed road is wide enough to accommodate on -road parking. The applicant has proposed a note indicating they will seek signage for no parking. The Development Review Board has no authority to limit parking on a public street, nor would the Board support this request. The road does not need to be delineated for parking, but shall remain 26 feet in width and shall be available to on -street parking. This road will be a city street and it is the City Council's decision as to how they shall permit parking. The applicant is proposing to access the duplex units in the western portion via a 20 foot wide dead end private drive off of the public road, and a 20 foot private drive to serve the two single family units. At the sketch plan review, the Board indicated that the applicant shall provide a sidewalk along this private road. The plans do not indicate a sidewalk on this road. The westernmost private drive is not designed in a manner to connect with the property to the south. The Board finds this acceptable given the presence of wetlands to the immediate south. A recreation path has already been completed along the Dorset Street perimeter of the property, in the road right of way. Staff has consulted with the Recreation Path Committee and recommends that the 20 foot wide easement which exists on private property be discontinued. 5 PADevelopment Review Boa rd\Findings_Decisions\2009\Wedgewood_SD0905_ffd.doc #SD-09-05 (3) Recreation paths, utilities, sidewalks, and lighting shall be designed in a manner that is consistent with City utility plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. The Board has already discussed the need for revisions based on the comments of the Director of Public Works, City Engineer, and Water Quality department. (4) The plan shall be reviewed by the Fire Chief or his designee to insure that adequate fire protection can be provided, with the standards for evaluation including, but not limited to, minimum distance between structures, street width, vehicular access from two directions where possible, looping of water lines, water flow and pressure, and number and location of hydrants. The City of South Burlington Fire Department has not yet been able to provide written comments on the plans and will review the plans at the next level. E. Circulation. The project shall incorporate access, circulation and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unsafe conditions on of adjacent roads and sufficient to create connectivity for pedestrians, bicycles, vehicles, school transportation, and emergency service vehicles between neighborhoods. In making this finding the Development Review Board may rely on the findings of a traffic study submitted by the applicant, and the findings of any technical review by City staff or consultants. The Board has reviewed the proposed curbcut to the property. Previous attempts have been made to use the existing Autumn Hill Road to the north as the access to the property; however, the applicant and staff have found this to be impossible, per a previous decision by the court. The proposed access will suffice. However, should the property to the north be developed at any time, it shall utilize the new public road, referred to herein as Black Dog Drive. (1) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. The Board has already discussed this issue at length. The property to the south, should it be developed, shall be served by a public road which will also serve units labeled 7-12 on the site plan. The property to the north, should it be developed, shall be served by a shared public road labeled as Black Dog Drive on the site plan. (2) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is consistent with City roadway plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. The proposed public road is proposed to be 26 feet wide. This meets the standards set forth in Table 9-4, Street Design Criteria for Local Streets in the SEQ-VR zoning district. The Board has already addressed its concerns with the proposed easternmost private drive. 6 PADevelopment Review Boa rd\Findings_Decisions\2009\Wedgewood_SD0905_ffd.doc #SD-09-05 Again, the Director of Public Works has reviewed the plans and provided comments in a memo dated June 11, 2009. The Planning Commission approved Black Dog Drive as an acceptable street name for the public street at its meeting on February 10, 2009. The private drive serving units 1-6 should have a name. The applicant should propose a name to be approved by the Planning Commission, who has stated they wish for the road details to be finalized before considering names. (3) The provisions of Section 15.12(D)(4) related to connections between adjacent streets and neighborhoods shall apply. 9.08 SEQ-NR &NRT Sub -District; Specific Standards The SEQ-NRT sub -district has additional dimensional and design requirements, as enumerated in this Section. A. Street, Block and Lot Pattern (1) Development blocks. Development block lengths should range between 300 and 400 linear feet; see Figure 9-2 for example. If longer block lengths are unavoidable blocks 400 feet or longer must include mid -block public sidewalk or recreation path connections. There is no development blocks proposed in this application. The Board finds this sufficient given the relatively small size of the subdivision. (2) Interconnection of Streets. Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 500 feet. Dead end streets (e.g. culs de sac) are discouraged. Dead end streets may not exceed 200 feet in length. Street stubs are required at the end of dead end streets to allow for future street connections and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections to open space and future housing on adjoining parcels per section 15.12(D)(4). The westernmost drive shall not be connected to future parcels. The easternmost drive will likely connect. To avoid confusion for residents in the proposed units, the Board recommends that covenants or deeds be drafted to indicate that the road will likely be continued. Generally, the regulations require that the roadways be constructed to the property line in cases where they may be continued across parcels. The applicant and staff have discussed this matter and agree that paving to the property line at this time will not be feasible as it requires construction vehicles to trespass on the abutting property. The applicant has offered to pave the road to within 10 feet of the property boundary but continue the ROW to the property boundary. This should be sufficient to allow the connection at such time as development occurs on the property to the south. (3) Street Connection to Adjoining Parcels. Street stubs are required to be built to the property line and connected to adjacent parcels per section 15.12(D)(4) of PADevelopment Review Boa rd\Findings_Decisions\2009\Wedgewood_SD0905_ffd.doc #SD-09-05 these Regulations. Posting signs with a notice of intent to construct future streets is strongly encouraged. The Board has already commented on this matter. (4) Lots shall maintain a minimum lot width to depth ratio of 1:2, with a ratio of 1:2.5 to 1:5 recommended. The single family lots meet this requirement; all other land is common. B. Street, Sidewalk & Parking Standards (1) Street dimensions and cross sections. Neighborhood streets (collector and local) in the NR sub -district are intended to be low -speed streets for local use that discourage through movement and are safe for pedestrians and bicyclists. Dimensions for public collector and local streets shall be as set forth in Tables 9-1 and 9-2, and Figures 9-4 and 9-5 of the SBLDR. (2) Sidewalks. Sidewalks must be a minimum of five feet (5') in width with an additional minimum five-foot planting strip (greenspace) separating the sidewalk from the street. Sidewalks are required on one side of the street, and must be connected in a pattern that promotes walkability throughout the development. The DRB may in its discretion require supplemental sidewalk segments to achieve this purpose. In the interest in adherence to this criterion, and in response to the direction of the DRB at the sketch plan review, the plans should be revised to include sidewalks along the private drive serving units 1-6. Furthermore, in accordance with the pedestrian -scaled development standards, and Figure 9-7 of the SBLDR, there shall be walkways connecting the residential units to the street or sidewalk. The plans should be revised to show these walkways. This is a specific requirement of the Southeast Quadrant with respect to design criteria and should be followed. (3) Street Trees; see Section 9.08(B)(3) Street trees are required along all streets in a planting strip a minimum of five feet wide. Street tress shall be large, deciduous shade trees with species satisfactory to the City Arborist. Street trees to be planted must have a minimum caliper size of 2.5 to 3 inches DBH, and shall be planted no greater than thirty feet (30') on center. The applicant has proposed a street tree planting plan. It shall be reviewed by the City Arborist. (4) On -street parking; see Section 9.08(B)(4). The Board has already commented on this issue. No on -street parking is proposed but is required. PADevelopment Review Boa rd\Findings_Decisions\2009\Wedgewood_SD0905_ffd.doc #SD-09-05 (5) Intersection design. Intersections shall be designed to reduce pedestrian crossing distances and to slow traffic; see Figure 9-6 and Section 9.08(B)(5). (6) Street and sidewalk lighting. Pedestrian -scaled light fixtures (e.g., 12' to 14') shall be provided sufficient to ensure pedestrian safety traveling to and from public spaces. Overall illumination levels should be consistent with the lower - intensity development patterns and character of the SEQ, with lower, smoother levels of illumination (rather than hot -spots) and trespass minimized to the lowest level consistent with public safety. Staff has asked the Director of Public Works to review the plans and comment on the proposed street lighting for the project. C. Residential Design (1) Building Orientation. Residential buildings must be oriented to the street. Primary entries for single family and multi -family buildings must face the street. Secondary building entries may open onto garages and/or parking areas. (Special design guidelines apply to arterial streets). It appears that this criterion is being met based on the buildings shown on the site plan. (2) Building Facades. Building facades are encouraged to employ a theme and variation approach. Buildings should include common elements to appear unified, but facades should be varied from one building to the next to avoid monotony. Front porches, stoops, and balconies that create semi -private space and are oriented to the street are encouraged. The applicant has not yet submitted building elevations. Only one elevation has been submitted so it appears that this criterion is not being met and that all six duplexes buildings (12 units) will be identical. The Board should review these and determine whether this criterion is being met. (3) Front Building Setbacks. In pedestrian districts, a close relationship between the building and the street is critical to the ambiance of the street environment. Buildings should be set back twenty-five feet (25') from the back of sidewalk. There is only one building (with two units) which fronts on a sidewalk. It is in compliance. The Board has already noted that a sidewalk should be included for units 1-6. These too shall be in compliance with this criterion. (4) Porches, stoops, and balconies may project up to eight feet (8') into the front setbacks. Porch, stoop and balcony areas within the front setback shall not be enclosed or weatherized with glazing or other solid materials. (5) Placement of Garages and Parking. See Section 9.08(C)(4) and Figure 9-7. The front building line of the garage must be set behind the front building line of the house by a minimum of eight feet. 0 PADevelopment Review Board\Findings_Decisions\2009\Wedgewood_SD0905_ffd.doc #SD-09-05 Based upon the building elevations are submitted, it does not appear that this criterion is being met. The applicant has stated that the plans will be similar to the existing development known as Water Tower Villas (the architectural drawings submitted indicate this name). The applicant has not submitted any elevations for the single family homes; they shall comply with the stipulations herein with respect to design elements. (6) Mix of Housing Types. A mix of housing types is encouraged within neighborhoods and developments. Housing types should be mixed within blocks, along the street and within neighborhoods rather than compartmentalized into sections of identical housing types. The applicant is proposing 2 single family dwellings (carriage homes) and 6 duplexes (12 units). This is sufficient to meet this criterion. This proposed subdivision is located in the southeast quadrant district. Therefore it is subject to the provisions of Section 15.18(B). The proposed subdivision is in compliance with all provisions of this section 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: 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 accomplishes a desirable transition from structure to site and from structure to structure. The Board has already commented on the need for sidewalks along the western private road for safe pedestrian movement. Parking on site is sufficient as all units have garages and ample driveway space. Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings to the greatest extent practicable. The proposed parking is to the front of the proposed buildings. Given the projects status as single family and duplex residential, this is in keeping with historical design. 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 heights of the proposed buildings are within the limitations of the district. 10 PADevelopment Review Boa rd\Findings_Decisions\2009\Wedgewood_SD0905_ffd.doc ffSD-09-05 Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines shall be underground. 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. In addition, the 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. The Board has addressed this as part of the specific SEQ design review. See notes above for concerns and necessary changes. Site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: 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. The Board has discussed this above in this report. 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. The Board has already noted that, pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines shall be underground. 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). No dumpsters are proposed. Landscaping and Screening Requirements The minimum landscaping budget shall be in accordance with Sections 13.06(F) and 13.06(G) and based on the value of the construction costs for the duplex units. The applicant should submit a landscaping plan and itemized budget prior to final plat approval. 11 PADevelopment Review Board\Findings_Decisions\2009\Wedgewood_SD0905_ffd.doc J #SD-09-05 DECISION Motion by L �%� seconded b ka � � Y to approve Preliminary Plat Application #SD-09-05 of Wedgewood Development Corporation, 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 plat plans shall be revised prior to final plat submittal as follows: a. The plans shall be revised to provide elevations with the height of the proposed buildings. b. The plans shall be revised in accordance with the comments of the City Stormwater Superintendent in his memo of 6/2/2009. c. The plans shall be revised to adhere to the comments of the South Burlington Water Department, per the memo dated 6/15/2009. d. The plans shall be revised to include an access pathway from the end of the private road to the Dorset Street recreation path. e. The plans shall be revised to depict walkways from all residences to the street or sidewalk, whichever is most adjacent. f. The plans shall be revised to include a landscaping plan for units 1-12. g. The plans shall be revised to adhere to the comments of the Director of Public Works in a memo dated 6/11/2009. h. The plans shall be revised to adhere to the comments of the City Engineer in a memo dated 6/11/2009. 4. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. 5. The open space area to the front of units labeled 1-6 shall be maintained as common land. The space shall be maintained in summer months for useable passive recreation. The City Attorney shall review the association documents to ensure that they clearly designate maintenance requirements to the association members, prior to issuance of a zoning permit for the first building on the site. 6. The plans show a scalloped line indicating those portions of the mature lines of trees that will remain. This line shall be maintained. No cutting or thinning of trees shall be permitted within this area. 12 I:\Development Review Boa rd\Findings_Decisions\2009\Wedgewood_SD0905_ffd.doc #SD-09-05 7. The proposed project shall 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 shall meet the standards set forth in Section 16.04 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. 8. The applicant shall obtain a Conditional Use Determination from the State of Vermont demonstration permission to impact a Class II wetland, which shall be submitted with the final plat submittal. 9. There shall be no use of pesticides or non -organic fertilizers within the wetlands or associated 50 foot buffers. This shall be reflected in the association documents which shall be reviewed by the City Attorney prior to issuance of a zoning permit for the first building on the property. 10. There shall be no mowing within 50 feet of the wetlands on the property. Brush - hogging shall be allowed no more than three (3) times per year. This shall be reflected in the association documents which shall be reviewed by the City Attorney prior to issuance of a zoning permit for the first building on the property. 11. The applicant shall receive final wastewater allocation from the Director of Planning and Zoning prior to issuance of the first zoning permit. 12. The applicant shall adhere to the comments of the Director of Public Works per the memo dated June 11, 2009. 13. The applicant shall adhere to the comments of the City Engineer per the memo dated June 11, 2009. 14. The applicant shall work with staff and the City's attorneys to dissolve the recreation path easement along Dorset Street. 15. The South Burlington Fire Chief shall review all future sets of plans and provide comments. 16. Prior to the final plat approval, the applicant shall coordinate with the city's E- 911 cogrdinator to determine street names and addresses. 17. The applicant shall provide covenants or association language that indicates that the public road is likely to connect to abutting properties to the north and south, prior to issuance of a zoning permit for the first building on the property. 18. The City Arborist shall review and approve of the street tree planting plan prior to final plat approval. 19. The applicant shall provide a budget for the street trees and the site landscaping with the final plat submittal. 20. The proposed buildings shall include common elements to appear unified, but facades should be varied from one building to the next to avoid monotony. 13 PADevelopment Review Board\Findings_Decisions\2009\Wedgewood_SD0905_ffd.doc #SD-09-05 21. The building line of the garage must be set behind the building line of the house by a minimum of eight feet. The applicant shall submit renderings showing this as part of the final plat application. 22. The parking of RVs on site shall be prohibited. Mark Behr -.Q/nay/abstain/not present Matthew Birmingham - yea/nay/abstain/of present John Dinklage - ea/nay/abstain no presen Roger Farley - /nay/abstain/not present Eric Knudsen - /nay/abstain/not present Gayle Quimby - e /nay/abstain/not present Motion carried by a vote of �-C> -0 Signed this IL day f J J rl 2009, by Mark Behr, Vice Chairman Please note: You have the right to appeal this decision to the Vermont Environmental Court, pursuant to 24 VSA 4471 and VRECP 5 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). 14 PADevelopment Review Board\Findings_Decisions\2009\Wedgewood_SD0905_ffd.doc