The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutBATCH - Supplemental - 2000 Dorset Streeta f t •,. ;qry ' .. .. ✓ < Xis i rj4/ ' !A k ♦ �4 S` 11J .-0 • r--4 L.n 1.'J''� w r•I:J •--i r f�TI t_J CI1 + Lb L_ c > IJ Ln -r;J CIJ r L- • "--+ Ii-- CL �� IJ 1 rD C7 (n 1:7-- p 17J L.J CaJ A- -I-' -- CD I- Ln - + -i rU L-J Ili Lb 1_1 IJ l + OJ CD CU Ln Lt-~ CD CL. Ili • - LC1 C7 - ,--I '171 i t ❑J CJ = LII U-) I C_ - C!1 C7 J ! LI l C) QJ (Z- to 4a ra Ln mil_ CIJ r_) OJ Ili CJ -C r1J :z) 7-j rL r.t`l C7 LF) C21 r-0 Ln LIJ r-O -a - `j I A L]J _.0 Ili CIJ LJ O �I C--.`l J J; CU Cl- u-, I-- O QJ t.n -f-L C" C _l L -) JZ L,J r-7 ( Ln -41� QJ L! !]J CIJ # > FLI 4--_ -C7 rl_ 4^ U ! _--I F.._. �..._ _t_? C- n1 r--1 Ln .x V ale A 104 iu. V.,C-f_,b look"ing views of the proposed 333 unit development. Gould this proposal meet the goals of the 'Comprehensive Plan to "enhance the aesthetic character and open space" of the Southeast OuadranO No Text No Text AW No Text No Text No Text s � . ' 1—__ Views of the site of the proposed 133 unit development from i705, t720 and 1790 Dorset Street. .ACT 250 NOTICE APPLICATION #4C0948-7 AND HEARING 10 V.S.A. §§ 6001 - 6093 On August 18, 2015, Dorset East Associates, LLC, 44 Park Street, Essex Junction, VT 05452 filed application #4C0948-7 for a Project described as a request to amend Condition #14 of LUP #4C0948-EB and partial findings under Criteria 9(B) and 9(L). The Project is located at 2000 Dorset Street, in South Burlington, VT. This Project will be evaluated by the District #4 Environmental Commission in accordance with the 10 environmental criteria of 10 V.S.A., § 6086(a). A public hearing is scheduled for September 23, 2015 at 9 AM the Essex Junction District Office of the Agency of Natural Resources, 111 West Street, Essex Junction, Vermont. A site visit will be held before the hearing at 8 AM at the site. Directions to the site: Dorset Street south; Opposite Midland Ave. is a graveled driveway, turn left and park at end. The following persons or organizations may participate in the hearing for this project: 1. Statutory parties: The municipality, the municipal planning commission, the regional planning commission, any adjacent municipality, municipal planning commission or regional planning commission if the project lands are located on a town boundary, and affected state agencies are entitled to party status. 2. Adjoining property owners and others: May participate as parties to the extent they have a particularized interest that may be affected by the proposed project under the ten criteria. 3. Non-party participants: The district commission, on its own motion or by petition, may allow others to participate in the hearing without being accorded party status. If you plan on participating in the hearing on behalf of a group or organization, please bring: 1) a written description of the organization, its purposes, and the nature of its membership (T.10, § 6085(c)(2)(B)); 2) documentation that prior to the date of the hearing, you were duly authorized to speak for the organization; and 3) that the organization has articulated a position with respect to the Project's impacts under specific Act 250 Criteria. If you wish further information regarding participation in this hearing, please contact the district coordinator at the address below before the date of the first hearing or prehearing. If you have a disability for which you are going to need accommodation, please notify this office at least seven days prior to the above hearing date. If you feel that any of the District Commission members listed on the attached Certificate of Service under "For Your Information" may have a conflict of interest, or if there is any other reason a member should be disqualified from sitting on this case, please contact the district coordinator as soon as possible, no later than prior to the response date listed above. Copies of the application and plans for this project are available for inspection by members of the public during regular working hours at the South Burlington Town Offices, the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission Office, and the District #4 Environmental Office. The application can also be viewed at the Natural Resources Board web site (www.nrb.state.vt.us/lup) by clicking on "Act 250 Database" and entering the project number above. Dated at Essex Junction, Vermont this 21" day of August, 2015. BY: /s/ Peter E. Keibel Peter E. Keibel District #4 Coordinator Natural Resources Board 111 West Street Essex Jct., VT 05452 802-879-5658 Peter. Keibel(aD-vermont.gov w:\nrb\dist4\projects\4c0751-4c1000\4c0948\4c0948-7\4c0948-7 notice.docx CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify on this 21 st day of August, 2015, a copy of the foregoing ACT 250 NOTICE APPLICATION #4C0948-7 AND HEARING was sent by U.S. mail, postage prepaid to the following individuals without email addresses and by email to the individuals with email addresses listed. Note: any recipient may change its preferred method of receiving notices and other documents by contacting the District Office staff at the mailing address or email below. If you have elected to receive notices and other documents by email, it is your responsibility to notify our office of any email address changes. All email replies should be sent to nrb-act250essex(dstate.vt.us Please note you can now fill out and submit the Act 250 survey online at: http.//Permits.vermont.gov/act250-survey instead of printing and mailing the attached pdf version. Dorset East Associates, LLC c/o Peter Kahn 44 Park Street Essex Jct., VT 05452 Peterskahn(a0ve.com Daniel P. O'Rourke, Esq. Bergeron Paradis Fitzpatrick 34 Pearl Street Essex Jct., VT 05452 dorourke@bpflegal.com O'Leary -Burke Civil Associates 1 Corporate Drive, Suite 1 Essex Jct., VT 05452 obca(a)olearyburke.com Donna Kinville, City Clerk Chair, City Council/City Planning Commission City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 dkinville .sburl.com Charlie Baker, Executive Director Regina Mahony, Senior Planner Chittenden County Reg Plann Commission 110 West Canal Street, Suite 202 Winooski, VT 05404 cbakerCoDccrpcvt. orq rmahony(o)ccrpcvt.org Elizabeth Lord, Land Use Attorney Jennifer Mojo, Regulatory Planner Agency of Natural Resources National Life Drive, Davis 2 Montpelier, VT 056 am act250(a)vermont.aov jennifer.mojo(cbvermont.gov Barry Murphy Vt. Dept. of Public Service 112 State Street, Drawer 20 Montpelier, VT 05620-2601 barry.murphy(a vermont.gov Craig Keller/John Gruchacz/Jeff Ramsey VTrans Policy Plann. & Research Bureau One National Life Drive, Drawer 33 Montpelier, VT 05633 craiq. keller@vermont.gov; ieff.ramsey(a-)vermont.gov john.gruchacz(a)vermont.gov Lauren Masseria, Act 250 Devel Coord Vt. Agency of Agri., Food & Markets 116 State Street, Drawer 20 Montpelier, VT 05620-2901 AGR.ACT250(c)vermont.gov Division for Historic Preservation National Life Building, Drawer 20 Montpelier, VT 0562 scott.dillon .vermont.gov james.dugpan(d)vermont.gov NRCS, District Conservationist USDA Soils Conservation Service 1193 S. Brownell Road, Suite 35 Williston, VT 05495-7416 iohn.thurgood(d)vt.usda.gov White River NRCD Office 617 Comstock Road, Suite 1 Berlin, VT 05602 whiterivernrcd(o)gmail.com County Forester/ANR 111 West Street Essex Junction, VT 05452 Keith.thompson(d)vermont.gov John Gobeille/ANR Dept of Fish & Wildlife 111 West Street Essex Jct., VT 05452 John. Gobeille(a)vermont.gov patty. malenfant(ddvermont.gov Dated at Essex Junction, Vermont, this 215' day of August, 2015. /s/ Barbara J. Cady 879-5614 Barbara. cad y(c�vermont.gov Seven Days/Classified Ad Section c/o Ashley Brunelle 255 South Champlain St., PO Box 1164 Burlington, VT 05402 classifieds(a)sevendaysvt.com Green Mountain Power Corporation 163 Acorn Lane Colchester, VT 05446 allenCo)greenmountainpower.com Brian Gray Vermont Gas Systems PO Box 467 Burlington, VT 05402 bgray(a)vermontgas.com Project Intake Coordinator Efficiency Vermont 128 Lakeside Ave, Suite 401 Burlington, VT 05401 pics(o)veic.org Michael Barsotti, Water Quality Director Champlain Water District 403 Queen City Park Road South Burlington, VT 05403 mikeb cwd-h20.org FOR YOUR INFORMATION District #4 Environmental Commission Thomas A. Little, Chair Parker Riehle/James McNamara 111 West Street Essex Junction, VT 05452 ADJOINING LANDOWNERS On File at District Commission Office W:\NRB\DiST4\PROJECTS\4C0751-4C1000\4Co948\4C0948-7\4C0948-7 cos notice.docx GRAVEL AND SHEA Attorneys at Law Stewart H. McConaughy Clarke A. Gravel (1916-2002) " Robert B. Hemley William G. Post, Jr. Charles T. Shea 76 St. Paul Street Craig Weatherly John R. Ponsetto Of Counsel Post Office Box 369 Peter S. Erly Norman Williams Jennifer A. Giaimo° Burlington, Vermont 05402-0369 Robert F. O'Neill Margaret L. Montgomery Timothy M. Eustace Stephen P. Magowan Special Couneel Telephone 802.658.0220 Heather Briggs Heather Rider Hammond Facsimile 802.658.1456 Robert H. Rushford Andrew D. Manitsky Megan J. Shafritz Ross A. Feldmann www.gravelshea.com Michelle N. Farkas Jared M. Margolis William A. Mason, IV *Admitted only in Texas Matthew B. Byrne and New York. Writer'sE-Mail; September 4, 2007 rrushford@gravelshea.com Peter Keibel, District #4 Act 250 Coordinator 111 West Street Essex Junction, VT 05452 Re: JD South Burlington, LLC/Dorset East Associates, LLC Land Use Permit Application No. 4C0948- 0 Dear Peter: As a follow-up to our correspondence, enclosed please find an original and four copies of the Short Form Application, Check for the Application Fee, Memorandum in Support of Application for Permit Amendment (under Rule 34(E)) and supporting Exhibits. We have forwarded copies of these materials to the City of South Burlington, the South Burlington Planning Commission, the Regional Planning Commission and the Town of Shelburne and the Town of Shelburne Planning Commission. We have also included a list of adjoining property owners. Please let me know if you need any additional information to process this application. Thank you for your assistance. Very truly yours, GRAVEL AND SHEA Robert H. Rushford RHR:jar Enclosures cc: Mr. Gerald C. Milot (w/enclosures) Mr. Brad Dousevicz (w/enclosures) ACT 250 APPLICATION SHORT FORM This package includes: Application Cover Sheets, Schedule A (Fees), Short Form Schedule B (the 10 Criteria), Schedule E (Adjoiner Info.), Schedule F (Certification of Service), School Impact Questionnaire, and Municipal Impact Questionnaire. For detailed instructions, see the accompanying Guide to Applying for an Act 250 Permit-- www.nrb.state.vt.us/lup/publications.htm. For further information, contact the District Coordinator at the appropriate District Office below. The Permit Specialist in each office can also advise applicants about permits from the Agency of Natural Resources and other state agencies which may need to be obtained. Act 250 District Offices Rutland and Bennington Counties Washington and Lamoille Counties District Commissions #1 & 8 (and the towns of Williamstown, 440 Asa Bloomer State Washington, and Orange) Office Building District Commission #5 Rutland, VT 05701 5 Perry Street, Suite 60 Tel. 786-5920 Barre, VT 05641-4267 Tel. 476-0185 Caledonia. Orleans, and Essex Counties District Commission #7 1229 Portland Street, Suite 201 St. Johnsbury, VT 05819 Tel. 751-0120 Addison. Chittenden. Franklin and Grand Isle Counties District Commissions #4, 6 & 9 111 West Street Essex Jct., VT 05452 Tel. 879-5614 Windham and Windsor Cou Orange County (except towns of Williamstown, Washington, and Orange) District Commissions #2 & 3 100 Mineral Street, Suite 305 Springfield, VT 05156 Tel. 885-8855 Application Checklist -- Have you included: ❑ Signed Application Cover sheets ❑ Schedule F - Certification of Service ❑ Location Map ❑ Supporting Letters and Documents ❑ Site Plan ❑ Building Elevations (if appropriate) ❑ Schedule A - fee information ❑ Act 250 Fee (payable to "State of ❑ Schedule B - 10 Criteria Vermont") ❑ Schedule E - Adioiner Information0 These forms can be purchased on disk (Microsoft Word format) by calling the Natural Resources Board Office (828- 5441). They are also available at our web site: WWW.nrb.state.vt.us/lup/publications.htm Last Revised: August 24, 2007 Please help us provide you and the public with better service through electronic access — and protect the environment too! The Natural Resources Board is working to improve on-line access to Act 250 files for applicants, state agency staff, and the general public. As part of this effort we will be expanding the existing Act 250 database (available at www.anr.state.vt.us/site/cfm/act250/search.cfm into a comprehensive, searchable database of all current and past Act 250 applications, as well as an internet-based map which will allow users to geographically locate lands subject to Act 250 permits. We are confident that having this information readily available on-line will not only enable us to provide you with better service, but also save trees, vehicle miles traveled, and postage costs. You can help us in this effort by providing us with a copy of your application in electronic format. We understand that some application materials may not be available as electronic files (letters received from another state agency, for instance), but the more information you can provide electronically, the easier it will be for us to put this information into our expanded on-line database. Generally, we would prefer to receive separate documents (letters, site plans, reports, etc.) in separate electronic files. The application cover sheets, Schedule B, and other supporting schedules can be submitted as one file. Acceptable electronic formats, in order of preference, include Adobe PDF, Microsoft Word, and WordPerfect. Photographs may be submitted in JPEG format. Acceptable electronic media, in order of preference, include compact disc (CD) and digital video disc (DVD). Depending on the size of your electronic files, we may also be able to accept your electronic submission by email. Please check with our district office staff before sending any files by email. If you have questions about the best way to submit electronic files, please contact our district office staff (see contact information on the cover page). Please note that electronic submission is not a requirement — it is a voluntary effort aimed at making the permit process more efficient. Thank you for helping us to provide better service — and protect the environment. Please note that if you choose to submit an electronic copy of the application, you are still required to provide the correct number of paper copies under our application guidelines. This may change in the future as our capability to process electronic applications improves. Vermont Natural Resources Board 8/24/07 Vermont Agency of Natural Resources Regional Offices Regional Engineers Wastewater Management Div. District Wildlife Biologists District Fisheries Biologist Dept. of Fish & Wildlife Dept. of Fish & Wildlife Districts #1, 8 & 9 (Bennington, Rutland, Addison Cty.) District #1 District #1 450 Asa Bloomer State (Windham and Windham Cty.) 100 Mineral Street, Suite 305 Office Building 100 Mineral Street, Suite 305 Springfield, VT 05156 Rutland, VT 05701 Springfield, VT 05156 Tel. 885-8855 Tel. 786-5900 Tel. 885 8855 District #2 Districts #2 & 3 District #2 317 Sanitorium Road, West Wing (Windham and Windsor Cty.) (Bennington and Rutland Cty.) Pittsford, VT 05763 100 Mineral Street, Suite 305 217 Sanitorium Road, West Wing Tel. 483-2172 Springfield, VT 05156 Pittsford, VT 05763 Tel. 885-8855 Tel. 483-2172 District #3 3696 Roxbury Road Districts #4 & 6 District #3 Roxbury, VT 05669 (Chittenden, Franklin, Grand Isle Cty.) (Orange, Lamoille, Washington Cty.) Tel. 485-7566 111 West Street 5 Perry St., Suite 40 Essex Jct., VT 05452 Barre, VT 05641 District #4 Tel. 879-5656 Tel. 476-0199 111 West Street Essex Jct., VT 05452 Districts #3A and 5 District #4 Tel. 878-1564 (Orange, Lamoille, Washington Cty.) (Addison, Chittenden, Franklin, Grand 5 Perry St., Suite 80 Isle Cty.) District #5 Barre, VT 05641 111 West Street 1229 Portland Street, Suite 201 Tel. 476-0190 Essex Jct., VT 05452 St. Johnsbury, VT Tel. 878-1564 05819 District #7 Tel. 751-0100 (Caledonia, Essex, Orleans Cty.) District #5 1229 Portland Street, Suite 201 (Orleans, Essex, Caledonia St. Johnsbury, VT 05819 Portland Street, Suite 20011 Tel. 751-0130 St. . Johnsbury, VT 05819 Tel. 751-0100 Countv Foresters. Dept. of Forests. Parks, and Recreation Franklin/Grand Isle Counties Rutland County Addison County 278 S. Main St. 317 Sanitorium Road 68 Catamount Park, Suite C St. Albans, VT 05478-1866 West Wing Middlebury, VT 05753 Tel. 524-6501 Pittsford, VT 05763 Tel. 388-4969 Tel. 483-2730 Lamoille County Bennington County 29 Sunset Dr., Suite 1 Washington County 478 Shaftsbury State Park Road Morrisville, VT 05661-8331 5 Perry St., Suite 20 Shaftsbury, VT 05262 Tel. 888-5733 Barre, VT 05641 Tel. 375-1217 Tel. 476-0172 Orange County Caledonia/Essex Counties 5 Perry St., Suite 20 Windham County 1229 Portland Street Barre, VT 05641 157 Old Gilford Rd. Suite 201 Tel. 476-0173 Brattleboro, VT 05301 St. Johnsbury, VT Tel. 257-7967 05819-2099 Orleans County Tel. 751-0110 338 Highland Ave. Windsor County Newport, VT 05855 212 Holiday Dr., Suite 5 Chittenden County Tel. 334-7325 White River Jct., VT 05001 111 West Street Tel. 296-7630 Essex Jet., VT 05452 Tel. 879-5694 ACT 250 LAND USE PERMIT-- APPLICATION COVER SHEETS NAMES: Applicant(s) Name JD South Burlington, LLC Address_35 Cherry Street, Burlington, VT 05401 email: bradydc@comcast.net Phone 660-1914 Legal form: [ ] individual [ ] partnership (attach list of partners) [ ] municipal gov't [ ] state gov't [X] corporation: date formed 2/8/07 place formed South Burlington, Vermont date registered in Vt. 2/8/07 Legal interest in land. [ ] ownership in fee simple [ ] lease agreement [X] contract to purchase [ ] other: 2. Landowner(s) Name: Dorset East Associates LLC Address_76 St. Paul Street, Burlington, VT 05401 email: brett@milotrealestate.com Phone 658-2000 3. Names of others with significant interest(s) in the property: Name Address Phone Description of Interest (easement, right-of-way, etc.): 4. Contact person Robert H. Rushford, Esg. Address 76 St. Paul Street, Burlington, VT 05402 email: rrushford@ gravelshea.com Phone 658-0220 FAX 658-1456 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 5. Type: [ ] new project; [ ] expansion of project previously exempt from Act 250; [X] amendment of existing Act 250 permit or permit condition (permit # 4CO948 ) PLEASE NOTE: If you are applying to amend a permit condition which was included to resolve an issue critical to the district commission's or the board's issuance of a prior permit, please contact the District Coordinator to determine whether you need to address the "Stowe Club Highlands" analysis. Also see Act 250 Rule 34(E) (www.nrb.state.vt.us/lup/ruies.htm) 6. General description of project (include number and size of buildings; use of buildings; number of lots; length of roads; etc.): The construction of 81 multi -family units, consisting of a mix of duplex and single family townhouses, with a shared road and open space areas, all as depicted on a plan entitled: "Dorset East Associates, LLC, Open Space Plan, South Burlington, VT," prepared by Llewellyn -Howley, Inc., dated July 23, 2007, and attached to the accompanying Memorandum as Exhibit 9 (the "Open Space Plan") and a plan entitled; "Sketch Plan — Third Mtg., Edgewood, Dorset Street, South Burlington, VT," attached to the accompanying Memorandum as Exhibit 8 (the "Sketch Plan"). The Project will be constructed on 20.25 +/- acres of the 45.48 acre +/- parcel depicted as "Parcel G" on a plat entitled: "Dorset Farms, Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont, Common Area G Plat," prepared by Lamoureux, Stone & O'Leary Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated October 7, 1997 and recorded in Map Volume 404 at Page 68 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 7. Construction duration NIA J Duration of Permit Request (if project involves earth extraction or solid waste disposal) N/A 8. Total acres owned or controlled by applicant and landowner at project site 45.48 +/- , Acres in additional easements or rights -of -way Acres committed to this project 20.25+/- 9. Location'. Town South Burlington Road Dorset Street nearby landmark Dorset Farms State Plane Coordinates (NAD83): (preferable) or Latitude Longitude Coordinates Note., Choose a location as close as possible to the area where construction is to occur, 10. Deed (s):G rantee's name as recorded: Dorset East Associates, LLC Book(s) 671 Page(s) 747 Date(s) June 11, 2004 Town South Burlington . County Chittenden 11. Check below if you are concurrently applying for any of the following permits from the Agency of Natural Resources: [ ] Potable Water Supply and Wastewater System Permit; [ I Stormwater Discharge Permit; [ ] Construction General Permit; [ ] Public Water System Permit to Construct; f ] Conditional Use Determination; [ I Air Pollution Control Permit, f I other 12. Have you received local zoning and/or subdivision approval? [X] yes (Sketch Plan Approval) pending [ ]none needed 13. Attach the following unless waived by the District Coordinator: location map (U.S.G.S, map preferred) [ I Municipal Impact Questionnaire site plan or plot plan (see instructions) f I School Impact Questionnaire building elevation drawings []Supporting documents as recommended in (excluding single family homes) Schedule B or as needed schedule A - fee information Act 250 fee (payable to "State of Vermont") schedule B - Act 250 information A copy of any Act 250 master permits applicable I schedule E - adjoiner information to this project I schedule F - certification of service SIGNATURES: 14. 1 hereby swear that the inf accurate to the best of my Signature of applicant(s) Please clearly print name(s) provided above or attached to this application is true and Date 15. 1 hereby certify that I understand that I must not commence construction, demolition, remodeling or commercial use of the property as described in Environmental Board Rule 2(C) until I have received an Act 250 Land Use Permit as required by 10 V.S.A. Sec. 6083(a). Signature of applicant(s) Date 16. 1 hereby authorize the processing of this application for the above project on land(s) that I own, 09/01/2007 09:20 8044642232 WIEDERHORN PAGE 02 11. Check below if you are concurrently applying for any of the following permits from the Agency of Natural Resources: [ ] Potable Water Supply and Wastewater System Permit; [ ] Stormwater Discharge Permit; [ ] Construction General Permit; [ ] Public Water System Permit to Construct; (] Conditional Use Determination; [ ] Air Pollution Control Permit; [ ] other 12. Have you received local zoning and/or approval? [X] yes ndivision eeded (Sketch Plan Approval) [ ] pending [ ] none 13. Attach the following unless waived by the District Coordinator: [ ] location map (U.S.G.S. map preferred) (] Municipal Impact Questionnaire [ J site plan or plot plan (see instructions) [ ] School Impact Questionnaire [ ] Supporting documents as [ ] building elevation drawings recommended in (excluding single family homes) Schedule B or as needed "State [ ] schedule A-- fee information [ ] Act 250 fee (payable to of Vermont") [ ] schedule B - Act 250 information [ j A copy of any Act 250 master permits applicable [ ] schedule E - adjoiner information to this project [ ] schedule F - certification of service SIGNATURES. 14. 1 hereby swear that the information provided above or attached to this application is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Signature of applicants) Date Please clearly print name(s) 15. 1 hereby certify that I understand that I must not commence construction, demolition, remodeling or commercial use of the property as described in Environmental Board Rule 2(C) until I have received an Act 250 Land Use Permit as required by 10 V.S.A. Sec. 6083(a). Signature of applicant(s) Date 16. 1 hereby authorize the processing of this application for the above project on land(s) that I own, control, or have significant property interest in. (attach letter if easier) Signature of landowner(s) Dafie control, or have significant property interest in. (attach letter if easier) Signature of landowner(s) Please clearly print name(s) Date DISTRIBUTION OF APPLICATION PACKAGE: 17. SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL AND FOUR COPIES TO THE DISTRICT COORDINATOR. 18. SUBMIT ONE COPY EACH TO THE MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL PLANNING COMMISSION, REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION, AND TO ANY ADJOINING MUNICIPALITIES AND PLANNING COMMISSIONS IF THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON A TOWN LINE. SCHEDULE A Fee Information Submit with the application a check payable to the "State of Vermont". Municipal and state agency projects are exempt from fees but should still report construction costs on this form. Not -for -profit organizations are not exempt. Calculate the fee using the following table: 1) Number of lots to be created x $100.00 = 2) Gravel Pits: $.10/cubic yard of the estimated annual extraction rate = 3) Construction costs (include only common facilities for subdivisions): 4) Site preparation .. ....... . Buildings:* a) sq. ft. b) $ per sq. ft. Total (a x b) ......... Roads and parking ........ Utilities ................. Off -site improvements ...... Landscaping ............. Other Total costs: $ x 0.00475 = $ Total Fee (Sections 1 + 2 + 3) _ $ 100.00 ** *** * For residential subdivisions, include the construction cost of all single and multi -family dwellings proposed to be constructed by the applicant or a related entity. (For more information, see definition of "person" at 10 V.S.A. § 6001(14) (www.nrb.state.vt.us/Iup/statute.htm).) ** Minimum fee of $150 for new applications Minimum fee of $50 for amendment applications Treat expansions of approved projects as new applications. ***Per correspondence with Peter Keibel dated August 27, 2007 I attest by my signature that the above is true to the best of my knowledge: (signature of applicant or agent) SCHEDULE E Adjoiner Information Submit with the application a list of all adjoining landowners with mailing addresses. An "adjoiner" is a person or organization which owns or controls land or easements on lands which physically abut the tract or tracts of land on which your project is located. Be certain to include landowners on the opposite sides of highways, railways, and rivers. Also include homeowner associations, utility companies, and others with significant legal interest in the project land. It is very helpful if you indicate the location of each adjoiner on your site plan. If you do not provide a list which is thorough and up-to-date, your application could be delayed because of improper notice distribution! Please note: For lists which include more than 20 adjoining landowners, our administrative staff appreciates receiving the list on mailing labels to facilitate the notification process. Thank you. NAME MAILING ADDRESS WITH ZIP CODE Blair Alexander J. and Mary S. 1725 Dorset Street, S. Burlington, VT 05403 Cannizarro Paul J. 1935 Dorset Street, S. Burlington, VT 05403 Hill Cassius R. 1945 Dorset Street, S. Burlington, VT 05403 Larkin. John P. 1955 Dorset Street, S. Burlington, VT 05403 Hall Christopher S. and Anne F. 1965 Dorset Street S. Burlington, VT 05403 Dorset Farms Homeowners Association, Inc. 76 St. Paul Street, Burlington, VT 05401 Bolbuc Vincent L. 252 Autumn Hill Road, S. Burlington, VT 05403 Leduc Maurice 495 Cheesefactory Road, S. Burlington, VT 05403 School House Learning Center, Inc. 8 Catkin Drive, S. Burlington, VT 05403 O'Brien George 899 Barstow Rd (m) 889 Barstow Rd, Shelburne, VT 05482 Helen B. O'Brien Family Trust c/o Maureen O'Brien 718 Barstow Rd, Shelburne, VT_ Peters Gregory and Diane 1018 Cheesefactory Rd, Shelburne, VT 05482 Attach additional sheets if necessary. SCHEDULE F Certification of Service and Notice of Application You are required by 10 V.S.A. § 6084 to send notice and a copy of your application to the municipality, the municipal and regional planning commission in which the land is located and any adjacent Vermont municipality, municipal or regional planning commission if the land is located on a boundary on or before the date of filing your application with the district commission. You are also required to send notice and a copy of your application to the solid waste management district in which the land is located, if the development or subdivision constitutes a facility pursuant to subdivision 6602(10) of Title 10 V.S.A. Chapter 151. You must also post a copy of the notice in the town clerk's office of the town or towns where the land is located. A notice form is attached for your convenience. In order to verify that the statutory parties to the application have received copies of the application and thus avoid delay caused by improper distribution of the application, have a representative of the parties sign this form when they receive the application. You may, in the alternative, send copies of the notice and application by Certified U.S. Mail, UPS/Federal Express, or courier and list the names below. Applicant(s) Name JD South Burlington LLC I, the undersigned, have received a copy of an Act 250 application for the above applicant(s). for the selectmen, aldermen, or trustees date for the municipal planning commission date for the regional planning commission date for an adjacent municipality, if any* date for an adjacent planning commission, if any* date for an adjacent regional planning commission, date if any* for regional solid waste management district, date if applicable I hereby certify that I have forwarded a complete copy of this application to each of the parties entitled to notice pursuant to 10 V.S.A. Section 6084 and that I have posted a copy of the notice of application in the town clerk's office(s). cant(s)/Agent Signature 10aka XJ 4 k to-1- Date Attach additional sheets if more than one town is adjacent to the project lands. Schedule F - Notice Note To Applicants: This notice must be included with all copies of the application. You must also post, or cause to be posted, a copy of this notice in the town clerk's office of the town or towns wherein the land proposed for subdivision or development lies. Notice of Act 250 Application By application dated September 4, 2007, (name and address of applicant) JD South Burlington, LLC 35 Cherry Street, Burlington, VT 05401 filed an application pursuant to 10 V.S.A. § 6001 et seq. ("Act 250") to: (description of project including road location and Town) Construct 81 multi -family units, consisting of a mix of duplex and single family townhouses, with a shared road and open space areas, off Dorset Street in South Burlington, VT, to be constructed on 20.25 +/- acres of the 45.48 acre +/- parcel depicted as "Parcel G" on a plat entitled: "Dorset Farms, Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont, Common Area G Plat," prepared by Lamoureux, Stone & O'Leary Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated October 7, 1997 and recorded in Map Volume 404 at Page 68 of the City of South Burlington Land Records A copy of this application may be reviewed at the Town Offices, Town of _South Burlington___, Vermont (contact the Town Clerk or Administrator). Signature Date In the event you wish to receive further notice concerning this application, please contact the district office for your area: Environmental Comm. Environmental Comm. Environmental Comm. Districts #1 and 8 Districts #4, 6 and 9 District #7 440 Asa Bloomer State 111 West St. 1229 Portland St. Office Building Essex Jct., VT 05452 Suite 201 4th Floor 88 Merchants Row (Tel. 879-5614) St. Johnsbury, VT 05819 Rutland, VT 05701 (Tel. 751-0120) (Tel. 786-5920) Environmental Comm. Environmental Comm. Districts #2 and 3 District #5 100 Mineral Street 5 Perry Street, Suite 60 Suite #305 Barre, VT 05641 Springfield, VT 05156 (Tel. 476-0185) (Tel. 885-8855) SCHEDULE G Act 250 Participants Please list below the name and town of residence for all persons not listed on the Cover Sheet who are affiliated with the applicant(s) for the project or who may be involved in presenting the applicant's case as an agent or representative. This information will help District Commissioners to determine if they have potential conflicts of interest. Full and early disclosure of this information will help to avoid delays later in the process. Thank you. Additional Applicants, Landowners, or Persons Affiliated with the Applicant for the Project: [Examples of affiliation include partners, directors, officers, court appointed guardians, family members (e.g. spouse, parents, children), entity members, stockholders (if share is greater than 5%), or any professional whose benefit from the proposed Project indicates more than an agency relationship with the Applicant(s). If you have questions, please contact the district coordinator.] Name (Print) Town of Residence / Incorporation Consultants, Attorneys, or other Agents of the Applicant: Name (Print) Town of Residence Robert H. Rushford, Esq. Essex Skip McClellan Llewel Witnesses for the Applicant (if known at this time): Name (Print) Town of Residence Juli Beth Hinds South Burlington STATE OF VERMONT DISTRICT #4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION In re Dorset East Associates, LLC c/o Milot Real Estate 76 St. Paul Street Burlington, VT 05401 and JD South Burlington, LLC c/o Yandow/Dousevicz 35 Cherry Street Burlington, VT 05401 Land Use Permit Amendment #4C0948- APPLICANTS' MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF ITS APPLICATION FOR PERMIT AMENDMENT Applicants, Dorset East Associates, LLC ("Dorset East") and JD South Burlington, LLC ("JD"), by and through their attorneys Gravel and Shea, submit this Memorandum in support of their Application, pursuant to Environmental Board Rule 34(E), for an amendment to partially remove the open space requirement of Condition No. 14 of Land Use Permit No. 4CO948-EB (Altered) (the "MBL Permit") PRELIMINARY STATEMENT Permits for land development are not written in stone, and the process is meant to be flexible and allow for amendments to respond to changed conditions. The Vermont Supreme Court and the Environmental Board have noted that permit amendments may be appropriate to address changes in factual circumstances or municipal zoning strategies. This case presents a perfect example. In light of the City of South Burlington's fundamental shift in its approach to development design and preserving open space, the previously imposed condition requiring GRAVEL AND SHEA Parcel G to remain open is no longer the best or most effective way to meet the City's goals, or ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 even to mitigate the impacts of the project for which it was originally intended. Moreover, allowing the amendment furthers the City's innovative strategy and facilitates the City's achievement of its newly -adopted objectives. Under Rule 34(E)'s balancing test, several factors weigh strongly in favor of flexibility, while few support the interest in finality. Thus, the Application satisfies the requirements for an amendment of a prior condition. Accordingly, Applicants' request for a permit amendment should be granted. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In order to assist the District Commission in its review of this Application, Applicants briefly review below the factual and procedural history of the MBL Permit and the subject property, as well as the relevant changes to the South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. A. The MBL Permit As Issued in January 1996 For The Dorset Farms Project. In January 1996, the Environmental Board issued the MBL Permit, as altered, to MBL Associates, LLC ("MBL"). MBL is the original developer of Dorset Farms, a residential project on the west side of Dorset Street with 161 single family lots and 60 multi -family units on a 202 acre parcel of land in South Burlington, Vermont (the "Dorset Farms Project"), as more particularly shown on the property plat in four sheets attached as Exhibit 1. The Dorset Farms Project is surrounded by 79 acres of open space around the lots and homes located within the boundaries of the project on the west side of Dorset Street. At the time the MBL Permit was issued, MBL also owned a parcel of land located on the other side (the east side) of Dorset Street, containing 45.47 acres, depicted as "Parcel G" on Sheet 4 of the above -referenced plat attached as Exhibit 1 ("Parcel G"). Parcel G was not part of the area to be developed under the Dorset Farms Project and remained as open space. GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON,VERMONT 05402-0369 -2- MBL's initial application for the Dorset Farms Project was denied by the District #4 Environmental Commission in April 1994 for several reasons, including its view that the project failed to satisfy Act 250 Criterion 8.1 In its decision, the District Commission found that the preservation of Parcel G as open space was not an important element for the aesthetic mitigation of the Dorset Farms Project. According to the Commission, Parcel G "is visually disconnected from the project site to the west of Dorset Street and is physically separated from the project site by Dorset Street and the five [existing] house lots. This 45 acres of open space will contribute little visual mitigation for the density of the proposed development." In re MBL Assocs., Inc., Application No. 4C0948, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order at 12 (Apr. 13, 1994). MBL appealed the denial of the permit to the Environmental Board, which issued the MBL Permit for the Dorset Farms Project, subject to several conditions. In particular, the Board imposed Condition No. 14, which requires the 79-acre area of open space around the lots and houses on the west side of Dorset Street to remain open, as well as Parcel G located on the east side of Dorset Street.2 The Board found that the Dorset Farms Project complied with Criterion 8 because MBL had taken generally available and reasonable steps to mitigate the impact on the aesthetics and open space of the area. The Board based its conclusion not only on the set aside ' Section 6086(a)(8) of Act 250 requires that a proposed project "[w]ill not have an undue adverse effect on the scenic or natural beauty of the area, aesthetics, historic sites or rare and irreplaceable natural areas." 10 V.S.A. § 6086(a) (2006). 2 Condition No. 14 of the MBL Permit states that "[a]ll 127 acres of open space proposed by the Permittee shall remain open, and restricted only to conservation and non -motorized recreational uses. Such open space includes but is not limited to the 48-acre portion of the Project tract located east of Dorset Street, and the 50-acre set -aside to be located west of Dorset Street, between that street and the Single -Family Lots and Multi -Family Units." See Land Use GRAVEL AND sjkmit 44CO948-EB (Altered) (Jan. 30, 1996). We note that the actual acreage of Parcel G is ATTORNEYS AT 1,45.47 acres, as shown on the above -referenced plat. P. O. Box 369 ;URLINGTON, VERMONT - 3 - 05402-0369 of open space noted in Condition No. 14, but also on additional mitigation provided by MBL including a new landscaping plan submitted to the Board involving "extensive tree plantings to minimize the perception of the mass of the Project." In re MBL Assocs., Land Use Permit No. 4CO948-EB (Altered), Findings of Fact, Conclusions and of Law and Order at 17 (Jan. 30,1996). In making its affirmative findings under Criterion 8, the Board also noted additional mitigation measures including the use of muted color tones on the homes, an 800 foot setback from Dorset Street, the clustering of buildings and use of natural topography to partially screen buildings. Id. at 42. The Environmental Board's permit was appealed by the Town of Shelburne to the Vermont Supreme Court which affirmed the issuance of the MBL Permit without change. See In re MBL Assocs., 166 Vt. 606, 693 A.2d 693 (1997). Thereafter, MBL proceeded to construct and sell all of the housing units in the Dorset Farms Project.. Each purchaser's deed was made subject to a Declaration of Covenants for the project dated April 13, 1998 and recorded in Volume 426 at Page 101 of the City of South Burlington Land Records (the "Declaration"), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 2. In the Declaration, MBL expressly excluded Parcel G from the Dorset Farms Project.3 On June 11, 2004, MBL conveyed Parcel G to its affiliate, Dorset East, by Warranty Deed recorded in Volume 671 at Page 747 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 3 The Background section of the Declaration makes clear that "PRD Common Area G (containing 45.47 acres)... may also be excluded." Moreover, Parcel G is excluded from the GRAVEL AND sApperty description in Exhibit `B" of the Declaration. Section 1.1 states that only land declared ATTORNEYS AT Lin Exhibit "B" is subject to the Declaration. P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT - 4 - 05402-0369 B. The City Of South Burlington's Updated Comprehensive Plan And Newly - Adopted Approach To Open Space Preservation. On March 9, 2006, the City of South Burlington adopted a new Comprehensive Plan which substantially changed the manner of development and open space preservation in the Southeast Quadrant (the "SEQ"), the zoning district within which Parcel G and the Dorset Farms Proj ect are located. Under the plan in effect at the time the MBL Permit was issued, the SEQ was governed by regulations that identified "development" areas and "restricted" areas. The "designation of `restricted' areas was primarily based on visual factors, specifically establishing `scenic view corridor' setbacks along Spear Street, Dorset Street, and Hinesburg Road." See Southeast Quadrant Comprehensive Plan Update and Zoning Revisions Planning Concept Report at 3 (Jun. 28, 2005) ("Plan Update") attached as Exhibit 3; see also Southeast Quadrant Official Zoning Map dated January 29, 1996 attached as Exhibit 4. Under these prior regulations, strips along both sides of Dorset Street, including Parcel G, were designated as a scenic corridor and were labeled as "restricted" areas. According to Juli Beth Hinds, Director of Planning and Zoning for the City of South Burlington, the City previously focused its open space planning in the South East Quadrant ("SEQ") "primarily on the preservation of `scenic corridors' along major collector roadways." Affidavit of Juli Beth Hinds dated August 24, 2007, ¶ 3 ("Hinds Aff."), attached as Exhibit 5. However, this method of open space planning was subsequently called into question because it resulted in the creation of "fragmented pieces of land that have become leftover spaces rather than contributing to a cohesive open space network." See Ex. 3 (Plan Update) at 4 (citing as examples "strips of land fronting ... Dorset Farms"); see also Hinds Aff. ¶ 5 ("The approach also caused fragmentation of the landscape due to the lack of a cohesive district -wide plan for effective land use and open GRAVEL AND SHEA space preservation."). ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 ;URLINGTON, VERMONT - 5 - 05402-0369 In connection with the development of its new plan, the City commissioned an assessment of the wildlife and natural communities of the SEQ. This study revealed that large "clusters" of SEQ land areas had significant ecological value as wetlands, forests and wildlife corridors. According to this study, "[t]he current designation of the road corridors, however, creates a conflict with the wildlife corridors and natural communities by directing development away from the main roads and pushing it into the more valuable natural communities and wildlife areas." Ex. 3 (Plan Update) at 3; see also Hinds Aff. ¶ 5 ( "Based on this study, [the City] discovered that [the] existing method of open space planning failed to take into account the ecological characteristics of the landscape and pushed development away from roads and into sensitive wildlife areas."). In order to resolve this conflict, the new Comprehensive Plan radically remaps the SEQ in order to protect the significant environmental resources of the SEQ. See Southeast Quadrant Zoning Map, dated April 24, 2006, attached as Exhibit 6; see also Hinds Aff. ¶ 6. The new zoning design adopted by the Comprehensive Plan "represents a shifting of priority for land preservation, from areas alongside roads to the ecological associations described above." Ex. 3 (Plan Update) at 3. The City found that with the protection of roadside strips, "a larger opportunity is missed to create a more cohesive system that can serve multiple roles of environmental protection ... [and] [therefore, the City's [new] land use concept encourages protective strategies that are in accordance with the overall plan for the SEQ, rather than the fragmented, issue -by -issue approach fostered by some regulatory systems." Id. at 4. Therefore, the new Comprehensive Plan completely abandons the prior plan's approach, which resulted in the fragmented preservation of open space on a project -by -project basis, and now seeks to preserve larger contiguous areas of open space on a district -wide level by using the transfer of development rights ("TDRs") to promote higher densities of residential development in some GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS HE "receiving areas" and to promote the preservation of blocks of contiguous open space by AW P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT - 6 - 05402-0369 identifying TDR "sending areas." See Hinds Aff. ¶ 7 ("This revision constituted a dramatic shift in the City's priorities and vision for the SEQ and was a virtual reversal in the conceptual approach to open space planning."). According to the Comprehensive Plan: More recently, with the completion of the Open Space Strategy. .. there has been a strong interest in building neighborhoods at higher densities in order to conserve more of the SEQ's priority open space lands ... The SEQ Concept Plan was charged with evaluating whether and how to adjust the "sending" and "receiving" densities within the zoning to provide more incentive for this type of transfer to happen. City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan at 62 (Mar. 9, 2006) (emphasis added). The goal of the new Comprehensive Plan is to "encourage well planned residential development at densities and layouts that protect and preserve large contiguous areas of open space, important natural areas and scenic views." Id. at 9. The importance of this land use planning change to the City is exemplified by Goal 1.5, which states that the City should "[s]upport the re -consideration ofpreviously permitted projects that could be altered to better achieve the goals of this Plan and the SEQ Concept Plan." Id. at 75 (emphasis added); see also Hinds Af£ ¶ 10 (stating that "[t]he City strongly supports the reconsideration of these projects and encourages alteration of previously issued permits in order to promote these new goals").4 The new SEQ Zoning Map identifies two primary Subdistricts, the "SEQ-Neighborhood Residential Transition" or "SEQ-NRT" Subdistrict (which is a designated "receiving area" for TDRs to promote higher density development) and the "SEQ-Natural Resource Protection" or "SEQ-NRP" Subdistrict (which is designated as a "sending area" for TDRs to promote large scale open space conservation). Approximately 20 acres of Parcel G that front on Dorset Street are 4 Although the prior South Burlington Zoning Ordinance allowed the transfer of density from non-contiguous parcels, the full use of TDRs between unrelated parties was not officially GRAVEL AND sthorized by statute until the passage of 24 V.S.A. § 6301 on July 1, 2004 (authorizing ATTORNEYS AT LMunicipal zoning to use TDRs to encourage and assist with the maintenance of open space). P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT - 7 - 05402-0369 now located in the SEQ-NRT Subdistrict and, as such, are a designated "receiving area" for TDRs. This portion of Parcel G has been identified by the City as the place where it wants to locate "neighborhoods at higher densities."' Comprehensive Plan at 62. As Ms. Hinds notes, "it is essential that the City promote higher density neighborhood development in areas now zoned as SEQ-Neighborhood Residential Transition, while encouraging the protection of those areas within the SEQ-Natural Resource Protection Subdistrict." Hinds Aff. ¶ 8. The City's new focus on employing TDRs is also a key element of its ability to fulfill its housing goals; the construction of over 4,320 housing units in the SEQ is anticipated at full build-out.6 C. The JD Project's Current Development Proposal. Dorset Street Associates, LLC ("DSA"), an affiliate of MBL and Dorset East, has obtained an Option to Purchase Development Rights from Ernest N. Auclair as evidenced by Memorandum of Option dated May 5, 2003 and recorded in Volume 609 at Page 306 of the City of South Burlington Land Records (the "Option Agreement") attached as Exhibit 7. Under this Option Agreement, DSA has an option to purchase and transfer the development rights from the Auclair Farm to other development projects that may be developed by DSA or its affiliates. The Auclair Farm contains approximately 1,500 acres of land, the entire portion of which is located in the SEQ-NRP Subdistrict (a "sending area" for TDRs). See The Van Sicklen Limited 5 The rear 25 acres of Parcel G are identified by the SEQ Zoning Map as part of the SEQ- NRP Subdistrict. No development is proposed for this 25 acre area and the Applicants intend to convey this portion to the City in as part of the approval for the JD Project (described below). 6 The City, through its prior zoning ordinance and plan, approved regulations that accommodate a maximum of 4,320 housing units within the SEQ. This density was not changed by the new Comprehensive Plan. See Ex. 3 (Plan Update) at 7 (noting that the "4,320 housing units, would not change"); see also id. at 2 (noting the goal of accommodating "the estimated remaining development potential of approximately 2,100 new dwelling units in the SEQ"). The new Comprehensive Plan maintains this density and furthers the goal of creating and preserving more higher quality and cohesive open space by promoting the use of TDRs and development GRAVEL AND sITLegulations that "allow for clustering of development on `developable' parcels and preservation ATTORNEYS AT L.alf identified open space areas designated as `restricted' areas." Id. at 7. P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT _ 8 05402-0369 Partnership, Land Use Permit No. 4C1013R-EB, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order at 11 (Mar. 8, 2002). The Auclair Farm contains prime agricultural soils as well as other wildlife habitat and natural features. The preservation of this farm, together with other adjacent open space areas, is an important component of South Burlington's open space plan. See Ex.6. JD has entered into an option agreement with Dorset East to purchase the front 20 acres of Parcel G for use as a development project. JD obtained Sketch Plan Approval from the City of South Burlington on June 5, 2007 for the construction of 81 multi -family units on the front 20 acres of Parcel G substantially as shown on the Sketch Plan attached as Exhibit 8 (the "JD Project"). JD will be seeking an Act 250 Permit for the JD Project. However, before incurring the engineering and consultant expenses required for the preparation of its Act 250 Permit application, JD joins in this Memorandum to seek a determination under Rule 34(E) as to whether Condition No. 14 of the MBL Permit may be amended to allow the development of the JD Project on the front 20 acres of Parcel G. DISCUSSION Applicants seek a partial amendment to Condition No. 14 of the MBL Permit in order to accomplish the intended use of the subject property under the City of South Burlington's new Comprehensive Plan and zoning regulations and to facilitate achievement of the municipal development goals. The Environmental Board's rules allow for amendments where, as here, conditions have changed such that the interests in flexibility outweigh those of finality. In this case, changes in zoning regulations and preferred methods of mitigation, as well as other policy considerations and the absence of reliance by purchasers, weigh in favor of amending the previously imposed condition. Accordingly, Applicants' request for a permit amendment should GRAVEL AND SHEAbe granted. ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON. VERMONT 05402-0369 -9- I. THE RELEVANT LEGAL STANDARD REQUIRES A BALANCING OF THE INTERESTS OF FLEXIBILITY AND FINALITY. Conditions imposed in Act 250 permits are not intended to be entirely unchangeable and inflexible. The Supreme Court has determined that "[i]f existing permit conditions are no longer the most useful or cost-effective way to lessen the impact of development, the permitting process should be flexible enough to respond to the changed conditions." In re Stowe Club Highlands, 166 Vt. 33, 38, 687 A.2d 102, 105 (1996); see also In re Nehemiah Assocs., Inc., 168 Vt. 288, 294, 719 A.2d 34, 37 (1998) ("The permitting process should therefore be flexible enough to address changes in circumstances."). These cases set forth the Vermont Supreme Court's "Stowe Club Highlands test," which was designed to balance the competing interests of flexibility (intervening circumstances justifying a change to prior permit conditions) and finality (the public policy interest in final decisions) in deciding whether to allow a permit amendment. More recently, the Stowe Club Highlands test has been codified by the Environmental Board in Rule 34(E).' Rule 34(E) requires a multi -step analysis: • First, "[i]n reviewing an application for amendment, the district commission should consider whether the permittee is merely seeking to relitigate the permit condition or to undermine its purpose and intent." • Second, the Commission must "determine whether the need for flexibility arising from changes or policy considerations outweighs the need for finality in the permitting process. In balancing flexibility and finality, the district commission should consider the following, among other relevant factors": (a) changes in facts, law or regulations beyond the permittee's control; (b) changes in technology, construction, or operations which drive the need for the amendment; ' A proposed amendment to Rule 34(E) is pending before LCAR (addressing the SRAVEL AND slWlication of a critical versus non -critical permit condition). This Memorandum applies Rule ATTORNEYS AT L�34(E) in its current form, as the pending changes are not material to the analysis. P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT _ 10 - 05402-0369 (c) other factors including innovative or alternative design which provide for a more efficient or effective means to mitigate the impact addressed in the permit condition; (d) other important policy considerations, including the proposed amendment's furtherance of the goals of duly adopted municipal plans; (e) manifest error on the part of the district commission, the environmental board, the environmental court in the issuance of the permit condition; (f) the degree of reliance by the district commission, the environmental board, the environmental court, or parties on prior permit conditions or material representations of the applicant in prior proceeding(s). EBR 34(E)(2), (3)(a)-(3)(f). The elements listed in Rule 34(E)(3)(a)-(e) are generally considered to be the five "flexibility" factors and the element listed in Rule 34(E)(3)(f) is the "finality" factor. See In re Lapinsky, Land Use Permit No. 5L1018-4/5L0426-9-EB, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order at 15 (Oct. 3, 2003). As Applicants demonstrate below, consideration of these factors establish that the requested permit amendment should be granted. II. THE PERMIT AMENDMENT APPLICATION SATISFIES RULE 34(E)' S CONDITIONS FOR GRANTING AN AMENDMENT. A. Applicants Are Not Merely Seeking To Relitigate The Permit Condition. "Act 250 permits are written on paper, not carved in stone, and the relitigation concepts embodied in EBR 34(E)(2) cannot be considered to be unconditionally ironclad, as, in some sense, every permit amendment application is a relitigation of an initial permit condition." Lapinsky at 18 (emphasis in original). Therefore, "if this provision of Rule 34(E) is read to foreclose all permit amendment applications as a matter of course, then the remainder of the Rule is rendered meaningless." Id. GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 -11- The inquiry at the heart of the analysis is whether the applicant is seeking to undermine the permit's purpose and intent through the relitigation of the issue or whether the amendment request is the result of a significant change in conditions which justify an amendment. The latter criterion is satisfied here. The present request was brought about by significant shifts in the City's approach to open space planning and development patterns and presents an opportunity to provide protection for a larger area of contiguous open space with a higher ecological value. As such, this case is not simply a relitigation of the prior permit condition, but rather "present[s] reasonable intervening factors" which warrant further analysis pursuant to Rule 34E(2). See Lapinsky at 18-19. B. Applicants' Request Satisfies At Least Three Flexibility Standards Under Rule 34(E). At least three of Rule 34(E)'s flexibility factors weigh in favor of allowing the amendment to Condition No. 14. The first flexibility factor under Rule 34(E) is whether there has been a change in facts, law or regulation beyond the permittee's control. See EBR 34(e)(3)(a). Here, the City of South Burlington substantially changed its Comprehensive Plan and zoning regulations in 2006. These changes created a new vision for the SEQ by abandoning the prior practice of preserving strips of land along roadways (which the inclusion of Parcel G in the permit condition was meant to accomplish) in favor of a more cohesive open space plan targeting larger areas of open space with higher ecological values. Hinds Aff. ¶ ¶ 6-8. The new regulations promote this plan by encouraging the use of TDRs to transfer development rights from sending areas to receiving areas. Id at ¶ 9. "This TDR system promotes the City's goals because it protects ecologically significant areas and helps create neighborhoods of sufficient density to encourage connectivity and traditional design." Id. Significantly, the front 20 acre 3RAVELAND SHEAportion of Parcel G has now been designated as a "development area" in the SEQ-NRT ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 JRLINGTON, VERMONT - 12 - 05402-0369 Subdistrict and as such, is a receiving area under the TDR program. See South Burlington Land Development Regulations § § 9.04, 9.13 (October 24, 2006). The City has noted that the new plan represents a substantial "shifting in priority for land preservation." See Ex. 3 (Plan Update) at 3; Hinds Aff. ¶ 7 ("This revision constituted a dramatic shift in the City's priorities and vision for the SEQ and was a virtual reversal in the conceptual approach to open space planning."). South Burlington's changes to its zoning regulations were unquestionably beyond Applicants' control, and have substantial bearing on whether Condition No. 14 should be amended. This cases presents an unusual situation, in which the municipality's new regulation seeks to promote land use development and open space preservation in a different manner than originally required or anticipated, such that the previously imposed condition is rendered at least partially obsolete. Further, the City presumably would not have zoned the front portion of Parcel G as a development area if it did not intend for such development to occur. Parcel G's inclusion in Condition No. 14 is now directly contrary to the City's plan and vision for development and open space preservation in the SEQ, and indeed frustrates the goals the City sought to achieve! Hinds Aff. ¶ 7. Accordingly, the first Rule 34(E) factor counsels strongly in favor of flexibility. Applicants also satisfy a second flexibility factor since "other factors including innovative or alternative design ... provide for a more efficient or effective means to mitigate the impact addressed by the permit condition." EBR 34(E)(3)(c). The City of South Burlington has conducted extensive studies of the SEQ and has determined that the past practice of preserving strips of land along arterial roads "creates a conflict with wildlife corridors and natural communities by directing development away from the main roads and pushing it into more 8 For these reasons, Applicants' request is consistent with the "direct outgrowth" provision noted by the Board in Lapinsky. Here, the change in regulation "create[s] the need for the GRAVEL AND sendment," and is not merely "a byproduct of it." Lapinsky at 22 (emphasis omitted). Thus, ATTORNEYS AT LIkis factor supports the amendment. P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT - 13 - U5402-0369 valuable natural communities and wildlife areas." Ex. 3 (Plan Update) at 3 (emphasis added). The City has found that the prior "corridor setback" land use planning approach simply creates "fragmented pieces of land that have become leftover spaces rather than contributing to a cohesive open space network." Id. at 4; see also Hinds Aff. ¶ 5 ("The approach also caused fragmentation of the landscape due to the lack of a cohesive district -wide plan for effective land use and open space preservation."). To address this concern, the updated Comprehensive Plan proposes a new and innovative land use planning technique by shifting its open space priority from roadside strips to a larger "more cohesive system" of open space protection and by promoting the use of TDRs to further that goal. Ex. 3 (Plan Update) at 4. In particular, it encourages the transfer of development rights to areas such as Parcel G from the more valuable, protected areas. Hinds Aff. ¶ 9 ("One of the primary tools [] employ[ed] [by the City] to accomplish these goals is a Transfer of Development Rights program (TDR), which allows for higher density development in Village Residential and Neighborhood Residential areas, in exchange for the protection of lands designated as SEQ-NRP sending areas, such as the Auclair Farm in the Natural Resource Protection Subdistrict."). This innovative and alternative design will result in the preservation of more open space than under the original permit condition and the open space that will be preserved will have a higher ecological value than the area originally preserved. See Hinds Aff. ¶ 12 (the land protected in the SEQ-NRP "will contribute to the protection of a cohesive open space area with important ecological functions"). Accordingly, the new planning goals in the Comprehensive Plan provide a more efficient or effective means of mitigating the impacts addressed by the original permit condition, and no longer require the inclusion of Parcel G in that condition. Therefore, this factor also favors flexibility. GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 -14- Finally, Applicants satisfy a third flexibility factor because the proposed design of the JD Project supports "other important policy considerations, including the proposed amendment's furtherance of the goals and objectives of duly adopted municipal plans." EBR 34(E)(3)(d). As discussed above, the proposed amendment would provide an essential opportunity to utilize the City's new TDR program to further the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, i.e., by developing a "receiving area" at a higher density and preserving a "sending area" through the transfer of development rights. Such opportunities are instrumental for the City's overall housing goals, including 4,320 dwelling units in the SEQ. Significantly, the City has indicated that in order to promote the goals and objectives of the new Comprehensive Plan, it will "[s]upport the re -consideration ofpreviously permitted projects that could be altered to better achieve the goals of this Plan and the SEQ Concept Plan." City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan at 75 (Mar. 9, 2006) (emphasis added). Indeed, the City has expressed its support for the development of the front portion of Parcel G and for the amendment of the MBL Permit in particular. According to the Affidavit of Juli Beth Hinds: The City strongly supports the reconsideration of these projects ... The JD South Burlington project provides an excellent opportunity for the City to achieve its goals by utilizing the TDR program to protect land within the SEQ-NRP on the Auclair Farm while encouraging neighborhood development along Dorset Street, in an area appropriate for such development ... [A]llowing the development on Parcel G and the associated TDR protection on the Auclair Farm will promote directly the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan, and will contribute to the protection of a cohesive open space area with important ecological functions. Hinds Aff. ¶ ¶ 10-12. The City's support of the JD Project and the amended MBL Permit demonstrates that partially removing the prior condition will further the goals of the duly adopted municipal plan, and thus weighs heavily in favor of flexibility. GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 ,URLINGTON. VERMONT -15- 05402-0369 C. The Flexibility Factors Outweigh Ay Interest in Finality. The final factor of the Rule 34(E) analysis focuses on the need for finality in the permitting process. Under EBR 34(E)(3)(f), the Commission must consider the prior reliance by the district commission, the Board, and the involved parties on the prior permit condition. In this case, however, the strength of three flexibility factors discussed above outweighs any interest in the finality of the permit process and, therefore, the amendment application should be approved. As an initial matter, the District Commission cannot be found to have relied on Condition No. 14, particularly since it denied MBL's permit application. In its decision, the Commission stated that since Parcel G was across the street from the Dorset Farms Project, it is "visually disconnected from the project site to the west of Dorset Street and is physically separated from the project site by Dorset Street and the [existing] five house lots." In re MBL Assocs., Inc., Application No. 4C0948, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order at 12 (Apr. 13, 1994). The Commission further concluded that Parcel G's "45 acres of open space will contribute little visual mitigation for the density of the proposed development." Id. The Commission's findings and its opinion that Parcel G was essentially irrelevant to the project under consideration make clear that it did not "rely" on the preservation of Parcel G to provide mitigation for any adverse effects of the project pursuant to Criterion 8. On the other hand, the Environmental Board approved the MBL Permit and issued it with conditions. Thus, the Board can be found to have relied on the condition since it required the conservation of 127 acres of land (of which Parcel G made up only about 3 5 percent) under its analysis of Criterion 8 and noted that this open space preservation was central to its decision to approve the Dorset Farms Project. In re MBL Assocs., Land Use Permit No. 4CO948-EB GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYsAT LAW (Altered), Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order at 42 (Jan. 30, 1996). However, the P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT - 1 6 - 05402-0369 Board also equally relied on a substantial number of other mitigating factors for its conclusion that MBL had remedied any adverse effects of the project under Criterion 8. For example, the Board noted that MBL had submitted a new landscaping plan involving "extensive tree plantings to minimize the perception of the mass of the Project." Id. at 17. In making affirmative findings under Criterion 8, the Board also found significant additional mitigation measures including the use of muted color tones on the homes, an 800 foot setback from Dorset Street, the clustering of buildings and use of natural topography to partially screen buildings. Id. at 42. Therefore, the preservation of open space (and Parcel G in particular) was only one of many mitigating factors cited by the Board in its decision to grant the MBL Permit. In addition, the inclusion of Condition No. 14 arose out of the Board's concern that the Dorset Farms Project would cause a reduction in the amount of open space in the area. Id at 40 (noting that "the project will cause the loss of a significant amount of open space," and that this "adverse effect[] will be experienced by those who reside, use land, or pass through the area.") The finding that 127 acres of open space should remain open, however, was motivated by the Board's interest in the general character of the SEQ. The Board did not find that Parcel G itself was an essential piece of land that must remain open space. In fact, since Parcel G is across the street from the Dorset Farms Project, it provides only minor mitigation of any direct impacts of the Dorset Farms Project. Moreover, the new open space strategy in the City's Comprehensive GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 -17- Plan will ultimately preserve larger areas of contiguous open space areas with higher ecological values.' Accordingly, the interests the Board sought to further by imposing Condition No. 14 continue to be achieved notwithstanding the permit amendment by City's new development plan, and indeed are accomplished in a manner more consistent with the City's goals. See Lapinsky at 23-24 (granting permit amendment and holding that relief could be fashioned in a manner which accommodated neighbors' reliance interests). Finally, and most important, there has been no reliance on the permit condition by the Lot Owners in the Dorset Farms Project, nor would these parties be negatively affected by the proposed amendment. First, Parcel G was excluded from the Declaration of Covenants for the Project, and therefore any conditions placed on it were not part of the rights acquired by the Lot Owners in purchasing their property. Second, as a practical matter, Parcel G is not adjacent to the Lots in the MBL Project. Indeed, as the District Commission correctly observed in its initial findings, Parcel G is visually separated from the MBL Project, and provides little, if any, direct mitigation. The nearest Lot is more than 800 feet back from Dorset Street. See Land Use Permit No. 4CO948-EB (Altered), Finding 48; see Ex. 1. Third, the Lots are further separated from Parcel G by high vegetated berms within the MBL Project that obstruct the view of Parcel G. This also decreases the relevance of Parcel G to the MBL Project lots. For these legal and factual y Twenty acres of Parcel G were also protected under Criterion 9(B) as off -site mitigation for impacts on primary agricultural soils at another project. See Land Use Permit No. 4C0489-6. However, the proposed amendment would involve the development of only 20 of the 45.47 acres of Parcel G, with the remainder conveyed to the City to remain as open space. To the extent the remaining 25 acre area does not contain 20 acres of primary agricultural soils, Applicants :RAVEL AND S pWpose the conservation of the requisite number of acres of the Auclair Farm such that 20 acres ATTORNEYS AT Lof primary agricultural soils remain fully protected. P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT - 1 8 05402-0369 reasons, the Lot Owners could not properly have relied on the maintenance of Parcel G as open space.10 Nor can the Town of Shelburne demonstrate any reliance on the condition, since the Town in fact opposed the permit and appealed its issuance to the Vermont Supreme Court. The Town of Shelburne never "accepted the permit" with its conditions and, therefore, cannot claim to have relied on any specific conditions therein. In any event, the landscape plan for the JD Project includes berms and landscape plantings on the southerly side of the project that will partially screen the new homes from view from the Town of Shelburne. See Ex. 8. Further, the policy shift in the City's new Comprehensive Plan will ultimately preserve more open spaces along the Shelburne town line with a higher ecological value and with connections to important ecological open space areas in the Town of Shelburne. See Ex. 6. Thus, the Town of Shelburne's interests are adequately addressed by both the JD Project and the City's new development plan. In sum, the reliance that can be shown in this case is minimal. Thus, under Rule 34(E), this factor does not outweigh the significant flexibility factors that have been established above. 10 The facts of this case are easily distinguishable from those of Stowe Club Highlands and Nehemiah (in which the Court upheld the Board's refusal to modify permit conditions). In both of those cases, Court found substantial reliance by purchasers of neighboring lots. See, e.g., Stowe Club Highlands, 166 Vt. at 38, 687 A.2d at 105. Moreover, the open spaces which the applicants later sought to develop through permit amendments were directly adjacent to the project lots, which had been purchased with a reasonable expectation that the undeveloped land would remain undeveloped in accordance with the permit conditions. See id. at 39-40, 687 A.2d at 106-107. Similarly, in Stowe Club Highlands and Nehemiah, the land which was the subject of the amendment was the only open space for the entire project. However, in this case, the contrary is true: the open space at issue is not adjacent to the project lots, it is physically separated by Dorset Street, it is visually separated by a vegetated berm, it is not the only open space in the Dorset Farms Project, nor even the greatest part of such space, as 79 acres of open space remain on the west side of Dorset Street, and, finally, the lot purchasers did not rely on the permit condition. In addition, this application results in the preservation of additional open GRAVEL AND slice —something lacking in the prior cases. Thus, the results reached in the Stowe Club ATTORNEYS AT LKighlands and Nehemiah cases do not apply to the facts of this case. P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT - 19 - 05402-0369 Further, it bears mentioning that the Board's policy of finality is also influenced by a project's continued compliance with the Act 250 criteria. As noted in Stowe Club Highlands, "[t]he purpose of permit conditions is to alleviate adverse effects that would otherwise be caused by a project." Stowe Club Highlands, Application No. 5L0822-12-EB, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and Order at 10 (Jun. 20, 1995). Here, granting the permit amendment does not affect continued compliance with Criterion 8, because the amendment provides the opportunity to increase the amount of land protected in the area, through the protection of 67.5 acres on the Auclair Farm, as discussed above.' I Furthermore, JD proposes to develop only a small portion of Parcel G, with 25 acres to remain open space.12 The end result is that a larger area of open space will be protected if the JD Project is allowed to go forward and these open space areas will now be part of a cohesive open space network with a higher ecological value, thereby furthering the City's goals expressed in its Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, the original purpose and intent of Condition No. 14 will not be diminished because on balance, more high - quality open space will be protected. CONCLUSION In light of the City's new Comprehensive Plan and zoning regulations, Condition No. 14 is no longer the most cost-effective or best way to meet the goal of mitigating impacts of the Dorset Farms Project or protecting open space in the SEQ. By allowing Condition No. 14 to be ' 1 Allowed density in the SEQ is 1.2 units per acre. Zoning Regulations § 9.05(A). If this 20 acre parcel had available density, it would allow for 24 units (i.e., 1.2 du x 20 acres = 24 units). Under that scenario, only 47.5 acres would need to be protected by TDRs on the Auclair Farm to account for the remaining 57 units for the 8 1 - unit JD Project (or 47.5 acres x 1.2 du = 57 units). However, the 20 acre parcel has been treated as if it has no available density and all of the available density is being acquired by TDRs from the Auclair Farm, resulting in the preservation of 67.5 acres on the Auclair Farm (67.5 acres x 1.2 du = 81 units). GRAVEL AND SHEA In addition, we note that within the 20 acres proposed to be developed by JD, ATTORNEYS AT LA pproximately 7.1 acres will remain as open space. See Open Space Plan attached as Exhibit 9. P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT - 20 - 05402-0369 amended and Parcel G to be partially developed, the mitigation provided by the preservation of new areas of open space will be enhanced through the use of the City's innovative TDR program. Not only will more land be preserved as open space, but this preserved land will have a higher ecological value and will be part of a cohesive network of open space. In addition, allowing the permit amendment does not have a significant impact on the need for finality in the permitting process. Thus, under Rule 34(E)'s balancing test, the interests of flexibility outweigh those of finality. Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, the Applicants respectfully request that the Commission allow the proposed amendment of Condition No. 14 under EBR 34(E), and authorize Applicants to submit a complete application for the JD Project. Dated: Burlington, Vermont September 4, 2007 GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT,2... 84.2i6aa002!.wenn -21- GRAVEL AND SHEA Attorneys for Applicants Robert H. Rus for , Esq. 76 St. Paul Street, 7th Floor P.O. Box 369 Burlington, VT 05402-0369 (802) 658-0220 05402-0369 ION PLAN NOTES: 1. 11H SURVEY WAS COUPLED FROM Flf1D SURVEY AND RECORD RESEARCH INCLUOWD THE FOLLOMNG PLATS. 'BOUNDARY SURVEY-MBL ASSUCfATES• BY KREBS AND LANSING. DATED JANUARY 8, 1994. 'SOUTHEAST SUWMT-PUT OF SUBDIVISION OF LANDS-MBL ASSODA-,W' SHEETS 1-9 BY FIT2PATRIcKALEWELLYN, DATED JANUARY 6, 1994. 2. REFER TO SHEETS 2 of 3 AND 3 of 3 FOR LOT LAYOUTS AND EASEMENTS 3. BEARWOS ARE BASED ON THE ABOVE REFERENCED PLAN BY KREBS AND LANNSING N6� W. & G. LANG /F (1N31/299) / l\ D8 we 04 :AULKINS REVOCABLE '(RUST N/F )0 (209/68) 0D 5 OF IMPROVEMENTS iBL ASSOCIATES `. PRD COMMON AREA E4 1 19.77 ACRES PRD COMMON AREA \ 9.78 ACRES GRAPHIC SCALE rAel� (*moo E /AM AU9rEK17 foo A00 FMpaFD DM INK OF nJPRovErS Ens ASSOCIATEi�� J. & S. SHAPIRO / / N/F— /Inch - 200 TL 9AQ3Fi \ (307/53) t7. \ \19 \ 30 �" J. & K. PERNUCCI 21 \ LEGEND 18 \\ \ N/F 15 \ ( /!x) 23 \' \ PROJECT BOUNDARY - ABUTRNG PROPERTY LIKE ^ >e 25 0_ 14 a R. & P. WARD - SIDELINE OF NEW ROAD ROW PROPERTY LINE N \ IS CFNTEAJNE (102/41) NEW LOTUNE OF STREAM _ _ SIDELINE OF EASEMENT SSG 31 NIRE FENCE ea \r. 'IS m • IRON PIPE 1" \\ %5 1! • CONCRETE MONUMENT op. IRON PIPE FOUND uDO cmf CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND rn \\ JIG) N/F NOW OR FORMERLY 269. �� STREAM S39TJ� o� —" _ A — SURVEY CONTROL 50' WIDE BAND FOR 15' N10E PEDESTRIAN p i (307/53) DEED REFERENCE TRAIL EASEMENT (186/195) V) Y PRD COMMMON AREA B I ^ 19.39 ACRES �O�--11 OAR W A Sfnr 410Crt ro M I 1 C MBL ASSOCIATES N3713'S3'E all OF fOOM elwAlarox n TOTAL ACREAGE - 155.27 ACRES D0.00' \ , Np In II.-N. - 155.32 Aap (HWYVOL 1/12) Ir 68 OLD L+69232 'TOWN OF BURUNCTON RECORDS 0. do n R1uM euaAcla A•2040.00' _ N73 2 24 ; !earf:p rot acdo Ld20.5B' DOOR roK ryl 2 Ar��d¢pIX IeMrla_Y x_V K ' sew AI1 > ue Ata�m N wB N", a 1� I G „ .111ESi. roxN ¢Elo! NJ AREA E1 , to Y2E5 6EL5.59' ..I � > .rFAa1n err rsuulKN rc 1K n.lrr«c RY `� B. & S. �COTAS ROAD /�� N/Y I N(278/582maD ^1�-DAra Ia I I 1 (9nIM aFAA!cla! n,vFrro or�crort) 10' WIDE u UTBJtt EASEMENT I m MF ld'T oI tr txar�2 MB � `\i I j 'r, (216/3) P. t L. CANNRZARO rt nF F !R°UaFI°AwN. m( eaw IeA"Ac'a :�• �r�,, roro� II 9 oDaK 1[mmi wo wema L1oar a! _ us � let rRrur. Axr mroas rM Mc l (�/62) I I I e w� ne7 °rwr a �� 1pe .\r1oM°ip"/ : � m fit. ! cM .�' C. & L. HILL ` 1- 0° olAxatn 1m z$ eaaMex NtA • m N/i I 1_u-p room Im f saAn rarer ,w x so i0 (142/� 11-IZ-tr A�.7>m Ca1paWAR Oual01 r6tl fAx _/ COMMON AREA E2 I�I aal. aea rower er fERMGVi ELECTRIC PDWFR Mom._ Id RE�3MOL RASSSOCIATES MBL ASSOCIATES/ I *Q P �" � `"°O6 •RB° E s - (13I/B4 PRD _ _ _ FOR FUTURE USE N� alu t VD Is rE P18i 11141R Opt • COY (270/257) O SKETCH CONCEPT -� • y1SgTZ S \� F F OON MUMS °. \�CONDOIAINIU COMMON AREA1 1 8.4E ACRES / ` �C(A77770�N�-��DryRIVE / �� ORSET FARMS COND// INHINS AND �� M COMI AREA N V - _—_ - 1 /� ME PRELIMINARY AREA SF - FINAL REU 4 / I I [] RECORD DRAWING C. �r I. --HALAL DaRSSf FARW 9 = g� _ 2 E u —.no - ��""//jj / (312//96) DORSET STREET eFD%Lx. 'l SOUTH SURUNGTON, VERMONT DBffRs n PERna R PI?OPSRTY °`H PIdT u 6-29-9T B L1[OURsM STONE OILZM r -zoo It Yam 3n. ne. [m(BM) 877a-suo 2 1 OF See 270/251 foe, Development r Iriclians 1430.00'— O'BRIEN N/F (25/373) oT w DOWNING—CAULKINS REVOCABLE TRUST � � PRD COMMON AREA A Lor w ,nr es NOTES: 1�n x[T (xm/ee) � S rm w REFER DI THE SURVEY PLAT (SHEET t of N FOR ADDITIONAL SURREY RELATED MFORNATION• y ! REFER TO l0i LAYOUT NORTH (SHEET S o/ FOR alp EIND IDIdAVENUE Q M• W � SU801V1SI510N LOTS NORTH OF MIDLAND AVENUE S<Nm US T ro ~WE THERE 15 A 10' WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT ON THE LOTS I,",r 2tZ H ......r (m,nnm nR —D ° 1oT lI ALONG BOTH SIDES OF ALL ROADS. )ee3' L-uar RIaW y Rlaoo' .� 1e� LOT 11x 0i,., LoT rW Y i 4 19 s�6•, i �'il 6 1).02] r y r L r CONN >�i ll)T !o l . uer L . xase' )• N L S N AREAI C L°T I,! / [•>1 NeI2rlPE MR'IfLTE .x '� "( ( ri7F qmf✓ [� AW' tm x .' n for x 4$ ),%1 Y $ T 1M r Ve•A✓ s+eo' l'MdV i y d 44w r [` ate, � i%rro r �7•" L-,-L� I � v � � Y L.n if°d [v,L� 4ae"a j LR-00AY L-,n411' lni ,is Q i a u L . MW r r `rab [ £ p �64 Lora \X/ gg No.w J a aow r $ tl9y L [ `ky, y w Lor 3+ i.T III so AREA E4%r ,s>9n ax.n pxi di 6 .eO �� 7iTt .d rMer y 3 bw! r n b ib Y A' 4> •fI / R ITT 112 x ,antl °ero r iawi r 4 ''. 8 !� LOT os �bI ) L �21'r 7 / w4 z ay M p, �A L . S!!!' ( LJr ! eie T ar PRD COMMON AREA D BASIN B •\� soonxrW y '9'wSt T>n>� @ �' 4+4 3 rqi A for ,�� /8. [m ,z. •q ''?• / �' i�f / r wr ua nr r �" Lm ra rnr ae R. ? 703A. a � [,t � a L . xe.,o ro �''�E � � r m`"ar a � � � � e • � �'� s'3 '�.. �: � c, erT b •90. ).)eo rg•�`" ems} S � e.3.s .[ r ,q� TIm 9 >� � / is, y �r� J'r Q r¢ n °F miw rn ea\ 'rs 8 jr" _ • ,nT fn p - �K � � � ��ib�y�B, 9� �+2r � BASIN A e?� a\//Y ��, ! \6 k Fero a eLr s umaa e 1P :1W F vw2 6 PRD COMMON AREA E1 LBGEND PROJECT BOUNDARY \ R�0,%f Jam' SIDELINE OF NEV Row ROW �C \ // `— n,x I C UIToo' w$& f t ° g Si ) NEW LOTUNE ` \ \ \ 7 �•�1'/C \ \\ F lEy1 1°�F'1 I I k v, M•� Y', \ . aoq"\t �•✓ SmF11HE OF EASEMENT �WRE FENCE goo \ WON PIPE iamez a 4°si di. a A / COMMON AREA E2 \ C \ to ary a sww eLworF,a �+,b. a • CONCRETE MONUMENT n \A \ ro IXR)o ,0 FfIG, LFNrFIt a F'LS s60,' K l.e3Ar / w�R fU 4 N NOW OR FORMERLY °> Nexm'ss'E Y'/.s� tt- - N I A •. \ \ �� _ —�— ! / axle amaVt er REvinoNs F DORSET FARMS \ A PRD yc- — tu'92 I ,IB Rwa rN umr eLsrwa CONDOMINIUMS AND COMMON •LA N_ m 9>m ru u r,eat<ann cwE CONDOMINIUM COMMON AREA AREA H /°°" >a a •* �'� O SKETCH/CONCEPT \� (nw A016) \x�, (aeex AI _ 6 oL� Arc rsrcam r [] PRELIMINARY FINAL RECORD DRAWING \ s BASIN c DOMOT FAIM 97-099 W r$OWNER DORSET STREET aFu a J� i/ `W/ / " 'v' � � L . ❑ \ NBL ASSOCIATES SOUTH BURUNCTON, VERMONT wmaMiE— sc_ D� ■ �� } {ry�T�F p��F�F� F g L? e-a'�o°° / \ ( aIMROION nAuwq oF�clrn) �EE/i M OUi W V is GRAPHIC SCALE PLAT t 1n0[m i,oaa°rciiromsaa��ae Wirc °Y �•'�e;ow'rru'%s:;IIILAXOU80%, STONE h O'8A$Y tB•-2.9-Igo, CO�YnC EDCUUM s fno. 11 - U IJ '" (IIi F�1') Lw'ca�nmory °Fauv a ' ran L EwF.t.4iueeum. �tst J 1 In°h r 100 IL (eoz) saa-wo 2 OF 4 J AREA B LEGEND PROJECT BOUNDARY — ABUTTING PROPERTY LINE — SIDELINE OF NEW ROAD ROW NEW LOTUNE — — SIDELINE OF EASEMENT MIRE FENCE IRON PIPE • CONCRETE MONUMENT Ipf IRON PIPE FOUND —f CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND N/,F NOW OR FORMERLY STREAM 000v*-X REFER TO THE PERIMETER PLAT (SHEET 1 of 3) FOR ADDITIONAL SURVEY RELATED INFORMATION. REFER TO LOT LAYOUT SOUTH (SHEET 2 of 3) FOR SUBDIVISION LOTS SOUTH OF MIDLAND AVENUE THERE IS A 10' WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT ON THE LOTS ALONG BOTH SIDES OF ALL ROADS an a TWRI ewoAcrw eemlm rtR .¢cam Ao. re— A1 e'aLYw ruraJr Aw AmOletD ArI[sn mw mva AGMCAD er PEvoulllvr oI M pwmm ar®m o< ne: arc a scum euAnw�ac rx�r, a n[_lMr n R— wrm�u+»xam m�m.aff (scum ewwrzx n,vwu aercTa) PRELIMINARY FINAL O RECORD.' DRAWING DOMM FAIW DORSET STREET SOUTH SURUNGTON, VERMONT TES LOT LAYOUT NORTH PLAT me , LA ,•4I " & 01 Ina. , _tar u2 rm., RnewAe� E PLAN MIDLAI (36/136) GRAPHIC SCALE ( BT Ffa7 ) L IDoE - 200 ft (120/522 SEELBURNE LEGEND PROJECT BOUNDARY — ABUTTING PROPERTY LINE — SIDELINE OF NEW ROAD ROW NEW LOTUNE — — SIDELFIE OF EASEMENT WIRE FENCE IRON PIPE ■ CONCRETE MONUMENT Ipf IRON PIPE FOUND amf CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND N/F NOW OR FORMERLY STREAM SURVEY CONTROL (307/53) DEED REFERENCE OWNER MBL ASSOCIATES 70TAL ACREAGE 155.27 ACRES Area to U -Iiaa 155.32 Aww 1. THIS SURVEY WAS COMPILED FROM FIELD SURVEY AND RECORD RESEARCH INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING PLATS. 'BOUNDARY SURVEY-MBL ASSOCIATES' BY KREBS AND LANSING, DATED JANUARY 6, 1994. 'SOUTHEAST SUMMIT -PLAT OF SUBDIVISION OF LANDS-MBL ASSOCIATES', SHEETS 1-9 BY F1T2PATRICK/LLEWFLLYN, DATED JANUARY 6. 1904. 2. REFER TO SHEETS 2 of 3 AND 3 of 3 FOR LOT LAYOUTS AND EASEMENTS 3. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE ABOVE REFERENCED PLAN BY KREBS AND LANSING. n Of soI/w }AI.GId M[i'D1LD N7 AtmID AA IA — At O'0.0DY 1M/ILS_JI AID R49['iD M Arlp . 1pN 6kH( ,1P1'AOKD Fr /6aLNK1M Or K (LMMD colrsaw or nc a1r n Sd1M AII�AFIaIt ,aw�cr m n[ aa.Am[Krs d vD AlSAI/TM Ram OR�OAY Ot VC. (mrM ■wAaml aAM.D aasme) m FINAL ::1 RECORD DRAWING D0JW 1 FARM 97'Z- DORSET STREET +fr I ERD/GL SOUTH BURUNGTON, VERMONT COMMON AREA G PLAT V40F MO M°s' STONE it O' sexy Lpu Jmefbn, K WA61 (ml 676-4450 F■nA4n..�_tn.nnA«.r.finw.�..� }cw8d in pow. 101 —1.3 DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS, AND LIENS FOR DORSET FARMS, A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Dated as of April 13, 1998 [4/13/981 TABLE OF CONTENTS Paee ARTICLE 1 Submission, Defined Terms Section 1.1. Submission of Property; Creation .............................. 2 Section 1.2. Definitions ................................................ 3 ARTICLE 2 Declarant's Reserved Rights Section 2.1. Overview and Reservation of Rights By Declarant .................. 4 Section 2.2. Amendments .............................................. 5 Section 2.3. Contents of Amendments ..................................... 5 ARTICLE 3 Common Areas and Limited Common Areas Section 3.1. Common Areas ............................................ 6 Section 3.2. Limited Common Areas ...................................... 7 ARTICLE 4 The Association Section 4.1. Membership .............................................. 7 Section 4.2. Voting Rights ............................................. 7 Section 4.3. Board of Directors .......................................... 7 Section 4.4. Declarant Control .......................................... 8 Section 4.5. Miscellaneous 8 ARTICLE 5 Covenant for Onerating Maintenance Repair and Replacement Assessments Section 5.1. Creation of a Lien and Personal Obligation for Assessments .......... 9 Section 5.2. Purpose of Assessment ...................................... 10 Section 5.3. Budget for Assessments ..................................... 10 Section 5.4. Special Assessments ........................................ 10 Section 5.5. Annual Operating Assessment ................................ 10 [4/7/98] -1- ARTICLE 6 Unit Owner's Rights and Obligations in the Common Areas Section 6.1. Easement of Enjoyment ..................................... 11 Section 6.2. Easement Over Roads and for Storm Water Drainage .............. 11 Section 6.3. Declarant's Reserved Easements 11 Section 6.4. Use of Common Areas ...................................... 11 Section 6.5. Amendment .............. . ............................... 12 ARTICLE 7 Maintenance Section 7.1. Association Responsibility ................................... 12 Section 7.2. Additional Property ........................................ 12 Section 7.3. Unit Owner's Responsibility ................................. 12 Section 7.4. Declarant's Disclaimer for Security ................... . 12 ARTICLE 8 Permit Compliance Section 8.1. Permits ................................................. 13 Section 8.2. Responsibility ............................................. 14 Section 8.3. Specific Disclosures and Covenants ............................. 14 Section 8.4. Amendment .............................................. 15 ARTICLE 9 Architectural Review Covenants Conditions Easements Obligations and Restrictions Applicable to Lots Section 9.1. Architectural Review ....................................... 15 Section 9.2. Architectural Review and Approval ............................ 15 Section 9.3. General Covenants ........................................ 15 Section 9.4. Apartments .............................................. 18 Section 9.5. Enforcement ............................................. 18 ARTICLE 10 Condemnation. Damage or Destruction Section 10.1. Condemnation of Portion of Common Areas .................... 18 Section 10.2. Damage or Destruction .................................... Section 10.3. Insurance .............................................. 19 [4/7/981 - ii - ARTICLE 11 Amendment to or Termination of the Declaration Section 11.1. General ............................................... . Section 11.2. Rights Reserved in Declarant ............................... . Section 11.3. First Mortgagee Approval Required as to Certain Amendments ...... Section 11.4. Failure to Provide Negative Responses ......................... Section 11.5. Termination ............................................ . Section 11.6. Duration ........................................... . .. . Section 11.7. Compliance ............................................. ARTICLE 12 Rights Related to First Mortgagees 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 Section 12.1. General Rights to Notice ................................... 21 ARTICLE 13 Miscellaneous Section 13.1. Conflict ................................................ 21 Section 13.2. Waiver ................................................ 21 Section 13.3. Partition ............................................... 21 Section 13.4. Declarant's Disclaimer ..................................... 21 Section 13.5. Captions. Headings ....................................... 21 Section 13.6. Partial Invalidity ......................................... 21 Section 13.7. Governing Law .......................................... 22 Exhibits: Exhibit "A" - Description of Property and Additional Land Exhibit "B" - Description of Property Exhibit "C" - Description of Condominium Property [4/7/981 - iii - DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS, AND LIENS FOR DORSET FARMS, A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT This Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions, Easements, and Liens for Dorset Farms, a Planned Residential Development (the "Declaration") is made by MBL ASSOCIATES, a Vermont partnership with a place of business in Burlington, County of Chittenden, and State of Vermont (the "Declarant") Background 1. Declarant owns, in fee simple, unimproved land located on the east and west sides of Dorset Street in South Burlington, Vermont, said property consisting of 202 acres, more or less, and described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. 2. The land described in Exhibit "A" is presently approved by the City of South Burlington and the State of Vermont for the construction and development of two hundred twenty-one (221) residential units, one hundred and sixty one (161) of which are proposed to be detached single family residences on individual lots, and sixty (60) of which are proposed to be clustered condominium apartments (the "Project"). The Project is depicted on a four page set of plans entitled: "Dorset Farms, Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont," Sheets 1 through 4, prepared by Lamoureux, Stone & O'Leary Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated August 29, 1997 and October 7, 1997, approved by the South Burlington Planning Commission on December 29, 1997, and recorded in Plat Volume 404 at Pages 68-71 of the City of South Burlington Land Records, Sheet 1 being further revised on January 25, 1998 and Sheet 2 being further revised on January 22, 1998, as approved by the South Burlington Planning Commission on March 3, 1998 and recorded in Map Volume 404 at Pages 84-85 of the City of South Burlington Land Records (the "Plans"). The Project was formerly depicted on a 47 page set of plans, entitled: "Southeast Summit, Overall Site Plan," prepared by Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn, Inc., dated October, 1992, last revised April 14, 1994, pages 1 though 12 being recorded in Plat Volume 365 at Pages 44-56 of the City of South Burlington Lands Records, and as shown on a 9 page subdivision plat entitled: "Southeast Summit, Plat of Subdivision of Lands of MBL Associates, Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn, Inc., dated January 6, 1994, last revised April 15, 1994, recorded in Plat Volume 365 at Pages 35-43 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 3. Declarant intends to subject, in a phased manner, most of the land described in Exhibit "A" to the terms and conditions of this Declaration. Those portions of the land described in Exhibit "A" which will be specifically excluded from this Declaration include areas to be dedicated to the City of South Burlington, including the project roadways, the public recreation paths, storm water drainage easements, sewer line easements and a sanitary sewer pump station. PRD Common Area E2 (containing 28.33 acres) and PRD Common Area G (containing 45.47 acres), which are depicted on the Plans may also be excluded. 4. At this time, Declarant is proceeding with the development of one hundred and sixty one (161) detached single family residences on individual lots (the "Lots"), and thirty two (32) clustered condominium apartments in sixteen (16) duplex buildings on PRD Common Area F (the "Phase I Apartments"), all as shown on the Plans. The Declarant will establish a master association known as the Dorset Farms Homeowners Association, Inc., a Vermont non-profit corporation (the "Association"), the control of which is described in further detail in this Declaration. The owners of the Lots and Phase I Apartments will be members of the Association. The Declarant intends to convey PRD Common Area A 14ni981 (9.78 acres), PRD Common Area B (19.39 acres), PRD Common Area C (19,755 square feet), PRD Common Area D (3.95 acres), PRD Common Area E1 (4.75 acres), PRD Common Area E4 (19.77 acres), and PRD Common Area H (22,482 square feet) to the Association, which will be responsible for the maintenance, repair and upkeep of these areas. The Association will also be responsible for the maintenance, repair and replacement of additional common elements and facilities described in this Declaration, including the emergency access road and the storm water drainage basins depicted on the Plans. 5. The Declarant will also declare a condominium, known as Dorset Farms Condominium I, for the Phase I Apartments which will be located on PRD Common Area F. Except as otherwise set forth herein, the common condominium improvements and infrastructure located on PRD Common Area F will be separately maintained, repaired, replaced and insured by Dorset Farms Condominium Association 1, Inc., a Vermont non-profit corporation which will be established by Declarant ("Condominium Association I"). Each Phase I Apartment owner will also be a member of Condominium Association I. Additional details relating to the assessments and control of the Condominium Association I are set forth in the Declaration of Condominium for Dorset Farms Condominium I and the Bylaws for Dorset Farms Condominium Association 1, Inc., to be recorded in the City of South Burlington Land Records. 6. The Declarant intends to submit the remaining twenty eight (28) clustered condominium apartments in fourteen (14) duplex buildings (the "Phase II Apartments") to the terms of this Declaration at a later time. The Phase II Apartments will be located on PRD Common Area E3 (8.79 acres), as shown on the Plans. The Phase II Apartments will be established by a separate declaration of condominium (e.g., Declaration of Condominium for Dorset Farms Condominium II), and will be operated by a separate condominium association (e.g., the Dorset Farms Condominium Association 11, Inc.). When the Phase II Apartments are established, the Declarant will record an amendment to this Declaration which will: (i) cause the Phase 11 Apartment owners to become members of the Dorset Farms Homeowners Association, Inc., subject to and benefitted by the terms and conditions of this Declaration; and (ii) incorporate the new common areas to the terms of this Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, Declarant hereby makes and executes this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions, Easements and Liens for the purposes stated herein and upon the following terms and conditions. ARTICLE 1 Submission, Defined Terms Section 1.1. Submission of Property; Creation. Declarant hereby declares the land described in Exhibit "B," attached hereto (the "Property") to be subject to and held, transferred, sold, conveyed, leased, occupied, and used subject to all of the terms and conditions of this Declaration, all for the purpose of protecting the ambience and desirability of the planned residential development and establishing sound environmental and social values, said terms and conditions, including the covenants, conditions, easements, obligations, charges, liens, restrictions and reservations contained herein, to run with the land and be binding on all parties holding any right, title or interest in the land or any part thereof described in Exhibit "B," and their heirs, successors and assigns. [4/7/98] - 2 - Section 1.2. Definitions. Unless the context shall prohibit, certain words used in this Declaration shall have the following meanings: "Additional Property" shall mean any or all of the land described in Exhibit "A" which is presently not subject to but which may be subjected to this Declaration and become part of Dorset Farms in accordance with the provisions of this Declaration. "Apartment" shall mean a condominium apartment which is established pursuant to a declaration of condominium and the Vermont Condominium Ownership Act, 27 V.S.A. § 1301 et seq. The buildings within which each Apartment is located and the lands subject to the declaration of condominium are depicted on the Plans and described in Exhibit "C," attached hereto, as the same may be amended from time to time. The ownership of each Apartment shall include, and there shall pass with each Apartment as an appurtenance thereto, membership in the Association, together with membership in a condominium association. Each Apartment shall for all purposes constitute real property which may be owned in fee simple and which may be conveyed, transferred, or encumbered in the same manner as any other real property, subject to this Declaration and the terms and conditions of the declaration of condominium establishing the Apartments. "Assessments" shall mean the periodic assessments by the Association to cover the costs of the operation of the Association and maintenance, repair, and replacement of all Common Areas which are to be maintained by the Association, including the accumulation of reserves for future contingencies. "Association" shall mean and refer to the Dorset Farms Homeowners Association, Inc., a Vermont non-profit corporation organized under the laws of the State of Vermont, and its successors and assigns. The Owner of each Apartment or Lot shall be a member of the Association. "Board of Directors" or "Board" shall mean the persons elected or appointed as such in accordance with this Declaration and the Bylaws which shall be the governing authority of the Association and its duly authorized agents. "Bylaws" shall refer to the Bylaws of the Dorset Farms Homeowners Association, Inc., which are incorporated herein by reference. "Common Areas" shall mean those parcels of the Property, all improvements thereon and appurtenances thereto, conveyed to and owned by the Association for the benefit and enjoyment of the members of the Association, and their family, guests, invitees, and/or tenants. "Common Expenses" shall mean all lawful expenditures made or incurred by or on behalf of the Association in administering its duties including, but not by way of limitation, assessments for capital improvement escrow accounts and reserves for maintenance and replacement accounts for the Common Areas, landscaping, the storm water drainage system, and other purposes voted for by the Association. "Declarant" shall mean and refer to MBL Associates, and its assigns, provided any such successor declarant shall acquire for the purpose of development or sale all or any portion of the remaining undeveloped or unsold portions of the real property described in Exhibit "B," attached hereto, and further provided that upon such designation of such successor declarant, all rights of the Declarant in and to such status with respect to such property as Declarant hereunder shall cease. [4/7/98] - 3 - "Dwelling" shall mean the single-family residential structure, including garage, if any, which is located on a Lot. "First Mortgagee" shall mean any commercial or savings bank, savings and loan association, trust company, mortgage company, insurance company, private mortgage insurance company, pension fund, person, corporation or business entity, including a corporation of or affiliated with the United States Government or any agency thereof, the Veterans Administration, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, Federal National Mortgage Association, Federal Credit Union, and any other entities chartered under federal or state laws or agencies, which is the holder of any first mortgage lien, or the beneficiary under any first deed of trust encumbering a Unit. The term "Mortgage" shall be deemed to include both mortgages and deeds of trust. "Lot" shall mean a portion of the Property, other than the Common Areas, intended for individual ownership and use as permitted in this Declaration and as numbered and depicted on the Plans. Each Lot shall contain one Dwelling only. The ownership of each Lot shall include, and there shall pass with each Lot as an appurtenance thereto, membership in the Association. Each Lot shall for all purposes constitute real property which may be owned in fee simple and which may be conveyed, transferred, or encumbered in the same manner as any other real property. "Owner" shall mean and refer to the record owner, whether one or more persons, of the fee simple title to any Lot or Apartment, excluding, however, any person holding such interest merely as security for the performance or satisfaction of any obligation of an Owner. "Person" shall mean a person, as well as a corporation, limited liability company, partnership (general or limited), association, trustee or other legal entity. "Plans" shall mean the four page set of plans entitled: "Dorset Farms, Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont," Sheets 1 through 4, prepared by Lamoureux, Stone & O'Leary Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated August 29, 1997 and October 7, 1997, approved by the South Burlington Planning Commission on December 29, 1997, and recorded in Plat Volume 404 at Pages 68-71 of the City of South Burlington Land Records, Sheet 1 being further revised on January 25, 1998 and Sheet 2 being further revised on January 22, 1998, as approved by the South Burlington Planning Commission on March 3, 1998 and recorded in Map Volume 404 at Pages 84-85 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. "Property" shall mean the real property, together with any improvements located thereon, which is declared and subjected to this Declaration by incorporation in the description set forth in Exhibit "B," as amended from time to time. "Unit" shall mean and refer to an Apartment or a Lot as defined herein. ARTICLE 2 Declarant's Reserved Rights Section 2.1. Overview and Reservation of Rights By Declarant. Declarant intends to complete the development of the Project on the Property and to submit portions of the Additional Property to the terms and conditions of this Declaration for the purpose of developing the Phase II Apartments and for adding additional common areas to the Project. To accomplish these goals, Declarant reserves the following rights in the Property in connection with the development of the Project and the future development of the [4/7/98] - 4 - Additional Property, thereby creating easements on, over, through and under the Property, and reserves the following discretionary rights with respect to the kind, extent, and nature of subsequent development and construction on the Additional Property which will be declared and subjected to this Declaration and become part of Dorset Farms: (a) Declarant's reservation of the right to modify and enlarge existing utilities, roadways, walkways, and other improvements; construct and install additional utilities, roadways, walkways and other improvements on, above, under, or through the Property which are necessary or desirable for the benefit and use of existing Units or future Units subsequently made part of Dorset Farms; to make connections to existing roadways, utilities, walkways, and/or improvements for the benefit of the Additional Property; or other adjacent properties, provided, however, that such rights shall be exercised so as not to cause unreasonable interference with the use of existing Units, and that such construction is completed promptly after commencement of construction and the improvements are of similar quality to those already existing. (b) Declarant's reservation of the right to display signs, to use any Apartment or Dwelling as a model and/or sales office with the right to relocate the same from time to time, to rent any Units which Declarant owns and which have not been sold, and any other rights which will aid Declarant in the construction and sale of the Units as the Project is completed. (c) Declarant's right to change, alter or modify the configuration, materials, architectural and engineering design, or size of future Units subsequently made a part of Dorset Farms. (d) Declarant's right for a period of seven (7) years from the date of this Declaration, to unilaterally file amendments to this Declaration to declare and subject Additional Property to this Declaration; to change the number of Units, the perimeter boundary of any Lot or the Common Areas, to change the mix between Lots and Apartments, to and realign roadways, utilities, and other improvements; provided, however, that in no event shall the total number of Units in the Project exceed 221, or the Property consist of land other than the Additional Property. (e) Declarant's right to terminate the plan to develop the Additional Property. The Project shall be deemed complete in all respects upon completion of construction of the Units and any improvements on the Land at any point in time. A Unit Owner, by acceptance and recordation of an instrument conveying title to a Unit, and a First Mortgagee by holding a mortgage secured by a Unit, shall be deemed to have been given notice and to have consented to all the rights and discretions reserved by Declarant in this Article 2, including specifically, but not by way of limitation, the right of Declarant to amend the Declaration to declare and subject Additional Property, Units and Common Areas to the Project. Section 2.2. Amendments. The Declarant shall have the unilateral right to file the amendments described in Section 2.1 of this Article. Section 2.3. Contents of Amendments. If the conditions set forth in Section 2.2 have been satisfied, Declarant may execute and file an amendment to this Declaration which shall be filed in the Land Records of the City of South Burlington, Vermont. Upon amending Exhibit `B" to add Additional Property, the Additional Property shall become a portion of the Property as defined under this Declaration [4/7/98] - 5 and shall be subject to all of the terms and conditions herein. In addition, the amendment to this Declaration shall include, but not by way of limitation, the following: (a) A specific metes and bounds description of the Additional Property being added to this Declaration, and a statement that the Additional Property shall be subject to the terms of this Declaration, and that the jurisdiction of the Association is extended to cover the Additional Property. (b) Extending all Unit Owners' rights and non-exclusive easements of enjoyment in and to any Common Areas within the Additional Property in accordance with the terms contained in the amendment to this Declaration, and subjecting all present and additional Units to the obligation to contribute to the cost of improvement, operation, maintenance and repair of the Common Areas. ARTICLE 3 Common Areas and Limited Common Areas Section 3.1. Common Areas. (a) The Common Areas shall consist of all the real and personal property and interests therein, together with the facilities and improvements located thereon, now or hereafter owned by the Association or held for the common use and enjoyment of the Unit Owners. The Common Areas include the lands and premises described in Exhibit `B" together with all improvements thereon and appurtenances thereto, except the Lots, PRD Common Area F, which will be owned by the Apartment Owners of Dorset Farms Condominium I, PRD Common Area E3, which will be owned by the Apartment Owners of Dorset Farms Condominium Il, and the roadways, pedestrian/recreation paths, and storm water drainage and sewer easements depicted on the Plans, which will be conveyed to the City of South Burlington as public improvements. The Common Areas also include those portions of the storm water drainage system, including storm water outflow devices and infiltration systems, pipes, swales, detention ponds, and catch basins, and those portions of the water lines, sewer lines, and force mains which are located outside the boundaries of a public right of way, the boundaries of a particular Lot, the boundaries of PRD Common Area F or the boundaries of PRD Common Area E3. (b) Except as otherwise set forth herein, the Common Areas shall, after having been conveyed to the Association by Declarant, remain the property of the Association and shall be devoted to the common use and enjoyment of all Unit Owners. No Unit Owner or any other person shall maintain any action for partition or division thereof. The Common Areas may be developed only as specifically authorized by the City of South Burlington and the State of Vermont. (c) Each Unit Owner may use the Common Areas in accordance with the purposes for which they were intended without hindering or encroaching upon the lawful rights of other Unit Owners. Use of the Common Areas shall be subject to the limitations set forth herein and as may otherwise be limited by the Declaration, Bylaws, and the Rules and Regulations regarding the use thereof as may be established from time to time by the Board of Directors. [4/7/981 - ( - Section 3.2. Limited Common Areas. A Limited Common Area is a portion of the Common Areas allocated for the exclusive use of one or more, but fewer than all, of the Unit Owners. ARTICLE 4 The Association Section 4.1. Membership. (a) Each Unit shall be assigned one appurtenant and indivisible membership in the Association which may not be assigned, hypothecated, pledged or transferred in any manner except as an indivisible appurtenance to the Unit. Multiple or joint Owners of a single Unit shall be treated for all purposes as jointly owning and holding the one membership appurtenant to that particular Unit. (b) A membership appurtenant to a Unit shall be initiated by either: (i) the recording of a deed in the City of South Burlington Land Records conveying a Unit to a purchaser; or (ii) the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for a Unit by the City of South Burlington, whichever sooner occurs. Once a membership is initiated, liability for Assessments shall automatically commence. Membership in the Association shall be owned and held by each Unit Owner, including the Declarant with respect to unsold Units which have been issued a certificate of occupancy by the City of South Burlington. (c) The number of memberships in the Association shall automatically increase as Additional Property is declared and subjected to this Declaration and Units are sold and constructed thereon. No membership rights or liability for Assessments shall be allocated or attributed to a Unit until the Unit is either sold or has been issued a certificate of occupancy. (d) Liability for Assessments shall be prorated equally among the members existing in the Association at any point in time, unless altered as hereinafter set forth in Section 4.5(b). Section 4.2. Voting Rights. Initially, there shall be two classes of membership in the Association, voting memberships and non -voting memberships. A voting membership shall be any membership owned and held by Declarant as a Unit Owner. A non -voting membership shall be any membership owned and held by any Unit Owner other than Declarant. All memberships in the Association shall automatically become voting memberships: (i) one hundred and twenty (120) days after the sale by Declarant of seventy five percent (75%) of the proposed 221 Units in the Project; (ii) seven (7) years after the date of this Declaration; or (c) upon Declarant amending the Bylaws to make all memberships voting memberships, whichever is the first to occur. Thereafter only one class of voting membership shall exist. When a membership is a voting membership, each Unit Owner, or one of the Unit Owners if record title in a Unit is held by more than one person, shall be entitled to vote in any meeting of the membership. Section 4.3. Board of Directors. The initial Board of Directors shall be three (3) in number and shall be appointed by the Declarant acting in its sole discretion and shall serve at the pleasure of the Declarant, so long as the Declarant retains control of the Association. The initial directors shall serve: (i) until 120 days after the sale by Declarant of seventy-five percent (75%) of the proposed 221 Units in the Project; (ii) a period of seven (7) years from the date of this Declaration; or (iii) upon Declarant voluntarily [4/7/98] -7- relinquishing control of the Association, whichever is the first to occur. At that time, a meeting of the Association shall be held to elect a new Board of Directors from among the Unit Owners. Section 4.4. Declarant Control. The Declarant will convey to the Association marketable title to the Common Areas, and such portions of the Additional Property which will be designated as Common Areas, by standard Warranty Deed(s) and/or Easement Deed(s) for One Dollar ($1.00), and the Association will accept said title. Said conveyance of title (and the transfer of control of the Association which may or may not be made at the same time) shall be made: (i) one hundred and twenty (120) days after the sale by Declarant of seventy-five percent (75%) of the proposed 221 Units in the Project; (ii) seven (7) years from the date of this Declaration; or (iii) voluntary relinquishment in writing by the Declarant, whichever is the first to occur. If Additional Property is added, the transfer of title and control may be made separately for each portion of Property added in the sole discretion of the Declarant. Section 4.5. Miscellaneous. In addition to any other powers and authority given the Association or its Board of Directors in the Bylaws or in this Declaration: (a) The Board of Directors of the Association shall have the authority to perform any duties and provide any services which a condominium association within the Project may request to be performed or assumed by the Association, provided that the condominium association, acting as agent for the Association, collects any Assessments from the Apartments for the performance of the duties or provision of the services, and delivers said assessment monies to the Association. Separate bookkeeping records shall be maintained to insure that Lots are not being assessed for duties or services provided for the sole benefit of the Apartments. (b) Common Expenses of the Association shall be borne equally among the Units, except that the Board of Directors may allocate expenses among the Units on a different basis if the basis is reasonably related to the benefits of the services provided. In addition, allocation of expenses to Units constructed and owned by Declarant, but not occupied, may be less than Assessments allocated to Apartments and Lots which have been conveyed to persons other than Declarant. (c) The Board of Directors may enter into a management agreement to operate the affairs of the Association until such time as all memberships in the Association become voting memberships. At the time all memberships become voting memberships, any management agreement entered into by Declarant may be terminated by the Association without cause upon giving ninety (90) days notice. (d) The Association shall maintain current copies of its Declaration, Bylaws, and any Rules and Regulations concerning the Project, as well as its own books, records and financial statements. These will be available for inspection by Unit Owners or First Mortgagees. In addition, the Association must provide an audited financial statement for the preceding fiscal year upon the written request of any First Mortgagee once the Project exceeds fifty Units. [4/7/981 - 8 - ARTICLE 5 Covenant for Operating, Maintenance, Repair and Replacement Assessments Section 5.1. Creation of a Lien and Personal Obligation for Assessments. (a) Each Unit Owner, by the acceptance and recordation of a deed or other instrument conveying title to a Unit, whether or not it be so expressed in such deed or instrument, is deemed to covenant and agree to pay to the Association: (i) annual Assessments to pay for Common Expenses; and (ii) special Assessments for capital improvements, and reserves for maintenance, replacement, or modification of the Common Areas, and for such other purposes voted by the Association. (b) The annual and special Assessments, together with interest, costs and reasonable attorneys' fees arising from the Association's efforts to collect the Assessment, shall be a charge against the Unit and shall be a continuing lien upon the Unit against which each such Assessment is made, subordinate only, as to a Lot, the lien of a first mortgage thereon, and, as to an Apartment, the lien of a first mortgage thereon and the lien of the condominium association. Each Assessment, together with interest, costs and reasonable attorneys' fees arising from the Association's efforts to collect the Assessment, shall also be the personal obligation of the Unit Owner who was the Unit Owner of a Unit at the time when the Assessment became due. (c) No Unit Owner shall be exempt from liability for Assessments by attempted waiver of the use or enjoyment of any of the Common Areas, by abandonment of a Unit, or for any other reason. Prior to or at the time of any conveyance of a Unit, all liens and Assessments shall be paid in full to the Association and discharged by the Association. The purchaser of a Unit shall be jointly and severally liable with the selling Unit Owner for all unpaid Assessments against the latter, up to the time of recording of the instrument transferring ownership of the Unit, without prejudice to the purchaser's right to recover from the selling Unit Owner amounts which may have been paid by the purchaser; provided, however, that any such purchaser shall be entitled to a statement setting forth the amount of the unpaid Assessments against the selling Unit Owner within five (5) days following a written request to the Association, and the purchaser shall not be liable for, nor shall the Unit being conveyed be subject to a lien for any unpaid Assessments in excess of the amount set forth in the statement from the Association; except that each First Mortgagee who comes into possession of a Unit by virtue of foreclosure (or by deed or assignment in lieu of foreclosure), or any purchaser at a foreclosure sale, shall take ownership of the Unit free and clear of all unpaid Assessments or charges against said Unit which had become due or were delinquent prior to the acquisition of title to such Unit by the mortgagee or foreclosure sale purchaser. The Association shall provide any Unit Owner, contract purchaser or mortgagee so requesting the same with a written statement of all unpaid Assessments against the Unit. (d) The Association shall take prompt action to collect any Assessments which remain unpaid for more than thirty (30) days from the due date for payment thereof. Any Assessment not paid within ten (10) days of its due date shall bear interest from the due date at the rate of one percent (1%) per month, or at such other legal rate as may be fixed by the Board of Directors from time to time, and may additionally accrue a late charge if the Board of [4/7/98] - 9 - Directors establishes one at any time. The Association shall also be entitled to recover all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred by the Association to collect Assessments. (e) Until all Units are conveyed by Declarant to a third party, or have received a certificate of occupancy, Declarant shall be legally bound to cover any deficits or shortages that may arise in the Project's initial period of operation. Section 5.2. Purpose of Assessment. The Assessments levied by the Association shall be used to promote the recreation, health, safety and welfare of the Unit Owners; to maintain, repair and replace the Common Areas; to meet all requirements for capital improvements; and to meet all other expenses and obligations incurred by the Association, including but not by way of limitation, management fees, administrative expenses, corporate fees, real estate taxes, income taxes, insurance premiums, costs of monitoring, and other demands imposed or required by existing permits or approvals, or by subsequent amendments thereto. Section 5.3. Budget for Assessments. The Board of Directors of the Association shall project and determine the total Assessments necessary to meet the expenses and reserve needs for each upcoming year in accordance with the Bylaws. Section 5.4. Special Assessments. The Board of Directors shall levy special Assessments as follows: (a) The Board of Directors may, in any assessment year, include a capital Assessment to fund the cost of any construction, repair or replacement of any capital improvement located in the Common Areas. The methods and requirements for said capital Assessment are more fully set forth in the Bylaws. If a proposed capital Assessment is for a new capital improvement, rather than the continuing construction, repair or replacement of an existing capital improvement, the proposed capital Assessment shall be approved by the membership at a duly -warned meeting at which a quorum is present by vote in favor by more than eighty-five percent (85%) of the votes cast. (b) The Board of Directors shall, in any fiscal year, approve a special Assessment when required for the purpose of replacing any and all diseased trees, bushes or other landscaping which was required and approved as part of the Land Use Permit 4C0948-EB. Section 5.5. Annual Operating Assessment. Each year, the Board of Directors shall establish a budget for an operating fund to be used to cover the on -going annual expenses of the Association, including, but not limited to, those expenses itemized in Section 5.2. The Assessments shall be billed and collected on a monthly basis unless otherwise voted by the Board of Directors. Assessments shall be paid in advance in a manner initially established by the Declarant which complies with the requirements of FNMA and/or FHLMC, and thereafter in a manner as may be subsequently adopted by the Board of Directors. [4/7/981 - 10 - ARTICLE 6 Unit Owner's Rights and Obligations in the Common Areas Section 6.1. Easement of Enjoyment. Each Unit Owner shall have an unrestricted right and easement in common with others for ingress, egress, use and enjoyment in and to the Common Areas, which right and easement shall be appurtenant to and pass with the title to every Unit, subject to the following limitations, obligations and provisions: (a) The right of the Association to charge reasonable admission and other fees for the use of any recreational facility or area situated or constructed in or on the Common Areas. (b) The right of the Association to suspend the right to use any of the Common Areas or recreational facilities by any Unit Owner for a period during which any Assessment against the Unit remains unpaid; and for a period not to exceed ninety (90) days for any infraction of the Association's published Rules and Regulations. Section 6.2. Easement Over Roads and for Storm Water Drainage. Each Unit Owner shall have an unrestricted right of way and easement in common with others for utilities and for pedestrian and vehicular access over, under and through the Project roadways until such roadways are accepted by the City of South Burlington as public streets. Each Unit shall be subject to and benefitted by easements for the shared use of the storm water drainage system depicted on the Plans, including, without limitation, easements for the use of storm water Basin C located on PRD Common Area E2. Section 6.3. Declarant's Reserved Easements. There is hereby reserved to the Declarant and its successors and assigns blanket easements upon, across, above, and under the Property, including the Common Areas, for access, ingress, egress, installation, repairing, replacing, and maintaining all utilities serving the Property or any portion thereof, including, but not limited to, gas, water, sewer, telephone, and electricity, as well as storm water drainage and other services, such as, but not limited to, a master television and/or radio system, or cable television system. It shall be expressly permissible for the Declarant, the Association, or their designees, as the case may be, to install, repair, replace, and maintain or to authorize the installation, repairing, replacing, and maintaining of such wires, conduits, cables, and other equipment related to the providing of any such utility or service. Should any party furnishing any such utility or service request a specific license or easement by separate recordable document, the Board of Directors shall have the right to grant such easement. Declarant also reserves for itself, and its successors and assigns, a non-exclusive, perpetual right, privilege, and easement with respect to the Property for the benefit of Declarant, its successors and assigns, over, under, in, and/or on the Property, without obligation and without charge to Declarant, for the purpose of completing the Project, including the construction, installation, development, sale, lease, maintenance, repair, replacement, use, and enjoyment of the Units on the Property and/or otherwise dealing with the Property. Section 6.4. Use of Common Areas. The Common Areas shall be for the use and enjoyment of any Unit Owner, members of the immediately family of a Unit Owner, invitees or guests of a Unit Owner, or tenants or contract purchasers occupying a Unit. Rules and Regulations regarding the use of the Common Areas, which may regulate the number of guests allowed, the hours of use, and all other matters appropriate to maintain health and safety, shall be promulgated and adopted by the Board of Directors of the Association. [4/7/981 - I I - No use or practice shall be permitted in the Common Areas which would be a source of annoyance to other Unit Owners or adjoining properties outside the Project. The Common Areas shall be kept in a clean and sanitary condition, and no rubbish, refuse, or garbage shall be allowed to accumulate. No immoral, improper, offensive, or unlawful use of the Common Areas shall be permitted. No motorized vehicles of any type including, but not limited to, trail bikes, go-carts, snowmobiles, or all terrain vehicles shall be allowed in the Common Areas. Section 6.5. Amendment. No amendment to Section 6.4 of this Article shall be valid unless the amendment has first been approved by the Association pursuant to the terms of this Declaration, and thereafter and prior to becoming effective, has received the written approval of the District #4 Environmental Commission or the Environmental Board. Such written approval by the District #4 Environmental Commission or the Environmental Board shall be recorded in the City of South Burlington Land Records along with any amendment to Section 6.4. ARTICLE 7 Maintenance Section 7.1. Association Responsibility. The Association shall maintain and keep in good repair at all times the Common Areas, including, without limitation, the streets, roadways, sewer lines, water lines, storm water drainage lines and the sewer pump station located on PRD Common Area G until the same are accepted by the City of South Burlington as public facilities, and those portions of the storm water drainage system (including storm water outflow devices and infiltration systems, pipes, swales, detention ponds, and catch basins), and those portions of the water lines, sewer lines, and force mains which are located outside the boundaries of a public right of way, the boundaries of a particular Lot, the boundaries of PRD Common Area F, or the boundaries of PRD Common Area E3. The Association shall also be responsible for the maintenance of PRD Common Area H, the emergency access road located on PRD Common Area E2, and the specific maintenance requirements set forth in Section 8.3 of this Declaration. Section 7.2. Additional Property. In the event that Declarant adds Additional Property to this Declaration, the Unit Owners of such Additional Property will become members of the Association and the Association shall be responsible for the maintenance of the Common Areas and Limited Common Areas located on the Additional Property. Section 7.3. Unit Owner's Responsibility. Each Lot Owner shall maintain his or her Lot and all improvements thereon and thereto in good repair. Such maintenance shall be consistent with this Declaration. In addition, each Lot Owner shall be responsible for paying the real estate taxes assessed against the Lot, for insuring the Lot and all improvements thereon, and for maintaining all private electricity, telephone, cable television, and water or sewer pipes, lines, ducts, conduits, or other apparatus which serve only the Lot. Each Apartment Owner shall be responsible for paying the real estate taxes assessed against the Apartment, for insuring the contents of the Apartment, and for maintaining their Apartment in accordance with the terms of the declaration of condominium. Section 7.4. Declarant's Disclaimer for Security. Neither the Association nor the Declarant shall be held liable for any loss or damage by reason of failure to provide adequate security or ineffectiveness of security measures undertaken. All Owners, tenants, guests, and invitees of any Owner, as applicable, acknowledge that the Declarant and the Association are not insurers and that each Owner, tenant, guest, and invitee assumes all risk of loss or damage to persons, to buildings, and to contents of buildings, and further acknowledge that neither the Declarant nor the Association has made any representation or warranty, [4/7/98] - 12 - nor has any Owner, tenant, guest, or invitee relied upon any representation or warranty, express or implied, including any warranty of merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose relative to any security measures recommended or undertaken. ARTICLE 8 Permit Compliance Section 8.1. Permits. The overall development plan permitting up to 221 Units has obtained municipal and state permits and approvals, including but not limited to the following: (a) October 12, 1993 Final Plat Approval from the South Burlington Planning Commission. (b) May 10, 1994 Revised Final Plat approval from the South Burlington Planning Commission. (c) August 8, 1995 Revised Final Plat approval from the South Burlington Planning Commission. (d) December 29, 1997 Revised Final Plat approval from the South Burlington Planning Commission. (e) March 3, 1998 Revised Final Plat approval from the South Burlington Planning Commission. (f) Conditional Use Determination by Vermont Agency of Natural Resources dated December 20, 1994 and recorded in Volume 373 at Pages 2-10 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. (g) Land Use Permit No. 4C0948-EB dated June 20, 1995 and recorded in Volume 379 at Page 375 of the City of South Burlington Land Records, as modified by Land Use Permit No. 4C0948-EB (Altered) dated January 30, 1996, and as it may be amended from time to time. (h) Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit No. WW-4-0710 dated August 4, 1994, amended by Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit No. WW-4-0710-1 dated March 12, 1998, as it may be subsequently amended from time to time. (i) State Subdivision Permit No. EC-4-1795 dated August 4, 1994 and recorded in Volume 270 at Page 371 of the City of South Burlington Land Records, amended by State Subdivision Permit No. EC-4-1795-1 dated March 12, 1998 and recorded in Volume 425 at Page 364 of the City of South Burlington Land Records, as it may be subsequently amended from time to time. (j) May 3, 1994 Public Water System Permit WSID 45091, and as it may be amended from time to time. (k) September 7, 1994 State of Vermont Discharge Permit No. 1-1169, and as it may be amended from time to time. [4/14/981 - 13 - These permits and approvals include conditions which require disclosures to purchasers, demand the establishment of responsibilities to assure the maintenance, repair, replacement or modification of systems, establish monitoring and inspection requirements, and require certain construction standards be adhered to as Units are constructed. Section 8.2. Responsibility. Declarant hereby designates and empowers the Association to be responsible for: (i) assuring that all demands, conditions, covenants, and disclosures contained in the permits and approvals are continually complied with; and (ii) establishing the necessary Assessments and accounting systems to insure that all continuing obligations for monitoring, inspecting, maintaining, repairing, modifying and replacing as called for in permits and approvals are achieved and the fiscal capability to perform the obligations is in place. Section 8.3. Specific Disclosures and Covenants. In addition to all other disclosures, covenants, and responsibilities contained in this Declaration, Declarant and/or the Association are charged with and required to insure that the following permit and approval requirements are met, and accordingly the Property is declared to be subject to the following where appropriate: (a) All heated structures shall be constructed with insulation to an R-value of at least R-19 in the exterior walls, at least R-38 in the roof or cap, and at least R-10 around the foundation or slab. All slabs shall be thermally sealed from the foundation. All residential buildings shall have Thermopane windows. The lighting fixtures in any utility buildings shall have energy efficient ballasts. The installation or use of electricity as a primary heating source is prohibited. (b) All Units shall be constructed with water conserving plumbing fixtures including low -flush toilets, low -flow showerheads, and aerator or flow -restricted faucets, and no Unit Owner shall remove or replace them except with fixtures of a similar water conserving nature. (c) Those portions of the Property which are identified as fire lanes shall be kept clear of all obstacles, no parking shall be permitted in said fire lanes, and no storage or other activities which would interfere with the use of the lanes for the purposes intended shall be permitted. (d) The Association shall continually maintain all Common Areas, facilities, recreational amenities, and landscaping substantially as approved by the City of South Burlington and the Environmental Board, including, without limitation, the maintenance, repair and snow plowing of the emergency access road which crosses PRD Common Area E2, as depicted on the Plans, until such time as the east -west collector road (e.g., Midland Avenue) is extended to and connected with Spear Street, and the maintenance of the retention ponds which are identified as Basin A, Basin B, and Basin C on the Plans. (e) To maintain the scenic character of the area, the Association shall mow the grassy areas within PRD Common Area B and PRD Common Area E 1 at least once per year. (f) PRD Common Area A, PRD Common Area B, PRD Common Area C, PRD Common Area D, PRD Common Area El, and PRD Common Area E4 shall be used for conservation and non -motorized recreational uses only. [4i7i98] - 14 - (g) Portions of the Common Areas contain Class Two wetlands and 50 foot buffer zones. The wetland areas must be allowed to regenerate woody vegetation and no woody vegetation shall be cleared or cut in these areas without the prior written approval of the Department of Environmental Conservation, Water Quality Division. Section 8.4. Amendment. For as long as the District #4 Environmental Commission or the Environmental Board retains jurisdiction, no amendment of the terms of this Article shall be effective without the prior written consent of the District #4 Environmental Commission or the Environmental Board. ARTICLE 9 Architectural Review, Covenants, Conditions, Easements, Obligations and Restrictions Applicable to Lots Section 9.1. Architectural Review. In order to ensure that development of the Lots is undertaken in a manner consistent with this Declaration, no dwelling, building, addition, fence, wall or other structure (an "Improvement") shall be commenced, erected or maintained upon a Lot except for: (a) Improvements installed by the Declarant; or (b) Improvements which have been approved as set forth below in Section 9.2. Section 9.2. Architectural Review and Approval. All plans for the construction of Improvements, other than those which have been installed by the Declarant, shall be submitted to an architectural review committee (the "Architectural Review Committee"). Each member of the Board of Directors of the Association shall be a member of the Architectural Review Committee. Submitted plans shall include exterior elevations and specifications showing the nature, kind, shape, height, exterior materials, location and proposed grading for the Improvements (the "Plans"). The Architectural Review Committee shall promptly review and approve any Plans which satisfy the architectural review standards (the "Standards") which may be promulgated by the Committee from time to time. The Architectural Review Committee may deny approval for any Plans which: (a) are not consistent with the terms and requirements of this Declaration; (b) are incompatible with the existing architectural design or layout of the Project; (c) are not consistent with the Standards; or (d) are not in compliance with all applicable state and local permit requirements, statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations. The failure of the Architectural Review Committee to approve or deny Plans within sixty (60) days after the date the Plans are submitted shall be deemed to be an approval of the Plans, and no further approval from the Architectural Review Committee shall be required for the construction of the Improvements described in the Plans. Section 9.3. General Covenants. In order to insure the use of the Lots for attractive residential purposes only, to prevent nuisances and the impairment of the attractiveness of the Project, and to secure to each owner of a Lot the full benefit and enjoyment of his or her home with no greater restriction on the free and undisturbed use of the Lot other than necessary to insure the same advantages for other Unit Owners, Declarant does hereby declare that the following protective covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall apply to each and every Lot. (a) Residential Use. All Lots shall be used for permanent single-family residential purposes only. This covenant in no way restricts an Owner's right to rent a Unit as a single-family residence except that all such rentals shall be evidenced by a written lease which must be for a minimum term of thirty (30) days. No building or structure intended for or adapted to business, commercial or industrial purposes, and no apartment house, double or duplex house, lodging house, rooming house or other multiple -family dwellings shall be erected, [4/7/98] - 15 - placed, permitted or maintained on a Lot or any part thereof. This paragraph shall not prohibit customary home occupations, except that no wholesale or retail sale of any products of a home occupation shall be conducted on a Lot. No improvements or structure whatever, other than a Dwelling, patio, walls and fences, swimming pool, and garage or carport may be erected, placed or maintained on any Lot. (b) Limitation On Habitation. No outbuilding, shed, tent, trailer, mobile home or temporary building of any kind shall be erected, constructed, permitted or maintained prior to commencement of the construction of the residence, and no outbuilding, shed, tent, trailer, mobile home, basement or temporary building shall be used for permanent or temporary residence purposes. This covenant shall not prohibit the use of a construction trailer on a Lot during construction of the residence. (c) Occupancy. No permitted private, single-family Dwelling erected upon any Lot shall be occupied during the course of construction, nor at any time prior to it being fully completed as herein required; nor shall any residence when completed be in any manner occupied unless in complete compliance with all covenants, conditions, reservations and restrictions herein set forth. All construction shall be completed within six (6) months from the start thereof except in the instance where construction cannot be completed within said time frame due to strikes, delays occasioned by Declarant, material shortages, casualties or other acts of God. This paragraph is not meant to require that all interior finishing must be completed within the aforementioned six month time period, but all exterior work including but not limited to shell, chimney, roof, porches, steps, decks, windows, doors, garages, siding and landscaping must be completed within the six month period for purposes of appearance. If the applicability of said time frame to landscaping is inappropriate because of weather conditions, then said landscaping shall be completed as soon as practicable during the subsequent spring season. (d) Grading and Drainage. The grading and/or drainage patterns of any Lot in the subdivision shall not be altered for any reason due to each Lot's necessary conformance with the Plans submitted and approved by the City of South Burlington and the Environmental Board. (e) Garages. Garages shall be used only by the occupants of the residence to which they are appurtenant for the storage of motor vehicles and personal belongings. Garages may be attached or detached from the residence and shall contain space for not more than two motor vehicles. Garages shall not be converted to any other use. (f) Tanks. Etc. Except for temporary above -ground propane or natural gas tanks installed by Declarant or Vermont Gas Systems, Inc. prior to the extension of natural gas lines to the Project, no elevated tanks of any kind shall be erected, placed or permitted on any part of any Lot. Any tanks for use in connection with any Dwelling constructed on such premises, including tanks for the storage of fuels, must be buried or screened sufficiently to conceal them from the view of neighboring lots, roads or streets. (g) Garbage and Rubbish. All garbage and rubbish shall be kept in sanitary containers and there shall be no dumping on any part of a Lot and no incineration. Said sanitary containers shall be stored inside, or if outside, screened sufficiently to conceal them from the view of neighboring Units, roads or streets. [4/7/481 - 16 - (h) Subdivision. No Lot depicted on the Plans shall be resubdivided for any purpose (i) Landscaping. Grading, seeding and planting shall be extended to the applicable rear lines and sidelines of the Lot in question and in the front to the street curb. Maintenance of the property between the street curb and the front line of a Lot shall be the responsibility of the Owner of the Lot. All fencing, hedging or barriers shall consist solely of live plantings. The only exceptions to live fencing, hedging or barrier requirements shall be fencing surrounding a swimming pool or for animal runs or areas. All Lots which have been sold by Declarant to a Lot Owner shall be mowed and kept in a neat, trimmed manner regardless of whether the Lot is vacant or has a Dwelling constructed upon it. (In the case where a Lot is vacant and the Lot Owner fails to mow and maintain same, the Association may hire someone to mow or maintain the Lot and include the expense of doing so in the Association Assessment levied against the Lot Owner). (j) Setback Lines. Setback lines shall be those as required by the applicable provisions of the South Burlington Zoning Ordinance, as amended. (k) Animals. No animals, livestock or poultry of any kind shall be raised, bred or kept on any Lot, except that dogs, cats and other household pets may be kept provided they are not kept, bred or maintained for any commercial purposes, and do not become a nuisance, annoyance, or danger to Unit Owners in the vicinity. (1) Utility Lines: Satellite Dishes. All electrical, telephone, cable TV and other utility or transmission lines shall be placed underground. No above -ground radio or television antennae shall be permitted on any Lot; however satellite dishes of less than 18" in diameter shall be permitted above -ground, provided they are sufficiently screened from view. (m) Nuisances. No Lot shall be used in whole or in part for the storage of rubbish, trash or scrap of any character whatsoever; nor for the storage of any property or item that will cause such Lot to appear in an unclean or untidy condition or that will be obnoxious to the eye; nor shall any substance, item or material be kept upon any Lot that will emit foul or obnoxious odors or cause any noise that will or might disturb the peace, quiet, comfort or serenity of the occupants of surrounding Units. (n) Si ns. No billboards or advertising signs of any character shall be erected, placed, permitted or maintained on any Lot or on the residence or other structures located thereon, except: (i) the Declarant shall have the right to place signs advertising the sale or lease of Lots and/or Units on any portion of the Property or the Additional Property owned by Declarant; and (ii) an Owner or his agent may erect or display one sign of not more than six square feet advertising the Owner's property for sale. (o) Recreational Vehicles/Boats. No recreational vehicles or boats shall be stored on a Lot unless kept in a garage completely enclosed. Recreational vehicles or boats may be stored in the overflow parking area located on PRD Common Area H, if such use is established by the Board of Directors. [4/7/98] - 17 - (p) Commercial Vehicles. After a Dwelling has been constructed on a Lot, no commercial vehicles, construction, or like equipment of any kind shall be permitted on any Lot unless kept in a garage completely enclosed. (q) Clotheslines. Clotheslines or drying yards shall be located so they will not to be visible from the street serving the Lot, and shall be located to the rear of the residence. (r) Swimming Pools. All swimming pools shall be completely enclosed by a minimum four foot high chain -link or equivalent fence with locked gate. Swimming pools will be considered a structure and shall comply to the applicable setback provisions of the South Burlington Zoning Ordinance. Swimming pools shall be located no closer to the front lot line than the front wall of the residence on said Lot. Section 9.4. Apartments. Covenants, conditions, easements, obligations, and restrictions applicable to Apartments in the Project shall be set forth in the declaration of condominium establishing the Apartments. Section 9.5. Enforcement. Should the Association employ counsel in order to validly enforce any of the foregoing covenants, conditions, reservations, restrictions or obligations, all costs incurred in such enforcement, including a reasonable fee for counsel, shall be paid by the owner of such Lot or Lots found to be in violation by a court of competent jurisdiction. Further, no delay or omission on the part of the Association in exercising any right, power or remedy herein provided for in the event of any breach of the covenants, conditions, restrictions and obligations herein contained shall be construed as a waiver thereof or acquiescence therein. No right of action shall accrue, nor shall any action be brought or maintained by any Unit Owner against Declarant for or on account of its failure to bring an action on account of any breach of these covenants, conditions, restrictions or obligations, or for imposing covenants, conditions, restrictions and obligations herein which may be unenforceable at law. ARTICLE 10 Condemnation. Damage or Destruction Section 10.1. Condemnation of Portion of Common Areas. If the condemnation involves a portion of the Common Areas, then, unless within sixty (60) days after such taking, and unless at least sixty-seven percent (67%) of the Owners shall otherwise agree, the Association shall restore or replace such improvements so taken on the remaining land included in the Common Areas to the extent lands are available, or may acquire additional lands for such purpose, if such lands are reasonably available. All awards received from such a taking shall be first used to pay for the restoration or replacement of the Common Areas. Any surplus funds remaining after such restoration or replacement shall be retained by the Association in a reserve fund, or, at the option of the Board of Directors, may be paid to the Owners in accordance with their respective interests. Section 10.2. Damage or Destruction. Any portion of the Common Areas which are damaged or destroyed shall be promptly repaired or replaced by the Association to the condition that existed immediately before the damage or destruction unless: (a) Repair or replacement is not permitted under applicable State or local statutes, laws, rules or ordinances; or [4/7/981 - 18 - (b) The Owners controlling eighty percent (80%) of the votes of the Association vote at a special meeting of the Association not to repair or replace the damaged or destroyed portion of the Common Areas. Section 10.3. Insurance. The Association shall maintain, to the extent available, property insurance on the Common Areas, insuring against all risks of direct physical loss commonly insured against by an all-risk type policy with replacement cost endorsement and comprehensive liability insurance, in all such amounts as the Association shall determine from time to time. The annual cost of such insurance shall be included in the Annual Assessments. Any loss covered by insurance shall be adjusted by the Association. All insurance proceeds shall be first used to pay for the restoration or repair of the portion of the Common Areas covered by an insurance claim. Any surplus funds remaining after such restoration or repair shall be retained by the Association in a reserve fund, or, at the option of the Board of Directors, may be paid to the Owners in accordance with their respective interests. ARTICLE 11 Amendment to or Termination of the Declaration Section 11.1. General. This Declaration shall run with the land and be binding upon Declarant and all subsequent Unit Owners. Except as limited hereinafter, this Declaration may be amended upon the vote or agreement of at least sixty-seven percent (67%) of the Unit Owners who hold voting memberships in the Association. Every amendment shall be prepared, executed, acknowledged, and recorded by the Association through its Board of Directors and shall become effective upon the recording of the amendment in the City of South Burlington Land Records. Section 11.2. Rights Reserved in Declarant. Declarant may unilaterally amend this Declaration in accordance with the provisions of Article 2, and may also unilaterally amend this Declaration at any time to satisfy and meet any requirement of the Federal National Mortgage Association, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, the District #4 Environmental Commission, the Environmental Board, the City of South Burlington, or a title insurance company insuring or offering to insure all or a portion of the Property. Section 11.3. First Mortgagee Approval Required as to Certain Amendments. With respect to certain proposed amendments to this Declaration which could have a significant impact upon the rights and security of First Mortgagees, in addition to such an amendment receiving the approval of Unit Owners required in Section 11.1, the amendment shall also require the approval in writing of sixty percent (60%) of the First Mortgagees. The amendments which would be deemed to have a significant impact upon the rights and security of a First Mortgagee are as follows: (i) a change in voting rights of Unit Owners other than provided for in this Declaration, (ii) a change in the manner Assessments are allocated or an alteration in the existing priority of First Mortgage liens over Assessments; (iii) alteration or elimination of the requirements for Assessment of reserves for maintenance, repair, monitoring and replacement of Common Areas and the improvements located thereon; (iv) sale, transfer, or alienation of the Common Areas, or alteration in the use of the Common Areas; (v) changes in responsibility for maintenance and repairs; (vi) changes in boundaries of any Apartment, Lot, or the Common Areas, (vii) changes in any insurance or fidelity bonds; (viii) change in the terms required for leasing a Unit; (ix) expansion of the Project beyond the boundaries of the Additional Land, or increasing the number of Units to more than 221; (x) removal of Property from the Project; (xi) imposition of restrictions on a Unit Owner's rights to sell, transfer or alienate a Unit: (xii) restoration of the Project after casualty damage or partial condemnation in a manner other than restoring or repairing the Project to the way it existed prior to said casualty or condemnation; (xiii) any amendment or action that would effectively terminate this Declaration or the legal status of the [4/7/98] - 19 - Project; (xiv) any decision by the Association to establish self -management when professional management had been previously required by a First Mortgagee; or (xv) change in any provision of this Declaration which expressly benefits First Mortgagees. Section 11.4. Failure to Provide Negative Responses. For the purposes of Section 11.3 of this Declaration, a First Mortgagee who receives a written request by certified mail, return receipt requested, to approve an action of the Owners or the Association for the matters described in Section 11.3, shall be deemed to have consented to such action unless said First Mortgagee provides a negative response to the Association within thirty (30) days of the date the written request is received by the First Mortgagee. Section 11.5. Termination. Termination of this Declaration and the Project it has created shall occur if so voted by eighty percent (80%) of the Unit Owners who hold voting memberships in the Association. A decision to terminate this Declaration shall also require the written approval of sixty percent (60%) of the First Mortgagees. Section 11.6. Duration. (a) If any covenant, condition, restriction or obligation of this Declaration, or this Declaration itself, is adjudicated to be illegal and/or of no force and effect because of its perpetual nature, then any covenant, condition, restriction or obligation, or this Declaration itself, shall be deemed to run with and bind the Property for a term of forty (40) years from the date of execution of this Declaration, and shall be deemed to automatically be extended for successive periods of ten (10) years unless terminated as provided herein. (b) Upon the termination of the Project, the Common Areas shall be deemed to be owned in equal undivided common interests held by each of the Unit Owners, and the net proceeds in the event of a sale of any or all of the Common Areas shall be paid in equal shares to all of the Unit Owners, a Unit Owner's share to be made payable to both the Unit Owner and the First Mortgagee, if any, as their interest may appear. Section 11.7. Compliance. Each Unit Owner shall be governed by and shall comply with the terms of this Declaration, the Bylaws of the Association, and any resolution, Rules and Regulations or similar type documentation promulgated by the Association. A Unit Owner shall be liable for any expense incurred for maintenance, repair or replacement rendered necessary by a Unit Owner's act, negligence or carelessness, or by the act of any member of a Unit Owner's family, guest, invitees, agents or lessees, but only to the extent that such expense is not met by the proceeds of insurance carried by the Association. In addition to any and all remedies provided by law, the Declaration or the Bylaws, the Association, acting through its Board of Directors, shall be entitled to the following relief. (a) The Board of Directors of the Association shall have the right to impose a reasonable fine commensurate with the severity of the violation, which fine shall be a continuing lien against the Unit and the defaulting Unit Owner enforceable in the manner provided by the laws of the State of Vermont, this Declaration and the Association Bylaws. (b) The Board of Directors of the Association and/or an aggrieved Unit Owner shall have the right to abate, enjoin or remedy the continuance of any such violation, by appropriate legal proceedings either in law or in equity, including, without limitation, an action to recover any sums due for money damages, injunctive relief, or foreclosure of the lien for payment of Assessments, any combination thereof, including, without limitation, the right of the [4/7/981 - 20 - Association to recover costs and reasonable attorneys' fees arising from the Association's efforts to abate, enjoin or remedy a violation, and any other relief afforded by a court of competent jurisdiction. Said remedies shall be deemed cumulative and shall not constitute an election of remedies. There shall be and there is hereby created and declared to be a conclusive presumption that any violation or breach or any attempted violation or breach of this Declaration or Bylaws shall so damage the Project and its property values that it cannot be adequately remedied by action at law or exclusively by recovery of damages. ARTICLE 12 Rights Related to First Mortgagees Section 12.1. General Rights to Notice. Any First Mortgagee may send the Association a written request identifying the First Mortgagee's name and address and the Unit against which it holds a first mortgage lien. Thereafter, the Association shall be obligated to send said First Mortgagee timely written notices as to any of the following: (i) any condemnation loss or casualty loss which materially affects the financial condition of the Project or any Unit; (ii) any delinquency in the payment of Assessments or other charges by a Unit Owner of a Unit subject to a first mortgage which delinquency remains uncured for a period of sixty (60) days; (iii) any lapse, cancellation or material modification of any insurance policy or fidelity bond maintained by the Association; and (iv) any proposed amendment or termination which requires the approval of the First Mortgagees. ARTICLE 13 Miscellaneous Section 13.1. Conflict. In the event of any conflict between the terms of this Declaration and the terms of the Bylaws of the Association, or between the terms of this Declaration and any terms of a declaration of condominium which purport to effect the operation or governance of all or a portion of the Project, the provisions of this Declaration shall control. Section 13.2. Waiver. No restriction, condition, obligation, or provision of this Declaration shall be deemed to have been abrogated or waived by reason of any failure to enforce it. Section 13.3. Partition. No Owner nor any other Person shall bring any action for partition or division of the whole or any part of the Common Areas without the written consent of the Association. Section 13.4. Declarant's Disclaimer. Declarant has made no representations, and Declarant hereby disclaims any representations made by anyone claiming to act as Declarant's authorized agent, as to the feasibility of renting a Unit in the Project or otherwise generating income or deriving any other economic benefit from a Unit. [4/13/98] - 21 _ Section 13.5. Captions, Headings. The captions and section numbers appearing in this Declaration are inserted only as a matter of convenience. They do not define, limit, construe or describe the scope or intent of such sections, nor in any way affect this Declaration or have any substantive effect. Section 13.6. Partial Invalidity. If any term, covenant or condition of this Declaration or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall, to any extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Declaration, or the application of such term, covenant or condition to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby and each term, covenant or condition of this Declaration shall be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. Section 13.7. Governing Law. This Declaration shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Vermont, without giving effect to such jurisdiction's principles of conflicts of laws. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Declarant has executed or caused this Declaration to be executed as of the day of 'fits 1 1998. Y IN PRESENCE OF: ,r � --7- Witn�ss STATE OF VERMONT CHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS. MBL ASSOCIATES By: ` l Duly Authorized Agent At r.r _, + , Vermont this ;' c�` day of ^ J >� �1998, personally duly authorized agent of MBL ASSOCIATES, to me known, and he acknowledged this instrument by him signed and sealed, to be his free act and deed and the free act and deed of MBL ASSOCIATES. Before me, �Ac N(6tary Public Notary Commission issued in Chittenden County My commission expires: 2/10/99 <MBL D—cl Farms Dcdu ntion/3J25G/gfkOl!. WP/RHR> - 22 - Exhibit "A" Description of Property and Additional Land Two certain pieces or parcels of land, with all improvements thereon and appurtenances thereto, located in the City of South Burlington, County of Chittenden, State of Vermont, and more particularly described as follows: PARCEL A A parcel of land situated westerly of Dorset Street and depicted on a survey entitled: "Dorset Farms, Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont, Perimeter Property Plat," Sheet 1 of 4, prepared by Lamoureux, Stone & O'Leary Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated August 29, 1997, last revised January 25, 1998 and recorded in Plat Volume 404 at Page 85 of the City of South Burlington Land Records and being more particularly described as follows: Commencing a point located on the westerly boundary of the right-of-way of Dorset Street in the common boundary of the Town of Shelburne and City of South Burlington; thence proceeding N69' 19'05"W along the common boundary line between the Town of Shelburne and City of South Burlington a distance of 3,100.74 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence turning to the right and proceeding N05 ° 17'46"W a distance of 602.28 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence turning to the right and proceeding N86°38'49"E a distance of 251.43 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence turning to the left and proceeding N06°20'30"W a distance of 418.86 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence turning to the right and proceeding N79°59'21"E a distance of 1,242.14 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence turning to the left and proceeding N06°54'44"W a distance of 447.63 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence turning to the left and proceeding S86'42'39"W a distance of 128.22 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence turning to the right and proceeding N05°21'45"W a distance of 350.22 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence turning to the right and proceeding N82°33'14"E a distance of 535.80 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence proceeding N81 °22'34"E a distance of 154.32 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence proceeding N82° 17'20"E a distance of 949.75 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence turning to the right and proceeding S07°53'47"E a distance of 870.19 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence turning to the left and proceeding N76°12'04"E a distance of 199.68 feet, more or less, to a calculated point in the center of a stream depicted on the plan; thence proceeding along the centerline of the stream in a southeasterly direction to a calculated point in the westerly boundary of property now or formerly of Ward; thence turning to the right and proceeding S16°29'36"W a distance of 196.73 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence turning to the left and proceeding S59° 13'06"E a distance of 269.20 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe marking the centerline of said stream where it intersects with the westerly boundary of the right-of-way of Dorset Street; thence turning to the right and proceeding S17°00'57"W along the westerly boundary of Dorset Street a distance of 599.62 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence turning to the right and proceeding S81 °58'S8"W a distance of 411.61 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence turning to the left and proceeding S22°26'39"W a distance of 1,153.13 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence turning to the left and proceeding N87'13'26"E a distance of 508.72 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe in the westerly boundary of the right-of-way of Dorset Street; thence turning to the right and proceeding S17°23'S6"W along the westerly boundary of the right-of-way of Dorset Street a distance of 28.00 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence proceeding S 16 ° 59' 16"W along the westerly boundary of the right-of-way of Dorset Street a distance of 320.73 feet, more or less, to the point or place of beginning. Parcel A is all and the same land and premises conveyed to MBL Associates by the following instruments: (i) Warranty Deed of David Ramsey dated September 30, 1988 and recorded in Volume 270 at Page 259 of the City of South Burlington Land Records; (ii) Warranty Deed of David Ramsey dated September 30, 1988 and recorded in Volume 270 at Page 261 of the City of South Burlington Land Records; (iii) Warranty Deed of David Ramsey dated September 30, 1988 and recorded in Volume 270 at Page 263 of the City of South Burlington Land Records; (iv) Quit Claim Deed of George G. O'Brien and James D. O'Brien Administrator of the Estate of Helen B. O'Brien dated January 8, 1994 and recorded in Volume 357 at Page 346 of the City of South Burlington Land Records; and (v) all of "Parcel 2" conveyed to MBL Associates by Warranty Deed of George G. O'Brien dated September 30, 1988 and recorded in Volume 270 at Page 251 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. With respect to "Parcel 2" identified above in Paragraph (v), in order to comply with the State of Vermont Environmental Protection Rules on the subdivision of lands and disposal of waste including sewage, the lot owner shall not construct or erect a structure or building on Parcel 2, the useful occupancy of which will require the installation of plumbing and sewage treatment facilities or convey this Parcel without first complying with said State regulations. The lot owner acknowledges that Parcel 2 may not qualify for approval of development under appropriate environmental protection or health regulations and that the State may deny any application to develop the Parcel. PARCEL B A parcel of land containing 45.48 acres, more or less, situated on the easterly boundary of the right of way of Dorset Street and depicted on a survey entitled: "Dorset Farms, Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont, Common Area G Plat," prepared by Lamoureux, Stone & O'Leary Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated October 7, 1997 and recorded in Plat Volume 404 at Page 68 of the City of South Burlington Land Records and being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at an iron pin located on the easterly side of Dorset Street at the point were the boundaries of the City of South Burlington and Town of Shelburne converge and being the southwesterly corner of the parcel herein described; thence proceeding along Dorset Street N17°06'44"E a distance of 1,537.09 feet, more or less, to a marble monument; thence turning to the right and proceeding N82'04'0IM a distance of 727.80 feet, more or less, to an iron pin; thence turning to the right and proceeding S08°32'06"E along land now or formerly of Blair a distance of 259.64 feet, more or less, to an iron pin; thence proceeding S07°27'48"E a distance of 1,883.67 feet, more or less, to an iron pin; thence turning to the right and proceeding N69° 19'59"W along land now or formerly of Peters and being the boundary between the City of South Burlington and Town of Shelburne a distance of 361.87 feet, more or less, to an iron pin; thence continuing along said boundary between the City of South Burlington and Town of Shelburne N69°04'48"W a distance of 1,196.62 feet, more or less, to an iron pin set in the easterly boundary of the right of way of Dorset Street, being the point or place of beginning. Parcel B is all of the land and premises described as "Parcel 1" in the Warranty Deed from George G. O'Brien to MBL Associates dated September 30, 1988 and recorded in Volume 270 at Page 251 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Reference is hereby made to the above -mentioned instruments, the records thereof and the references therein contained all in further aid of this description. Exhibit "B" Description of Property The Property consists of the lands and premises depicted as Lot Nos. 1-161, PRD Common Area A (9.78 acres), PRD Common Area B (19.39 acres), PRD Common Area C (19,755 square feet), PRD Common Area D (3.95 acres), PRD Common Area E1 (4.75 acres), PRD Common Area E3 (8.79 acres), PRD Common Area E4 (19.77 acres), PRD Common Area F (8.46 acres), and PRD Common Area H (22,482 square feet) on a set of plans entitled: "Dorset Farms, Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont," Sheets 1 through 3, prepared by Lamoureux, Stone & O'Leary Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated August 29, 1997, Sheet 1 being last revised on January 25, 1998 and recorded in Plat Volume 404 at Page 85 of the City of South Burlington Land Records, Sheet 2 being last revised on January 22, 1998 and recorded in Plat Volume 404 at Page 84 of the City of South Burlington Land Records, and Sheet 3 being recorded in Plat Volume 404 at Page 69 of the City of South Burlington Land Records The Property also includes and has the benefit of non-exclusive easements over Common Area E2 for: (i) the operation, use, maintenance, repair and replacement of storm water Basin C which is depicted on the Plans; and (ii) ingress, egress, operation, use, maintenance, repair and replacement of the emergency access road located on Common Area E2, as depicted on the Plans. The Property is subject to and benefitted by the following: Deferral of Permit No. DE-4-1944 dated August 4, 1994. 2. Deferral of Permit as to that portion of the Property conveyed to MBL Associates by George G. O'Brien by Warranty Deed dated September 30, 1988 and recorded in Volume 270 at Page 251 of the City of South Burlington Land Records (identified therein as Parcel 2 therein). 3. Deferral of Permit No. DE-4-2314 dated March 12, 1998 for PRD Common Area H. 4. Deferral of Permit No. DE-4-2315 dated March 12, 1998 for PRD Common Area E-1. Terms and conditions of Conditional Use Determination by Vermont Agency of Natural Resources dated December 20, 1994 and recorded in Volume 373 at Pages 2-10 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Terms and conditions of Land Use Permit No. 4C0948-EB dated June 20, 1995 and recorded in Volume 379 at Page 375 of the City of South Burlington Land Records, as modified by Land Use Permit No. 4C0948-EB (Altered) dated January 30, 1996, and as it may be amended from time to time. 7. Terms and conditions of Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit No. WW-4-0710 dated August 4, 1994, amended by Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit No. WW-4-0710-1 dated March 12, 1998, as it may be subsequently amended from time to time. Terms and conditions of State Subdivision Permit No. EC-4-1795 dated August 4, 1994 and recorded in Volume 170 at Page 371 of the City of South Burlington Land Records, amended by State Subdivision Permit No. EC-4-1795-1 dated March 12, 1998 and recorded in Volume 425 at Page 364 of the City of South Burlington Land Records, as it may be subsequently amended from time to time. Utility easement granted by George G. O'Brien and Helen B. O'Brien to Vermont Electric Power Company, Inc. by deed dated December 30, 1986 and recorded in Volume 131 at Page 34 of the City of South Burlington. See also Public Service Board Findings dated December 30, 1976 and recorded in Volume 131 at Page 34 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Note: These instruments provide for the burning and spraying with chemicals of all trees, underbrush and vegetation located within the 150' easement. 10. Terms and conditions of Notice of Development Conditions by MBL Associates dated January 6, 1994 and recorded in Volume 357 at Pages 350-352 of the City of South Burlington Land Records, as amended. 11. Restrictions set forth in the Warranty Deed from David Ramsey to MBL Associates dated September 30, 1988 and recorded in Volume 270 at Page 259 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 12. Utility easement granted by Frank L. Blair and Maybelle S. Blair to Vermont Electric Power Company, Inc. by instrument dated February 19, 1974 and recorded in Volume 109 at Page 514 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 13. Restrictions and covenants set forth in the Warranty Deed of Frank L. Blair and Maybelle Blair to William Lang and Gail Lang dated June 15, 1979 and recorded in Volume 148 at Page 415 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 14. Pedestrian easement granted by William and Gail Lang to the City of South Burlington by Offer of Irrevocable Dedication dated December 13, 1982 and recorded in Volume 186 at Page 193 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Reference is also made to the Right of Way and Easement dated February 16, 1982 and recorded on February 14, 1985 in Volume 212 at Page 105 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 15. Right of way 60' in width granted by William and Gail Lang to the City of South Burlington by Offer of Irrevocable Dedication dated December 29, 1982 and recorded in Volume 186 at Page 255 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 16. Utility easement granted by David M. Ramsey to Green Mountain Power Corporation and New England Telephone and Telegraph Company by deed dated December 29, 1986 and recorded in Volume 218 at Page 3 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 17. Utility easement granted by MBL Associates to New England Telephone and Telegraph Company by instrument dated August 1, 1997 and recorded in Volume 412 at Page 524- 525 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Reference is made to the plan entitled "New England Telephone Telecommunications Site, Property of MBL Associates, South Burlington, Vermont" dated July, 1997, prepared by Dunroven Associates and recorded in Map Volume 404 at Page 43 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 18. Easements, rights of way, conditions, restrictions and notations set forth on the survey entitled: "Boundary Survey, MBL Associates," dated January 6, 1994, prepared by Krebs & Lansing Consulting Engineers, Inc. and recorded in Map Volume 365 at Page 22 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 19. Irrevocable Offers of Dedication from MBL Associates to the City of South Burlington dated November 29, 1997 and recorded in Volume 419 at Pages 143-153 of the City of South Burlington Land Records for: (i) the Project roadways, identified as Midland Avenue, Catkin Drive, Bower Street, Branch Court, and Floral Drive on the Plans, including all public water and sewer lines which are located within said roadways; (ii) a twenty foot wide recreation path easement located on the westerly boundary of the Property as depicted on the Plans; (iii) a twenty foot wide recreation path easement located on the easterly boundary of the Property as depicted on the plans; and (iv) storm and sewer easements depicted on the Plans. Being a portion of the land and premises conveyed to MBL Associates by the following instruments: (i) Warranty Deed of David Ramsey dated September 30, 1988 and recorded in Volume 270 at Page 259 of the City of South Burlington Land Records; (ii) Warranty Deed of David Ramsey dated September 30, 1988 and recorded in Volume 270 at Page 261 of the City of South Burlington Land Records; (iii) Warranty Deed of David Ramsey dated September 30, 1988 and recorded in Volume 270 at Page 263 of the City of South Burlington Land Records; (iv) Quit Claim Deed of George G. O'Brien and James D. O'Brien Administrator of the Estate of Helen B. O'Brien dated January 8, 1994 and recorded in Volume 357 at Page 346 of the City of South Burlington Land Records; and (v) Warranty Deed of George G. O'Brien and Helen B. O'Brien dated September 30, 1988 and recorded in Volume 270 at Page 251 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Reference is hereby made to the above -mentioned instruments, the records thereof and the references therein contained all in further aid of this description. 4 m tF Exhibit "C" Description of Condominium Property The condominium property consists of PRD Common Area F (8.46 acres) which is depicted on a plan entitled: "Dorset Farms, Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont," Sheets 1 through 2, prepared by Lamoureux, Stone & O'Leary Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated August 29, 1997, Sheet 1 being last revised on January 25, 1998 and recorded in Plat Volume 404 at Page 85 of the City of South Burlington Land Records, and Sheet 2 being last revised on January 22, 1998 and recorded in Plat Volume 404 at Page 84 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Y_R FIRST AMENDMENT TO. DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RDSTRICTIONS';i EASEMENTS, AND LIENS FOR DORSET FARMS, A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT This First Amendment to Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions, Easements, and Liens for Dorset Farms, a Planned Residential Development (the "First Amendment") is made by MBL ASSOCIATES, LLC, a Vermont limited liability company with a place of business in Burlington, County of Chittenden, and State of Vermont (the "Company"). The Company was formerly known as MBL Associates, a Vermont partnership (the "Partnership"). Back round 1. The Partnership is the original Declarant under the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions, Easements, and Liens for Dorset Farms, a Planned Residential Development (the "Declaration") dated April 13, 1998 and recorded in Volume 426 at Pages 101-132 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 2. On February 20, 1998, the Partnership converted to a limited liability company, which conversion is evidenced by the Notice of Conversion dated May 14, 1998 and recorded in Volume at Page of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 3. The Company executes this First Amendment for the purpose of affirming and ratifying all of the terms and conditions of the Declaration that was executed by the Partnership and for the purpose of amending the Declaration to substitute MBL Associates, LLC, as the Declarant. NOW, THEREFORE, In consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants and agreements herein set forth, and in reliance on the representations and warranties contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows: Section (a). Affirmation. and Ratification of Declaration. The Company hereby affirms and ratifies all of the terms, conditions, reservations, and rights set forth in of the Declaration, which terms and conditions are incorporated herein by reference. Section 1. Definition of Declarant. The terms, conditions, reservations and rights set forth in the Declaration including, without limitation, Section 1.1, are amended to identify and define MBL Associates, LLC as the Declarant under the Declaration. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Declarant has executed or caused this Declaration to be executed as of the 14th day of May, 1998. IN PRESENCE OF: Witness MBL ASSOCIATES, LLC By. Member and Duly Authorized Agent STATE OF VERMONT CHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS. At Burlington, Vermont this 14th day of May, 1998, personally appeared GERALD C. MILOT, Member and Duly Authorized Agent of MBL ASSOCIATES, LLC, to me known, and he acknowledged this instrument by him signed and sealed, to be his free act and deed and the free act and deed of MBL ASSOCIATES, LLC. i Before 1Votary Public Notary Commission issued in Chittenden County My commission expires: 2/10/99 <MBL Dorset Farms Fim Amendment to Declaradom/49957/12jp0l!. WP/RHR> ff .,,.,, SECOND AMENDMENT TO ,tea q*MO&ATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS, AND LIENS FOR DORSET FARMS, A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT This Second Amendment to Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions, Easements, and Liens for Dorset Farms, a Planned Residential Development (the "Second Amendment") is made by MBL ASSOCIATES, LLC, a Vermont limited liability company with a place of business in Burlington, County of Chittenden, and State of Vermont ("MBL"). Back round 1. MBL is the original Declarant under the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions, Easements, and Liens for Dorset Farms, a Planned Residential Development dated April 13, 1998 and recorded in Volume 426 at Pages 101-132 of the City of South Burlington Land Records, as amended by First Amendment dated May 14, 1998 and recorded in Volume 428 at Pages 318-319 of the City of South Burlington Land Records (the "Declaration"). 2. The Declaration submits one hundred sixty one (161) Lots and thirty two (32) Phase I Apartments to the terms of the Declaration and further provides that the Owners of the Lots and Phase I Apartments will be members of the Dorset Farms Homeowners Association, Inc. (the "Association"). 3. The Declaration provides that at a later date, the Declarant will submit the twenty-eight (28) Phase II Apartments to the terms of the Declaration and further provides that once the Phase II Apartments are added, the Owners of the Phase II Apartments will become members of the Association. 4. MBL executes this Second Amendment for the purpose of submitting the Phase II Apartments to the terms and conditions of the Declaration and to grant the Phase II Apartment Owners membership in the Association. NOW, THEREFORE, Pursuant to Sections 2.2 and 11.2 of the Declaration, Declarant hereby amends the Declaration as follows: Section 1.1 of the Declaration is hereby amended by adding the following language: Declarant hereby submits the Phase II Apartments to the terms and conditions of the Declaration and grants the Owner of each of the Phase II Apartments one membership in the Association. The lands upon which the Phase II Apartments have and will be constructed is identified as "PRD Common Area E3 (8.79 Acres)" on the Plans, which lands were previously submitted to the terms of the Declaration by their inclusion in Exhibit `B" of the original Declaration. 2. Exhibit "C" of the Declaration is hereby amended as follows: Description of Condominium Property. The condominium property consists of PRD Common Area F (8.46 acres) and PRD Common Area E3 (8.79 acres) which are depicted on a plan entitled: "Dorset Farms, Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont," Sheets 1 through 2, prepared by Lamoureux, Stone & O'Leary Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated August 29, 1997, Sheet 1 being last revised on January 25, 1998 and recorded in Plat Volume 404 at Page 85 of the City of South Burlington Land Records, and Sheet 2 being last revised on January 22, 1998 and recorded in Plat Volume 404 at Page 84 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. The Phase I Apartments are more particularly described in the Declaration of Condominium of Dorset Farms Condominium I and its exhibits dated March 30, 1999 and recorded on March 31, 1999 in Volume 451 at Pages 169-214 of the City of South Burlington Land Records, as amended by First Amendment to Declaration of Condominium dated June 25, 1999 and recorded on June 30, 1999 in Volume 457 at Page 140 of said Land Records, by Second Amendment to Declaration of Condominium dated October 6, 1999 and recorded on October 12, 1999 in Volume 463 at Pages 694-698 of said Land Records and by Third Amendment to Declaration of Condominium dated April 5, 2000 and recorded on April 6, 2000 in Volume 473 at Pages 21-26 of said Land Records. The Phase I1 Apartments are more particularly described in the Declaration of Condominium for Dorset Farms Condominium II and its exhibits dated January 6, 2000 and recorded on January 7, 2000 in Volume 468 at Page 430 of the City of South Burlington Land Records, as amended by First Amendment to Declaration of Condominium for Dorset Farms Condominium 11 dated April 5, 2000 and recorded on April 6, 2000 in Volume 473 at Pages 14-19 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 3. Except for the specific provisions and exhibits amended herein, all of the original terms, conditions and provisions of the Declaration shall remain in full force and effect. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Declaration. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Declarant has executed or caused this Amendment to be executed , V as of the.. day of ► `b"<_ , 2000. IN PRESENCE OF: MBL ASSOCIATES, LLC ' r Witness trr-$art}e4� Managing Member g g and Duly Authorized Agent 11PA STATE OF VERMONT CHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS. At i` -C 1! i��' '= 't , Vermont this=-�2 day of i3 , 2000, personally appeared T, Managing Member and Duly Authorized Agee of MBL ASSOCIATES, LLC, to me�knowri and he acknowledged this instrument by him signed and sealed, to be his free act and deed and the free act and deed of MBL ASSOCIATES, LLC. Before, v"_., _.' Y�, J`�,. otary blic Notary Commission issued in Ch—i enden County My commission expires: 2/10/03 <MBL Second Amendment to PRD D=I;imtion/1099(7@C2V011.WP/RHR> — 3 — #' Southeast Quadrant Comprehensive Plan Update and Zoning Revisions Planning Concept Report Introduction This memo describes the recommended approach to future development and conservation in South Burlington's Southeast Quadrant (SEQ). It has been prepared as part of an update of the Comprehensive Plan, zoning map and bylaws which were adopted in 1992. Since the regulations guiding development in the SEQ were adopted, the City has been through several major development review processes and has done extensive further study regarding open space and environmental resources. This is the first time that a comprehensive evaluation of development and conservation in the Southeast Quadrant has been undertaken since the current development regulations were adopted. This process has been undertaken in accordance with Vermont planning statutes that require five-year updates of Comprehensive Plans, as well as to respond to a number of issues that have arisen as new development has undergone review. The principal issues are: • conflicts between conservation and environmental goals for the Southeast Quadrant and the existing regulations; • dissatisfaction with some aspects of the patterns of development, particularly visual character • concern about the loss of open space and environmental resources Another development over the past five years with enormous bearing on future planning is the conservation of three key natural areas, two privately and one by the City. In 2004, the City purchased the development rights and option to purchase on the 43-acre Scott property, located between Dorset Street and Hinesburg Road in the headwaters of Shelburne Pond. This property is now available for public recreation and creates a conserved "keystone" in this section of the SEQ. Also in 2004, the Vermont Housing & Conservation Board and Town of Shelburne conserved a working farm just south of the town line that is also part of the Shelburne Pond headwaters. These two conservation deals followed several months of productive discussions between the two towns on conservation opportunities in the Shelburne Pond headwaters area that can create an open space reserve benefiting both communities and the region as a whole. Finally, also in 2004, a transfer of development rights between a property owner and Burlington International Airport resulted in conservation and restoration of the Clay Plain forest and associated wetlands north of Van Sicklen Road along the Muddy Brook. Through SEQ transfer of development rights (TDR) program the development rights from the conserved parcel were transferred to a planned neighborhood off of Hinesburg Road. These conservation deals provide an outstanding base from which to begin more aggressive work on conservation and neighborhood planning in the SEQ over the coming years. With the development and permitting of some 2,000 dwelling units having gone forward in the SEQ since 1992, as well as development of Dorset Park and conservation of the Scott parcel and Clay Plain forest, this report and process can be viewed as a mid-term review of the area, and an appropriate time to take stock of the area and evaluate if the regulations and resulting development meet the goals for the quadrant as expressed in the Comprehensive Plan. OR WLandscape Architects and Planners/South Burlington Planning & Zoning 612812005 The Planning Process This Comprehensive Plan Update was preceded by the City's Open Space Strategy, prepared by T.J. Boyle and Associates and completed in 2002. This was the first step in identifying which areas were most important for conservation, and how these areas related to the plan, zoning map and bylaws for the SEQ. During the update of the Land Development Regulations in October, 2002, a well -attended public workshop on the SEQ was held at City Hall. After this workshop, the Planning Commission decided to hold off on revisions to the SEQ regulations pending further study of several key issues raised by the Commission and the public. After the adoption of the new Land Development Regulations in May, 2003, the Planning Commission began to turn to conservation and SEQ issues again. In the fall of 2003, the City commissioned an evaluation of the SEQ's ecology by Arrowwood Environmental, including mapping sites of significant natural communities and providing recommendations for managing these areas. Brian Pfeiffer of Wings Environmental completed a concurrent assessment of the SEQ's bird populations and habitat that provided additional detail on the SEQ. The Planning Commission then engaged ORW Landscape Architects and Planners to assist in preparing the Comprehensive Plan Update and zoning revisions for the SEQ. In October 2004, a broadly noticed public workshop was held to elicit community input on the future of the SEQ. At this well attended workshop, participants were asked to work in small groups to plan the future of the SEQ. More specifically, participants were asked to: • Accommodate the estimated remaining development potential of approximately 2,100 new dwelling units within the SEQ; • Provide a 10 acre site for a new elementary school and associated playfields; • Use recently developed environmental information on natural communities and wildlife as the primary basis for the open space network; • Provide logical additions to the street network; • Provide walking/bicycling connections to the existing path system; and • Consider how best to provide transit through the area The workshop, attended by nearly 80 people, sparked a lively conversation about the area. There was a high degree of consensus expressed by the workshop participants, which is summarized as follows: • All groups expressed the desire to preserve more open space, even if it meant increasing density in developable areas. Most groups also wanted to direct higher density development towards specific areas in the northern and western sections of the SEQ, and preserve open space in and around Cheesefactory Road between Dorset Street and Hinesburg Road. • Most groups felt the estimated remaining buildout of 2,100 new units seemed like too much housing to be built within the SEQ zoning district. • Several groups promoted the idea of a mixed -use center for the SEQ with some limited retail or service uses. • Participants felt that the plan needs to address the potential impacts of subdivision of large rural residential parcels (i.e., in the 10-acre range). The planning team also conducted `stakeholder interviews' with individuals representing a broad range of perspectives, including the development community, residents of the SEQ, open space and environmental interests, and legal professionals involved with the current regulations and various Environmental Board proceedings. The purpose of these meetings was to gain more insight regarding the issues in the area. ORWLandscape Architects and Planners/South Burlington Planning & Zoning 2 612812005 Stakeholder meetings were held privately after the public workshop, which allowed for a discussion of the common themes of the workshop-4he level and pattern of development, the idea of a mixed -use center, the visual quality of the area --as well as other issues raised by the stakeholders. Guiding Principles The key principles underlying this planning concept for the SEQ are as follows: 1: Preserve Areas of Ecological Significance The zoning maps established in 1992 created `development' and `restricted' areas, with an overall development density for the SEQ of 1.2 dwelling units per acre developed through the Goals Based Plan Process (See Goals Based Plan Map). New housing is to be clustered into `development' areas at a density of 4 units per acre. Overall the zoning regulations were estimated to achieve an overall buildout of roughly 4,320 housing units in the SEQ, principally within the `development' areas. Over the years some development was allowed within `restricted' areas as well, but subject to additional DRB scrutiny on visual and environmental factors. The designation of `restricted' areas was primarily based on visual factors, specifically establishing "scenic view corridor" setbacks along Spear Street, Dorset Street, and Hinesburg Road. Wetlands and floodplains were also mapped as restricted areas. Some areas mapped as "woodland/wildlife habitat" on the underlying zoning map were also designated "restricted," but many such areas were not, leading to intense confusion about the regulatory status of woodland/wildlife habitat areas. Through the development review process, continuing questions were raised about conflicts between development and environmental resources. To address these concerns the City prepared an assessment of the SEQ's environmental resources. The study, prepared by Arrowwood Environmental, revealed that "clusters" of different types of land cover (i.e. wetlands, small woodlots, streams, hedgerows) with ecological significance traverse the SEQ, including wetlands, woods, and wildlife corridors associated with the Great Swamp, Cheesefactory Swamp and Woods, Van Sicklen Woods, Dubois Swamp, and the City Woods (see Environmental Resources Map). Some of these areas are protected by the current development/restricted designations, but some are not. The current designation of the road corridors as restricted areas, however, creates a conflict with the wildlife corridors and natural communities by directing development away from the main roads and pushing it into more valuable natural communities and wildlife areas. The designated `development' and `restricted' areas thus are proposed to be re -mapped in order to protect the significant environmental resources of the SEQ. The highest priority for restricted areas will be given to the protection of ecological resources and systems, and these areas will serve as the foundation for the larger open space network. This represents a shifting in priority for land preservation, from areas alongside roads to the ecological associations described above. In addition to environmental protection, the open space system is also intended to serve recreation, transportation (trails), visual resource, cultural and historic resource protection, as described below. ORW Landscape Architects and Planners/South Burlington Planning & Zoning 612812005 2: Create a Cohesive and Publicly Accessible Open Space System. Much of the open space set aside as a part of subdivisions in the SEQ has been fragmented pieces of land that have become leftover spaces rather than contributing to a cohesive open space network. Examples of this include the house -lot sized `open space' lots in the Irish Farm subdivision and the strips of land fronting Butler Farms, Oak Creek Village, and Dorset Farms. Better examples of open space conservation in subdivisions are the Dubois Swamp area conserved behind Ledgeknoll, and the large open space buffer between the AuClair farm and the Stonehouse Village subdivision. This plan encourages zoning designations and regulations that result in a cohesive network of usable open spaces that can serve multiple roles, including: • Land for wildlife habitat and a network of connecting ecological lands; • Protection of environmentally sensitive lands; • Provision of a connected system of trails that can be used for recreation (walking, running, biking, skiing, etc.), transportation (trail connections between neighborhoods and uses) and environmental education (interpretation of environmental resources); • Maintaining opportunities for traditional and emerging forms of agriculture to ensure the continued productivity of the land; • Maintaining cultural and historic resources that add meaning to the community, such as the Calkins house and gardens, farms and other important features of the landscape; and • Preservation of significant views and visual resources such as vistas of the Green Mountains, Adirondacks and expansive meadows in the SEQ. While open space set asides fulfill current requirements regarding wetland setbacks, agricultural soils as defined for Act 250, or scenic road setbacks, a larger opportunity is missed to create a more cohesive system that can serve multiple roles of environmental protection, recreation, transportation (through trails), and protection of visual, historic and cultural resources. Therefore, the City's land use concept encourages protective strategies that are in accordance with the overall plan for the SEQ, rather than the fragmented, issue -by -issue approach fostered by some regulatory systems. 3: Encourage Development Patterns that Create Walkable Neighborhoods, a Range of Housing Choices and a Unique Sense of Place. As identified by many workshop participants, more compact development patterns that reduce the overall footprint of new development areas can preserve more open space and make better neighborhoods. Many stakeholders expressed support for the design approach taken by the proposed South Village project, which includes a mix of housing types in a compact and walkable neighborhood design. Overall, there is a strong sentiment that developments at four units per acre have been done successfully and contribute positively to the City and the SEQ, and that higher density options that fit with the context of the SEQ can be supported. Another component of walkable neighborhood design, and a concept supported through the workshop and stakeholders discussions, encouraged a modestly -scaled mixed -use center in order to encourage trips by foot, bicycle, and eventually transit. The following approach is recommended as part of the SEQ land use concept: Neighborhood Market. Many workshop participants and stakeholders mentioned that at the current time SEQ residents must drive into town to buy a quart of milk. A village center, ORWLandscape Architects and Planners/South Burlington Planning & Zoning 4 612812005 including a small neighborhood market combined with higher density housing and a small park or green is recommended for the SEQ on Dorset Street south of Old Cross Road. The market could be designed as an expansion of the Chittenden Cider Mill, or another site in the central portion of the SEQ and would be designed to create a central focus for the SEQ community (see below). There is an important discussion to be had as to whether a very limited number of gas pumps and/or continuation of the existing auto service use should be allowed in conjunction with such a market if the Chittenden Cider Mill site is chosen. Elementary School. An elementary school was likewise mentioned many times as a future use in the SEQ. Looking to the future, the size of the SEQ at approximately 37% of the City's land area and the projected buildout of roughly 4,320 housing units, the SEQ will be a significant residential district of the City. The concept of neighborhood schools that serve nearby children and reinforce neighborhood social ties is an important part of South Burlington's culture. An elementary school is recommended as a future component of the SEQ, either as a replacement for another school facility or a new one, as the School District's needs arise. Parks. There is an immediate need in the SEQ for playing fields, and an ongoing need to create smaller functional public park spaces. Small pocket parks, community gardens and neighborhood green spaces also play an important role in neighborhood life as a venue for social gathering as well as active recreation. Small parks located within neighborhoods provide an auto -free destination for neighbors, especially children, to assemble. Small parks and greens that are well located along the pedestrian network and faced by houses become important neighborhood gathering places. In addition, larger recreation spaces including both open playing fields and natural areas with recreation paths (such as the Scott property) should be planned for and acquired. As the SEQ continues to grow, there will be increasing demands for more space for active recreation fields. In all cases, parks should be connected to the recreation path system. Developed recreation uses, structures and lighting are discouraged in this district, except for appropriate lighting of playing fields. Mixed Uses in the I-O District. The I/O district north of the SEQ has long been planned as an employment destination. This concept recommends that a select, carefully defined portion of this area be designated as a "receiving zone" for higher density housing to serve the employment base. Such housing should not be allowed as a permitted or conditional use as a matter of course, but should be allowed only upon the transfer of development rights from priority conservation areas within the SEQ. Ancillary retail services oriented to employees, such as a deli, restaurant, dry cleaners, or bank, currently are allowed within principal buildings only. As this area develops, the City may wish to revisit this limitation and consider allowing a small convenience center in an appropriate part of the IO district. An elementary school, playing fields, and a public safety facility are recommended to be developed as a component of this district and the adjacent City -owned parcel just north of Oak Creek Village. These civic buildings should be developed to serve as a focal point for the mixed - use district and be well -integrated with surrounding residential and employment uses. 4: Create a Central Village Center for the SEQ. The overall vision for the Southeast Quadrant is one of residential neighborhood villages integrated within a cohesive open space system that is linked together by recreational paths through a publicly accessible open space system. ORW Landscape Architects and Planners/South Burlington Planning & Zoning 5 612812005 Creating a central `village center' for the SEQ community that could include a small market, a park and a mixture of higher density housing is a key part of this concept. The `village center' would be carefully designed to be pedestrian oriented and linked to neighborhoods throughout the SEQ through the open space/trail system, streets and even transit. Connections to the City recreation path system are a crucial part of this concept. 5: Create a Circulation System That Balances Automobile Circulation with Bicycle, Pedestrian and Transit Modes. A common refrain from all involved is that the main roads are `barriers' that carry fast-moving traffic through the area and diminish the quality and livability of the area. Wide roads are also an impediment to wildlife mobility and adversely affect scenic views. Similarly, many internal neighborhood streets are also very wide (30'-32' pavement widths), which allows traffic to drive too fast and contributes to a sterile -feeling neighborhood environment. It is also recommended that street standards be reviewed and reconsidered in order to promote the concept of livable streets that provide access and circulation, but also create an attractive and comfortable environment for pedestrians, bicyclists, and serve as important public spaces. Streets between new and existing neighborhoods must be interconnected, to promote clear and efficient paths for pedestrians, bicyclists and automobiles. At the same time, streets should be designed to slow traffic, discourage `cut - through' traffic and made to be pedestrian -friendly, through streetscape design and the relationship between development and the street. At the same time, the network of connecting roads through the SEQ, specifically Swift Street, Midland Avenue and Old Cross Road, must be completed, as contemplated in the Comprehensive Plan, to serve the SEQ. Discontinuity on the larger road systems creates circuitous and unnecessarily long vehicular travel. To this end, the circulation concept includes the extension of Swift Streets and Old Cross Road through to Hinesburg Road and Midland Avenue through to Spear Street to create a logical grid of connector streets to serve the area. More specifically, roads through the planning area should be addressed as follows: North -South Arterials. The area is served by three primary north -south arterials: Spear Street; Dorset Street; and Hinesburg Road (Route 116). When these roads were initially developed, the SEQ was primarily an agricultural area, and these roads primarily served through traffic and farm to market functions. With increasing growth in the region, these roads have evolved into a larger commuter function linking housing to the south to jobs to the north. This has resulted in increasing volumes of through traffic at relatively high -speeds. As the SEQ continues to grow as a significant developed residential district, the roads that serve the area need to evolve as well, from rural highways to slower speed urban multi -modal thoroughfares. This is important in order to improve safety, and to accommodate greater volumes of local tips, cars, pedestrians, bicyclists, and potentially bus transit. Spear Street: Follow the recommendations of the Spear Street Corridor Plan for traffic calming and other improvements Dorset Street: Traffic calming designs should be developed for this roadway to slow traffic. The profile of Dorset Street from Cheese Factory -Barstow Road north to Nowland Farm -Old Cross Road should include traffic calming and utilize a profile appropriate to a village center. Hinesburg Road (Route 116): Hinesburg Road, which is a state-owned highway (Route 116), is recognized in the Comprehensive Plan as the roadway that will eventually have an interchange on I-89 and serve as the primary north -south travel route in the SEQ. Future design and OR WLandscape Architects and Planners/South Burlington Planning & Zoning 612812005 improvement of this road should accommodate through traffic, but also allow for comfortable use by bicyclists and pedestrians. A north -south local road parallel to Route 116 through the Butler Farms -Oak Creek neighborhood may need to be considered to provide local access to the IO district. East-West Roadways. As described above, Swift Street and Midland Avenue/Nowland Farm road need to be completed to provide a functional circulation system. The primary role of these roads is local in nature ---to provide local connections between neighborhoods. The roads should be designed to be slow, discourage through traffic and be bicycle and pedestrian friendly. Local Neighborhood Streets. Local streets should have a very strong pedestrian character, with sidewalks on both sides of the street, tree verges, on -street parking and with lane widths wide enough for two cars to pass at very slow speeds. Description of the Land Use Concept Level of Development. The Land Use Concept for the SEQ allows for the continued development of the area for residential uses. The overall hypothetical buildout of the area, which could theoretically amount to approximately 4, 320 housing units, would not change, but some of this housing would be accommodated within the IO district west of Route 116. Similarly, the existing Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) provisions in the Land Development Regulations that allow for clustering of development on `developable' parcels and preservation of identified open space areas designated `restricted' areas would also remain. Restricted and Development Areas. The designation of `restricted' and `developable' areas would be changed to promote the protection and conservation of the SEQ's overall ecological function. These re - mapped `restricted' areas would include wetlands with 50-foot setbacks, streams with 100 foot setbacks (50 feet each side), floodplains, and the primary natural communities identified in the Arrowwood Environmental report, including the Great Swamp, the Cheesefactory Swamp and Woods, the Muddy Brook corridor and basin, the Bowl, the Van Sicklen Woods, City Woods and Dubois Woods. Secondary open space areas, which provide green linkages between open space areas for wildlife and recreational purposes, would be mapped as `secondary restricted areas' to ensure that any development within the areas is subject to strict site design and environmental standards, and helps contribute to a cohesive open space system through the SEQ. The plan recommends a change in the approach to views and preservation of visual resources. Rather than a 300-foot "scenic setback" along the major roads, open areas which create breaks in development and "windows" into significant natural areas are recommended in place of the scenic setbacks. This will be implemented through development review. Community Structure. Future residential development is directed to several focused village neighborhood zones within the SEQ, as shown in the Conceptual Master Plan Map. These areas are envisioned to be developed as residential neighborhoods that encompass a range of housing types and respond to the special qualities of the natural environment to create a unique identity for the Southeast Quadrant. The vision is to create residential villages set within a larger framework of open space and connected through streets and landscape connections, such as pathways along creeks, and through open space areas. Building off of a village model, each neighborhood would be structured around a neighborhood gathering place, such as a park, natural area, the elementary school, or on Dorset Street initially, a small market. A finer grained mixture of housing types integrated with open space is recommended rather than monoculture subdivisions of identical houses. Each neighborhood would derive a unique identity from its internal neighborhood structure, as well as its setting and connection ORWLandscape Architects and Planners/South Burlington Planning & Zoning 7 612812005 with the surrounding landscape. City design review, including architectural elevations, landscaping, and site layout, is absolutely essential in executing this concept. Future village neighborhoods have a hierarchy of their own: Employment Center. A mixed -use employment center including a mix of higher density housing, employment, ancillary retail, a school and small park within the City's Industrial Open Space zone along Hinesburg Road, and relating to the existing neighborhoods nearby (Butler Farms, Oak Creek, Ledgeknoll and the VNCQ. Village Center. A Village Center along Dorset Street focused around a small neighborhood serving retail center potentially at the Chittenden Cider Mill. Residential Villages. Two new residential neighborhoods at the intersection of Hinesburg Road and Old Cross Road, and at Spear Street and Old Cross Road. These neighborhoods would be organized around neighborhood parks. Height: The current base height limit of 45 feet for pitched -roof structures should continue to be observed in the SEQ zoning district, but with the standard allowances for waivers that are contained in the LDRs. To facilitate higher -density development in the density receiving area in the IO district, however, a height allowance of fifty feet should be followed. Description of the Conservation and Open Space Concept The environmental and open space resources of the SEQ are conceived as a coherent system of connected corridors that serve the multiples roles of environmental protection, recreation, transportation (trails) and protection of visual, historic and cultural resources. The Conservation and Open Space Concept is comprised of the following components (see Conservation and Open Space plan map): Ecological Resources: Areas of ecological significance form the base of the open space system. These areas are (see map of environmental resources): • Ponds • Floodplains • Streams with 100-foot buffers • Wetlands with 50-foot buffers • Primary natural communities and buffers • Secondary natural communities • Open space connections (interstitial areas between designated resources that create continuity and cohesion in the open space system) Portions of these resources have been preserved as a part of various open space set -asides described below. Remaining areas are expected to remain in open space through future development set -asides or remain to be held as privately owned open space parcels. Existing Open Space: This includes land that is currently set aside as open space, parks or recreation land through ownership by the City or private homeowner associations. This category includes a mix of public and private land, as well as natural open space and active public recreation land (Dorset Park and the Golf Course). The city -owned parcel just north of Oak OR WLandscape Architects and Planners/South Burlington Planning & Zoning 612812005 Creek Village is recommended for an elementary school and public safety facility, and not general open space. The wetland resources on the parcel would be a part of the open space system. This category also includes lands that have been conserved as open space through the purchase of development rights by public or private entities. Priority Conservation Parcels: These lands reflect areas that have been identified as highly valuable open space parcels through this planning process and the 2002 Open Space Strategy. These areas represent desired future components of the open space system. These parcels are encouraged to be conserved through future transfer or purchase of development right transactions. Integration of Development and Open Space Areas The plan concept also promotes a more careful integration of open space with adjacent development areas. For the most part, future development will be encouraged to avoid fragmenting open space, to maintain continuity and connection for wildlife and recreational linkages. Additional emphasis will be placed on creating positive transitions between development and open space areas. In general, orienting development to the open space and establishing transitions such as single -loaded roads rather that backing up to open spaces with backyards, places a clear emphasis that open spaces are attractive public amenities. This approach also facilitates management and maintenance of the open space. Guidelines will be developed for consideration during the development review process. Next Steps The Planning Commission will continue to refine these ideas and distill them into revisions to the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning bylaws. ORWLandscape Architects and Planners/South Burlington Planning & Zoning 9 612812005 1 n _ c� r P t1 I�' 3 . r�l is � ��4 � �. � � Q 5••. �() ' of 1atl V11 t �•+.'d It �f.4�..r� 1�L,,. [!,' �.r. �� - f9 i •''� '? 4 I ✓ fl'JIN963 11 � 7�.,�..+--r" pg �� g� iE r a•: � t. et .... �� •. �1. +r's'� �T k�Q l�p-Aq II �r a pppp ��'1'I'��+ :.�rlrl'y•�'%y f'fiir �*- 1�� "y � ' I ® _ 11 0. y l+ r��. r . B.rSi " , t'1" ii �.% f '. :+ , s._��L' ' S�• ,• `^ rryryr d! S � n �i'li� d�b a .7. '•. .{�: :.�: r ! %'�^ �A.-+' k i � LL Is �Idl J / S 17I � _..r 0.7 � `oba as331u ter`"". � •.•gy,4'p-.':..t, �'+.:iJB 1 - FA t'I 3 a. �� \�193llLS.'wGtltlq - u U D / If lZ �r� � �i il. -� .- — � J i �, i �I,- ! r/ r��,• q. m G �..... 0 9 / � ®/ � ! rt h '��'• 3. �� •. ^-j• 1 •i F''�F I SAS �r .n�T �� y � r ,!� i 0 � - • f`�c L ��`� i {g. !M1'if t 11�t:il' i', ,k97�sy 1 �.11i{ .t'',. 7 .'A ��rA�," 1 I"5�',�LL 1.�� .IQ 1 1 • 1. 1 •'y 1,,�1•{y•. ! I � Q ' � { . J. P•' viN,4d,1iR�"'{!'. ''� //`�`• C9G V` ,` _ ..—' , �.+^ -. �"T y� ',` k..✓ � � 1 pp; i .. i'i � , II'.. �..r-r�M.d,..'• 1 s .yh^� i ,_,i'"�`^^.`. �—�' 3 - 't'' /� '� r.^ `�..� .mod* (�"• �.r �:° '� /� �.�� I `. ,„ kl';�`•• 1 �(rr..��y' �\'`n'��:S ,ti•'�9e"w:5 s� � �, :.1. Tt ��!• .�<,• ,�� ':,'1• � � � r •-, gip.• r• � , Cnee:0 R R I till Ix L ° _ I Ono Cl1EE5E E® I Gy �; f i s / °c „- —1�� `•.-�. � ` J'9 �I(1 S?"8� . F � 1 J ' ri, � r • ' � ._ � tl • ' � x.,f � �''' �i ' � � 'e � y.••:a.• t l F[: t r q f 0 rlf d Fr O 40 R® I41 � =1 II � � �`'r zr{t� •�.�:rl^' /Y �r,�'•,'' .•r . A�u �, i , � 0 c; ke�yy, u 1 ry u t•._.�� 0 P E CH ''Yi•7t1" 1p �lfl:�ii. i.�a bL(S4 }rf:. '�':.1+'� a :li. 3 I� 4 pp � ~1 E9BIIAGA ' �g �� 1 s 2 1 �._.e, 11 a n A B e U• •� ?�� 1 t %Yi � 1 � r n- �.f+ .` �• ...-.�•i�� l`f�l`. �,w? C i ,fi rn.r�F s d f k' 'VY!' 4 // If4v�_: z / IMF .. �,. "� :V•- .+"- � t y r pHIMS s �� STATE OF VERMONT DISTRICT #4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION In re Dorset East Associates, LLC c/o Milot Real Estate 76 St. Paul Street Burlington, VT 05401 FT�J JD South Burlington, LLC c/o Yandow/Dousevicz 35 Cherry Street Burlington, VT 05401 Land Use Permit Amendment #4C0948- AFFIDAVIT NOW COMES JULI BETH HINDS, of South Burlington, Vermont who being first duly sworn, deposes and states as follows: I am the Director of Planning and Zoning for the City of South Burlington, and have held this position for 6 years. As Director of Planning and Zoning, I have overseen the development of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations, including the revisions to the Comprehensive Plan which took place in 2006. Prior to the 2006 revisions, the City focused its open space planning in the South East Quadrant ("SEQ") primarily on the preservation of "scenic corridors" along major collector roadways. The City's regulations protected land along major roads such as Dorset Street, but did not consider other aspects of the SEQ beyond the perceived visual impact of these roadway strips. The 2001 Comprehensive Plan recognized that preservation of roadway strips was leading to adverse land use outcomes and directed the City to re-evaluate its land use and zoning policies for the SEQ regarding this specific issue. See South Burlington 2001 Comprehensive Plan at page 53, Recommended Actions (h) and (1). In 2004 and 2005, in response to the above -referenced Plan recommendations the City performed a thorough evaluation of the environmental resources and development patterns of the SEQ, including a professional assessment of the wildlife and natural communities of the SEQ. Based on these studies, we discovered that our existing method of open space planning failed to take into account the ecological characteristics of the landscape and pushed development away from roads and into sensitive wildlife areas. The approach also caused fragmentation of the landscape due to the lack of a cohesive district -wide plan for effective land use and open space preservation. 6. In its revision to the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations, the City recognized the conflict between the former policy of preserving open space strips along roads and the need to protect larger contiguous ecologically sensitive areas. The revisions sought to create a more cohesive plan, and to focus preservation efforts on ecological value by designating lands away from the major roads as Natural Resource Protection ("NRP") areas. 7. This revision constituted a dramatic shift in the City's priorities and vision for the SEQ and was a virtual reversal in the conceptual approach to open space planning. Many of the corridors of land previously designated as "restricted" for development along the roadways are now seen as appropriate for in -fill development, while large areas of open space and forested areas existing away from the major roads, into which development was previously being pushed, are now slated for protection. 8. In order to accomplish the goals set forth in the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, it is essential that the City promote higher density neighborhood development in areas now zoned as SEQ-Neighborhood Residential Transition, while encouraging the protection of those areas within the SEQ-Natural Resource Protection Subdistrict. 9. One of the primary tools we employ to accomplish these goals is a Transfer of Development Rights program ("TDR"), which allows for higher density development in Village Residential and Neighborhood Residential areas, in exchange for the protection of lands designated as SEQ-NRP sending areas, such as the Auclair Farm in the Natural Resource Protection Subdistrict. This TDR system promotes the City's goals because it protects ecologically significant areas and helps create neighborhoods of sufficient density to encourage connectivity and traditional design. 10. As a result of this dramatic shift in our planning goals, there are previously developed projects that do not fit into this new vision of ecological resource protection and in -fill development along previously protected roadway strips. The City strongly supports the reconsideration of these projects and encourages alteration of previously issued permits in order to promote these new goals. See South Burlington 2006 Comprehensive Plan at Page 75, Recommendation 1.5. H . The JD South Burlington project provides an excellent opportunity for the City to achieve its goals by utilizing the TDR program to protect land within the SEQ-NRP on the Auclair Farm while encouraging neighborhood development along Dorset Street, in an area appropriate for such development. 12. As the Director of Planning and Zoning for the City of South Burlington, it is my opinion that allowing the development on Parcel G and the associated TDR protection on the Auclair Farm will promote directly the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan, and will contribute to the protection of a cohesive ppen space area with important ecological functions. Dated a&& I �AVermont this day of August, 2007. Juli Beth Hinds STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. Atc'5• Vermont this Q� day ofauor, 2007, personally appeared JULI BETH WNW, to me known, and after first being duly sw did acknowledge that she made this statement freely and without compulsion, and that it is a true statement to the best of her knowledge. Not Notary commission issued in Chittenden County My commission expires: 2/10/11 No Text CITY CLERK'6 ©D 60903.06 Received_-42�� al t / .4 din Vole _.fig on page �a Recor a .— Of So. Burlingteh land Records 307 Attest. �MA QI1 OPTION TO PURCHASE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS Dtl S ine, City Clerk bus Mevillmorandum of Option to Purchase Development Rights is made and entered into by and between Ernest N. Auclair, hereinafter referred to as "Seller", and Dorset Street Associates, LLC, hereinafter referred to as "Purchaser". L . Seller and Purchaser entered into an Option to Purchase Development Rights (hereinafter referred to: as the "Option Agreement") by instrument dated November 4, 2002; and as subsequently amended by any addendums thereto. 2.. Seller's address is 1650 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, Vermont 05403. Purchasers address is 25 Pinecrest Drive, Essex Junction, VT 05452. 3.: The Option Agreement commenced as of November 4, 2002, and does not contain provisions for extension, renewal or termination of the Option Agreement. 4. i The property which is subject to the Option to Purchase Development Rights is more particularly described as follows: Being all remaining lands and premises owned by the Seller in the City of South Burlington which were conveyed to him by the following deeds: 1. - Warranty Deed of Ernest N. Auclair and Mildred Auclair dated May 26, - 1981, of record at Volume 171, Page 480, of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Also: being those lands and premises conveyed to Ernest and Mildred Auclair by Warranty Deed of Arthur and Grace Auclair dated March 18, 1975, of;record at Volume 118, Page 546, of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 2. Warranty Deed of Ernest N. Auclair and Mildred Auclair dated May 26, 19,81, of record at Volume 171, Page 478, of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Also being those lands and premises conveyed to Ernest and Mildred Auclair by Warranty Deed of Arthur and Grace Auclair dated June 9, 1976, of record at Volume 127, Page 48, of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Specifically excluded from the Option are those lands and premises known and designated as 1650 Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, Vermont, which were conveyed to Ernest N. Auclair and Mildred Auclair by Quitclaim Deed of Alan F..Sylvester dated September 3, 1974, of record at Volume 93, Page 469, of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 5. , The Option.Agreement permits the Purchaser to transfer the development rights for the Seller's property by means of conservation easements for the benefit of properties currently owned or hereafter acquired by the Purchaser in the City of South Burlington. The Purchaser shall have, the right to designate the non-profit organization(s) to whom the conservation easement shall be granted. The Option Agreement is limited to the purchase of the development right potential of the Seller's property for nonagricultural activities. The Seller shall retain the right to continue to farm the land and to construct any structures necessary for the support of farming! activities. The Seller shall have the further right to sell or otherwise transfer ownership of his property, subject to this Option and to any conservation easements created pursuant hereto. The Seller shall retain the right to keep the development rights to a portion of the lands described above. G090307 IIi VI r. 6. The original Option Agreement, and all addendums thereto, are held by the Purchaser. A copy ofthe Option Agreement, and all addendums thereto, have been retained by the Seller. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and seal this day off 2003. In the sence of. SELLER: I s Ernest STATE OF VERMONT CRITTENDEN COUNTY, SS. Vermont, this `,�_ day of 2003, personally appeared Ernest N. At air, and he acknowledged this instrument Yy him sealed and subscribed, to be his free act and deed. Before me, N ary Public My Co • sion ires: L— — I 0 - 01 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and seal this day of Xt, 2003. Witness PURCHASER: Dorset Street Associates, LLC, by its duly authorized agent STATE OF VERMONT CHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS. At Essex Junction, Vermont, this 2-1 day of %Za 2003, personally appeared Alan H. Bartlett, duly authorized agent of for Dorset Street A�tes, LLC, and he acknowledged this instrument by him sealed and subscribed, to be his free act and deed, and the free act and deed of Dorset Street Associates, LLC. Before me, ,2 4---_-s .�..p.. Notary Public My Commission Expires: z//0/o7 V/Auclair.memo.option. wpd �� a �� • � < No Text Locus Notes 1. Owner of R—d: Dareef Eaat Aaaocfutea, LLD 16 S . Pwl Street &xlMglarr, Vamo0t 05401 2 Applkanl: $ Sealh tAel%'- LLD 50 Weat 1wM OduTnenpce S— DarlMglan, t 040 1 Parcel Ma' 45.46 acres Z.Md Dltlrkt: Southeast Duaaonl 5. Engeweed Profe I Deacriptlon: ReaWentld decalop t enafrveted on 10.15 acres with occesa f'" Dorset SI oel. Die 20.25 aaa pace) 101 be—dialded f Ina c ,tMg 45 M oae peal owned by Dorset Eaaf Aaeacktea, LLD the realdenlld units vrs ad fownhauaea conrgured Mlo duplex .1 aMgle apnRgaaeront. 6. PaNn.tar prepartY lNe Mfwmption ab1." hen wan entitN Tiwnpay =y - Saufheaat 6 It' prepared by Kre6a X Lonaeq DmadlMp EngTaero, Mc. dated 1/6/84 oa ahosn an the attached plan enRfled 'Seutneaat SumMt - DrorM Site plm' prepaeE br Fffepahkk-lhwNlM Incarpaoled, last .ewee 6/5/s4. LLEWELLYN = NOWLEY _ a.aeMa nR. tiparxxlc sepLs : rre, Dorset East Associates, LLC J— IR C0 RPO R-AT9D r^irrl�aM _ a T = � ir,9 aervieas [n in n P rm, �tM�c e,anM tat I zo k�mewll ..,eta.:a3R a . ,aa3, s� Rye II.al• 80 FLOpen Space Plan ARt11 m taw Tta�:, 6ae&-z;ro •rfrt� , �06a03 .01Maro1 GRAVEL AND SHEA Attorneys at Law 76 St. Paul Street Post Office Box 369 Burlington, Vermont 05402-0369 Telephone 802.658.0220 Faeeimile 802.658.1456 www. gravelshea.com Writer's E-Mail: rrushford@gravelshea.com HAND DELIVERED District Commission #4 Attn.: Peter Keibel, District Coordinator 111 West Street Essex Junction, VT 05452 September 22, 2008 Re: Dorset East Associates, LLC Land Use Permit Amendment #4C0948-6 Dear Peter: Stewart H. McConaughy Robert B. Hemley William G. Post, Jr. Craig Weatherly John R. Ponsetto Peter S. Erly Robert F. O'Neill Margaret L. Montgomery Robert H. Rushford Andrew D. Manitsky Michelle N. Farkas William A.Mason, IV Matthew B. Byrne Karen K. O'Neill Enclosed please find the original and three copies Applicant's Request for Reconsideration of Open Space Area, along with our Certificate of Service. We will forward an electronic copy of the Memorandum under separate cover. Please be in touch with any questions. Very truly yours, GRAVEL AND SHEA R ert H. Rushford RHR: j ar Enclosure cc: Parties on Certificate of Service Clarke A. Gravel (1916-2002) Charles T. Shea Heather Briggs Of Cnaneel Norman Williams Timothy M. Eustace Special Couaeel Heather Rider Hammond Megan J. Shafritz Ross A. Feldmann } STATE OF VERMONT DISTRICT #4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Re: Dorset East Associates, LLC c/o Milot Real Estate 76 St. Paul Street Burlington, VT 05401 and JD South Burlington, LLC c/o Yandow/Dousevicz 35 Cherry Street Burlington, VT 05401 Land Use Permit Amendment #4C0948-6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Robert H. Rushford, Esq., attorney for Dorset East Associates, LLC, certify that on September 22, 2008, I served Applicants' Request for Reconsideration of Open Space Area, by causing a copy to be mailed, postage prepaid to the following: JD South Burlington, LLC 35 Cherry Street Burlington, VT 05401 bradydc(o-)comcast.net Dorset East Associates, LLC 76 St. Paul Street Burlington, VT 05401 brett milotrealestate.com Robert Rushford, Esq. 76 St. Paul Street Burlington, VT 05402 rrushford(a_gravelshea.com Lance Llewellyn, PE Llewellyn -Howley Inc. 20 Kimball Ave., Suite 202N South Burlington, VT 05403 la�lhinc.net Jim Dousevicz & Brad Dousevicz 56 W. Twin Oaks Terrace, Unit #1 South Burlington, VT 05403 GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 Chair, City Council Dir. of Planning & Zoning City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 planninq(a)burl.com; chafter(a)sburl.com; jhinds sburl.com Chair, Select./Chair, Pln. Com. Town of Shelburne PO Box 88 Shelburne, VT 05482 chaag(a)shelburnevt.org Chittenden Cty. Reg. P1an.Comm. 30 Kimball Avenue, Suite 206 South Burlington, VT 05403 Elizabeth Lord, Land. Use Attorney/ANR 103 S. Main St. - Center Bldg., 3rd Floor Waterbury, VT 05671-0301 anr. act250(a�state.vt.us John Becker Vince Bolduc Vt. Dept. of Public Service 112 252 Autumn Hill Road State Street, Drawer 20 South Burlington, VT 05403 Montpelier, VT 05620-2601 john.beckerC&state.vt.us Thomas C. Walsh, Esq. Walsh Law, LLC Craig Keller 178 Main Street, Ste 301 Utilities & Perrnits/VTrans Burlington, VT 05401 One National Life Drive, Drawer 33 twalsh(a walshlawllc.com Montpelier, VT 05633 craiq.keller@state.vt.us David Bond, Esq. Fead Construction Law, PLC Louise Waterman, Ed. Coord./lan Balcom P.O. Box 673 Vt. Agency of Agriculture, Burlington, VT 05402-0673 Food & Markets bondna feadlaw.com 116 State Street, Drawer 20 Montpelier, VT 05620-2901 FOR YOUR INFORMATION louise.watermanna state.vt.us: District #4 Environmental Commission ian.balcomna state.vt.us Thomas Little, Chair Michael Flaherty Division for Historic Preservation James McNamara National Life Building, Drawer 20 111 West Street Montpelier, VT 05620 Essex Junction, VT 05452 i ane.lendway(&state.vt.us i udith. ehrlichC&state. vt. us scott.dil.lon@state.vt.us Dorset Farms Homeowners Association c/o Dan Wetzel 183 Catkin Drive South Burlington„ VT 05403 danwetzna us.ibm.com Dated: Burlington, Vermont September 22, 2008 Robert H. Rushford, Esq. Gravel and Shea 76 St. Paul Street, 7th Floor P. O. Box 369 Burlington, VT 05402-0369 (802) 658-0220 For Applicant GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 #331847 v1 - Dorset East JD South Burlington Czrti6cate of Service 91508 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 STATE OF VERMONT DISTRICT #4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION In re Dorset East Associates, LLC c/o Milot Real Estate 76 St. Paul Street Burlington, VT 05401 and JD South Burlington, LLC c/o Yandow/Dousevicz 35 Cherry Street Burlington, VT 05401 Land Use Permit Amendment #4C0948-6 APPLICANTS' REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF OPEN SPACE AREA NOW COME the Applicants, Dorset East Associates, LLC ("Dorset East") and JD South Burlington, LLC ("JD"), by and through their attorneys Gravel and Shea, and submit this request for reconsideration of their open space set aside area pursuant to Environmental Board Rule 31(B). BACKGROUND In its May 1, 2008 Memorandum of Decision and Order (the "Decision"), the District Commission determined that the open space set aside area offered by the Applicants on the Auclair Farm was not sufficient as replacement open space for Dorset Farms under Criterion 8 because the lands on the Auclair Farm were one mile from the Dorset Farms Project and were not visible from Dorset Street. Since the date of the Decision, the Applicants have negotiated with Leduc Farm, Inc. to use a portion of its land for open space. The Applicants propose using the Leduc lands as a substitute open space set aside. The proposed open space set aside on the Leduc lands will consist of one 46.7 acre parcel in South Burlington which is directly adjacent and to the east of Parcel G, and a second 20.8 acre portion of another Leduc parcel located nearby along Cheesefactory Road GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 (the "Leduc Open Space Area").' The Leduc Open Space Area is depicted on the Overall Open Space Plans attached hereto as Exhibit "A" (the "Open Space Plan"). The close physical relationship between the Leduc Open Space Area and Parcel G is also shown on the computer model photograph attached as Exhibit "B."Z The Applicants request that the Commission reconsider its Criterion 8 mitigation analysis set forth in its Decision in light of the Applicants' proposal to use of the Leduc Open Space Area as the new set aside area. THE LEDUC OPEN SPACE AREA ADDRESSES THE PROXIMITY AND VISIBILITY ISSUES RAISED BY THE COMMISSION In its Decision, the Commission was unable to find that the Applicants would maintain compliance with Criterion 8 under the Quechee analysis using the Auclair open space set aside. According to the Decision, "[t]his area is approximately one mile from the Dorset Farms Project. The area is not visible from Dorset Street. Therefore it is difficult to see how this open space could mitigate for the area around Dorset Farms." Decision at 4. The new Leduc Open Space Area addresses the Commission's concerns because these lands are adjacent to Parcel G and they are partially visible from Dorset Street. Moreover, they straddle the town line between the City of 1 Consistent with prior filings, the Applicants have shown 67.5 acres for their open space set aside. This acreage corresponds with the number of TDR acres the Applicants must acquire to satisfy the anticipated density of the JD Project (i.e., 81 units _ 1.2du/acre = 67.5 acres needed for TDRs). In the event the JD Project is ultimately approved at a density of less than 81 units, the Applicants will require fewer TDRs and, therefore, there will be a corresponding reduction in their acquisition of open space. For example, if the JD Project is ultimately approved for 76 units, then the Applicants will need to acquire only 63.33 acres of TDRs and open space (i.e., 76 units 1.2du/acre = 63.33 acres). The Applicants propose that any future reduction in TDRs/open space based the approval of the JD Project at a density of less than 81 units will be taken first from the 20.8 acre parcel before any reduction is made to the 46.7 acre parcel. 2 The buildings and improvements shown on the model photograph are for illustrative purposes only to show a possible layout of the buildings on the site and their relationship to the open space on Parcel G and the Leduc Open Space Area. The Applicants will, of course, return to the Commission with a complete application for the building project once their project has been approved by the City of South Burlington. —2— GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 South Burlington and Town of Shelburne and, therefore, will provide future open space protection along the Shelburne town line. CONCLUSION Accordingly, the Applicants respectfully request that the Commission find: (a) that the Leduc Open Space Area is sufficient mitigation for the development of 20 acres of Parcel G; (b) that the Applicants will maintain compliance with Criterion 8, thereby satisfying the finality prong of the Stowe Club Highlands Analysis; and (c) that the Commission allow the proposed amendment of Condition No. 14 under EBR 34(E), and authorize Applicants to submit a complete application for the JD Project.3 Dated: Burlington, Vermont September 22, 2008 GRAVEL AND SHEA Attorneys for Applicants — Z�� obert H. Rushford, Esq. 76 St. Paul Street, 7th Floor P.O. Box 369 Burlington, VT 05402-0369 (802) 658-0220 3 When the Applicants eventually submit their Act 250 Application for their development proposal, the Leducs will sign as a co -applicant to provide the Commission with jurisdiction over their lands for purposes of imposing conditions consistent with this Petition. #331577 vI - Dorset East Request for Reconsideration —3— GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 D.... SM.t %=0.1=671 EDGMOOD OPEN SPACE 25..3 acres LEDUC OPEN SPACE 46.7 ..-. (— P—I—) LEDUC OPEN 51 20.8.- GRAPHIC SCALE LLEWELLYN - HOWLEY 1 %0 Edgewood Overall Open Space Plan LLEWELLYN - HOWLEY I Wh. XG IL Notes Edgewood Open Space Comparison Plan — (W. Currant P—. —. —F-1) No Text x r r e �=m "r oZ ..e0 9 VEL AND SHEA Attorneys at Law 76 St. Paul Street Post Office Box 369 Burlington, Vermont 05402-0369 Telephone 802.658.0220 Facsimile 802.658.1456 www. gravelshea.com Writer's E-Mail: rrushford@gravelshea.com District Commission #4 Attn.: Peter Keibel, Coordinator 111 West Street Essex Junction, VT 05452 January 16, 2008 Re: Dorset Street Associates, LLC Land Use Permit Amendment #4C0948-6 Dear Peter: Stewart H. McConaughy Clarke A. Gravel (1916-2002) Robert B. Hemley William G. Post, Jr. Charles T. Shea Craig Weatherly Of COHndel John R. Ponsetto Peter S. Erly Norman Williams Robert F. O'Neill Timothy M. Eusta.ce Margaret L. Montgomery Special Counsel Heather Briggs Robert H. Rushford Heather Rider Hammond Andrew D. Manitsky Megan J. Shafritz Michelle N. Farkas Ross A. Feldmann William A. Mason, IV Matthew B. Byrne Karen K. O'Neill Enclosed please find the original and three copies of the following: (1) Applicant's Supplemental Memorandum Support of Their Application for Permit Amendment; (2) copy the Exhibit referenced therein; and (3) our Certificate of Service. l cover. We will forward an electronic copy of the Please be in touch with any questions. RHR: j ar Enclosures cc: Parties on Certificate of Service Findings and Exhibiunder Very truly yours, GRAVEL AND SHEA Robert H. Rushford / / Z STATE OF VERMONT DISTRICT #4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Re: Dorset East Associates, LLC c/o Milot Real Estate 76 St. Paul Street Burlington, VT 05401 and JD South Burlington, LLC c/o Yandow/Dousevicz 35 Cherry Street Burlington, VT 05401 Land Use Permit Amendment #4C0948-6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Robert H. Rushford, Esq., attorney for Dorset East Associates, LLC, certify that on January 16, 2008, I served a Applicants' Supplemental Memorandum in Support of Their Application for Permit Amendment, by causing a copy to be mailed, postage prepaid to the following: JD South Burlington, LLC 35 Cherry Street Burlington, VT 05401 bradydc(a)comcast.net Dorset East Associates, LLC 76 St. Paul Street Burlington, VT 05401 brett milotrealestate.com Robert Rushford, Esq. 76 St. Paul Street Burlington, VT 05402 rrushford(a)gravelshea.com Lance Llewellyn, PE Llewellyn -Howley Inc. 20 Kimball Ave., Suite 202N South Burlington, VT 05403 lal(&Ihinc.net Jim Dousevic & Brad Dousevicz 56 W. Twin Oaks Terrace, Unit #1 GRAVEL AND SHEA South Burlington, VT 05403 ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 Chair, City Council Juli Beth Hinds, Dir. of Planning & Zoning City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 nlanninaC&burl.com. chafterasburl com• ihindsasburl.com Chair, Select./Chair, Pln. Com. Town of Shelburne PO Box 88 Shelburne, VT 05482 chaag(c)shelburnevt.org Chittenden Cty. Reg. P1an.Comm. 30 Kimball Avenue, Suite 206 South Burlington, VT 05403 Elizabeth Lord, Land Use Attorney/ANR 103 S. Main St. - Center Bldg., 3rd Floor Waterbury, VT 05671-0301 anr.act250(d)state.vt.us John Becker Vt. Dept. of Public Service 112 State Street, Drawer 20 Montpelier, VT 05620-2601 john.becker(&state.vt.us Craig Keller Utilities & Perruits/VTrans One National Life Drive, Drawer 33 Montpelier, VT 05633 craiq keller(a)state.vt.us Louise Waterman, Ed. Coord./Ian Balcom Vt. Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets 116 State Street, Drawer 20 Montpelier, VT 05620-2901 louise.waterman(a)state.vt.us: ian.balcom(a�state.vt.us Division for Historic Preservation National Life Building, Drawer 20 Montpelier, VT 05620 jane.lendway@state.vt.us j udith. ehrlich(&state.vt.us scott.dillon(a)state.vt.us Dated: Burlington, Vermont January 16, 2008 Dorset Farms Homeowners Association c/o Dan Wetzel 183 Catkin Drive South Burlington„ VT 05403 danwetz(&us.ibm.com Vince Bolduc 252 Autumn Hill Road South Burlington, VT 05403 FOR YOUR INFORMATION District #4 Environmental Commission Thomas Little, Chair Michael Flaherty James McNamara 111 West Street Essex Junction, VT 05452 Z�'�c Robert H. Rushford, Esq. Gravel and Shea 76 St. Paul Street, 7th Floor P. O. Box 369 Burlington, VT 05402-0369 (802) 658-0220 For Applicant GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 #311754 vt - Dorset East Associates JD South Burlington Certificate of Service STATE OF VERMONT DISTRICT #4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION In re Dorset East Associates, LLC c/o Milot Real Estate 76 St. Paul Street Burlington, VT 05401 and JD South Burlington, LLC c/o Yandow/Dousevicz 35 Cherry Street Burlington, VT 05401 Land Use Permit Amendment #4C0948-6 APPLICANTS' SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF THEIR APPLICATION FOR PERMIT AMENDMENT Applicants, Dorset East Associates, LLC (`Dorset East') and JD South Burlington, LLC ("JD'), by and through their attorneys, Gravel and Shea, submit this Supplemental Memorandum in support of their Application, pursuant to Environmental Board Rule 34(E), for an amendment to partially remove the open space requirement of Condition No. 14 of Land Use Permit No. 4CO948-EB (Altered). PRELIMINARY STATEMENT In its November 29, 2007 Memorandum of Decision and Order regarding Applicants' request for a permit amendment, the District Commission found that flexibility will outweigh finality in the amendment analysis as long as the Dorset Farms project will continue to satisfy Criterion 8 once the previously -imposed condition regarding open space is modified. Thus, the Commission has requested that the Applicants: (1) submit the details regarding the lands that are now proposed to be set aside; and (2) demonstrate that the Dorset Farms project will remain in :sRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORRNEYS AT LAW P. Box 3compliance with Criterion 8 if the permit amendment is granted. As described more fully below, URLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 :;RAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 JRLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 the proposed set -aside will more than satisfy the open space concerns noted by the Environmental Board and will not diminish the mitigating steps that were taken in connection with the Dorset Farms project. Accordingly, the Dorset Farms project still satisfies Criterion 8, and the permit amendment should be granted. DISCUSSION I. THE PROPOSED SET -ASIDE ADDRESSES THE OPEN SPACE CONCERNS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD. The Applicants have prepared a set -aside plan, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 1, which shows an open space area containing 67.5 acres on the Auclair Farm. Although the Applicants have the eventual right under their Option with the Auclairs to conserve most of the Auclair Farm (subject to some minor exceptions) for protection and transfer of development rights, the Applicants have selected an area that is in keeping with their agreement with the Auclairs and will maximize the open space goals outlined in the original Environmental Board decision for Dorset Farms. Of concern in the decision was the impact on the open space/rural character of the area and visual impact for the public traveling on the roads in the area. See In re MBLAssocs., Land Use Permit No. 4CO948-EB (Altered), Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order at 20 (Jan. 30,1996). The set -aside satisfies these goals by creating protection along a large portion of Hinesburg Road (a major traveling route in the SEQ) so that a significant portion of the roadway frontage is permanently protected from development through the deeded transfer of development rights. In addition, the area is in close proximity to the Shelburne town line, further addressing the open space concerns expressed by the Town of Shelburne.1 'As discussed below, the Environmental Board decision contains no requirement as to the exact location of this open space or that it directly adjoin the Dorset Farms project. THE DORSET FARMS PROJECT WILL STILL COMPLY WITH CRITERION 8 IF THE PERMIT AMENDMENT IS GRANTED. We understand the District Commission's inquiry to be whether the removal of approximately 20 acres of open space from the 45 acre Parcel G would have a negative impact on the Environmental Board's finding that the Dorset Farms project satisfied Criterion 8 and, if so, whether the proposed set -aside would overcome any negative effects under the Criterion 8 analysis. In order to address these questions, it is necessary to reexamine the Dorset Farms project under the Quechee Lakes test. Under Criterion 8, a determination must be made as to whether a project will have an undue adverse effect on aesthetics. At the outset, it should be noted that: Criterion #8 was not intended to prevent all change to the landscape of Vermont or to guarantee that the view a person sees from his or her property will remain the same forever. Change must and will come, and Criterion #8 will not be an impediment. Criterion #8 was intended to ensure that as development does occur, reasonable consideration will be given to the visual impacts on neighboring landowners, the local community, and on the special scenic resources of Vermont. In re Horizon Dev. Corp., Application No. 4C0841-EB, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order at 20 (Aug. 21,1992) (citation omitted); In re Casella Waste Management, Inc., Land Use Permit Amendment No. 8B0301-7-WFP, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order at 25 (May 16, 2000). In Quechee Lakes, the Environmental Board established five questions to determine whether or not a project will have an adverse impact on aesthetics and natural beauty, which address the following: (1) the surroundings of the project; (2) the compatibility of the project's design with its surroundings; (3) the issue of color and materials; (4) the visibility of the project from different angles; and (5) the impact of the project on open space. In re Quechee Lakes, Nos. 3RAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 JRLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 _ 3 ' 3W4011-EB and 3W4039-EB, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order at 19-21(Nov. 4, ,RAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 1985). If a district commission answers any one of these five questions in the negative and determines that there is an "adverse" impact on aesthetics, the commission must then go on to review the second prong of the Quechee Lakes test to determine if the adverse aesthetic impact is "andue." The test to establish whether or not an adverse aesthetic impact is undue is as follows: (a) Does the project violate a clear, written community standard intended to preserve the aesthetics and natural beauty of the area; (b) Does the project offend the sensibilities of the average person when viewed as a whole? Is it offensive or shocking because it is out of character with its surroundings or significantly diminishes the scenic qualities of the area; and (c) Has the Applicant failed to take generally available mitigating steps which a reasonable person would take to improve the harmony of the proposed project with its natural surroundings? In the Dorset Farms case, the Board originally made two adverse impact findings. However, given the changes that have occurred in the area over the past twelve years, it is doubtful that these adverse findings are appropriate today. In fact, Applicants submit that all five Quechee Lakes questions should now be answered in the affirmative. In any event, even if such adverse findings were made, the mitigation element is unaffected by the replacement of 20 acres of open space from Parcel G with 67.5 acres on the Auclair Farm. Thus, the Dorset Farms project is still in compliance with Criterion 8 despite the permit amendment. A. The First Prone Of The Quechee Lakes Analysis. In the Dorset Farms Environmental Board decision, the Board found an "adverse" aesthetic impact under two of the five Quechee Lakes questions: (a) "the Project density will be out of context when considered against the immediate context of the Proj ect tract;" and (b) "the —4— Project will cause the loss of a significant amount of open space." In re MBL Assocs., Land Use Permit No. 4CO948-EB (Altered), Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order at 20 (Jan. 30, 1996). The Board found that `tt]hese adverse effects will be experienced by those who reside, use land, or pass through the area, including the Jewetts, the Blairs, the Goldbergs, Mr. Bolduc and the Trust." Id. (emphasis added). However, in light of the new residential developments that have been approved and/or built in the SEQ during the twelve years since the Environmental Board decision, it is not clear that these same adverse findings would be made today. 1. The Dorset Farms Density is Less than that of Surrounding Projects. On July 9, 2007, the District Commission granted master plan approval for the South Village project, a 334 unit residential development on 226.9 acres which directly abuts the westerly boundary of the Dorset Farms project and is similarly situated near the Shelburne town line. See In re South Village, LLC, Land Use Permit #4C1160R, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order at 1(Jul. 9, 2007). The South Village project will have 334 units of housing on 226.9 acres, resulting in a total density of 1.47 units per acre. However, the Dorset Farms project has a lower original density than South Village with 221 units on 202 original acres, resulting in 1.09 units per acre. In fact, even with the removal of the 20 acres from Parcel G, the Dorset Farms project still has a lower per unit density than South Village (i.e., 221 units on 182 acres = 1.21 units per acre).2 Thus, the density of the Dorset Farms project is now not out of context when considered against the immediate area, and a negative finding on this question is no longer appropriate. GRAVEL AND SHEA 21.2 dwelling units per acre is the district -wide density provision in the current South Burlington Zoning Ordinance ATTORNEYS AT LAW for the SEQ. City of South Burlington Zoning Regulations § 9.05(A). P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 —5— 1 2. The Dorset Farms Project has More Open Space than Surrounding Projects. The Dorset Farms project also preserves more open space per unit than the South Village project. South Village has 334 units and 153 acres of open space, resulting in 0.458 acres of open space per unit. See South Village at 4. By contrast, Dorset Farms has 127 original acres of open space for 221 units, resulting in 0.574 acres of open space per unit. Even considering the removal of the 20 acres from Parcel G, Dorset Farms still has more open space per unit than South Village (i.e., 107 acres of open space for 221 units = 0.484 acres of open space per unit).3 Therefore, it cannot be said that the removal of 20 acres of open space from Parcel G will cause the amount of open space for the Dorset Farms project to fall below acceptable standards. This QuecheeLakes question should be answered in the affirmative as well. GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 URLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 B. The Second Prong of the Quechee Lakes Analysis. As demonstrated above, in view of the development that has occurred or is planned in the area, the two factors which the Environmental Board relied on in concluding that the Dorset Farms project had an adverse aesthetic impact should not give rise to such a finding today. However, if the Commission adheres to the Board's original decision under the first part of the examination, it must then proceed to the second part. The Board found that the Dorset Farms project satisfied all three elements of the second prong of Quechee Lakes test, and held that any adverse impact was not "undue." The proposed changes in the open space preserved under this permit amendment request do not affect this analysis. 3 With the addition of the Auclair set -aside, the total open space is 174.5 acres (107 + 67.5) which results in 0.789 acres of open space per unit for the 221 units in Dorset Farms. Even when the 81 units for the JD Project are added to this total, there is still more open space per unit than South Village (i.e., 221 + 81 = 302 units with 174.5 acres of open space = 0.578 acres of open space per unit). This calculation does not include the additional open space which is planned within the JD Project. l 1. There is No Violation of a Clear Community Standard. The Environmental Board first found that the Dorset Farms project did not violate a clear community standard, since it satisfied the City's Zoning Regulations. Dorset Farms still satisfies this element since the project continues to meet the applicable zoning requirements. The removal of 20 acres of open space from Parcel G does not alter this conclusion since the 20 acres of Parcel G that front on Dorset Street are now located in the NR-T Subdistrict, a designated "receiving area" for TDRs. This portion of Parcel G has been identified by the City as the place where it wants to locate "neighborhoods at higher densities." Comprehensive Plan at 62. 2. Dorset Farms Does Not Shock or Offend the Average Person. The Environmental Board found that Dorset Farms would not shock or offend the average person in light of the mitigation (described below) and based on "the larger context of the Project area, which includes increasing suburban development growing out from Chittenden County's urban core in Burlington, Vermont's largest urban area. Within this larger context are several medium density residential developments similar to the Project. Thus, the Board believes that the average person would not be shocked or offended to find a project of this nature in the proposed location." In re MBL Assocs., at 20. As noted above, additional residential projects have been approved and constructed in the SEQ over the past decade, including the adjacent South Village project. Therefore, in the larger context of the SEQ, the removal of 20 acres from Parcel G does not shock or offend the average 4 person. 3RAVEL AND SHEA 4 Moreover, the fact that no adjoining property owners attended the Commission's hearing to actively oppose the ATTORNEYS AT LAW removal of 20 acres from Parcel G further demonstrates that the removal of 20 acres from Parcel G is not shocking or P. O. Box 369 offensive to the average person. URLINGTON, VERMONT 03402-0369 — 7 — E 3. Dorset Farms Satisfies the Mitigation Element of Quechee Lakes. The Environmental Board found that the Dorset Farms applicants had taken generally available steps to mitigate the adverse effects on density and open space, including clustering of project buildings, reduction of mass through landscaping and muted housing colors, and placement of buildings to take advantage of the higher elevations on the westernmost portion of the tract so rooflines are below tree level. The Board also noted the preservation of 127 acres of open space, "including a 50-acre open space set -aside between Dorset Street and the Project residences." Id. at 21. The Board's specific reference to the 50-acre open space area on the west side of Dorset Street (in front of the Project residences) suggests that this was the most significant component of its finding, particularly since these lands provide a direct visual buffer between the public roadway and the project residences.5 Although the remaining areas of open space contributed to the mitigation effort, the precise location of these lands was not noted as an essential element of the Board's finding.6 Thus, the shifting of 20 acres of open space from 5 It should be noted that the South Village project is situated on lands formerly owned by the Downing -Calkins Trust, one of the parties the Dorset Farms Board sought to protect in its discussion of density and loss of open space under Criterion 8. In addition, Mr. Bolduc, another party identified in the Environmental Board's discussion of Criterion 8 density and open space, appeared at the District Commission hearing in this matter to sSMport the pending application. Moreover, the Goldbergs have obtained permits to subdivide their property into five residential lots. Thus, it would appear that concerns regarding the effect of a permit modification on these parties are no longer relevant. The remaining parties cited by the Board as being affected by a loss of open space were the Blairs and the Jewetts. However, their properties are located approximately 800-1,200 feet north of Parcel G and are situated within the sightline of the northern section of the Dorset Farms project; accordingly, the relevant open space for the protection of the interests of these parties is the open space on the west side of Dorset Street between Dorset Street and the Dorset Farms residences (due to the visual buffer that is created). Given its considerable distance from these properties, it is unlikely that Parcel G (on the east side of Dorset Street) is visible from them, or that it provided any direct open space mitigation for the Dorset Farms project on the west side of Dorset Street. Rather, it is more likely that Parcel G's mitigating function was merely to serve as a visual buffer for parties passing through the area. As discussed in our initial papers, in its consideration of Criterion 8 for the original Dorset Farms project, the District Commission found that the preservation of Parcel G was not relevant as a mitigating factor under Criterion 8 because it is "visually disconnected from the project site to the west of Dorset Street and is physically separated from the project site by Dorset Street and the [existing] five house lots." In reMBLAssocs., Inc., Application No. 4C0948, :RAVEL AND SHEA Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order at 12 (Apr. 13, 1994). The Commission further concluded that ATTORNEYS AT LAW Parcel G's "45 acres of open space will contribute little visual mitigation for the density of the proposed P. O. Box 369 development." Id. URLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 p - O - 1 Parcel G to the Auclair Farm does not automatically alter the Board's conclusions as to the effectiveness of the mitigating steps taken. Further, the Board's discussion of density and open space did not focus simply on the immediate vicinity of the Project, but considered the broader context. In its discussion of these issues, the Board stated that "these adverse effects will be experienced by those who reside, use land, or pass through the area." Id. at 20 (emphasis added). In its finding that the project was not shocking or offensive, the Board likewise examined the "larger context of the Project area." Id. Therefore, the adverse impacts the Board sought to mitigate were those experienced in the broader context and for parties residing or passing through the "area," not simply those immediately adjacent to the project or immediately adjacent to Parcel G. Keeping in mind the Board's focus, the set -aside of 67.5 acres on the Auclair Farm certainly provides mitigation for the loss of open space in the area caused by the Dorset Farms project, and this element of the Quechee Lakes analysis remains satisfied. Any discussion of the "area" impacted by the Dorset Farms project must focus on the SEQ.' Not only is the SEQ the zoning district in which Dorset Farms is located, but the comprehensive plan requirements for the SEQ were the subject of considerable debate in the Environmental Board decision and, most important, the SEQ was the context for the Board's evaluation and comparison of the issues of density and open space. See id. at 20-21. The new set -aside is located within this same zoning district a short distance away from the Dorset Farms It bears mentioning that the City's open space strategy for the SEQ is not devoted solely to the protection of ecological areas, but also to the creation of large blocks of open space for the protection of scenic views. See Comprehensive Plan at 62 (the goal of the new Comprehensive Plan is to "encourage well planned residential development at densities and layouts that protect and preserve large contiguous areas of open space, important natural 'RAVEL AND SHEA areas and scenic views"). Moreover, the changes to the SEQ do not change the overall housing density in the SEQ. ATTORNEYS AT LAW Instead, the new plan simply moves development into concentrated areas through the use of TDRs to create larger P. O. Box 369 blocks of open space. If the City's goals are realized, these larger blocks of open space provide more protection of IRLINCTON, VERMONT scenic areas and will further preserve the overall rural character of the SEQ. 05402-0369 —9— project on a major arterial road that is traveled by many parties who pass by the Dorset Farms project. As noted above, the set -aside has been carefully designed to provide a visual open space buffer for parties traveling along the roadway and helps preserve the rural character of the area. Thus, it serves essentially the same mitigation function for Dorset Farms as did Parcel G. Finally, even with the removal of 20 acres of open space from Parcel G, the Dorset Farms project still has more open space per unit than the recently approved (and adjacent) South Village Project. With the set -aside of 67.5 open space acres on the Auclair lands, the open space areas associated with Dorset Farms far exceed the South Village standard. Therefore, for all of these reasons, the Dorset Farms project still complies with Criterion 8 after the removal of 20 acres of open space from Parcel G and the set -aside of 67.5 acres of open space on the Auclair Farm. CONCLUSION Under the Quechee Lakes analysis, the Dorset Farms project will remain in compliance with Criterion 8 if the permit amendment is granted. The proposed new set -aside more than satisfies the open space concerns noted by the Environmental Board. Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, the Applicants respectfully request that the Commission allow the proposed amendment of Condition No. 14 under EBR 34(E), and authorize Applicants to submit a complete application for the JD Project. Dated: Burlington, Vermont January 16, 2008 ,,RAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. O. Box 369 FRLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0369 —10— GRAVEL AND SHEA Attorneys for Applicants obert H. Rushford, Esq. 76 St. Paul Street, 7th Floor P.O. Box 369 Burlington, VT 05402-0369 (802) 658-0220 5:\PROJECTS\2W6\2006067 Douscwicz SB\clwg\2006067 ill Open Space Trade Sketch 010708.dwg,.1/14/20D8 10:55:36 AM, Acrobat Disti er _ �®s■.� : � ��.. � ®®�i®�i� �®- � �= is %� EM � LOS M111f, M e ® J L� __ �ieReart►` ,:rv"e�r� ®�11 ► s r'iA • e®i - ® j - 1 STATE OF VERMONT DISTRICT #4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION In re Dorset East Associates, LLC c/o Milot Real Estate 76 St. Paul Street Burlington, VT 05401 and JD South Burlington, LLC c/o Yandow/Dousevicz 35 Cherry Street Burlington, VT 05401 Land Use Permit Amendment #4C0948- AFFIDAVIT NOW COMES JULI BETH HINDS, of South Burlington, Vermont who being first duly sworn, deposes and states as follows: I am the Director of Planning and Zoning for the City of South Burlington, and have held this position for 6 years. 2. As Director of Planning and Zoning, I have overseen the development of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations, including the revisions to the Comprehensive Plan which took place in 2006. Prior to the 2006 revisions, the City focused its open space planning in the South East Quadrant ("SEQ") primarily on the preservation of "scenic corridors" along major collector roadways. The City's regulations protected land along major roads such as Dorset Street, but did not consider other aspects of the SEQ beyond the perceived visual impact of these roadway strips. 4. The 2001 Comprehensive Plan recognized that preservation of roadway strips was leading to adverse land use outcomes and directed the City to re-evaluate its land use and zoning policies for the SEQ regarding this specific issue. See South Burlington 2001 Comprehensive Plan at page 53, Recommended Actions (h) and (1). In 2004 and 2005, in response to the above -referenced Plan recommendations the City performed a thorough evaluation of the environmental resources and development patterns of the SEQ, including a professional assessment of the wildlife and natural communities of the SEQ. Based on these studies, we discovered that our existing method of open space planning failed to take into account the ecological characteristics of the landscape and pushed development away from roads and into sensitive wildlife areas. The approach also caused fragmentation of the landscape due to the lack of a cohesive district -wide plan for effective land use and open space preservation. 6. In its revision to the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations, the City recognized the conflict between the former policy of preserving open space strips along roads and the need to protect larger contiguous ecologically sensitive areas. The revisions sought to create a more cohesive plan, and to focus preservation efforts on ecological value by designating lands away from the major roads as Natural Resource Protection ("NRP") areas. This revision constituted a dramatic shift in the City's priorities and vision for the SEQ and was a virtual reversal in the conceptual approach to open space planning. Many of the corridors of land previously designated as "restricted" for development along the roadways are now seen as appropriate for in -fill development, while large areas of open space and forested areas existing away from the major roads, into which development was previously being pushed, are now slated for protection. 8. In order to accomplish the goals set forth in the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, it is essential that the City promote higher density neighborhood development in areas now zoned as SEQ-Neighborhood Residential Transition, while encouraging the protection of those areas within the SEQ-Natural Resource Protection Subdistrict. 9. One of the primary tools we employ to accomplish these goals is a Transfer of Development Rights program ("TDR"), which allows for higher density development in Village Residential and Neighborhood Residential areas, in exchange for the protection of lands designated as SEQ-NRP sending areas, such as the Auclair Farm in the Natural Resource Protection Subdistrict. This TDR system promotes the City's goals because it protects ecologically significant areas and helps create neighborhoods of sufficient density to encourage connectivity and traditional design. 10. As a result of this dramatic shift in our planning goals, there are previously developed projects that do not fit into this new vision of ecological resource protection and in -fill development along previously protected roadway strips. The City strongly supports the reconsideration of these projects and encourages alteration of previously issued permits in order to promote these new goals. See South Burlington 2006 Comprehensive Plan at Page 75, Recommendation 1.5. 11. The JD South Burlington project provides an excellent opportunity for the City to achieve its goals by utilizing the TDR program to protect land within the SEQ-NRP on the Auclair Farm while encouraging neighborhood development along Dorset Street, in an area appropriate for such development. 12. As the Director of Planning and Zoning for the City of South Burlington, it is my opinion that allowing the development on Parcel G and the associated TDR protection on the Auclair Farm will promote directly the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan, and will contribute to the protection of a cohesive ,,open space area with important ecological functions. Dated �A - ,Vermont thi4 day of August, 2007. Juli Beth Hinds STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. i A U�/� Vermont thisv4 day of Q var2007, personally appeared JULI BETH HP4b4. to me known, and after first being duly sw drr! id acknowledge that she made this statement freely and without compulsion, and that it is a true statement to the best of her knowledge. mo Avi� 4,0 "W.Ioe;�va Notary I Notary commission issued in Chittenden County My commission expires: 2/10/11 SOUTH D61LINGTON PLANNING & Wi-4 )- 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4io6 June 20, 2007 Lance Llewellyn Llewellyn -Howley, Inc. 20 Kimball Avenue, Suite 202N South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Minutes - Edgewood Dear Lance: For your records, enclosed is a copy of the approved June 5, 2007 Development Review Board meeting minutes. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. r t SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4io6 June 20, 2007 Greg Rabideau Rabideau Architects 299 College Street Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Minutes - Edgewood Dear Mr. Rabideau: For your records, enclosed is a copy of the approved June 5, 2007 Development Review Board meeting minutes. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, 4 BetlysyDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. C SOUTH BLAINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 5 JUNE 2007 11. Continued Sketch Plan Application #SD-07-15 of JD South Burlington, LLC, for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) subdividing an undeveloped 45.58 acre parcel into two parcels of 20.25 acres and 25.23 acres, and 2) developing the 20.25 acre parcel with 15 single family dwellings and 33 duplexes (66 units) for a total of 81 dwelling units, 2000 Dorset Street: Mr. Rabideau said they are at the density the applicant hopes to achieve. They have infilled along the major street for a continuity of community and have added some architectural variety. They will provide building details at preliminary plat. There is an issue with entrance to one of the parking bays, and this might be changed at preliminary plat. 42 surface parking spaces are being provided in addition to garage spaces. There are wide cross -paths which don't connect to a street. The Fire Department would be able to drive over the curbing in an emergency. Mr. Rabideau said he thought they would have a sidewalk on both sides of the street. Ms. LaRose said Vince Bolduc has complained about the noise from the pump station, and this may be something to consider. She also suggested having the Waste Water Department weigh-in on the pump station. Mr. Behr said he would like to see the sidewalk finished under the power line. The applicant was OK with this. Mr. Wetzel asked if there would be a light at the Midland intersection. Mr. Rabideau said that would make sense at some time. Ms. LaRose said than can be art of th t ff study. p e ra is Mr. Belair asked if the Board was OK with the mix of single family and duplexes. Members were, as long as there is architectural variety. Mr. Belair also raised a question of sight distance at one location. Mr. Rabideau said they will look at that again. Mr. Belair reminded the applicant that they will have to show all patios, decks, retaining walls, and above ground utility cabinets with screening. Ms. LaRose said staff would like all the documents at preliminary plat as there are so many TDR's involved. Mr. Belair asked that the street lights be the same as those on the Golf Course. Staff can provide information on these. -7- SOUTH BLYc INGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 5 JUNE 2007 Members were OK with 4 units encroaching into a setback. Ms. LaRose said information on this development will have to be given to the Dorset St. Study Committee. Ms. Quimby moved to invoke Technical Review for traffic. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. Cler hL--/q-n7 Date SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4io6 June 6, 2007 Greg Rabideau Rabideau Architects 299 College Street Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Minutes -2000 Dorset Street Dear Mr. Rabideau: For your records, enclosed is a copy of the approved May 15, 2007 Development Review Board meeting minutes. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, l� Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4io6 June 6, 2007 Lance Llewellyn Llewellyn -Howley, Inc. 20 Kimball Ave, Suite 202N South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Minutes -2000 Dorset Street Dear Lance: For your records, enclosed is a copy of the approved May 15, 2007 Development Review Board meeting minutes. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 15 MAY 2007 Overlay District. Part of the existing building is in that District (it is a non -conforming use that is grandfathered). Mr. Ponsetto said they feel this use can be expanded by 25%, according to Section 3.11. Mr. Dinklage asked what error the applicant feels has been committed. Mr. Ponsetto said that they can't expand a non -conforming use. Mr. Dinklage asked if there is anything in Mr. Belair's memo that the applicant takes issue with. Mr. Ponsetto said there is not. Mr. Dinklage asked if Hall Communication acknowledges that they have not submitted a complete application. Mr. Ponsetto said they so acknowledge. Mr. Dinklage asked if Mr. Ponsetto remembered Mr. Belair saying the DRB could not approve such an application. Mr. Ponsetto said he did. Mr. Dinklage said that was advice, not a decision. He added that Mr. Belair said you can't build in the Overlay District. Mr. Belair said the issue is whether he had made a decision. He stressed that he had not received an application and had not made a decision. He felt there can be no appeal as there is no decision to appeal. Mr. Belair noted the City Attorney has advised that the Board should not act on an incomplete application. Ms. Quimby moved that the Board dismiss Appeal #AO-07-01 per the Findings of Fact and conclusions of law. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. j,V-- 8. Continued Sketch Plan Application #SD-07-15 of JD South Burlington, LLC, for a planned unit development consisting of. 1) subdividing an undeveloped 45.48 acre parcel into to parcels of 20.25 acres and 25.23 acres, and 2) developing the 20.25 acre parcel with 15 single family dwellings and 33 duplexes (66 units), for a total of 81 dwelling units, 2000 Dorset St: Mr. Rabideau reviewed the network of streets. He said they have added units to achieve the target density. He showed the location of these units. He also showed where some curb cuts were reduced to footpaths. Mr. Rabideau noted that staff does not like this iteration of the plan. Ms. LaRose showed the area that was previously broken up. Staff is looking for 400-foot blocks and this is now 1200 feet. The concept staff wants is a network of neighborhood streets. There are also now 7 buildings in the front setback of the buffer where there were previously only 2. Mr. Dinklage stressed that the Board will not be comfortable with less than a 50-foot setback. Ms. LaRose noted this plan is exactly what the Planning Commission wants to disallow. They want a traditional grid design. Mr. Behr cited the problem of getting a grid because of the wetland. -3- r 1 SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 15 MAY 2007 Mr. Plumeau said he liked the "alleyway" concept to access garages. Mr. Dinklage said this is a "cookie cutter" layout. He suggested higher buildings with balconies. Mr. Rabideau said they were told they could have only duplexes. Ms. LaRose said she thought they could go up to quads. Regarding the long road, Mr. Belair said staff wants intersections so it is not an uninterrupted road. Ms. Quimby noted that the road by units 30 and 73 looks a lot narrower than at other places. Mr. Bolduc noted that at a meeting for the Goldberg development, it was suggested to design the road so it could someday connect at a location he indicated on the plan. He suggested a "spur" at that location. Mr. Dinklage stressed the importance of having only 2 curb cuts on Dorset St. and of having a 50-foot setback from Dorset St. He advised the applicant to check on the possibility of more than a duplex concept. Ms. Quimby moved to continue Sketch Plan Application #SD-07-15 to 5 June. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. r Dt'©,5^-© / Date CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Report preparation date: June 1, 2007 drb\sub\milot\edwewood_sketch3.doc Plans received: May 31, 2007 nda # 11 MBL ASSOCIATES 2000 DORSET STREET SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION #SD-07-15 Meetinq date: June 5. 2007 Owner Applicant MBL Associates JD South Burlington LLC c/o Milot Real Estate 56 West Twin Oaks Terrace 76 St. Paul Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Burlington, VT 05401 En_gineer/Surveyor Propertv Information Lance Llewellyn, Llewellyn -Howley, Inc. Tax Parcel 0570-2000 20 Kimball Avenue, Ste. 202N SEQ Zoning District - So. Burlington, VT 05403 Neighborhood Residential Transition Natural Resource Protection Greg Rabideau, Rabideau Architects 45.48 acres 299 College Street Burlington, VT 05401 Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sublmilot\edgewood sketch seq JD South Burlington, LLC, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking sketch plan review of a planned unit development consisting of: 1) subdividing an undeveloped 45.48 acre parcel into two (2) parcels of 20.25 acres and 25.23 acres, and 2) developing the 20.25 acre parcel with 7 single family dwellings, and 35 duplexes (70 units), for a total of 81 dwelling units, 2000 Dorset Street. At the sketch plan hearing on March 20, 2007 (minutes attached), there were significant concerns from the Development Review Board and abutting property owners regarding the front setback waiver request and the number of units proposed within the front setback. Some members expressed concerns that there were too many `backyards' visible near the road and that such a layout would invite a cluttered look once homeowners set up patio furniture, play structures, laundry lines, fences, and barbeque grills. Other members added that it was too much density at the entrance to the City, and the transition from open farmland in Shelburne to so much density along Dorset Street was a visual shock. Other members were concerned that any future widening of Dorset Street would further decrease the apparent setback and the many buildings would be even closer to the road. Given these concerns, Board members asked the applicant to give the plan additional thought with respect to the units along Dorset Street and return with a plan that addresses the concerns noted above. The applicant worked with Staff and several of the abutting property owners to discuss ideas, and at the hearing on April 17, 2007, submitted a new plan which proposed only two buildings within the 50 foot front yard setback, and approximately one half dozen units beyond but near the setback. The applicant proposed two main ingress and egress points from Dorset Street at the northern and southern edges of the subject property, with the northern entrance proposed to be aligned with Midland Avenue. Staff and the Board agreed that this was the preferred alignment. The applicant is working with the property owner to the north to try to find a way to make this happen. Staff has already stated that this should be finalized before preliminary plat approval. Still, the applicant should provide an update on this situation to the Board at the sketch plan review. The Board was generally pleased with the plan presented on April 17, 2007. Staff also felt that the plan positively addressed many of the previous concerns while still meeting the goals outlined in the Southeast Quadrant chapter of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. However, the applicant stated that they were still short in reaching their target number of units and the Board instructed them to come back for sketch when additional units were added. The applicant submitted revised plans on May 9, 2007 which were substantially different than those presented at the previous hearing. Staff reviewed those plans and strongly felt that they do not comply with the Southeast Quadrant design standards per Section 9.07 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. The Board discussed the plans at the meeting on May 1.5 9nn7 and generally agreed. The Board asked the applicant to meet with staff and continue to work on the plans. The applicant met with staff shortly after the meeting. Staff suggested eliminating the parking lot pods, redesigning with more linear lots, and fronting additional units on the open space. Staff was generally agreeable to one additional curbcut on Dorset Street. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\milot\edgewood sketch seq The applicant submitted new plans on May 31, 2007. Staff apologizes in advance that the staff notes are sporadic, scattered and far from thorough as the plans were submitted at a very late date and we had only a few hours to review them and issue comments. Street block and lot patterns are generally acceptable. The number of units is within the allowable density provided that the appropriate number of TDR's are received and documented. Street design is generally acceptable. The additional units on the main north -south road will help to reduce vehicular speed and enhance the neighborhood feel. Staff is concerned about the location of the entrance to the northernmost group of buildings. At the last sketch hearing, staff suggested that it be located where it is currently, as opposed to from the more northern side. The engineer present said that the entrance could not be located on the main strip because of sight distance issues. Staff was satisfied and agreed that safety was more important than aesthetic design. However, that entrance is now located in the area where there appeared to be sight -distance problems. The applicant should address this issue. Building design: staff cannot fully assess this until elevations are received. At this time, there appears to be a fair mix of housing types and styles. Wetlands: the buildings appear to respect the wetlands and associated buffers. Fences and plantings have been preliminary proposed. Pump station: staff is concerned about the units located so close to the sewer easement and pump station. The Board should discuss this. Decks/Patios: at this time, there do not appear to be any proposed. The applicant should discuss this. Parking: staff was unable to determine parking counts given the confusion of where garages are present and where they are not. There appears to only be one dedicated guest parking area. The applicant should address this. It is unlikely that staff would support a large parking waiver. Front setback/Dorset Street: The front yard setback from Dorset Street is 50 feet. It appears that only two buildings are within this setback. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Development Review Board discuss the issues raised above. Respectfully submitted, Cathyann LaRose, Associate Planner Copy to: Lance Llewellyn, Llewelyn-Howley Greg Rabideau, Rabideau Architects MBL Associates, Owner of Record SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 15 MAY 2007 Overlay District. Part of the existing building is in that District (it is a non -conforming use that is grandfathered). Mr. Ponsetto said they feel this use can be expanded by 25%, according to Section 3.11. Mr. Dinklage asked what error the applicant feels has been committed. Mr. Ponsetto said that they can't expand a non -conforming use. Mr. Dinklage asked if there is anything in Mr. Belair's memo that the applicant takes issue with. Mr. Ponsetto said there is not. Mr. Dinklage asked if Hall Communication acknowledges that they have not submitted a complete application. Mr. Ponsetto said they so acknowledge. Mr. Dinklage asked if Mr. Ponsetto remembered Mr. Belair saying the DRB could not approve such an application. Mr. Ponsetto said he did. Mr. Dinklage said that was advice, not a decision. He added that Mr. Belair said you can't build in the Overlay District. Mr. Belair said the issue is whether he had made a decision. He stressed that he had not received an application and had not made a decision. He felt there can be no appeal as there is no decision to appeal. Mr. Belair noted the City Attorney has advised that the Board should not act on an incomplete application. Ms. Quimby moved that the Board dismiss Appeal #AO-07-01 per the Findings of Fact and conclusions of law. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. k e 8. Continued Sketch Plan Application #SD-07-15 of JD South Burlington, LLC, ' for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) subdividing an undeveloped 45.48 acre parcel into to parcels of 20.25 acres and 25.23 acres, and 2) developing the 20.25 acre parcel with 15 single family dwellings and 33 duplexes (66 units), for a total of 81 dwelling units, 2000 Dorset St: Mr. Rabideau reviewed the network of streets. He said they have added units to achieve the target density. He showed the location of these units. He also showed where some curb cuts were reduced to footpaths. Mr. Rabideau noted that staff does not like this iteration of the plan. Ms. LaRose showed the area that was previously broken up. Staff is looking for 400-foot blocks and this is now 1200 feet. The concept staff wants is a network of neighborhood streets. There are also now 7 buildings in the front setback of the buffer where there were previously only 2. Mr. Dinklage stressed that the Board will not be comfortable with less than a 50-foot setback. Ms. LaRose noted this plan is exactly what the Planning Commission wants to disallow. They want a traditional grid design. Mr. Behr cited the problem of getting a grid because of the wetland. -3- SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 15 MAY 2007 Mr. Plumeau said he liked the "alleyway" concept to access garages. Mr. Dinklage said this is a "cookie cutter" layout. He suggested higher buildings with balconies. Mr. Rabideau said they were told they could have only duplexes. Ms. LaRose said she thought they could go up to quads. Regarding the long road, Mr. Belair said staff wants intersections so it is not an uninterrupted road. Ms. Quimby noted that the road by units 30 and 73 looks a lot narrower than at other places. Mr. Bolduc noted that at a meeting for the Goldberg development, it was suggested to design the road so it could someday connect at a location he indicated on the plan. He suggested a "spur" at that location. Mr. Dinklage stressed the importance of having only 2 curb cuts on Dorset St. and of having a 50-foot setback from Dorset St. He advised the applicant to check on the possibility of more than a duplex concept. Ms. Quimby moved to continue Sketch Plan Application #SD-07-15 to 5 June. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Clerk Date of I 3. s ME s SKETCH PLAN — THIRD MTG. RABIDEAU ARCHITECTS SCALE 1• - GC'-0" _ m ~ 95 ST. PAUL ST6 SUITE 110 ph 802,863,0222 �DG�WOOD A Burlington, VT 05401 faxS02,86a6407 5OUTH 5URUP GTON DMSET STREET CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 June 1, 2007 Greg Rabideau Rabideau Architects 299 College Street Burlington, VT 05401 Re: 2000 Dorset Street Dear Mr. Rabideau: Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Development Review Board meeting and staff comments to the Board. Please be sure that someone is at the meeting on June 5, 2007 at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, -:�dN Q1\00 Betsy McDonough `� Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 June 1, 2007 Lance Llewellyn Llewellyn -Howley, Inc. 20 Kimball Ave, Suite 202N South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: 2000 Dorset Street Dear Lance: Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Development Review Board meeting and staff comments to the Board. Please be sure that someone is at the meeting on June 5, 2007 at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, 7T0_1 � �Q Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4io6 May 16, 2007 Lance Llewellyn Llewellyn -Howley, Inc. 20 Kimball Avenue #202N South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Minutes - Farmstand, Cider Mill, & 2000 Dorset Street Dear Lance: For your records, enclosed are copies of the approved minutes from the April 10, 2007 and April 17, 2007 Development Review Board meetings. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. 1 DEREVIEW BOAh�„) aVELOPMENT f w(nj- 17 APRIL 2007 Mr. Plumeau asked about the small parking lot on Lot #4. Mr. Dinklage said that was required for the development across the street. Ms. Quimby asked if there has been communication from the Fire Chief regarding access issues. Mr. Belair said he got the Chief s comments yesterday. He is asking for modification of the landscaping plan so there are no trees to interfere with access to the upper floors where there are windows. Mr. Belair didn't know what affect this will have on the plan. He suggested having the applicant work with the Fire Chief and the City Arborist. Members asked to see the landscaping plan agreed upon by this group before making a decision. Ms. Quimby moved to continue Final Plat Application #SD-07-18 of Cupola Golf Course, Inc., until 1 May 2007. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Continued Sketch Plan #SD-07-15 of JD South Burlington, LLC, for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) subdividing an undeveloped 45.48 acre parcel into two parcels of 20.25 acres and 25.23 acres, and 2) developing the 20.25 acre parcel with 15 single family dwellings and 33 duplexes (66 units), for a total of 81 dwelling units, 2000 Dorset Street: Mr. Rabideau showed a plan which is a significant revision from the first sketch plan. He noted that the major concern had been for the relationship of buildings to Dorset Street. In the previous plan, the backs of the residential buildings were to the street. Mr. Dinklage asked about the prime ag soil issue. Mr. Rabideau said there is a meeting scheduled on that issue. Mr. Dinklage asked if that will be resolved before a preliminary plat is presented. Mr. Rabideau said it will. Mr. Rabideau then showed a 50-foot buffer from Dorset St. for the structures. He said they may ask to reduce that to 35 feet in places in order to get variety in buildings for more visual interest. Mr. Dinklage reminded the applicant that there are discussions taking place regarding a general streetscape design and asked that the building design be consistent with that design. Mr. Rabideau showed the variation as you drive down Dorset St. with open spaces interspersed with buildings, more like the plan across the road. One road into the development will parallel Midland Avenue. A boundary line adjustment with the Bolduc property will be required at one of the intersections. Mr. Rabideau also showed the pedestrian paths along the front porches of the housing units. There is some talk of eliminating these in favor of more green space, possibly something wide enough to support a fire truck. They will talk to the Fire Chief about this. Mr. Dinklage said he would like to see a sidewalk connection along the fronts of the houses but would take guidance from the Fire Chief for anything more. He suggested DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOAkj 17 APRIL 2007 something more like a rec path than a sidewalk would be acceptable, possibly with a break -away gate for emergency vehicles, so it is accessible from Dorset St. only in a true emergency. Mr. Rabideau noted the farming operation to the south. They are looking at a berm to keep people from walking out into the cornfields. Mr. Bolduc asked that there be a stipulation that the green spaces and "paths" be left open in perpetuity so there are no development rights transferred in at some future time. Mr. Rabideau said they would have to resolve that issue with the owner before making that commitment. Mr. Dinklage asked if more density could be transferred in. Mr. Belair said density is maxed out on the westerly parcel. Mr. LaRose said the only way they could add more density would be if zoning changes. Mr. Bolduc suggested the DRB be more proactive now so there is no issue if zoning does change later on. Mr. Dinklale said the Board will ask for a use and maintenance plan for the open spaces. Mr. Bolduc asked if there will be anything like a "community house." Mr. Rabideau said that could happen in the green spaces. He said they need to fit in 10 more units of density, and may not reach it. Mr. Blair noted that where the road lines up with Midland Avenue there is an agreement that it be called Jennie Blair Lane. Mr. Belair noted that the applicant must propose names to the Planning Commission. Ms. Quimby then moved to continue Sketch Plan Application #SD-07-15 until 15 May 2007. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Public Hearing: Preliminary Plat Application #SD-07-20 and Final Plat Application #SD-07-21 of CEA Properties, LLC, for a planned unit development to: 1) subdivide a 49.48 acre parcel into two lots of 46.42 acres and 3.055 acres, and 2)develop the 3.055 acre parcel with three 7200 sq. ft. general office buildings and one 1000 sq. ft. detached accessory structure, 1110 Hinesburg Rd: Mr. Marshall identified the location as Meadowland Business Park. He showed the other businesses located there and the O'Brien Brothers condo development on lot 42. The applicant originally proposed a building fronting on Hinesburg Road and a latter phase building beside the Rowley house. They have now removed the second large building and divided it into 2 smaller buildings similar to the Civil Engineering building. The applicant will be requesting a rear yard setback waiver from 50 feet to 35 feet. The adjoining neighbor (Munson) has no issue with that. -5- SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4io6 May 16, 2007 Greg Rabideau 299 College Street Burlington, VT 05401 Re: Minutes - 2000 Dorset Street Dear Mr. Rabideau: For your records, enclosed is a copy of the approved minutes from the April 17, 2007 Development Review Board meeting. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Betsy cDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Report preparation date: March 13, 2007 drb\sub\milot\edwewood_sketch.doc Plans received: February 21, 2007 nda # 8 MBL ASSOCIATES 2000 DORSET STREET SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION #SD-07-15 Meetinq date: March 20. 2007 Owner Applicant MBL Associates JD South Burlington LLC c/o Milot Real Estate 56 West Twin Oaks Terrace 76 St. Paul Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Burlington, VT 05401 Engineer/Surveyor Property Information Lance Llewellyn, Llewellyn -Howley, Inc. Tax Parcel 0570-2000 20 Kimball Avenue, Ste. 202N SEQ Zoning District - So. Burlington, VT 05403 Neighborhood Residential Transition Natural Resource Protection Greg Rabideau, Rabideau Architects 45.48 acres 299 College Street Burlington, VT 05401 Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\milot\edgewood sketch seg PROJECT DESCRIPTION JD South Burlington, LLC, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking sketch plan review of a planned unit development consisting of: 1) subdividing an undeveloped 45.48 acre parcel into two (2) parcels of 20.25 acres and 25.23 acres, and 2) developing the 20.25 acre parcel with 7 single family dwellings, and 35 duplexes (70 units), for a total of 77 dwelling units, 2000 Dorset Street. At the sketch plan hearing on March 20, 2007 (minutes attached), there were significant concerns from the Development Review Board and abutting property owners regarding the front setback waiver request and the number of units proposed within the front setback. Some members expressed concerns that there were too many `backyards' visible near the road and that such a layout would invite a cluttered look once homeowners set up patio furniture, play structures, laundry lines, fences, and barbeque grills. Other members added that it was too much density at the entrance to the City, and the transition from open farmland in Shelburne to so much density along Dorset Street was a visual shock. Other members were concerned that any future widening of Dorset Street would further decrease the apparent setback and the many buildings would be even closer to the road. Given these concerns, Board members asked the applicant to give the plan additional thought with respect to the units along Dorset Street and return with a plan that addresses the concerns noted above. The applicant worked with Staff and several of the abutting property owners to discuss ideas, and at the hearing on April 17, 2007, submitted a new plan which proposed only two buildings within the 50 foot front yard setback, and approximately one half dozen units beyond but near the setback. The applicant proposed two main ingress and egress points from Dorset Street at the northern and southern edges of the subject property, with the northern entrance proposed to be aligned with Midland Avenue. Staff and the Board agreed that this was the preferred alignment. The applicant is working with the property owner to the north to try to find a way to make this happen. Staff has already stated that this should be finalized before preliminary plat approval. Still, the applicant should provide an update on this situation to the Board at the sketch plan review. The Board was generally pleased with the plan presented on April 17, 2007. Staff also felt that the plan positively addressed many of the previous concerns while still meeting the goals outlined in the Southeast Quadrant chapter of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. However, the applicant stated that they were still short in reaching their target number of units and the Board instructed them to come back for sketch when additional units were added. The applicant submitted revised plans on May 9, 2007 which are substantially different than those presented at the previous hearing. Staff has reviewed the plans and finds that they do not comply with the Southeast Quadrant design standards per Section 9.07 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. 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._07 Requlatinq Plans (C) Street Block and Lot Patterns CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\milot\edqewood sketch seq (1) Overall Criteria: Development criteria within the Street, Block, and Lot Pattern section are intended to provide pedestrian -scaled development patterns and an interconnected system of streets that allow direct and efficient walking and bicycle trips and decrease circuitous vehicular trips. (2) Street Design: The intention of street design criteria is to provide a system of attractive, pedestrian -oriented streets that encourage slower speeds, maximize connections between and within neighborhoods, and contribute to neighborhood livability. (3) Building design: The intention of the building design guidelines is to ensure that new housing and commercial development reinforce a pedestrian -friendly environment, while allowing creativity in design. The plan presented does not meet the above criteria. The housing pods are not pedestrian oriented. There is no interconnected system of streets. The four major pods are disjointed and only connected via a single, elongated road. This is not a neighborhood street designed to encourage slower speeds but instead a thoroughfare which extends more than 1200 feet, disrupted only by two small breaks. There is no neighborhood connectivity. The three main housing pods each have their ingress and egress at a single point. They are disjointed and do not provide for connection to the other neighborhoods without returning to the main thoroughfare. This fragmented pattern forces both pedestrian and vehicular traffic to concentrate on the lone connector street. 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. (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). Again, this development is characterized by a single lengthy thoroughfare and fragmented development pods. Circulation is poor. 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. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\milot\edgewood sketch seg 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). The majority of the buildings are not oriented to the street as very few of them are actually located on a street. Many of the buildings are oriented to the inner `courtyard' of the pods. (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 should submit building elevations to ensure that this criterion is being met. Front facades for those buildings fronting on the new streets are suggested. Elevations should also be submitted for those units which have frontage on but do not face Dorset Street. It will be important to consider the appearance of those units on this arterial road. 15.11 Standards for Roadways, Parking, and Circulation in PUDs and Subdivisions Section 15.12(D) states that a public roadway shall be required if the roadway has only one point of access on another public roadway and serves more than nine dwelling units. The pods presented in this application have at least 15 units and therefore shall be served by a public roadway. The pod -design presented does not meet public roadway standards. Front Setback The front yard setback from Dorset Street is 50 feet. At least seven buildings appear to be within this buffer. The Board should discuss this matter and advise the applicant if they intend to grant the necessary front yard setback waiver for these buildings. RECOMMENDATION Staff strongly recommends that the Development Review Board discourage the applicant from proceeding to the next level without significant changes in street and building design. The plan presented for the hearing does not meet the letter or the intent of the Southeast Quadrant Zoning District design standards. Respectfully submitted, "Cathyann LaRose, Associate Planner Copy to: Lance Llewellyn, Llewelyn-Howley Greg Rabideau, Rabideau Architects MBL Associates, Owner of Record Cwrgroen wlml 8—k N/r SchoM — L—ing C-tN 9 I i'II/ 11 J � I / I / / 1 1. AL / d4 I✓k N/F Hall 10' Reer dowt Path C) s i Ruelved i (� oP.nstr■ee w✓� ilk , DORSET STREET t ► ��I Ier I � GL im7mi /*•1 ;ram aew � �� IN I„LUN < ' 1- �f AL I4 .......... A, / r. / ja ; 1>k !.AL / i / :' AL a'!4 % i ..... . AL ? AL ........... e. tL ,. Legend Proposed Existing Property Line ---------- Easement Line ----------------- — — ---- ----- Welland Limit .................................. Buffer Zone — — — — — — Building Setback — — — — — — 4i,'S?I Tree Line r Edge of Water --•-- Notes ....... 1. Owner of Record: MBL Associates, c% Milot Real Estate 76 St. Paul Street �. Burlington, Vermont 05401 2. Applicant. JB South Buffington, LLC 56 West Twin Oaks Terrace South Burlington, Vermont 05403 \� J. Porch Area: 45.48 acres 4. Zoning District. Southeast Quadrant 5. Project Description: This layout is collaboration between the applicant, Robideau Architects and Llewellyn —Howley for discussion at Sketch Plan. The plan shows 77 resider tlal units constructed an 20.25 acres with / access from Dorset Street. The 20.25 acre parcel will be subdivided from / the existing 45.48 acre parcel owned by MBL Associates. The 77 units are all townhouses configured into 35 duplexes and 7 singles. Municipal wastewater treatment facilities, water supply and roads will serve the Project. Power, natural gas. telephone, cable and other services will be provided. Stormwater runoff will be conveyed and treated prior to discharge. 6. Perimeter property line information obtained from plan entitled 'Boundary Survey — Southeast Summit^ prepared by Krebs & Lansing Consulting Engineers, Inc, dated 1/6/94 as shown on the attached plan entitled 'Southeast Summit — J J. Overall Site Plan• prepared by FitzPatrick—Llewellyn Incorporated, lost revised 815194. z 7. Streets are proposed to be 26 feet wide with pocking and sidewalks an one side. Street are proposed to be public. Sidewalks are five feet wide and set nine feet from the roadway. Street trees are proposed in accordance with City regulations. Residential units will be set back 25 feet from the back of the sidewalk and have two parking spaces (one garage and one open). Additional street parking is Provided by the 26 foot wide roadways. The minimum residential unit area is 1,100 sf. Front porches may project up to eight feet Into the front setbacks. 8. Wetlands delineation performed by Cathy O'Brien Wetland Consulting. Appnnni GRAPHIC SCALE r:, LLEWELLYN - HOWLEY Ed ewood "'"" '°°�°' fNaYMwgAM o 11g ]Ur I N C O ItP O R A T E D Dtls VMngel Z — Consulting Services • Engineering - Permitting D—bP FLM ACT 290 20 Klmbail Ave Ste. 202M P (802) 658.2882 Sketch Plan DmNR no ekthA 003 ACT kw RSNMbb as D 1 inch ■ (i0 R. ', r In `,� seaeh Burlington r (802) ssazloo CrtuttueOeR ,..r.,.wrsrr��rrrr�ryryrw+yr t Vermont 05403 hup:l1-1hinc.net eft l e t I 1 SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 20 MARCH 2O07 Mr. Burke said that the way the units are shown, they meet the 20-foot setback from the 50-foot right of way. Mr. Dinklage said a major issue is whether to require a public road as staff suggests. Members said they want the road to be public. Mr. Behr asked about the cul de sac. Mr. Dinklage said that would go away. Mr. Burke noted that there is an easement required for a rec path. That path is already built, and the Rec Path Committee is OK with the easement being dissolved. Mr. Dinklage said there could eventually be enough traffic to require a left turn lane. He said the Board may want enough room for moving the rec path. He suggested maintaining the easement. Mr. Burke said he would work on redesigning that. Staff has suggested 12'-15' lights. Mr. Burke said at that height, they would wind up with a lot of lights. He suggested a light at the intersection. Mr. Dinklage advised the applicant to come in with something reasonable. Ms. LaRose suggested lights at the sharp turn of the road and the soft curve. Mr. Belair noted that the original subdivision imposed a condition that there be a 100- foot "no build" zone either side of the stream. Mr. Burke said they meet that condition. Ms. LaRose suggested the applicant get a statement from a wetlands ecologist regarding the function of the wetland "fingers." Mr. Behr felt the applicant could pull unit #9 back out of the setback to have less impact on the buffer. Mr. Dinklage asked if it would be possible to formalize a future connection to the Jewett property to the north. Mr. Belair said approval would require any connection to be to Black Dog Drive. Ms. LaRose said there will have to be a notice in the deeds that the roads will eventually connect. Mr. Scott asked about the prospect of abandoning his driveway. Mr. Burke said that would be in the future. Ms. Goldberg noted there are 2 other people accessing their properties from Autumn Hill Road. Mr. Scott said there is a right-of-way to the house and a utility right-of-way. Ms. LaRose said it is far to early to say what will happen in the future. 4. Sketch Plan Application #SD-07-15 of JD South Burlington, LLC, for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) subdividing an undeveloped 45.48 acre parcel into two parcels of 20.25 acres and 25.23 acres, and 2) developing the 20.25 acre parcel with 15 single family dwellings and 33 duplexes (66 units) for a total of 81 dwelling units, 2000 Dorset Street: Mr. Rabideau showed the location of electric power lines, the stream, wetland, and apse of trees that will remain. Mr. Dinklage asked if the width meets the guidelines of -2- SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 20 MARCH 2O07 the wildlife corridor. Ms. LaRose said the Natural Resources Protection boundary shows that. Mr. Rabideau said they propose a continuous 50-foot buffer on either side of the stream. There would be a grid of streets 26 feet wide with a sidewalk on one side. There would be a variety of buildings (duplexes, single family, duplexes without attached garages, etc.). There will also be color variation to make this look more like a neighborhood than a "project." Mr. Rabideau reviewed the under -unit parking for the "carriage house" units. Mr. Dinklage noted that some units have a sidewalk leading to them but no driveway. Ms. Quimby asked where guest parking would be if residents happen to have 2 cars. This is especially an issue when there is no on -street parking in winter. Mr. Rabideau said he had not answer to that but may have to create an area. Mr. Behr said there would be an issue for people who have to walk too far from the parking for their units. Mr. Belair asked whether RV's would be prohibited. Mr. Rabideau said that is what they traditionally do in these dense developments. Mr. Rabideau said they would like to create a better alignment with Midland Avenue. This will require discussion with Vince Bolduc. Mr. Bolduc said it makes sense to him. Mr. Dinklage said that discussion should take place before preliminary plat. Mr. Rabideau said they are aware of the issue with the two "spurs" and asked if there is a waiver possible. Mr. Belair said the maximum length is 200 feet without a waiver. Mr. Dinklage raised the issue of blocking the "hammerhead" with parked vehicles when it may be needed for emergency vehicle turning. He said the Fire Chief may require there be no parking and a tow -away zone. Mr. Rabideau said they will give him when he wants. Mr. Rabideau asked about the setback from Dorset St. He noted the rec path is not right on the street. Mr. Dinklage said there should be enough room in case Dorset St. is widened in the future. Mr. Belair said there is a requirement that garages be 8 feet back from the front face of the building. Mr. Rabideau said they will try to figure out a solution to that. Mr. Dinklage asked what setback they proposed from Dorset St. Mr. Rabideau said 25 feet. Mr. Belair said the requirement is 50 feet. Ms. LaRose said the DRB can waive up to 5 feet from the right-of-way. Mr. Dinklage stressed that this is a major corridor into the city, and he didn't want to see all sorts of backyards up against Dorset Street. He felt it would create a "slummy" situation. Mr. Rabideau suggested landscaping or a buffer as screening. Mr. Dinklage suggested reducing the front yards. Ms. LaRose said that would affect parking. Mr. am 1 j SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 20 MARCH 2O07 Rabideau said they will try to propose a creative buffer and see if the Board is OK with it. Mr. Dinklage said the city doesn't want a straight berm that creates a tunnel effect. Ms. Quimby said she wants to see more than a 25-foot setback from Dorset St. Mr. Knudsen said as the plan is drawn, there are 21 units back up to Dorset Street with no break between them, creating a straight "wall of backyards." He couldn't think of another development like that in the city. Mr. Dinklage added that he didn't want to see a hodge-podge of fences behind these units either. Mr.Blair said a few years ago there was a proposal that Dorset Street would become 4 lanes. There would have to be room to accommodate that, and it would take more room that the applicant is allowing. This would require the city to condemn land for the road. Mr. Cannizzaro said this used to be a scenic corridor; now all you will have is backyards. He felt there has to be some consideration for people who have to look at this. He also noted the 12 inch waterline goes only to Midland Avenue. From the corner of Midland, there are 3 homes who share a well. He said they would like the ability to hook onto the water system from this development. Mr. Dinklage suggested getting the City Manager involved in this discussion. Mr. Bolduc agreed with the opposition to seeing the backs of homes. He didn't feel it would work and thought it would look awful. He felt the applicant might have to reduce the number of units to avoid that. Mr. Scott said he was confused about the history of this project. He thought part of Dorset Farms was set aside as open space. Now it looks like what was open space is being developed. Mr. Belair explained that this parcel is owned by the Dorset Farms owner. The density was previously transferred across the street. Now, this applicant is transferring density into this space. Mr. Scott asked if the place the density is coming from will be permanently protected. Ms. LaRose said if the 81 units are coming from a "green area," that area cannot receive density at another time. The city has asked for official documents on this. Mr. Jewett said this was a key piece to be left open at the entrance to the city so that density increased closer to the city center. Now this will look like a solid core of houses. Mr. Bolduc agreed. Mr. Jewett said this was sold to the public as open land in perpetuity. Mr. Belair said the new zoning changed that. There was no formal language to keep it open in perpetuity. Mr. Dinklage asked if Dorset Farms now meets the density allowed today without this parcel. Mr. Belair said he would say yes because the open space has been moved. Mr. Blair reviewed the history of the transferal of units. He noted that there is a provision in the Act 250 approval that this land can't be used until 2013. Mr. Llewellyn said that involved transfer of prime ag soils. Mr. Blair said the provision was still that M r � SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 20 MARCH 2O07 this land be kept open until 2013 as prime ag soil. Mr. Llewellyn said they will look into that. Ms. LaRose said if it happened at Act 250, they would deal with it. Members of the Board had varying opinions on the Dorset St. setback. Mr. Farley was OK with 25 feet. Ms. Quimby wanted at least 35-40. Mr. Behr wanted more than 25 with some creative effect so you don't see the backs of buildings. Mr. Knudsen said he would have to be convinced it will work. Mr. Behr said that from the point of view of unit layout, the top left corner seems too close to Dorset St., with vehicles turning in from Dorset St. He felt the driveways are too close for backing out. Mr. Belair asked if members wanted a traffic impact study. Ms. Quimby moved to invoke technical review of a traffic study. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Wetzel raised the issue of building homes so close to a farm that will be using pesticides. Mr. Bolduc raised the issue of having compatible uses at the ends of towns. He noted that the Regional Plan recommends this. This project would be one inch away from a farm use in Shelburne. Ms. Quimby moved to continue the Sketch Plan meeting until 10 April. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. Clerk Date IRE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 17 APRIL 2007 Mr. Plumeau asked about the small parking lot on Lot #4. Mr. Dinklage said that was required for the development across the street. Ms. Quimby asked if there has been communication from the Fire Chief regarding access issues. Mr. Belair said he got the Chief s comments yesterday. He is asking for modification of the landscaping plan so there are no trees to interfere with access to the upper floors where there are windows. Mr. Belair didn't know what affect this will have on the plan. He suggested having the applicant work with the Fire Chief and the City Arborist. Members asked to see the landscaping plan agreed upon by this group before making a decision. Ms. Quimby moved to continue Final Plat Application #SD-07-18 of Cupola Golf Course, Inc., until 1 May 2007. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Continued Sketch Plan #SD-07-15 of JD South Burlington, LLC, for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) subdividing an undeveloped 45.48 acre parcel into two parcels of 20.25 acres and 25.23 acres, and 2) developing the 20.25 acre parcel with 15 single family dwellings and 33 duplexes (66 units), for a total of 81 dwelling units, 2000 Dorset Street: Mr. Rabideau showed a plan which is a significant revision from the first sketch plan. He noted that the major concern had been for the relationship of buildings to Dorset Street. In the previous plan, the backs of the residential buildings were to the street. Mr. Dinklage asked about the prime ag soil issue. Mr. Rabideau said there is a meeting scheduled on that issue. Mr. Dinklage asked if that will be resolved before a preliminary plat is presented. Mr. Rabideau said it will. Mr. Rabideau then showed a 50-foot buffer from Dorset St. for the structures. He said they may ask to reduce that to 35 feet in places in order to get variety in buildings for more visual interest. Mr. Dinklage reminded the applicant that there are discussions taking place regarding a general streetscape design and asked that the building design be consistent with that design. Mr. Rabideau showed the variation as you drive down Dorset St. with open spaces interspersed with buildings, more like the plan across the road. One road into the development will parallel Midland Avenue. A boundary line adjustment with the Bolduc property will be required at one of the intersections. Mr. Rabideau also showed the pedestrian paths along the front porches of the housing units. There is some talk of eliminating these in favor of more green space, possibly something wide enough to support a fire truck. They will talk to the Fire Chief about this. Mr. Dinklage said he would like to see a sidewalk connection along the fronts of the houses but would take guidance from the Fire Chief for anything more. He suggested DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 17 APRIL 2007 something more like a rec path than a sidewalk would be acceptable, possibly with a break -away gate for emergency vehicles, so it is accessible from Dorset St. only in a true emergency. Mr. Rabideau noted the farming operation to the south. They are looking at a berm to keep people from walking out into the cornfields. Mr. Bolduc asked that there be a stipulation that the green spaces and "paths" be left open in perpetuity so there are no development rights transferred in at some future time. Mr. Rabideau said they would have to resolve that issue with the owner before making that commitment. Mr. Dinklage asked if more density could be transferred in. Mr. Belair said density is maxed out on the westerly parcel. Mr. LaRose said the only way they could add more density would be if zoning changes. Mr. Bolduc suggested the DRB be more proactive now so there is no issue if zoning does change later on. Mr. Dinklale said the Board will ask for a use and maintenance plan for the open spaces. Mr. Bolduc asked if there will be anything like a "community house." Mr. Rabideau said that could happen in the green spaces. He said they need to fit in 10 more units of density, and may not reach it. Mr. Blair noted that where the road lines up with Midland Avenue there is an agreement that it be called Jennie Blair Lane. Mr. Belair noted that the applicant must propose names to the Planning Commission. Ms. Quimby then moved to continue Sketch Plan Application #SD-07-15 until 15 May 2007. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Public Hearing: Preliminary Plat Application #SD-07-20 and Final Plat Application #SD-07-21 of CEA Properties, LLC, for a planned unit development to: 1) subdivide a 49.48 acre parcel into two lots of 46.42 acres and 3.055 acres, and 2)develop the 3.055 acre parcel with three 7200 sq. ft. general office buildings and one 1000 sq. ft. detached accessory structure, 1110 Hinesburg Rd: Mr. Marshall identified the location as Meadowland Business Park. He showed the other businesses located there and the O'Brien Brothers condo development on lot #2. The applicant originally proposed a building fronting on Hinesburg Road and a latter phase building beside the Rowley house. They have now removed the second large building and divided it into 2 smaller buildings similar to the Civil Engineering building. The applicant will be requesting a rear yard setback waiver from 50 feet to 35 feet. The adjoining neighbor (Munson) has no issue with that. -5- CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 May 10, 2007 Greg Rabideau Rabideau Architects 299 College Street Burlington, VT 05401 Re: 2000 Dorset Street Dear Mr. Rabideau: Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Development Review Board meeting and staff comments to the Board. Please be sure that someone is at the meeting on May 15, 2007 at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, '�;6H nii Betsy McDoq4 Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 May 10, 2007 Lance Llewellyn Llewellyn -Howley, Inc. 20 Kimball Avenue, #202N South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: 2000 Dorset Street Dear Lance: Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Development Review Board meeting and staff comments to the Board. Please be sure that someone is at the meeting on May 15, 2007 at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. .r fl CA 0 M fl 0 ft cm1 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Report preparation date: April 13, 2007 drb\sub\milot\edwewood_memo.doc Plans received: April 13, 2007 MBL ASSOCIATES 2000 DORSET STREET SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION #SD-07-15 nda #7 Meetina date: April 17. 2007 Owner Applicant MBL Associates JD South Burlington LLC c/o Milot Real Estate 56 West Twin Oaks Terrace 76 St. Paul Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Burlington, VT 05401 Engineer/Surveyor Property Information Lance Llewellyn, Llewellyn -Howley, Inc. Tax Parcel 0570-2000 20 Kimball Avenue, Ste. 202N SEQ Zoning District - So. Burlington, VT 05403 Neighborhood Residential Transition Natural Resource Protection Greg Rabideau, Rabideau Architects 45.48 acres 299 College Street Burlinqton, VT 05401 Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING April 13, 2007 drb\sub\milot\edgewood memo seq JD South Burlington, LLC, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking sketch plan review of a planned unit development consisting of: 1) subdividing an undeveloped 45.48 acre parcel into two (2) parcels of 20.25 acres and 25.23 acres, and 2) developing the 20.25 acre parcel with 7 single family dwellings, and 26 duplexes (52 units), for a total of 69 dwelling units, 2000 Dorset Street. At the sketch plan hearing on March 20, 2007 (minutes attached). At that time, there were significant concerns from the Development Review Board and abutting property owners regarding the front setback waiver request and the number of units proposed within the front setback. Some members expressed concerns that there were too many `backyards' visible near the road and that such a layout would invite a cluttered look once homeowners set up patio furniture, play structures, laundry lines, fences, and barbeque grills. Other members added that it was too much density at the entrance to the City, and the transition from open farmland in Shelburne to so much density along Dorset Street was a visual shock. Other members were concerned that any future widening of Dorset Street would further decrease the apparent setback and the many buildings would be even closer to the road. Given these concerns, Board members asked the applicant to give the plan additional thought with respect to the units along Dorset Street and return with a plan that addresses the concerns noted above. The applicant has since worked with Staff and several of the abutting property owners to discuss ideas. They have since submitted a new plan which proposes only two buildings within the 50 foot front yard setback, and approximately one half dozen units beyond but near the setback. The applicant is proposing two main ingress and egress points from Dorset Street at the northern and southern edges of the subject property. The northern entrance is proposed to be aligned with Midland Avenue. Staff and the Board have already discussed this issue and agreed that this is the preferred alignment. The applicant is working with the property owner to the north to try to find a way to make this happen. Staff has already stated that this should be finalized before preliminary plat approval. Still, the applicant should provide an update on this situation to the Board at the sketch plan review. The southern access is located in the same location as last reviewed by the Board; however, this `pod' of units now connects with a north -south cross street to the main development. Staff commends this new connection. The applicant is also proposing a choice of street designs to front the two major open space areas. One option is to provide a wide pedestrian walkway which would enable a pedestrian connection, hardscape play areas for residents (i.e. children's bicycling) while still enabling emergency vehicular access. The other option is to provide a dead end street. The Board should discuss these options and give guidance to the applicant. Also of note, the applicant has removed the previous carriage style units with parking below. Several units are now shown with garages which are to be side -loaded. Staff believes this to be a creative and efficient design solution. SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 20 MARCH 2O07 Mr. Burke said that the way the units are shown, they meet the 20-foot setback from the 50-foot right of way. Mr. Dinklage said a major issue is whether to require a public road as staff suggests. Members said they want the road to be public. Mr. Behr asked about the cul de sac. Mr. Dinklage said that would go away. Mr. Burke noted that there is an easement required for a rec path. That path is already built, and the Ree Path Committee is OK with the easement being dissolved. Mr. Dinklage said there could eventually be enough traffic to require a left turn lane. He said the Board may want enough room for moving the rec path. He suggested maintaining the easement. Mr. Burke said he would work on redesigning that. Staff has suggested 12'-15' lights. Mr. Burke said at that height, they would wind up with a lot of lights. He suggested a light at the intersection. Mr. Dinklage advised the applicant to come in with something reasonable. Ms. LaRose suggested lights at the sharp turn of the road and the soft curve. Mr. Belair noted that the original subdivision imposed a condition that there be a 100- foot "no build" zone either side of the stream. Mr. Burke said they meet that condition. Ms. LaRose suggested the applicant get a statement from a wetlands ecologist regarding the function of the wetland "fingers." Mr. Behr felt the applicant could pull unit #9 back out of the setback to have less impact on the buffer. Mr. Dinklage asked if it would be possible to formalize a future connection to the Jewett property to the north. Mr. Belair said approval would require any connection to be to Black Dog Drive. Ms. LaRose said there will have to be a notice in the deeds that the roads will eventually connect. Mr. Scott asked about the prospect of abandoning his driveway. Mr. Burke said that would be in the future. Ms. Goldberg noted there are 2 other people accessing their properties from Autumn Hill Road. Mr. Scott said there is a right-of-way to the house and a utility right-of-way. Ms. LaRose said it is far to early to say what will happen in the future. 4. Sketch Plan Application #SD-07-15 of JD South Burlington, LLC, for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) subdividing an undeveloped 45.48 acre parcel into two parcels of 20.25 acres and 25.23 acres, and 2) developing the 20.25 acre parcel with 15 single family dwellings and 33 duplexes (66 units) for a total of 81 dwelling units, 2000 Dorset Street: Mr. Rabideau showed the location of electric power lines, the stream, wetland, and copses of trees that will remain. Mr. Dinklage asked if the width meets the guidelines of -2- SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 20 MARCH 2O07 the wildlife corridor. Ms. LaRose said the Natural Resources Protection boundary shows that. Mr. Rabideau said they propose a continuous 50-foot buffer on either side of the stream. There would be a grid of streets 26 feet wide with a sidewalk on one side. There would be a variety of buildings (duplexes, single family, duplexes without attached garages, etc.). There will also be color variation to make this look more like a neighborhood than a "project." Mr. Rabideau reviewed the under -unit parking for the "carriage house" units. Mr. Dinklage noted that some units have a sidewalk leading to them but no driveway. Ms. Quimby asked where guest parking would be if residents happen to have 2 cars. This is especially an issue when there is no on -street parking in winter. Mr. Rabideau said he had not answer to that but may have to create an area. Mr. Behr said there would be an issue for people who have to walk too far from the parking for their units. Mr. Belair asked whether RV's would be prohibited. Mr. Rabideau said that is what they traditionally do in these dense developments. Mr. Rabideau said they would like to create a better alignment with Midland Avenue. This will require discussion with Vince Bolduc. Mr. Bolduc said it makes sense to him. Mr. Dinklage said that discussion should take place before preliminary plat. Mr. Rabideau said they are aware of the issue with the two "spurs" and asked if there is a waiver possible. Mr. Belair said the maximum length is 200 feet without a waiver. Mr. Dinklage raised the issue of blocking the "hammerhead" with parked vehicles when it may be needed for emergency vehicle turning. He said the Fire Chief may require there be no parking and a tow -away zone. Mr. Rabideau said they will give him when he wants. Mr. Rabideau asked about the setback from Dorset St. He noted the rec path is not right on the street. Mr. Dinklage said there should be enough room in case Dorset St. is widened in the future. Mr. Belair said there is a requirement that garages be 8 feet back from the front face of the building. Mr. Rabideau said they will try to figure out a solution to that. Mr. Dinklage asked what setback they proposed from Dorset St. Mr. Rabideau said 25 feet. Mr. Belair said the requirement is 50 feet. Ms. LaRose said the DRB can waive up to 5 feet from the right-of-way. Mr. Dinklage stressed that this is a major corridor into the city, and he didn't want to see all sorts of backyards up against Dorset Street. He felt it would create a "slummy" situation. Mr. Rabideau suggested landscaping or a buffer as screening. Mr. Dinklage suggested reducing the front yards. Ms. LaRose said that would affect parking. Mr. -3- } SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 20 MARCH 2O07 Rabideau said they will try to propose a creative buffer and see if the Board is OK with it. Mr. Dinklage said the city doesn't want a straight berm that creates a tunnel effect. Ms. Quimby said she wants to see more than a 25-foot setback from Dorset St. Mr. Knudsen said as the plan is drawn, there are 21 units back up to Dorset Street with no break between them, creating a straight "wall of backyards." He couldn't think of another development like that in the city. Mr. Dinklage added that he didn't want to see a hodge-podge of fences behind these units either. Mr.Blair said a few years ago there was a proposal that Dorset Street would become 4 lanes. There would have to be room to accommodate that, and it would take more room that the applicant is allowing. This would require the city to condemn land for the road. Mr. Cannizzaro said this used to be a scenic corridor; now all you will have is backyards. He felt there has to be some consideration for people who have to look at this. He also noted the 12 inch waterline goes only to Midland Avenue. From the corner of Midland, there are 3 homes who share a well. He said they would like the ability to hook onto the water system from this development. Mr. Dinklage suggested getting the City Manager involved in this discussion. Mr. Bolduc agreed with the opposition to seeing the backs of homes. He didn't feel it would work and thought it would look awful. He felt the applicant might have to reduce the number of units to avoid that. Mr. Scott said he was confused about the history of this project. He thought part of Dorset Farms was set aside as open space. Now it looks like what was open space is being developed. Mr. Belair explained that this parcel is owned by the Dorset Farms owner. The density was previously transferred across the street. Now, this applicant is transferring density into this space. Mr. Scott asked if the place the density is coming from will be permanently protected. Ms. LaRose said if the 81 units are coming from a "green area," that area cannot receive density at another time. The city has asked for official documents on this. Mr. Jewett said this was a key piece to be left open at the entrance to the city so that density increased closer to the city center. Now this will look like a solid core of houses. Mr. Bolduc agreed. Mr. Jewett said this was sold to the public as open land in perpetuity. Mr. Belair said the new zoning changed that. There was no formal language to keep it open in perpetuity. Mr. Dinklage asked if Dorset Farms now meets the density allowed today without this parcel. Mr. Belair said he would say yes because the open space has been moved. Mr. Blair reviewed the history of the transferal of units. He noted that there is a provision in the Act 250 approval that this land can't be used until 2013. Mr. Llewellyn said that involved transfer of prime ag soils. Mr. Blair said the provision was still that -4- SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 20 MARCH 2O07 this land be kept open until 2013 as prime ag soil. Mr. Llewellyn said they will look into that. Ms. LaRose said if it happened at Act 250, they would deal with it. Members of the Board had varying opinions on the Dorset St. setback. Mr. Farley was OK with 25 feet. Ms. Quimby wanted at least 35-40. Mr. Behr wanted more than 25 with some creative effect so you don't see the backs of buildings. Mr. Knudsen said he would have to be convinced it will work. Mr. Behr said that from the point of view of unit layout, the top left corner seems too close to Dorset St., with vehicles turning in from Dorset St. He felt the driveways are too close for backing out. Mr. Belair asked if members wanted a traffic impact study. Ms. Quimby moved to invoke technical review of a traffic study. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Wetzel raised the issue of building homes so close to a farm that will be using pesticides. Mr. Bolduc raised the issue of having compatible uses at the ends of towns. He noted that the Regional Plan recommends this. This project would be one inch away from a farm use in Shelburne. Ms. Quimby moved to continue the Sketch Plan meeting until 10 April. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. Clerk Date -5- 8f 8 5 MW T/ a71SCHEMA11C SITE PLAN � 1� ray From: Lance Llewellyn [lal@lhinc.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 12:58 PM To: ray April 3, 2007 , Ray RE: JD South Burlington Sketch Plan Continuation April 10, 2007 We wish to postpone our Sketch Plan application for the Edgewood development proposed by JD South Burlington, from the DRB meeting on April 10, 2007 and reschedule for April 17, 2007. Thank you, Lance Llewellyn, P.E. 1 SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 20 MARCH 2O07 Mr. Burke said that the way the units are shown, they meet the 20-foot setback from the 50-foot right of way. Mr. Dinklage said a major issue is whether to require a public road as staff suggests. Members said they want the road to be public. Mr. Behr asked about the cul de sac. Mr. Dinklage said that would go away. Mr. Burke noted that there is an easement required for a rec path. That path is already built, and the Rec Path Committee is OK with the easement being dissolved. Mr. Dinklage said there could eventually be enough traffic to require a left turn lane. He said the Board may want enough room for moving the rec path. He suggested maintaining the easement. Mr. Burke said he would work on redesigning that. Staff has suggested 12'-15' lights. Mr. Burke said at that height, they would wind up with a lot of lights. He suggested a light at the intersection. Mr. Dinklage advised the applicant to come in with something reasonable. Ms. LaRose suggested lights at the sharp turn of the road and the soft curve. Mr. Belair noted that the original subdivision imposed a condition that there be a 100- foot "no build" zone either side of the stream. Mr. Burke said they meet that condition. Ms. LaRose suggested the applicant get a statement from a wetlands ecologist regarding the function of the wetland "fingers." Mr. Behr felt the applicant could pull unit #9 back out of the setback to have less impact on the buffer. Mr. Dinklage asked if it would be possible to formalize a future connection to the Jewett property to the north. Mr. Belair said approval would require any connection to be to Black Dog Drive. Ms. LaRose said there will have to be a notice in the deeds that the roads will eventually connect. Mr. Scott asked about the prospect of abandoning his driveway. Mr. Burke said that would be in the future. Ms. Goldberg noted there are 2 other people accessing their properties from Autumn Hill Road. Mr. Scott said there is a right-of-way to the house and a utility right-of-way. Ms. LaRose said it is far to early to say what will happen in the future. 4. ketch Plan Application #SD-07-15 of JD South Burlington, LLC, for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) subdividing an undeveloped 45.48 acre parcel into two parcels of 20.25 acres and 25.23 acres, and 2) developing the 20.25 acre parcel with 15 single family dwellings and 33 duplexes (66 units) for a total of 81 dwelling units, 2000 Dorset Street: Mr. Rabideau showed the location of electric power lines, the stream, wetland, and copses of trees that will remain. Mr. Dinklage asked if the width meets the guidelines of -2- SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 20 MARCH 2O07 the wildlife corridor. Ms. LaRose said the Natural Resources Protection boundary shows that. Mr. Rabideau said they propose a continuous 50-foot buffer on either side of the stream. There would be a grid of streets 26 feet wide with a sidewalk on one side. There would be a variety of buildings (duplexes, single family, duplexes without attached garages, etc.). There will also be color variation to make this look more like a neighborhood than a "project." Mr. Rabideau reviewed the under -unit parking for the "carriage house" units. Mr. Dinklage noted that some units have a sidewalk leading to them but no driveway. Ms. Quimby asked where guest parking would be if residents happen to have 2 cars. This is especially an issue when there is no on -street parking in winter. Mr. Rabideau said he had not answer to that but may have to create an area. Mr. Behr said there would be an issue for people who have to walk too far from the parking for their units. Mr. Belair asked whether RV's would be prohibited. Mr. Rabideau said that is what they traditionally do in these dense developments. Mr. Rabideau said they would like to create a better alignment with Midland Avenue. This will require discussion with Vince Bolduc. Mr. Bolduc said it makes sense to him. Mr. Dinklage said that discussion should take place before preliminary plat. Mr. Rabideau said they are aware of the issue with the two "spurs" and asked if there is a waiver possible. Mr. Belair said the maximum length is 200 feet without a waiver. Mr. Dinklage raised the issue of blocking the "hammerhead" with parked vehicles when it may be needed for emergency vehicle turning. He said the Fire Chief may require there be no parking and a tow -away zone. Mr. Rabideau said they will give him when he wants. Mr. Rabideau asked about the setback from Dorset St. He noted the rec path is not right on the street. Mr. Dinklage said there should be enough room in case Dorset St. is widened in the future. Mr. Belair said there is a requirement that garages be 8 feet back from the front face of the building. Mr. Rabideau said they will try to figure out a solution to that. Mr. Dinklage asked what setback they proposed from Dorset St. Mr. Rabideau said 25 feet. Mr. Belair said the requirement is 50 feet. Ms. LaRose said the DRB can waive up to 5 feet from the right-of-way. Mr. Dinklage stressed that this is a major corridor into the city, and he didn't want to see all sorts of backyards up against Dorset Street. He felt it would create a "slummy" situation. Mr. Rabideau suggested landscaping or a buffer as screening. Mr. Dinklage suggested reducing the front yards. Ms. LaRose said that would affect parking. Mr. -3- SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 20 MARCH 2O07 Rabideau said they will try to propose a creative buffer and see if the Board is OK with it. Mr. Dinklage said the city doesn't want a straight berm that creates a tunnel effect. Ms. Quimby said she wants to see more than a 25-foot setback from Dorset St. Mr. Knudsen said as the plan is drawn, there are 21 units back up to Dorset Street with no break between them, creating a straight "wall of backyards." He couldn't think of another development like that in the city. Mr. Dinklage added that he didn't want to see a hodge-podge of fences behind these units either. Mr.Blair said a few years ago there was a proposal that Dorset Street would become 4 lanes. There would have to be room to accommodate that, and it would take more room that the applicant is allowing. This would require the city to condemn land for the road. Mr. Cannizzaro said this used to be a scenic corridor; now all you will have is backyards. He felt there has to be some consideration for people who have to look at this. He also noted the 12 inch waterline goes only to Midland Avenue. From the corner of Midland, there are 3 homes who share a well. He said they would like the ability to hook onto the water system from this development. Mr. Dinklage suggested getting the City Manager involved in this discussion. Mr. Bolduc agreed with the opposition to seeing the backs of homes. He didn't feel it would work and thought it would look awful. He felt the applicant might have to reduce the number of units to avoid that. Mr. Scott said he was confused about the history of this project. He thought part of Dorset Farms was set aside as open space. Now it looks like what was open space is being developed. Mr. Belair explained that this parcel is owned by the Dorset Farms owner. The density was previously transferred across the street. Now, this applicant is transferring density into this space. Mr. Scott asked if the place the density is coming from will be permanently protected. Ms. LaRose said if the 81 units are coming from a "green area," that area cannot receive density at another time. The city has asked for official documents on this. Mr. Jewett said this was a key piece to be left open at the entrance to the city so that density increased closer to the city center. Now this will look like a solid core of houses. Mr. Bolduc agreed. Mr. Jewett said this was sold to the public as open land in perpetuity. Mr. Belair said the new zoning changed that. There was no formal language to keep it open in perpetuity. Mr. Dinklage asked if Dorset Farms now meets the density allowed today without this parcel. Mr. Belair said he would say yes because the open space has been moved. Mr. Blair reviewed the history of the transferal of units. He noted that there is a provision in the Act 250 approval that this land can't be used until 2013. Mr. Llewellyn said that involved transfer of prime ag soils. Mr. Blair said the provision was still that SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 20 MARCH 2O07 this land be kept open until 2013 as prime ag soil. Mr. Llewellyn said they will look into that. Ms. LaRose said if it happened at Act 250, they would deal with it. Members of the Board had varying opinions on the Dorset St. setback. Mr. Farley was OK with 25 feet. Ms. Quimby wanted at least 35-40. Mr. Behr wanted more than 25 with some creative effect so you don't see the backs of buildings. Mr. Knudsen said he would have to be convinced it will work. Mr. Behr said that from the point of view of unit layout, the top left corner seems too close to Dorset St., with vehicles turning in from Dorset St. He felt the driveways are too close for backing out. Mr. Belair asked if members wanted a traffic impact study. Ms. Quimby moved to invoke technical review of a traffic study. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Wetzel raised the issue of building homes so close to a farm that will be using pesticides. Mr. Bolduc raised the issue of having compatible uses at the ends of towns. He noted that the Regional Plan recommends this. This project would be one inch away from a farm use in Shelburne. Ms. Quimby moved to continue the Sketch Plan meeting until 10 April. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. 0 ./a-07 Date -5- CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 March 15, 2007 Greg Rabideau Rabideau Architects 299 College Street Burlington, VT 05401 Re: 2000 Dorset Street Dear Mr. Rabideau: Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Development Review Board meeting and staff comments to the Board. Please be sure that someone is at the meeting on March 20, 2007 at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, —Be�q1-� Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4i06 April 11, 2007 Lance Llewellyn Llewellyn -Howley, Inc. 20 Kimball Avenue, Suite 202N South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: 2000 Dorset Street Dear Lance: For your records, enclosed is a copy of the approved minutes from the March 20, 2007 Development Review Board meeting. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 March 15, 2007 Lance Llewellyn Llewellyn -Howley, Inc. 20 Kimball Avenue, Suite 202N South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: 2000 Dorset Street Dear Lance: Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Development Review Board meeting and staff comments to the Board. Please be sure that someone is at the meeting on March 20, 2007 at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Report preparation date: March 13, 2007 drb\sub\milot\edwewood_sketch.doc Plans received: February 21, 2007 nda # 4 MBL ASSOCIATES 2000 DORSET STREET SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION #SD-07-15 Meetinq date: March 20, 2007 Owner Applicant MBL Associates JD South Burlington LLC c/o Milot Real Estate 56 West Twin Oaks Terrace 76 St. Paul Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Burlington, VT 05401 En_gineer/Surveyor Property Information Lance Llewellyn, Llewellyn -Howley, Inc. Tax Parcel 0570-2000 20 Kimball Avenue, Ste. 202N SEQ Zoning District - So. Burlington, VT 05403 Neighborhood Residential Transition Natural Resource Protection Greg Rabideau, Rabideau Architects 45.48 acres 299 College Street Burlinaton. VT 05401 Location Map CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\milot\ed.gewood sketch sea JD South Burlington, LLC, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking sketch plan review of a planned unit development consisting of: 1) subdividing an undeveloped 45.48 acre parcel into two (2) parcels of 20.25 acres and 25.23 acres, and 2) developing the 20.25 acre parcel with 15 single family dwellings, and 33 duplexes (66 units), for a total of 81 dwelling units, 2000 Dorset Street. Associate Planner Cathyann LaRose and Administrative Officer Ray Belair, referred to herein as staff, have reviewed the plans submitted on February 21, 2007 and have the following comments. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements Table 1. Dimensional Requirements SEQ-NRT Zoning District Requirement/Limitation Proposed Min. Lot Size 12,000 SF All common land + Max. Density 1.2 units/acre base density max of 4/acre with TDR 4/acre Max. Building Coverage 15% 14% �1 Max. Total Coverage 30% 30% ** Min. Front Setback 20 ft. 25 ft.** Min. Side Setback 10 ft. >10 ft. Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. >30 ft. zoning compliance the subject property was once a portion of a larger PUD which created the Dorset Farms subdivision. All density from the subject property was utilized for the Dorset Farms subdivision. The applicant has stated that they will be utilizing transferred development rights (TDR) for this property; this will allow them the ability to have up to 4 dwelling units per acre with the appropriate number of TDRs (81 shall be required for the 81 units). The applicant should submit legal documents to this effect prior to preliminary plat approval ** waiver needed 1. The City Attorney shall review and approve all legal documents pertaining to the purchase and sale of development rights associated with this application prior to preliminary plat approval. 2. The plans shall be revised to show the Southeast Quadrant sub -district boundaries. 3. The plans shall be revised to label the South Burlington/Shelburne town line. The front setback requirement in the Southeast Quadrant zoning district is 20 feet. Without road right-of-way lines shown, it is difficult to determine if this criterion is being met. However, the front setback requirement for Dorset Street is 50 feet in accordance with the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. The applicant is proposing 22 feet from the Dorset Street Right -of -Way to the buildings. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a front setback waiver from Dorset Street of CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\milot\ed eq_wood sketch seg 28 feet. Staff may support this waiver if the building elevations for the buildings fronting on Dorset Street are pedestrian scaled and in accordance with the southeast quadrant design elements included later in this report. 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. 4. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s). Staff feels 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 this development. 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 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\milot\edqewood sketch seq The layout of the proposed subdivision provides for two substantial parks in the center of the development. Furthermore, there is an open space corridor under the 150' VELCO R.O.W. Finally, the eastern edge of the property is proposed to be subdivided. This portion lies within the SEQ- Natural Resource Protection sub -district. No development shall occur on this parcel. (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. Staff finds the streets and building lots to be consistent with the regulating plan. The street, block and lot pattern provides pedestrian -scaled development and the street patterns allow for direct walking and bicycling trips. The street design also promotes slower speeds and connections between neighborhoods. The proposed parks are easily accessible for all residents of the proposed development. (3) A plan for the proposed open spaces and/or natural areas and their ongoing management shall be established by the applicant. The eastern portion of the property is located within the SEQ-Natural Resource Protection sub- district. No development shall occur on this parcel in accordance with the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. The applicant should provide language which provides for ongoing maintenance of the park areas. Deed covenants or home owner's association language would be appropriate. 4. The applicant shall submit deed covenants with language intended to provide for ongoing maintenance of the park areas with the preliminary plat submittal. Furthermore, this language should include provisions for protection of the wetland and associated buffers. (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 not yet submitted a grading and erosion control plan for the construction of the road. 5. The applicant shall submit a grading and erosion control plan as part of preliminary plat application. The plan shall meet the standards set forth in Section 16.03 and 16.04 of the SBLDR. (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. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\milot\edgewood sketch seq The subject property contains identified wetlands. They should be marked as to their class 6. The plans shall be changed to mark the class of wetlands on the site. The plans depict a line of trees along the wetland buffer to provide a visual and physical barrier between what is to be the grassed common areas and the more sensitive wetland buffer. Staff finds the trees to be well placed but suggests additional measures of protection, including limitations on fertilizers and mowing. 7. There shall be no use of pesticides or non -organic fertilizers within the wetlands or associated 50 foot buffers. 8. There shall be no mowing of the 50 foot wetland buffer. Brush -hogging shall be allowed no more than three (3) times per year. 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 stated that they will review the plans at the preliminary plat level when more details are available. 9. The preliminary plat shall contain details pertaining to the proposed water lines. The SBWD shall review all future sets of plans and provide comments. 10. The applicant shall receive preliminary wastewater allocation from the Director of Planning and Zoning prior to final plat approval. (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. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\milot\edgewood sketch seq The applicant is proposing to continue the road and sidewalk to the northern property line. A recreation path currently extends to the eastern property line and connects to the Cider Mill development. Staff finds this sufficient to serve as an extension to adjacent properties. (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 applicant is proposing a recreation path along Dorset Street to be located within the City's Right of Way. It is difficult to measure the proposed width given the scale of the plan that was submitted. 11. The plans submitted for preliminary plat shall be scaled no greater than 1 "=60'. The South Burlington Recreation Path Committee met to preliminarily discuss the proposed development. They have asked that the recreation path be constructed at 8 feet in width along the entire eastern edge of the property. They have stated that it is acceptable to be located in the public Right of Way, but that a 10 foot green strip is left between the path and the roadway. 12. The preliminary plat shall contain details of the proposed recreation path. (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 stated that they will review the plans at the next level. 13. The South Burlington Fire Chief shall review all future sets of plans and provide comments 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 entrance proposed at the northern portion of the site is unacceptable as it is not aligned with the heavily traveled Midland Avenue across to the west. This is difficult as the property boundary is located in this area. Staff understands that the applicant is working with the property owner to the north to properly align the entrance. 14. The proposed northern curbcut shall be properly aligned across from Midland Avenue prior to preliminary plat approval. Staff has reviewed the plans for three curbcuts to the property. Given the site distances and the surrounding curbcuts, staff finds the plan acceptable. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\milot\edgewood sketch sea (1) Roads shall be designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent properties. The property to the south is located within the Town of Shelburne. There is no need to provide for a connection at that point. The lot to the east is protected land, zoned as SEQ-NRP and shall not be developed. There is no need for extension to that portion. The property to the north is likely to be developed at some point. The northernmost curbcut, once adequately located, will be sufficient to serve both developments. (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 roads are proposed to be 26 feet wide with parking on one side. This meets the standards set forth in Table 9-4, Street Design Criteria for Local Streets in the SEQ-VR zoning district. However, staff suggests that the plans be revised to show the location of on -street parking as some locations will not be acceptable given sight distances and other criteria. 15. The plans shall be revised to show the location of proposed on -street parking The applicant has not yet submitted roadway details. 16. The applicant shall submit roadway details with the preliminary plat application 17. The site plan shall be revised to depict a road right-of-way of 50 feet. The Director of Public Works should review the details when they are available and provide written comments prior to preliminary plat approval. 18. The Director of Public Works shall review the plans and provide comments prior to preliminary plat approval. The South Burlington City Engineer has reviewed the plans and issued comments in a memo dated March 8, 2007. Staff concurs with most items, but recommends that the Board amend item #1 as the right of way for local streets shall be 50 feet, not the 60 requested by the City Engineer. 19. The Plans shall be revised to comply with the comments of the City Engineer per the memo dated March 8, 2007, with the exception that the road right-of-way shall be 50 feet. The City Engineer shall continue to review future sets of plans. The applicant has not shown proposed street names for the project. This shall be granted final approval by the planning commission prior to final plat approval. 20. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant should coordinate with the city's E- 911 coordinator and planning commission to approve street names. 21. Prior to the recording of the final plat, the applicant should coordinate with the city's E- 911 coordinator to determine street addresses. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 8 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\milot\edqewood sketch seq (3) The provisions of Section 15.12(D)(4) related to connections between adjacent streets and neighborhoods shall apply. 9.08 SE_Q-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. This criterion is being met in this application. The development blocks are broken by the two proposed parks and are approximately 240 feet in length. (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 applicant is proposing 2 dead end streets which are approximately 300 and 500 feet respectively. These `fingerling' streets appear to be arranged so as to best respect the wetland and wetland buffer. Staff recommends that the Board discuss these streets and render an opinion on whether or not this criterion is being met. 22. The Development Review Board should discuss the proposed dead-end streets. Staff does not recommend connecting the dead-end streets due to wetland limitations. Furthermore, there is no need for future connection of the northernmost dead-end as the street end at the wetland buffer. The easternmost dead-end does have a street stub which could potential to connect to the property to the south. However, as this property is in the town of Shelburne, it is unlikely. Staff does recommend that the DRB defer to the City Engineer and Director of Public Works as to the acceptability of the street -stubs and hammerhead turnarounds. 23. The City Engineer and Director of Public Works shall specifically comment on the design of the proposed turnarounds. (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 these Regulations. Posting signs with a notice of intent to construct future streets is strongly encouraged. Staff has already commented on this matter. There is no need to build the streets to the property line as the possibility for connection is extremely low. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 9 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\milot\edgewood sketch seg (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. There are no proposed building lots; all land will be 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. This criterion is being met. (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 should propose a street tree planting plan as part of preliminary plat review. It shall be reviewed by the City Arborist. 24. The City Arborist shall review and approve of the street tree planting plan prior to final plat approval. (4) On -street parking; see Section 9.08(B)(4). Staff has already commented on this issue. The road width is acceptable to accommodate on - street parking on one side. However, the applicant should denote the location proposed for on - street parking. It is possible that signage shall be provided to limit parking to only one side of the street. (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). The intersections proposed are sufficient to meet this criterion. (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. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 10 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\milot\edgewood sketch seq The applicant has not yet submitted lighting details. Staff has asked the Director of Public Works to review the plans and comment on the necessity of street lighting for the project. 25. If necessary, the plans shall be revised to depict a street lighting plan in accordance with the regulations cited above and including cut sheets and a point -by -point illumination plan. 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 should submit building elevations to ensure that this criterion is being met. Front facades for those buildings fronting on the new streets are suggested. Elevations should also be submitted for those units which have frontage on but do not face Dorset Street. It will be important to consider the appearance of those units on this arterial road. 26. The applicant should submit building elevations as part of the preliminary plat application. (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. This criterion is being met. (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. Compliance with this criterion cannot be determined until road right-of-way lines and building elevations are submitted. (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. Again, compliance with this criterion cannot be fully determined until building elevations are submitted. Staff is concerned about the proposal to locate a four -car garage under a single family unit. This would not meet this criterion and does not seem to be a prudent plan. It is extremely awkward. The Development Review Board should discuss this issue. 27. The Development Review Board should discuss the parking associated with the single family units. They do not appear to meet the garage design criteria. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 11 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING drb\sub\milot\edgewood sketch seq (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 15 single family dwellings and 33 duplexes (66 units). Staff finds this 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). Staff finds that the proposed subdivision is in compliance with all provisions of this section. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the applicant address the numbered items in the comments section of this report before proceeding to preliminary plat application. Respectfully submitted, -1, %-Z'LWiaexXjA 11 Pt/1 6�-� Cithya—nrjta Rose, Associate Planner Copy to: Lance Llewellyn, Llewelyn-Howley Greg Rabideau, Rabideau Architects MBL Associates, Owner of Record Bill Szymanski, City Engineer City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 (802) 846-4106 Edgewood Dorset Street March 8, 2007 1. Public streets should have a minimum r.o.w. width of 60 feet. 2. Sidewalks should be one (1) foot from street r.o.w. with water service shut offs within the one foot. 3. Power, telephone, and television lines should be outside the street r.o.w. Gas main shall be opposite side of street from water main. 4. Sewer pumping station and 6-inch force main shall be checked for capacity. 5. Dead end streets should have turnarounds adequate for quick turnaround for snow plow trucks and school busses. They should be the cul-de-sac type as specified by City regulations. 6. Entrance from Dorset Street should be moved north about 25 feet for better alignment to Midland Avenue. Permit Number SD- 0 q" - I t CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the plans will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. For amendments, please provide pertinent information only. I) OWNER OF RECORD (Name as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #) MBL Associates, c/o Milot Real Estate, 76 St. Paul Street, Burlington, Vermont 05401 (T) 802-658-2000 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #) Vol 270, Pages 259,261 and 263 3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) JD South Burlington, LLC, 56 West Twin Oaks Terrace, South Burlington, Vermont 05403 (T)802-860-7315 (F)864-4213 4) APPLICANT'S LEGAL INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY (fee simple, option, etc.) Option 5) CONTACT PERSON (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) Lance A. Llewellyn, Llewellyn -Howley Inc., 20 Kimball Ave, South Burlington, Vermont, 05403, 658-2100 (T), 658-2882 (F) Greg Rabideau, Rabideau Architects, 299 College Street, Burlington, Vermont 05401, 863-0222 (T), 863-6407 (F) 6) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS 2000 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont 05403 7) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) Tax Parcel ID # 0570 02000 L 8) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) Existing uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use) Vacant b) Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain) PUD consisting of 15 single units and 33 duplexes (66 units) for a total of 81 units. Minimum residential units will be 1,100 sf. c) Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) Approximately 120,000 sf (footprints) d) Height of building and number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine) Less then 45 feet high, two stories, with basements e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) 81 new units f) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable) Not Applicable 9) LOT COVERAGE (ALL information MUST be provided here, even if no change is proposed) Residential units approximately 120,000 sf 10) TYPE OF EXISTING OR PROPOSED ENCUMBRANCES ON PROPERTY (easements, covenants, leases, rights of way, etc.) VELCO ROW City of South Burlington Easement 11) PROPOSED EXTENSION, RELOCATION, OR MODIFICATION OF MUNICIPAL FACILITIES (sanitary sewer, water supply, streets, storm drainage, etc.) All municipal facilities will be extended to this development. 12) OWNERS OF RECORD OF ALL CONTIGUOUS PROPERTIES & MAILING ADDRESSES (this may be provided on a separate attached sheet) See attached sheet 13) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE Three years 14) PLANS AND FEE Plat plans shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (I I" x 17") of the plans must be submitted. A sketch subdivision application fee is $125.00. I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. 1 � SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT SIGN RE OF PROPERTY OWNER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: I O I have reviewed this preliminary plat application and find it to be: Complete ❑ Incomplete � i & Zoning or Designee Date Edgewood Residential Sketch Plan Submission 2000 Dorset Street Abutters List City of South Burlington Abutters Parcel #0570-01925 Blair, Alexander J. and Mary S. 1725 Dorset Street S. Burlington, VT 05403 Parcel #0570-01935 Cannizaro, Paul J. 1935 Dorset Street S. Burlington, VT 05403 Parcel #0570-01945 Hill, Cassius R. 1945 Dorset Street S. Burlington, VT 05403 Parcel #0570-01955 Larkin, John, P. 1955 Dorset Street S. Burlington, VT 05403 Parcel #0570-01965 Hall, Christopher, S. Flint, Hall Anne 1965 Dorset Street S. Burlington, VT 05403 Parcel #0570-01855 Dorset Farms Homeowners Association, Inc. 76 St. Paul Street Burlington, VT 05401 Sketch Plan Submission February 21, 2007 Parcel #0570-01780/01800 Bolduc, Vincent, L. 252 Autumn Hill Road S. Burlington, VT 05403 Parcel #0360-00495 Leduc, Maurice 495 Cheesefactory Road S. Burlington, VT 05403 Parcel # 0297-00008 School House Learning Center Inc. 8 Catkin Drive S. Burlington, VT 05403 Town of Shelburne Abutters Parcel # 4-1-17.2 O'Brien, George 899 Barstow Road (m) 889 Barstow Rd Shelburne, VT. 05482 Helen B. O'Brien Family Trust c/o Maureen O'Brien 718 Barstow Road Shelburne, VT 05482 Parcel #4-1-20 Peters, Gregory and Diane 1018 Cheesefactory Road Shelburne, VT 05482-7177 Parcel #4-1-21 Leduc, A. 495 Cheesefactory Road S. Burlington, VT 05403 LLEWELLYN - HOWLEY I N C O R P O R A T E D IN/F s� Lswnha G tM /F Nd r— — _..L J._._._-_.-I _._._._ _._._.r _._._. 66 it 65 I1 1 67 I i l I I 68 1 I I 69 76 i 1 53 t I I EM the 1 1 70 i I 77 1 "° WLCo Raw ; 52 I t I j 1 1 j I 71 I j 1 i72 I 79 i 50 i 73 i 74 i 75 I I j 1 niR I 1 "hh��✓✓ 1 i 4tt'ser R.Iw Pmu snie Prqmly Line \ \ \ N/F lath 1 2 13 r7 24 PARK M/F Ne DORSET STREET 11C at 8 71 18 I 19 If -Ai- 4 111 t� J L 56 60 57`1 59 RYa N/F Canine N/F SIaY 21�22 V 00'0f S'p BUh% n0017 GRAPHIC SCALE a av tw ss ' /., LLEWELLYN - HOWLEY ` INCORPORA —� T TED == Consulting Services Engineering - Permitting 20 Kimbell Ave Ste. 202N F (802) 65&2882 III South Burlington T (802) 658-2100 'r/ - , I ` �.`` Vermont 05403 httinfi .lhine.net P-nO !Rherf� PPw i Inch a SO k. _ Kf 2M N� � am CeNtrw r...rrw•r�.r�-r..r.r r`.r.rr _ _ __. Legend Locus Proposed Existing Property Line--�--� Easement Line ------------- —....... Wetland Limit -------_._.._--_. Buffer Zone — — — — — Building Setback — — — — Tree Line rWYYYYY`/Yl rY r Y YYYI Edge of Water ------- —..— Center Line —•---- -----•— Notes 1. Owner of Record: MBL Associates, c/o Mllot Real Estate. 76 St. Paul Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 2. Applicant: JB South Burlington, LLC, 56 West Twin Oaks Terrace South Burlington, Vermont 05403 3. Parcel Are.: 45.48 acres 4. Zoning District: Southeast Quadrant 5. Project Description: This layout is collaboration between the applicant, Rabideau Architects and Llewellyn —Howley for discussion at Sketch Plan. The plan shows 81 residential units constructed on 20.25 acres with access from Meet Street. The 20.25 acre parcel will be subdivided from the existing 45.48 acre parcel owned by MBL Associates. The 81 units will consist of 33 townhouse style duplexes (66 units), 7 townhouse style single units and 8 residential flats. Municipal wastewater treatment facilities, water supply and roads will serve the Project. Power, natural gas, telephone, cable and other services will be provided. Stormwoter runoff will be conveyed and treated prior to discharge. 6. Perimeter property line inforrnation obtained from plan entitled-9oundory Survey — Southeast Summit- prepared by Krebs @ Lansing Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated 1/6/94 as shown on the attached plan entitled Southeast Summit — Overall Site Plan- prepared by FltzPatrick—Llewellyn Incorporated, last revised 8/5/94. 7. Streets ore proposed to be 26 feet wide with parking and sidewalks on one side. Street are proposed to be public, however, rights —of —way are not shown on this sketch plan. Sidewalks are five feet wide and set five feet from the roadway. Street trees are proposed Inn accordance with City regulations. Residential units will be set back 25 feet from the back of the sidewalk and haw two parking spaces (one garage and one open). Additional street parking is provided by the 26 foot wide roadways. The minimum residential unit area ie 1.100 al. Front porches may project up to eight feet Into the front setbacks. 8. Wetlands delineation performed by Cathy O'Brien Wetland Colsulting. Edgewood aeah ws.sl.. v-wser this. Mel orsrs twr aA Sketch Plan °--�- --°� 1 e 1 NB2yy Z i/'I,1t 18 17 `\, `\ k N/F SHAPIRO \\\ 20; I 1j'21 1B \ 20' FUTURE RECREATION PA.'R EASEMENT TO BE B9 CENTERED ON FINAL PAN ALIGNMENT � 22 I �� 16 � \\ B4 N/F TRlTT NB)�5M �? 85 7324 ` 1413 38 el 40 N/F WARD li 80•.. ` BB B 4 28 _ a •, � 69 77 ` � 'AR e 1 f c e 14 II 28 t i a 58 B BEi 7® 7B; 1 4q 30,• �` 7 4 u B3'1 59 56 B4 79i :74 46 5 SB58 3 91 S5 65 `i 32 �,I 1 4 t \ I 34 52 1 48 33 3 1!l I •� i 93 63 51 50 4a' YB 4T• 34 2 i `.! 4 1•�' 94 MOT .I I B' PAYE& R£CREAno PAN N/F DOWNING - CAULKINS i19 I1B If7 /IBI 115 714 119 SRN/N ROAD ROw-h .. 112 It 6 1 A/ .• II 113 .,,�` 120 138 If0 q7 I 1 i. ...... r 1. 1 VI b�/ \ •'167x41 '�` -. 12{�. 108 Q, r. .\ t 13B •t, II 125 4 1 B /'—/f �0 SI <� i '154 153 145 I 1 FUTURE RECIREA17ON PAN -�/I \ 1$1' 14B ` 13it I 126 IMR9N ROAD RIGHT 'O�' wAv�A.. / \•� JOD \ 13 ;HOB 9a II N/F COTE 'y 161'<�^ /i�-'•..,;`'.`, t B. I50•. 147 1 193 S 12B b 100 i 1 148 t94, I i 108 :' �� _ f33, A HOB T I I 1 ❑ 1I�N/F CANNIZZAR .166, 128 i 104 ]09 192�•, lit 1>30 / i oYA1O \VITA \•1 I q 'D SIT^ N/F HILL 16Y ASSOC. N 395�E`' /F MBL / ^ / ............ V£LCO R.o W.115 Z 20' FU NRE RECREA ROMI PAN EASEMENT �SE OL 1 HALL ARCHEIXppDOIIRALLY 4 I I N H U` CEN]ERFD ON FINAL PA il/ ALIGNMENT 'I SENS/l1YE•AR'A 1 -�= 1i �F ALL a\ II L T .. '\ 11 { P 1 1 c ��) .IB755O13 j5' \\ N/F VALLEE et. ol. S6979'05 E 3100.74 NOTES 1. ONN£R/APPLICANT.• M B L ASSOCIATES Pa BOX 4193 BURL/NG7m, VERMONT 05406-4193 2 ZONED: SOUTHEAST QUADRANT 3. TOTAL PARCEL AREA: 2022 ACRES (INCLUDES EAST PARCEL) 4. TOPOGRAPHIC AND EXISTING FE417IRES INFORMATIGIH BY n72PATRICE-LLEWELL YN. 5. PERIMETER PROPERTY LINE INFORMATION TAKEN FROM PLAN ENTITLEDBOUNDARY SURVEY -SOUTHEAST SUMMIT' BY KREBS AND LANSING CoNSLKANG ENGINEER$ INC OA TED 1/6/94 6. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 161 SINGLE FAMILY LOT$ 60 MUL77-FAMILY UN17S IN 15 BUILDINGS ON THE WEST SIDE. OF OORSET STREET IN SOUTH BURLINGTDW, VERMONT. Z680 (+/-) LINEAR FEET OF 32' WD£ ROADWAY VITH CURBS BOTH SIDES AND A BIKE/PEDESTRIAN PATH ONE SIDE IN AN 80- R.o VS. tam (+l) LINEAR FEET OF m, WIDE ROADWAY WITH CURBS 807H SIDES AND A SIDEWALK ONE WE W7HIN A 60' R.O.W- , 1Z000 (+/-) LINEAR FEET OF 8- GRAVITY SANITARY SEWtR.70 A -PUMP STATION THEN THROUGH A PRESSURED SANITARY SEVER ALONG DORSET STREET TO AN EXISTING FORCE MAIN FROM THE VILLAGE AT DORSET, PARK N/F Mc BEAN IX DOD (+/-) LINEAR FEET OF 8' AND 12' WATER MAIN FROM A'PROPOSED EXTENTILW of THE CVD WATER MAIN ON THE VEST SIDE OF DQRSET STREE7 •Va �� j .�� `�.o N/F BLAIR 11.200 (+/-) LINEAR FEET OF GRAVITY STORMWA TER COUEC71ON'SENER '. DISCHARGING TO THREE STORMWATER DETENTION BASINS } 65Ao 7. FOR DETAIL OF 7.5 ACRE ARCHEOLOGICALLY SENSl77W AREA SEE DRAWING \ ENTITLED 'ARCHEOLOGICAL STUDY -NNE PLAN' BY F777PAIR/CK-LLEWELL YN,- INC DATED DEC 199E \ a FOR DETAIL OF CORSET STREET WIDENING SEE DRAWINGS EN1777ED "pORSET \ STREET ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS' BY R72PATRICK-LLENELLYN, INC. DA TED OCTpBER 1991 N73D015'W \ `- 7066' 9. NO DRIVEWAYS OR OTHER STREET ACCESS FROM STREET PIP (MIDLAND AVE). \\ to FOR SUBOM9ON INFORM AnoN SEE DRAWINGS ENTITLED 'SOUTHEAST SUMMIT -PLAT OF -q4MM9OW CAE LANDS OF MBL ASSOCA TES; SHEETS 2-9/V BY FITZPATRICK LLEWEU M. B' PAYED PAN AND 20' R ATION PAN \ INC., DATED JANUARY 6, 1994 �— EASEMENT TO BE CENTERED FINAL PAN ALIGNMENT 11. WEILAND DELINEATION BY NATURAL RESOURCE CONSULTING SERVICE'S' GRAND ISLE„ , 12. THIS SET OF DRAWINGS HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR FINAL RENEW OK THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON AND IS SUB..ECT TO ANY MooinCATIONS REQUIRED BY THE FINAL--. REVIEW OF THE PLANNING COA0469ON AND THIS OFFICE n ,1 \o �•1 Yi a __.. I$� PROJECT SITE \ +/- \ (20 acre) ICI \ N/F LEDUC FARMS, INC. \ i 'I St 7-2435'W 27.9X 1 N5717632 W GRAPHIC SCALE 1196.62 362.08' w, N/F PETERS NTT 0•BR/EN LEGEND PERIMETER PROPERTY ONE PROPOSED LOT LINE RICH OF WAY -- EASEMENT LINE I - EXISTING N£ILANOS - - - - - ARCHEOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE AREA PROPOSED H)DRANT LOCATION _ FES RGJISEl7 (-oT' NUry9EQ N.15 , ADD 4YreAJT 6.'5 /94 _ REVISE LOT L91ES 4/14/94 �F• REVISE LOTL/NES, STREET -A' 4/5/94 REVISE LOT LINES J/29/94 ADD ADDITIONAL AF71ANO DEDNEARON, ADO NOTE 11 3/8/94 ADD AD0177OVAL MERAND DEDNEA77ON 2/4/94 r Mop ADD 'NOT S 12,121193 AM ARCimorJCALLY S'EMSTRYE AREA. AND RECREATION PANS IMTH EASEMENTS IO/12/9J REVISE LOT LAMT/NOTEIIS`, REVISE PERIMETER PROPERTY LINES 114�J DESCRIPTION DATE _ ( R! FEET ) I Imh _ ZOO LL. PROGRESS PRINT E PRELIMINARY DESIGN E,ANAL DESIGN . ACT 250 CHECKED BLOCK INLYCATES STANS OF N19 QRAMNC`..' IT IS THE U9ER5 RE5PoNv&UTY TO ENSURE THIS CRY INCYuoa ,THE LA7EST awslomS BOiTT.H.EAST SUMMIT SOUTH BURLINO TON _ - VERMONT 0 VERALL SITE PLAN Pp920 9 OCTLJBERT 1992 ' (# I W w o� la/ ` INCORPORATED w rro xmeen �. a•OI&tl L elwr.IE . Arm rlNUArla. MRMMS DN4409 NLUSTON VERMONT 2 dT 47 Ar U,) 1 ��1 ti1 c�C V s f Y 1 /t e .� �V v 77 w• -�� v! 7 Z v 17 /77 a/ h -5h u.` c-77 Cf/ r j f c fur cliL7 va S• De-gvl <f of S-Irez %) / vYM �r5 `��, /c / �dv e �Vv 17 q ✓29u�,u/s cad a u,,J, s 4 1 0/ /o �f'V o sus A'r-► � ,� � o uw.s� e �' � v� a 7Lll� � ,� �t//o C l.� s S/p L G � -t' j �c� � i�✓ �r -f'� s / -�v�o�-r� �u vs c � vl �✓ c t 74 �S h i� c✓ v ou - '7 a t-- "v OC 7770 Yec/ /` 0 v A 415 W— y -7��h/ ` ii Bill Szymanski, City Engineer City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 (802) 846-4106 CITY ENGINEER'S COMMENTS Dorset Street Properties (formerly Lake Buick) Dorset Street November 2, 2006 2�/ v 1. Th�60 ft. future street R.O.W. should extend across entire parcel. It is i3Otended to access the property to the east. Preliminary (sketch plan) review comments No. 1* regarding the location of the Dorset St. water atrr nd comment No. 4** regarding drainage have not been add sed. * V1Taterliain on Dorset Street is/not where plan shows. ** There is a drainage ditch aldng the east side of this parcel where retention basin is proposed. Thy existing drainage ditch serves a large area to the north. A retention baste -serving -this project should be outside or an existing drainage way. LLEWELLYN • HOWLEY I N C O R P O R A T E D February 21, 2007 Mr. Ray Belair Zoning Administrator City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Edgewood — Sketch Plan Application 2000 Dorset Street File: 2006067 Dear Ray: It is proposed to subdivide an existing 45.48 acre parcel at 2000 Dorset Street, immediately north of the Town of Shelburne/City of South Burlington boundary. An attached copy of a FitzPatrick-Llewellyn Incorporated drawing illustrates the location of this parcel. The parcel will be subdivided into two parcels of 20 +/- acre and 45 +/- acres. The 20 +/- acre parcel is the land proposed for development by this application. Attached, please find a Sketch Plan Application for this development into 81 residential units. We have included a Sketch Plan of the proposed development and a check for $125. We understand a Sketch Plan meeting can be scheduled for March 20, 2007. We would appreciate that if possible. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Llewellyn - Howley Incorporated Lance A. Llewell , P.E. Cc: JD South Burlington,LLC, (Dousevicz) MBL Associates (Milot, Bartlett & Larkin) Greg Rabideau , Architect Attachments Engineering • Land Development • Permitting 20 Kimball Ave., Ste. 202N • South Burlington • Vermont • 05403 T 802.658.2100 • F 802.658.2882 • e-mail: Ihinc@lhinc.net www.lhinc.net )CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGT%,iV DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4106 March 7, 2007 MBL Associates c/o Milot Real Estate 76 St. Paul Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Dear Property Owner: Enclosed is a draft agenda for the March 20, 2007 Development Review Board Meeting. It includes an application for development on your property. This is being sent to you and the abutting property owners to make aware that a public meeting is being held regarding the proposed development. Under Title 24, Section 4464 of State law, participation in a municipal regulatory proceeding is required in order to preserve your right to appeal a local development approval to the Vermont Environmental Court. State law specifies that "Participation in a local regulatory proceeding shall consist of offering, through oral or written testimony, a statement of concern related to the subject of the proceeding." If you would like to know more about the proposed development, you may call this office at 846-4106, stop by during regular office hours, or attend the scheduled public meeting. Sincerely, /&�4A 049T4 Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. cc: Lance Llewellyn Greg Rabideau CITY OF SOUTH BURL1 GTOI�i IDEPAIRTMENT OF PLANNING aka ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 I'AY (802) 846-4101 September 17, 2004 Lance Llewellyn Llewellyn -Howley, Inc. 20 Kimball Avenue, Suite 202N South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: 2000 Dorset Street Dear Lance: Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Development Review Board meeting and staff comments to the Board. Please be sure that someone is at the meeting on Tuesday, September 21, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. at the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, HcO L L . , Betsy McDonough Administrative Assistant Encl. LLEWELLYN • HOWLEY I N C O R P O R A T E D September 21, 2004 Mr. Ray Belair Zoning Administrator City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 RE: Dorset East Associates Sketch Plan Hearing File: 2004022 Dear Ray: On behalf of Dorset Street Associates we wish to withdraw our Sketch Plan Application from consideration by the Development Review Board this evening. Thank you. Sincerely, Llewellyn -Howley Incorporated Lance A. Llewellyn, P.E. Cc Gerald Milot Alan Bartlett John Larkin Steve Crampton, Esq Faxed 09.21.04 846 - 4101 Engineering • Land Development • Permitting 20 Kimball Ave., Ste. 202N • South Burlington • Vermont • 05403 T 802.658.2100 • F 802.658.2882 • e-mail: Ihinc@lhinc.net www.lhinc.net SEP-21-2004 14:16 FRal: TO;! 902 846 4106 P.iIIII September 21. 2004 LLEWELLYN - HOWLEY i N C 0 R P 0 A A T E 0 My- Ray 3clair Zoning Administrator City of South Burlington 575 Donw-I Street So uth Burlington, Verrii 05403 RF: Dorset Last Associates Sketch ketch Plan Hearing file, 2004022 Darr Ray-, on behalf of Dorset Street AssociaWs we wish to withdraw our Sketch Plan Application from consideration by the Development Review Board this evening. Thank you, 'sincerely, Lleweilvn-Howley Incorporated �'e_ Lance A. Llewellyn, P.E. Cc Gerald Milat Alan `Bartlett John Wkiii Steve Crumpton, Esq Faxed 09.21.04 846-4101 Engineering,, 11-ano N-velcapirant - Pcrrr�itthg 20 koibaft Ava Slo. 202N - S:)uth Bvftimpm - Vwmonl - 05403 T 802-6,98.2100 - F 6012-658.2882 - rz-rnail- li&iine:�ffiinc-no! w-sm hiw. not CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Report preparation date: September 15, 2004 \drb\sub\dorset_east_associates�sketch.doc Plans received: June 21, 2004 DORSET STREET ASSOCIATES - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION #SD-04-53 Agenda # 10 Meeting Date: September 21, 2004 Owner/Applicant Dorset East Associates, LLC 25 Pinecrest Road Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 Engineer Property Information Llewellyn -Howley, Inc. Tax Parcel 0570-02000-L 20 Kimball Avenue, Suite 202N SEQ Zoning District S. Burlington, VT 05403 45.47 acres Location Map J+I � y n v R s q 9; c {� } Pan • � � �� ..� Ace CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\sub\dorset east associates\sketch.doc Dorset East Associates, LLC, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is requesting sketch plan review of a planned unit development consisting of: 1) the transfer of development rights for 104 residential units from the east side of 1731 Hinesburg Road, and 2) constructing 104 residential units on a 45 acre parcel, 2000 Dorset Street. In 1993, the development rights from the subject property were transferred across the street as part of the Dorset Farms planned unit development. In addition, 20 acres of the subject property are subject to perpetual agriculture restrictions. Associate Planner Brian Robertson and Administrative Officer Ray Belair, referred to herein as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted on June 21, 2004 and have the following comments. ZONING DISTRICT & DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Table 1. Dimensional Requirements SEQ Zoning District Required Proposed �1 Min. Lot Size 40,000 SF 45,47 acres Max. Building Coverage 15% <15% Max. Overall Coverage 30% <30% + Min. Front Setback 20 ft. • Min. Side Setback 20 ft. Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. zoning compliance additional information needed from applicant 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: Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity is available to meet the needs of the project. According to Section 15.13(B)(1) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, the existing public utility system shall be extended to provide the necessary quantity of water, at an acceptable pressure, to the proposed additional dwelling units. 1. The South Burlington Water Department should review the plans, prior to preliminary approval. Pursuant to Section 15.13(D)(1), the developer shall connect to the public sewer system or provide a community wastewater system that is approved by the City and the State in any subdivision CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\sub\dorset east associates\sketch.doc where off -lot wastewater is proposed. The developer is required to provide such pumping and other facilities as may be necessary. The City Engineer reviewed the plans and provided comments in a memorandum dated September 15, 2004 (attached). 2. The applicant should comply with the requests of the City Engineer, as outlined in his memorandum dated September 15, 2004, prior to submittal of the preliminary plat application. 3. The applicant will need to obtain preliminary wastewater capacity allocation from the Director of Planning and Zoning, Juli Beth Hoover, prior to final plat approval. 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. 4. Grading and erosion control details should be submitted with the preliminary plat application_ 5. 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 project incorporates access, circulation and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unreasonable congestion of adjacent roads. The main access to this development is provided by a new 30' wide public street with two (2) points of access on Dorset Street. There are three (3) clusters of units that are proposed to be served by separate roadways. The northeast cluster is proposed to be served by a 24' wide roadway, and a 21'wide extension off of that roadway. The northwest cluster is proposed to be served by a 24' wide roadway. The middle cluster is proposed to be served by a 24' wide roadway. Pursuant to Section 15.12 of the Land Development Regulations, any roadway serving more than nine (9) dwelling units shall be public. The only roadway on the proposed plans that can be private is the one serving the eight (8) units in the northeast cluster. The other three (3) roadways that are proposed to be 24' wide shall be designed as public streets. Pursuant to Table 15-1 of the Land Development Regulations, a local public street shall have a 50' wide right-of-way and a 28' wide pavement width. 6. The plans shall be revised to depict the three (3) proposed 24' wide roadways as 28' wide roadways, prior to submittal of the preliminary plat plans. 7. The plans shall be revised to depict proposed right-of-ways for all public streets, prior to submittal of the preliminary plat plans. 8. The applicant shall submit a traffic study analyzing the traffic impacts and circulation of the proposed project with the preliminary plat application. 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. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\sub\dorset east associates\sketch doc The South Burlington Wetlands Delineation Map shows a stream and associated wetlands on the subject property. At a minimum, the plans show that one (1) of the roadways will encroach into a wetland. The plans should be revised to clearly depict any wetlands on the subject property, including a 50' wide buffer surrounding any wetland. Any proposed wetland impacts must be reviewed by the South Burlington Natural Resources Committee. 9. The plans should be revised to clearly depict any wetlands on the subject property, including a 50' wide buffer surrounding any wetland, prior to submittal of the preliminary plat application. 10. If there are any proposed wetland impacts the South Burlington Natural Resources Committee should review the plans. 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 districts) in which it is located. Pursuant to Section 9.01 of the Land Development Regulations, the Southeast Quadrant District (SEQ) is hereby formed in order to encourage open space preservation, scenic view and natural resource protection, wildlife habitat preservation, continued agricultural use, and well planned residential use in the largely undeveloped area of the City known as the Southeast Quadrant. The open character and scenic views offered in this area have long been recognized as very special and unique resources in the City and worthy of protection. The location and clustering of buildings and lots in a manner that in the judgment of the Development Review Board will best preserve the open space character of this area shall be encouraged. Without considering the "restricted areas" depicted on the Southeast Quadrant Official Zoning Map, the proposed plan is visually compatible with the planned development patterns in the area. The proposed dwelling units are clustered, which creates significant open space on the property. Staff feels that removing the northeast cluster would increase the proposed project's compatibility with the planned development patterns of the Southeast Quadrant. However, the entire property is identified as a "restricted area" on the Southeast Quadrant Official Zoning Map. Staff cannot recommend that this project be approved as long as this entire property remains a "restricted area." Staff suggests that the applicant set-up a meeting with the South Burlington Planning Commission to discuss their reasoning for identifying this entire property as a "restricted area" and the possibility of amending the Southeast Quadrant Official Zoning Map. 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. Staff feels that the proposed project provides adequate open space on the subject property. However, as mentioned above, staff feels that removing the northeast cluster from the plans would significantly increase the open space on the subject property. 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. 11. The South Burlington Fire Chief should review the plans, prior to preliminary approval. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING ldrb\sub\dorset east associates\sketch doc 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. 12. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. 13. The preliminary plat application should include additional information on roads, recreation paths, stormwater facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility lines, and lighting. 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 preliminary plat application should include additional information on roads, recreation paths, stormwater facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility lines, and lighting. The proposed recreation path appears to be 10' wide, but staff and the Recreation Path Committee will need verification on the width. 14. Exterior lighting details (cut -sheets) for the proposed street light and exterior building lights should be submitted with the preliminary plat application. The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s). The proposed project is not consistent with the South Burlington Comprehensive Plan, because the entire property is identified as a "restricted area" on the Southeast Quadrant Official Zoning Map. 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 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 PUD accomplishes a desirable transition from structure to site and from structure to structure. The proposed PUD also provides for adequate planting and safe pedestrian movement. According to Table 13-1 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, a total of 234 parking spaces are required for this PUD. All of these parking spaces will be provided by driveways and garages. Recreational vehicle parking is required in a PUD this size, unless the developer clearly states in the Homeowner's Association documents that recreational vehicles are prohibited in the PUD. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\sub\dorset east associates\sketch.doc Pursuant to Section 13.01(G)(5) of the Land Development Regulations, a bicycle rack is shown on the plans. Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings to the greatest extent practicable. The proposed parking locations are adequate. 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 scale of the proposed buildings is compatible with the site. According to Section 3.07 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, the maximum height of the buildings in this PUD shall not exceed 40' for pitched roofs or 35' for flat roofs. 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 Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications 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. 15. Building elevation details should be submitted by the applicant with the preliminary plat application_ 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. Building elevation details should be submitted by the applicant with the preliminary plat application. In addition to the above general review standards 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. At this point, staff sees the potential for access easements to the properties to the east and north of the subject property. 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. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 7 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\sub\dorset east associates\sketch doc Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications 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 at this time. Landscaping 16. Pursuant to Section 13.06 of the Land Development Regulations, the applicant should submit a detailed landscaping plan, including a street tree planting plan, with the preliminary plat application. In addition, the applicant should submit a landscape budget, in accordance with Table 13-9 of the Land Development Regulations, with the preliminary plat application. The landscape plan and budget must both be prepared by a landscape architect or other landscape professional. 17. The City Arborist should review the landscape plans. Other 18_ The preliminary plat submittal should include a property boundary survey for both properties involved, prepared by a licensed land surveyor RECOMMENDATION Staff does not recommend that the Development Review Board advise the applicant to submit a preliminary plat application, as the entire property is identified as a "restricted area". Respectfully submitted, Brian Robertson, Associate Planner Copy to: Lance Llewellyn BILL SZYMANSKI, City Engineer City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 846-4io6 (phone) 846-4101(fax) COMMENTS Dorset East Associates Dorset Street 9/15/04 i. Plans should be prepared using a standard scale. One inch equals 70 feet is not a standard scale. 2. A parking lot within the power line easement should be considered instead of the parallel parking of the inner loop street. F-7 �\ Power Linve \ ' New Recr�latiotn Path South lEntr rn i \ \ �Ope pa 5ce AdJa�ent to Dorset A I + A \ � Northwest Cluster ! z, units t%,y Acre f'ea,tral island ® - - on D -- — / ® o r a e t �' t a a t r fam r , Southwest Cluster no units Middle Cluster � 3 44 Units ry a� 6/no Acre Open Space h Forth Entrance ie IPx ist i;in g goods } t Northeast Cluster j41LInits Open ArA I j� 23-I- Acres /� h I n o_ --r5_-- e _ a _ 5 t �. A 5 5 oC I a �. 6 5_ 5 o u t h 13 u r I J n a t o n. V r i LLEwE INCL LYN R HO I �.Ie 1�0* 2 0• Conceptual Site Plan - 1 04 New Zesldential Units i,E••• r•••! raphic 0491MMM 0btl ►�-999 MO1i - I j 3.m 09rImOm T PI II 0"00 Michael Lawrence Assoc. Landscape Architects Essex Junction, Vermont ii� Y•^•°" ° �^ May 21,C4 I oV Z "+' AP""' Aff..d GRAPHIC SCALE LLEWELLYN - HOWLEY — Auclair Property �, Co Wuft." Plat" "A�,w I N C O R P O R A T E D v...e.e h.u.ann Fla I x n.aany P—lahy • C.—R).s I-1— sattat _-- --- ,00 .m or..m M wL FlnYFl.I _ 4olfimbsllAw.SuiL20la 180:,w-� Transfer Development Rights t—� a,,,, 11GT 3ua ( IN FEET swat eua�nvro» T fuuz19ua31ao North I inch - 200 tL Va Uu4m aq tw sa. K Dorset East Associates sh..* 2 m 2 Dorset East Associates June 17, 2004 Page 1 of 4 Permit Number SD - APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the plans will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. For amendments, please provide pertinent information only. 1) OWNER OF RECORD (Name as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #) Dorset East Associates, LLC c/o Alan Bartlett 25 Pinecrest Drive, Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 CF 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #) ✓(/� �O Vol. 270 , Page 251 c�O'9 ?O pfOy S'o 3) APPLICANT Dorset East AssoTiates, LLCc�/o AlaneBartlett , phonand fax #) o9fo 25 Pinecrest Drive, Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 4) APPLICANT'S LEGAL INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY (fee simple, option, etc.) Fee Simple 5) CONTACT PERSON (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) Lance A. Llewellyn, P.E., Llewellyn -Howley Incorporated. 20 Kimball Ave, Ste 202N, So. Burlington, VT (802) 658-2100 6) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 2000 Dorset Street 7) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) # 0570 02000 8) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) Existing Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use) None. Unimproved meadow and woods b) Proposed Uses on property (description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain) Residential Subdivision (showing 104 units at sketch plan) c) Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) 104 units at 2,400 sf per unit = 249,600 sf d) Proposed height of building (if applicable) 35' allowable Dorset East Associates June 17, 2004 Page 2 of 4 e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) 104 units (at sketch plan) f) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable) 9) LOT COVERAGE a) Building: Existing N/A Proposed Less then 15 % b) Overall (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing N/A Proposed Less then 30%o c) Front yard (along each street) Existing N/A Proposed 209 10) TYPE OF EXISTING OR PROPOSED ENCUMBRANCES ON PROPERTY (easements, covenants, leases, rights of way, etc.) Velco Power Line ROW 11) PROPOSED EXTENSION, RELOCATION, OR MODIFICATION OF MUNICIPAL FACILITIES (sanitary sewer, water supply, streets, storm drainage, etc.) Extension of city sanitary sewers, water mains, recreation path and roadways to service proposed units. 12) OWNERS OF RECORD OF ALL CONTIGUOUS PROPERTIES & MAILING ADDRESSES (this may be provided on a separate attached sheet) See Attached Sheet 13) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE 2010 K Dorset East Associates June 17, 2004 Page 3 of 4 14) PLANS AND FEE Plat plans shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (I I " x 17") of the plans must be submitted. A sketch subdivision application fee is $125.00. I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. Alan Bartlett for Dorset East Associates, LLC SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT GNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNER 0"4� (Oj�— Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: 77� d I have reviewed this sketch plan application and find it to be: Complete ❑ Incomplete i c & Zoning or Designee I Date 3 LLEWELLYN K HOWLEY I N C O R P O R A T E D TRANSMITTAL LETTER Date: June 18, 2004 To: Ray Belair Zoning Administrator City of South Burlington, VT Re: Dorset East Residential File: 2004022 Copies: Message: Please find attached: Five copies of the Sketch Plan and application form for the above referenced project. One 11x17 reduction. Please be sure to reference this project as "Dorset East" (not South Forty) in all future correspondence and feel free to call if you have questions or require additional information. Sincerely, LLEWELLYN-HOWLEY INCORPORATED Skip McClellan 20 Kimball Ave. Ste. 202N, South Burlington, Vermont 05403 T 802-658-2100 F 802-658-2882 e-mail: Ilewellinc@aol.com Engineering Land Development Permitting Dorset East Associates June 17, 2004 Page 4 of 4 OWNERS OF RECORD OF ALL CONTIGUOUS PROPERTIES & MAILING ADDRESSES 1. Chamberlain, Malcolm 492 Acorn Lane Shelburne, VT 05482 2. Leduc, Maurice 495 Cheese Factory Road So. Burlington, VT 05403 3. Bolduc, Vincent 1780 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 4. Cote, Bruce & Sandra 1925 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 S. Cannizzaro, Paul 1935 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 6. Hill, Cassius & Laura 1945 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 7. Larkin, John P. 410 Shelburne Road So. Burlington, VT 05403 8. Hall, Christopher & 1965 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 Anne Flint Hall 9. The Schoolhouse 8 Catkin Drive So. Burlington, VT 05403 10. Peters, Greg & Diane 1018 Cheesefctory Road Shelburne, VT 05482 11. O'Brien, George & 718 Barstow Road Shelburne, VT 05482 O'Brien Trust c/o Maureen O'Brien 4 LLEWELLYN • HOWLEY I N C O R P O R A T E D July 7, 2004 Mr. Ray Belair Zoning Administrator City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Dorset East Associates File: 2003022 Dear Ray: Thank you for your assistance in the preparation of our Sketch Plan application for Dorset East Associates. While we understand the need for a complete application, we are only seeking guidance from the DRB at this time. We realize our subsequent submissions may be considerably modified from this initial layout. In addition to the information previously submitted, we are providing the following: 1. A copy of the South Burlington tax map of the Auclair property in the Southeast Quadrant. The residential units for Dorset East Associates will be obtained by transferring development rights from Auclair to Dorset East Associates. Presently, we are showing 104 residential units on the Dorset East Associates Sketch Plan. To transfer 104 units requires dedicating 87 acres of the Auclair property. This is shown on the Auclair plan. Future submissions at Preliminary Plat or Final Plat may show more or less residential units at Dorset East. As the number of units varies so will the area dedicated for the transfer of development rights from the Auclair property. We will therefore, alter the "set aside" area as the project develops. 2. As the Auclair property is "involved" land, it is a requirement to have Ernest Auclair as co -applicant / property owner. We have obtained his signature on page 3 of the South Burlington application form. Engineering • Land Development • Permitting 20 Kimball Ave., Ste. 202N • South Burlington • Vermont • 05403 T 802.658.2100 • F 802.658.2882 • e-mail: Ihinc@lhinc.net www.lhinc.net Ray Belair July 7, 2004 Page 2 of 2 We believe these were the remaining items necessary to schedule a Sketch Plan meeting. Gerry Milot will be out of town for the August 3rd meeting. If prior dates are not available, we ask to be scheduled as soon as possible later in August. Thank you. Sincerely, Llewellyn -Howley Incorporated Lance A. Llew , P.E. Cc: Gerald Milot Alan Bartlett Brett Grabowski Ernest Auclair Steve Crampton, Esq. Attachments LLEWELLYN • HOWLEY I N C O R P O R A T E D f I FED 104 lington c l(i c Q c m @ s — 0 4-3 73 In y R/ E L W L lL