HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP-16-04 - Decision - 0078 Eastwood DriveCITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
ERIC FARRELL — 80 EASTWOOD DRIVE & 30 JOY DRIVE
SITE PLAN APPLICATION #SP-16-04
FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION
Site plan application #SP-16-04 of Eric Farrell for after -the -fact approval to amend a previously approved
amend a previously approved planned unit development (PUD) consisting of: 1) a 41,000 sq. ft. general
office building, 2) a 30 unit multi -family dwelling & 3,700 sq. ft. of light manufacturing use, 3) a 63 unit
multi -family dwelling, and 4) a 54 unit multi -family dwelling. The amendment consists of: 1) altering a
pedestrian access along the east side of the building, and 2) revising the landscaping plan, 80 Eastwood
Drive & 30 Joy Drive.
The Development Review Board held a public hearing on Tuesday, March 1 & 15, 2016. Eric Farrell
represented himself.
Based on testimony provided at the above mentioned public hearing and the plans and supporting
materials contained in the document file for this application, the Development Review Board finds,
concludes, and decides the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
Site plan application #SP-16-04 of Eric Farrell for after -the -fact approval to amend a previously
approved amend a previously approved planned unit development (PUD) consisting of: 1) a
41,000 sq. ft. general office building, 2) a 30 unit multi -family dwelling & 3,700 sq. ft. of light
manufacturing use, 3) a 63 unit multi -family dwelling, and 4) a 54 unit multi -family dwelling. The
amendment consists of: 1) altering a pedestrian access along the east side of the building, and 2)
revising the landscaping plan, 80 Eastwood Drive & 30 Joy Drive.
2. The owner of record of the subject property is Olympiad Housing, LLC.
3. The application was submitted on 1/11/16.
4. The subject property is located in the Commercial 1- Residential 12 Zoning District.
5. The plans submitted consists of a 10 page set of plans, page one (1) is entitled "80 Eastwood
Drive Proposed Residential Development 80 Eastwood Drive South Burlington, Vermont Overall
Proposed Conditions Plan", prepared by Civil Engineering Associates, Inc., dated October 2010,
and last revised on 11/02/15.
6. The overall project was previously approved on March 21, 2015 by the Board in its Findings of
Fact & Decision for application #SD-13-43.
Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements
Table 1. Dimensional
11 C-1,,R-15 Zoning District'' 11 Required 11 Proposed 11
r �
CITY OF SOUTH BURLING FON 2 DEPARTMENT OF
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING
SP 16 04 80 Eastwood Drive & 30 Joy Drive Eric Farrell ffd. doc
0 Residential Density
15 units per acre
(131 units)
146 units
Max. Building Coverage
40%
12.4
Max. Overall Coverage
70%
43.75 %
Min. Front Setback (Eastwood Drive)
30 ft.
115 ft.
* Min. Front Setback (Joy Drive)
30 ft.
25 ft.
Min. Side Setback
10 ft.
> 10 ft.
Min. Rear Setback
30 ft.
> 30 ft.
* Max Building Height and Max. Stories
35 ft. / 4 stories
62.31 ft. / 5 stories
✓Zoning compliance
0 Density bonus approved by Board, re application #SD-13-43
*Waivers approved by Board, re application #SD-13-43 (5' decrease in front yard setback, 27.31' height
increase).
SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS
Pursuant to Section 14.03(A)(6) of the 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.
In its decision for #SD-13-43, the Board found the amount and location of parking acceptable. However,
as detailed in sheets L-101; L-103 and L-201, with regards to the issue of adequate planting and safe
pedestrian movement, the applicant's as built -plans are different than what was previously approved.
Specifically, the as -built plans and requested change remove the sidewalk near the northeast portion of the
building which was designed to facilitate access to the sidewalk along Joy Drive and the private dog park as
well as provide pedestrian movement as cars entered and exited the property using the adjacent entrance.
The original design provided a more predictable and clearer pedestrian crossing of the driveway than the
"as -built" access. The original design provided a cross walk across the driveway opposite the access to the
dog park whereas the "as -built" access does not provided a cross walk and places the pedestrians in a
location which requires them to walk along the driveway for approximately 40 feet without a sidewalk.
The Board notes the numerous minor as -built features (landscaping, benches, flag poles, screening, etc.)
that differ from what was approved.
The applicant submitted drawings that they prepared in response to the conversation initiated by the Board
at the March 1st DRB hearing. The inset photo on drawing L-101 shows parking lot markings currently in use
at Wake Robin retirement community. The Board finds that the use of these pavement markings as
proposed would result in a safe pedestrian access to the dog park.
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.
No changes proposed.
CITY OF SOUTH BURLING TON 3 DEPARTMENT OF
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING
SP 16 04 80 Eastwood Drive & 30 Joy Drive Eric Farrell ffd.doc
Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building
expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground.
The DRB shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural characteristics,
landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of
different architectural styles.
In its decision for #SD-13-43, the Board previously found this criterion met.
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.
In its decision for #SD-13-43, the Board previously found this criterion met.
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 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 or collector street, to
provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in
the area.
In its decision for #SD-13-43, the Board previously found that the reservation of additional land was not
warranted.
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.
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).
In its decision for #SD-13-43, the Board previously found this criterion met.
Landscaping
Pursuant to Section 13.06(A) of the Land Development Regulations, landscaping and screening shall be
required for all uses subject to site plan and PUD review. Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development
Regulations requires parking facilities to be curbed and landscaped with appropriate trees, shrubs, and
other plants including ground covers.
Pursuant to Section 13.06(B) (4) of the Land Development Regulations, snow storage areas must be shown
on the plans. The plans show "non-exclusive", shared snow storage areas for the subject properties.
r �
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING
SP 16 04 80 Eastwood Drive & 30 Joy Drive Eric Farrell ffd. doc
Landscaping budget requirements are to be determined pursuant to Section 13.06(G) (2) of the SBLDR. The
landscape plan and landscape budget shall be prepared by a landscape architect or professional landscape
designer.
In an email to staff dated February 17, 2016, the City Arborist commented as follows:
I also looked at the as built landscaping additions for 80 Eastwood Dr. and they're fine.
Craig Lambert
South Burlington City Arborist
In its decision for #SD-13-43, the Board required posting of a landscape bond with a value of $16, 112. The
applicant did not plant hedgerows on the north side of the building as detailed in the approved plans.
According to the applicant, the value of that hedgerow was estimated at $3,300. The applicant instead
planted four (4) magnolias and three (3) birch trees with a value of $3,400.
The Board considers this $100 difference to be negligible and that no changes to the bond is necessary and
that the property remains compliant with this criterion.
Lighting
Pursuant to Appendix A.9 of the Land Development Regulations, luminaries shall not be placed more
than 30' above ground level and the maximum illumination at ground level shall not exceed an average
of three (3) foot candles. Pursuant to Appendix A.10 (b) of the Land Development Regulations, indirect
glare produced by illumination at ground level shall not exceed 0.3 foot candles maximum, with an
average level of illumination of 0.1 foot candles.
All lighting shall be shielded and downcast.
In its decision for #SD-13-43, the Board previously found this criterion to be met.
However, the applicant is asking for after -the -fact approval of an illuminated flagpole. The Board notes that
the applicant needs to apply for a zoning permit to do so pursuant to Section 13.08 Specific Requirements
for Nighttime Illumination of Governmental Flags.
Stormwater
The Department of Public Works provided the following comments to staff via email on February 17,
2016:
The Stormwater Section has reviewed the "80 Eastwood Drive — Proposed Residential Development —
Overall Proposed Conditions Plan" prepared by Civil Engineering Associates, dated Oct. 2010, last
updated 1112115. We do not have any comments.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment,
David P. Wheeler
( 1
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING
SP 16 04 80 Eastwood Drive & 30 Joy Drive Eric Farrell ffd. doc
Assistant Stormwoter Superintendent
DECISION
Motion by John Wilking, seconded by Matt Cota to approve Site Plan Application #SP-16-04 of Eric
Farrell, subject to the following conditions:
1. All previous approvals and stipulations, which are not superseded by this approval, will remain
in effect.
2. This project must be completed as shown on the plans submitted by the applicant and on file in
the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning.
3. The plan must be revised to show the changes below and shall require approval of the
Administrative Officer. Three (3) copies of the approved revised plans must be submitted to the
Administrative Officer prior to permit issuance.
a. The plan must be revised to show the proposed pavement markings for the pedestrian
access as discussed at the meeting.
4. The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months pursuant to Section 17.04 of the
Land Development Regulations or this approval is null and void.
5. The applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy from the Administrative Officer prior to the
use or occupancy of the building.
6. Any change to the site plan shall require approval of the South Burlington Development Review
Board or the Administrative Officer.
Mark Behr
Yea
Nay
Abstain
Not Present
Matt Cota
Yea
Nay
Abstain
Not Present
Bill Miller
Yea
Nay
Abstain
Not Present
David Parsons
Yea
Nay
Abstain
Not Present
Jennifer Smith
Yea
Nay
Abstain
Not Present
John Wilking
Yea
Nay
Abstain
Not Present
Motion carried by a vote of 4— 0 — 0.
Signed this � day of A 2016, by
q %, /�p g_
Bill Miller, Vice -Chair
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 6 DEPARTMENT OF
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING
SP 16 04 80 Eastwood Drive & 30 Joy Drive Eric Farrell ffd.doc
Please note: You have the right to appeal this decision to the Vermont Environmental Court, pursuant
to 24 VSA 4471 and VRCP 76 in writing, within 30 days of the date this decision is issued. The fee is
$225.00. If you fail to appeal this decision, your right to challenge this decision at some future time may
be lost because you waited too long. You will be bound by the decision, pursuant to 24 VSA 4472 (d)
(exclusivity of remedy; finality).