HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-11-20 - Decision - 0038 0078 Eastwood Drive#SD-11-20
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
F&M DEVELOPMENT CO LLC
FINAL PLAT APPLICATION #SD-11-20
FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION
F&M Development Co. LLC, herein referred to as the applicant, is requesting final plat review
for a planned unit development consisting of 1) razing an existing health club, 2) subdividing a
2.67 acre parcel into two (2) lots of 1.42 acres & 1.25 acres, 3) constructing a 49 unit multi-
family dwelling, 4) constructing a 62 unit multi -family dwelling, 5) converting 5000 sq. ft. of
general office use to medical office use (38 Eastwood Dr.) and 5) including the adjacent two (2)
developed properties at 20 Joy Drive and 38 Eastwood Drive into the proposed PUD, 78
Eastwood Drive.
The Development Review Board held a public hearing on July 5, 2011. Eric Farrell represented
the applicant.
Based on testimony provided at the above mentioned public hearing and the plans and supporting
materials contained in the document file for this application, the Development Review Board
finds, concludes, and decides the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. F&M Development Co. LLC, herein referred to as the applicant, is requesting final plat review
for a planned unit development consisting of 1) razing an existing health club, 2) subdividing a
2.67 acre parcel into two (2) lots of 1.42 acres & 1.25 acres, 3) constructing a 49 unit multi-
family dwelling, 4) constructing a 62 unit multi -family dwelling, 5) converting 5000 sq. ft. of
general office use to medical office use (38 Eastwood Dr.) and 5) including the adjacent two (2)
developed properties at 20 Joy Drive and 38 Eastwood Drive into the proposed PUD, 78
Eastwood Drive.
2. The owner of record of the subject property is EF Farrell LLC & DB Morrissey, LLC.
3. The application was received on May 6, 2011.
4. The subject property is located in the Cl-R15 Zoning District.
5. The plans submitted consists of a 30 page set of plans, page two (2) entitled "Final Plat
Eastwood Drive/Joy Drive PUD South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Civil Engineering
Associates Inc, dated May 6, 2011 and received on June 16, 2011.
CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\7.5.11 Meeting
Decisions\S D_11 _20_Eastwood Drive_F M Development_final_ffd.d oc
#SD-11-20
Table 1. Dimensional Requirements
C1-1115'Zonin 'District
Required
Pro osed
Min. Lot Size
40,000 SF
1.25 acres
Max. Density*
15 units/acre
See note below
Max. Building Coverage
40%
14.89%
Max. Total Coverage
60%
50.140,/o
Min. Front Setback Eastwood Drive)
30 ft.
30 ft.
Min. Front Setback (Joy Drive
30 ft.
30 ft.
Min. Side Setback
10 ft.
>10 ft.
Min. Rear Setback
30 ft.
>30 ft.
Max. Building Height
35 ft.
42.5 ft
zoning compliance
**** The density allowed in the Cl-R15 zone is 15 units per acre. Per Section 13.14(c)(2) of
the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, the Development Review Board may grant
a density increase of no more than 25% in the total number of allowed dwelling units for a mixed
rate housing development. For each additional market rate dwelling unit produced as a result of
the density increase, one comparable below market rate unit must be provided.
The subject property is 7.58 acres and so the maximum density is 113 units. The applicant is
proposing 141 units. This is within the 25% increase permitted via the Land Development
Regulations cited above. As this increase creates an additional 28 units over the maximum
allowed, 14 units must meet the affordability criteria listed in Section 13.14 of the Land
Development Regulations. Prior to recording of the final plat, and pursuant to Section
13.12(D)(3)(c), the applicant shall submit a plan detailing the affordable housing proposed as part of
the PUD. The plan shall "include a mechanism acceptable to the City Attorney for controlling resale
and re -tenanting the individual affordable housing units that ensures that the unit will remain
affordable in perpetuity."
D. Criteria for Awarding Density Increase. In addition to the standards found in Article 15,
Planned Unit Development and Article 14, Site Plan and Conditional Use Review, the following
standards shall guide the Development Review Board:
(1) The density upon which a bonus may be based shall be the total acreage of the
property in question multiplied by the maximum residential density per acre for
the applicable zoning district or districts.
(2) Within the Residential 1 and Residential 2 zoning districts, the provisions of this
Section 13.14 shall apply only to properties of five (5) acres or more, and the
maximum allowable residential density with or without such a density increase
shall be four (4) dwelling units per acre.
(3) Development Standards.
(a) Distribution. The affordable housing units shall be physically integrated
into the design of the development in a manner satisfactory to the Development
Review Board and shall be distributed among the housing types in the proposed
housing development in the same proportion as all other units in the
development, unless a different proportion is approved by the Development
2
CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\7.5.11 Meeting
Decisions\SD_11 _20_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment_final_ffd.doc
#SD-11-20
Review Board as being better related to the housing needs, current or projected,
of the City of South Burlington.
(b) Minimum Floor Area. Minimum gross floor area per affordable dwelling
unit shall not be less than comparable market -rate units in the housing
development.
(c) Plan for Continued Affordabilitv. Affordable housing units shall be
available for sale, resale or continuing rental only to qualified below market rate
households. The plan shall include a mechanism acceptable to the City Attorney
for controlling resale and re -tenanting the individual affordable housing units that
ensures that the unit will remain affordable in perpetuity. The City of South
Burlington may as needed set a cap on resale prices such that the resale price
must not exceed an appreciation on equity of a set percentage.
(4) Administration. The City of South Burlington Housing Authority, if any, or a
bona fide qualified non-profit organization shall be responsible for the on -going
administration of the affordable housing units as well as for the promulgation of
such rules and regulations as may be necessary to implement this program. The
Housing Authority or non-profit organization will determine and implement
eligibility priorities, continuing eligibility standards and enforcement, and rental
and sales procedures.
E. Housing Types. The dwelling units may at the discretion of the Development Review
Board be of varied types including one -family, two-family, or multi -family construction, and
studio, one -bedroom, two -bedroom, and three -bedroom apartment construction.
The language above states that the affordable housing plan shall be presented to and reviewed by
the Development Review Board for their approval. As such, this must be completed prior to final
plat approval.
Prior to recording of the final plat, and pursuant to Section 13.14(D) the applicant shall submit a plan
detailing the 14 units of affordable housing proposed as part of the PUD. The plan shall "include a
mechanism acceptable to the City Attorney for controlling resale and re -tenanting the individual
affordable housing units that ensures that the unit will remain affordable in perpetuity." The
dispersion and method of financing and control shall be as prescribed in the affordable housing plan
submitted by the applicant as part of the final plat application (titled Olympiad Redevelopment
Project... Affordable Housing Plan, marked as Exhibit A by staff).
The plan shall also illustrate the distribution and minimum floor area proposed, to the satisfaction of
the Development Review Board.
The building program is as follows:
• South building - 62 units (56%)
• North building — 49 units (44%)
• Total — 111 units (100%)
The 111 units are made up of the following types:
• Studio's — 56 (50.5%)
• One -Bedroom — 28 (25.2%)
• Two -Bedroom — 27 (24.3%)
3
CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\7.5.11 Meeting
Decisions\SD_11_20_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment_final _ffd.doc
C
r
#SD-11-20
The average size of the I I I units is approximately 790 sf.
Of the 28 allowable "bonus" units, 50% or 14 units are required to be perpetually "affordable".
The "affordable" units are specifically designated within the two proposed buildings and
proportionately distributed between them.
The mix of "affordable" units (i.e. number of studio, one -bedroom and two -bedroom units) will
be maintained as set forth below.
The project contains the following "affordable" units:
• Studio Units — 7 (50%)
• One -Bedroom Units — 3 (21%)
• Two Bedroom Units — 4 (29%)
• Total — 14 units (100%)
The "affordable" units are located, as follows:
• South Building - 7 units (50%)
• North Building — 7 units (50%)
• Total— 14 units (100%)
The designated affordable housing units are as follows:
North Building
South Building
Unit 105
— Studio (680 so
Unit 107 — Studio (680 so
Unit 204
— 2-Bedroom (925 so
Unit 104 — 1-Bedroom (790 so
Unit 207
— Studio (680 so
Unit 117 — Studio (680 so
Unit 208
— 2-Bedroom (925 so
Unit 208 — 1-Bedroom (790 so
Unit 215
— 2-Bedroom (925 so
Unit 203 — Studio (680 so
Unit 306
— 2-Bedroom (925 so
Unit 319 — Studio (680 so
Unit 311
- Studio (680 so
Unit 304 —1-Bedroom (790 so
Floor plans for each building are attached for reference. The average size of the 14 "affordable"
units is 775 sf.
Affordable Rent Levels
The affordable units will be rented to inhabitants whose gross annual household income does not
exceed 65% of the county median income, as defined by the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Affairs, and the total annual cost of the housing, including rent, utilities, and
condominium fees (if any), is not more than 30% of the household's gross annual income.
Affordable Sale Price Levels
In the event the property were converted to a condominium form of ownership and the units are
sold off, then the affordable units will be sold to inhabitants whose gross annual household
income does not exceed 80% of the county median income, as defined by the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Affairs, and the total annual cost of the housing, including
principal, interest, taxes and insurance, is not more than 30% of the household's gross annual
income.
4
CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\7.5.11 Meeting
Decisions\SD_11_20_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment _final_ffd.doc
#SD-11-20
Administrative Oversight
The property owner will contract with the Champlain Housing Trust, or a Municipal Housing
Authority, if one is established by the city, to provide annual monitoring and certification of the
continued compliance with the above referenced guidelines and restrictions.
Affordability Covenant
To guarantee the compliance and enforcement of the above referenced guidelines and restrictions,
in perpetuity, the property owner will record in the land records, in form and substance
satisfactory to the City Attorney, and Restrictive Covenant setting for the formulas for
establishing the affordable rents and sale prices.
Building Height:
South Buildine
The applicant has stated that he is seeking a height waiver of 11.5 feet for a height of 46.5 feet.
North Buildine
The applicant has stated that he is seeking a height waiver of 10.5 feet for a height of 45.5 feet.
The Board approved the applicant's request for a height waiver at the preliminary plat review. The
applicant submitted graphics and visualizations which depict the height of the buildings from several
approaches, as well as a comparison of height to surrounding buildings.
The Board grants a height waiver of 11.5 feet for an overall height of 46.5 feet for the South
building. The Board grants a height waiver of 10.5 feet for an overall height of 45.5 feet for the north
building.
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 dwelling units.
The South Burlington Water Department has reviewed the plans. The comments are included as part
of a consolidated utilities review by the Director of Public Works. He stated, in a memo dated June
15, 2011, that he has no outstanding issues. No changes to the plan are required per the Water
Department comments.
C:\Documents and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\7.5.11 Meeting
Decisions\SD_11_20_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment final_ffd.doc
#SD-11-20
The applicant shall obtain final wastewater allocation prior to issuance of a zoning permit.
Sufficient grading and erosion controls will be utilized during and after construction to prevent
soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the subject
property and adjacent properties.
The South Burlington Stormwater Superintendent has reviewed the plans. The comments are
included as part of a consolidated utilities review, in a memo from Justin Rabidoux, Director of
Public Works, dated April 21, 2011.
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.
Access is provided via two, two -directional curb cuts from Eastwood Drive and one two -
directional curb cut via Joy Drive. These curb cuts are already in place today.
There are four general parking areas throughout the PUD. All parking areas are connected via
vehicular connections. There is pedestrian access to the street through portions of the lot, and the
remainder of the lots is small enough that the pedestrian connection is sufficient for citizens who
may be patronizing both buildings.
The applicant has submitted a traffic impact report. The report was reviewed by an independent
party (subject to prior invocation of technical review by the Development Review Board). The
independent review, memo from Georges Jacquemart of BFJ, dated May 18, 2011, is attached. In
summary, the reviewer states that the project would generate comparably little traffic and that
there are no traffic impact concerns or need for infrastructure improvements as a result of the
development. The Director of Public Works and City Engineer concurs.
The applicant shall pay any applicable traffic impact fees for the additional vehicle trip ends the
proposed amendment is estimated to create, prior to issuance of the zoning permit for the
proposed building.
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.
There are wetlands located on the southern edge of the property near the existing buildings. No new
development or disturbance is proposed on that portion of the lot.
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.
According to the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, the Commercial 1 District is
hereby formed in order to encourage the location of general retail and office uses in a manner
6
CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\7.5.11 Meeting
Decisions\SD_11_20_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment_final_ffd.doc
I
#SD-11-20
that serves as or enhances a compact central business area. Other uses that would benefit from
nearby access to a central business area, including clustered residential development and small
industrial employers, may be permitted if they do not interfere with accessibility and continuity of
the commercial district. Large -lot retail uses, warehouses, major industrial employers, and
incompatible industrial uses shall not be permitted. Planned Unit Developments are encouraged
in order to coordinate traffic movements, promote mixed -use developments, provide shared
parking opportunities, and to provide a potential location for high - traffic generating
commercial uses.
The Board finds that the proposed development conforms to the purpose of the C 1 District and
that it is visually compatible with the area, which currently contains commercial uses and multi-
family dwellings. The proposed uses will not interfere with the accessibility and continuity of the
C 1 District. Also, the proposed development is part of a mixed use PUD, which is encouraged in
the C 1 District.
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.
The southern edge of the PUD that lies between the existing buildings and existing recreation path
(and then the interstate) is open and is proposed to remain open. Furthermore, the PUD lies within
one of the densest areas in the city, is directly accessible to the recreation path, is a short walk to a
city park.
The layout of a subdivision or PUD has been reviewed by the Fire Chief or (designee) to ensure
that adequate fire protection can be provided.
The South Burlington Fire Chief has reviewed the plans and provided comments in a letter dated
June 13, 2011 and with a follow up in an email to staff dated June 14, 2011. The Board reviewed the
proposal and is supportive of the applicant's plan for the two charcoal grills provided that the rules
and regulations for the buildings prohibit additional or private outdoor cooking facilities.
The Board is also supportive of the plans to retain the two large trees discussed in the letter, which
are adjacent to the access drive on Eastwood Drive.
The remainder of the Fire Chief's comments from the April 2011 letter shall remain in affect.
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.
The Director of Public Works and City Engineer have reviewed the plans and provided comments
from Justin Rabidoux (aforementioned).
Roads, utilities, sidewalks, recreation paths, and lighting are designed in a manner that is
consistent with City utility and roadway plans and maintenance standards.
Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any new
utility lines shall be underground.
CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\7.5.11 Meeting
Decisions\S D_11 _20_Eastwood Drive_F M Deve lopment_final_ffd.doc
#SD-11-20
The Recreation Path Committee discussed the project at their meeting on Monday May 2, 2011.
They previously asked that the recreation path be continued across the western edge of the property,
connecting to the existing path. This has been done.
The Board also asked the applicant to investigate the feasibility of a sidewalk along the north side of
Joy Drive. The applicant has agreed to construct the sidewalk, but a survey for the exact location will
take some additional time. This shall be a condition of approval.
The applicant shall continue to work with the Director of Public Works to site and construct a
sidewalk on the north side of Joy Drive. This shall be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.
The applicant shall submit exterior lighting details (cut -sheets) for the proposed street lights and
pedestrian lights on the property. Both of the proposed lighting fixtures shall comply with Appendix
A of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. The applicant has submitted exterior
lighting details (cut sheets) for building mounted lights, pole mounted lights, street lights and
pedestrian lights on the property. They meet the standards set forth in the SBLDRs.
The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the
affected district(s).
The Board finds the proposed PUD to be consistent with the South Burlington Comprehensive
Plan for the following reasons:
a. The plan is consistent with the stated purpose of the C 1 District, as outlined in Section 5.01 of
the South Burlington Land Development Regulations.
b. The proposed PUD will produce infill development, which is promoted through the
Comprehensive Plan.
SITE PLAN REVIE W STANDARDS
Pursuant to Section 14.03(A)(6) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, and
shall require site plan approval. Section 14.06 of the South Burlington Land Development
Regulations establishes the following` general review standards for all site plan applications:
The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure
to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and adequate
parking areas
The Board finds that the proposed project accomplishes a desirable transition from structure to site
and from structure to structure.
Planning staff worked with the applicant to calculate parking needs and asses parking provisions.
The applicant has submitted a shared parking analysis using one of three options available per the
SBLDRs. The data and information was reviewed by a third party consultant. Those comments
(memo from Georges Jacquemart, BFJ) and a spreadsheet detailing parking use at various times of
the day are attached.
CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\7.5.11 Meeting
Decisions\SD_11_20_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment_final_ffd.doc
#SD-11-20
According to the LDRs, 440 parking spaces would be required if each use were to be built
independently on their own lot, without any sharing.
A shared parking analysis provides a common sense approach as those spaces which typically would
peak in demand at one time would be able to complement those uses which would peak at different
times. Residential uses are very complimentary to office uses, each typically having peaks at
opposite times of the day, with some overlap in mid morning and late afternoon.
As can be seen in the spreadsheet, 303 parking spaces are needed at the peak hour of 9 am- when the
most spaces are needed by all of the involved uses. This new peak demand number will thus become
the base number for required parking. 310 parking spaces are proposed on site. If 15 parking spaces
are reserved and removed from the shared parking analysis, then 295 parking spaces are provided for
sharing. This is a shortfall of 8 spaces from the peak parking demand. Therefore, the applicant is
requesting a parking waiver of 8 spaces, or 2.6%.
As a shared analysis already provides for a substantial amount of relief and consideration for actual
use in an urban setting (ITE surveys typically occur in settings not altogether dissimilar to the
proposed site), the Board would not support a large waiver of parking requirements. However, the 8
spaces or 2.6% is reasonable and the Board is comfortable with the requested waiver and the
proposed amount of parking.
The Board accepts a shared parking analysis, acknowledges a peak demand of 303 parking spaces,
and grants a parking waiver of 8 spaces or 2.6%.
The Board stipulates that the 15 parking spaces proposed reserved for medical office use be signed
so as to limit their reservation to business hours. Although the independent review recommends 8-5
pm, the Board is comfortable with reservation from 7 am to 7pm. This still allows for ample
residential parking overnight.
Fifteen (15) parking spaces may be reserved for the medical office use. They shall be available for
shared use between the hours of 7 pm and 7 am. Signage shall reflect this accordingly.
All other spaces within the PUD described above, totaling at least 295 spaces, with the exceptions
noted above, and those reserved for handicapped accessibility, shall be shared amongst all users and
visitors of the PUD.
According to Section 13.01(J) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, parking or
storage facilities for recreational vehicles shall be provided in all multi -family residential
developments of twenty-five (25) units or more. Recreational vehicles shall not be stored on
any common open lands other than those specifically approved for such purpose by the DRB
through the review process. The Development Review Board may waive this provision only upon
a showing by the applicant that the storage and parking of recreational vehicles shall be
prohibited within all private and common areas of the development.
Parking of recreational vehicles shall be prohibited within the PUD.
(2) Parking:
(a) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings.
E
CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\7.5.11 Meeting
Decisions\SD_11 _20_Eastwood Drive_FMDevelopment_final_ffd.doc
#SD-11-20
(b) The Development Review Board may approve parking between a public street
and one or more buildings if the Board finds that one or more of the following
criteria are met. The Board shall approve only the minimum necessary to
overcome the conditions below.
(i) The parking area is necessary to meet minimum requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act;
(ii) The parking area will serve a single or two-family home;
(iii) The lot has unique site conditions such as a utility easement or
unstable soils that allow for parking, but not a building, to be located
adjacent to the public street;
(iv) The lot contains one or more existing buildings that are to be re -used
and parking needs cannot be accommodated to the rear and sides of
the existing building(s); or,
(v) The principal use of the lot is for public recreation.
(c) Where more than one building exists or is proposed on a lot, the total width of
all proposed parking areas that are both to the side of a building and between
the front lot line and the building line of the building on the lot that is closest to
the public street shall not exceed one-half of the total building width of all
buildings on the lot that are located adjacent to the public street. Buildings
separated from the front lot line by parking approved pursuant to 14.06(C)(2)(b)
shall be considered adjacent to the public street. Buildings separated from the
front lot line by any other parking areas shall not be considered adjacent to the
public street.
(d) The DRB shall require that the majority of the parking on through lots and
corner lots be located between the building(s) and the side yards or between the
building and the front yard adjacent to the public street with the highest average
daily volume of traffic. Where the rear yard of a lot abuts an Interstate or its
interchanges, the majority of parking shall be located between the building and
the side yards or between the building and the yard that is adjacent to the
Interstate.
The proposed parking is fully in compliance with this criterion.
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 Board has already addressed the height issues in this report.
Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or
building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground.
The Board has already stated that pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the South Burlington Land
Development Regulations, any new utility lines shall be underground.
10
CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\7.5.11 Meeting
Decisions\SD_11_20_EastwoodDdve_FMDevelopment_final_ffd.doc
#SD-11-20
The DRB shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural
characteristics, landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive
transitions between buildings of different architectural styles.
The Board finds that this criterion is being 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.
The Board finds that this criterion is being met.
Site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the
South Burlington Land Development Regulations:
The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting
properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial of
collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve
general access and circulation in the area.
The proposed development does not pose any appropriate opportunities to create access to abutting
properties that will reduce curb cuts, ,improve general access, or improve circulation more so than it
already does. The consultant, BFJ, who reviewed traffic and parking, suggests additional access
around the south side of the existing residential buildings. The Board disagrees and will not require
any additional access around the south side of the buildings. The buildings are already accessible on
three sides, and the south side provides the greatest and most contiguous green space on the site.
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 South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any new
utility lines shall be underground.
All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any
recycling or other requirements, shall be accessible, secure and properly screened with opaque
fencing to ensure that trash and debris do not escape the enclosure(s).
Adequate trash and recycling facilities are shown on the plans.
Landscaping and Screening Requirements
As previously stated and attached, the Director of Public Works, representing the comments of
Water, Sewer, Highway, and the Arborist, has stated that the plans have been prepared to his
complete satisfaction.
The minimum landscaping budget, per $10.1 million in construction costs, shall be $108,500. The
applicant is proposing $78,165 in new trees and shrubs, as well as a requested credit of $33,100 for
six existing trees to be preserved or relocated. If a full credit were to be given, the landscaping would
total $111, 265.
11
CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\7.5.11 Meeting
Decisions\SD_11_20_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment_final_ffd.doc
t�
#SD-11-20
The City Arborist supports the requested credit for five existing trees (6-14" calipers) to be kept on
site (3 to be relocated and two to be protected in place).
The Board grants the applicant a landscaping credit of $33,100 for the protection or relocation of five
existing trees on site.
Pursuant to Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations, snow storage area must be
specified and located in an area that will minimize the potential for run-off. Snow storage areas
are adequately shown on the plans.
Pursuant to Section 13.06(C)(1) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any utility
cabinets on the site shall be effectively screened.
The proposed parking areas contain more than twenty-eight (28) parking spaces, and therefore
should be landscaped in accordance with Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations.
The site plan shows some proposed landscaping on the interior of the proposed parking area and the
applicant has submitted a reduced drawing showing proposed landscaped areas. The Board finds that
these meet the intentions and requirements of this criterion.
For purposes of planning and zoning, the lots in this subdivision shall be considered one (1) lot.
The applicant will be required to record a "Notice of Condition" to this effect which has been
approved by the City Attorney prior to recording the final plat plans.
DECISION
Motion by Michael Sirotkin, seconded by Roger Farley to approve Final Plat Application #SD-
11-20 of F&M Development, subject to the following conditions:
1. All previous approvals and stipulations shall remain in full effect except as amended herein.
2. This project shall be completed as shown on the plat submitted by the applicant and on file in
the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning.
3. Prior to recording of the final plat, and pursuant to Section 13.14(D) the applicant shall submit a
plan detailing the 14 units of affordable housing proposed as part of the PUD. The plan shall
"include a mechanism acceptable to the City Attorney for controlling resale and re -tenanting the
individual affordable housing units that ensures that the unit will remain affordable in
perpetuity." The dispersion and method of financing and control shall be as prescribed in the
affordable housing plan submitted by the applicant as part of the final plat application (titled
Olympiad Redevelopment Project... Affordable Housing Plan, marked as Exhibit A by staff).
4. The Board grants a height waiver of 11.5 feet for an overall height of 46.5 feet for the South
building. The Board grants a height waiver of 10.5 feet for an overall height of 45.5 feet for the
north building.
5. The Board accepts a shared parking analysis, acknowledges a peak demand of 303 parking
spaces, and grants a parking waiver of 8 spaces or 2.6%.
12
CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\7.5.11 Meeting
Decisions\SD_11_20_EastwoodDrive_FM Development_final_ffd.doc
#SD-11-20
6. The applicant shall obtain final wastewater allocation prior to issuance of a zoning permit.
7. The applicant shall continue to work with the Director of Public Works to site and construct a
sidewalk on the north side of Joy Drive. This shall be completed prior to issuance of a certificate
of occupancy.
8. The applicant shall adhere to the comments of the South Burlington Fire Chief per the April
2011 letter, with the following exceptions/clarifications:
a. The trees may be retained along Eastwood Drive;
b. The two charcoal grills are permissible provided that language in the rules and
regulations for the buildings on Lots 3 & 4 prohibit any additional private outdoor
cooking grills.
9. 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.
10. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any new
utility lines shall be underground.
11. For the purpose of calculating road impact fees under the South Burlington Impact Fee
Ordinance, the Development Review Board estimates that the development will generate zero
additional trip ends during the P.M. peak hour.
12. Fifteen (15) parking spaces may be reserved for the medical office use. They shall be available
for shared use between the hours of 7 pm and 7 am. Signage shall reflect this accordingly.
13. All other spaces within the PUD described above, totaling at least 295 spaces, with the
exceptions noted above, and those reserved for handicapped accessibility, shall be shared
amongst all users and visitors of the PUD.
14. The Board grants the applicant's request for a landscaping credit of $33,100 for the protection or
relocation of five existing trees on site.
15. The applicant shall post a $108,500 landscaping bond. This bond shall remain in full effect for
three (3) years to assure that the landscaping has taken root and has a good chance of survival.
16. Pursuant to Section 13.06(C)(1) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any
utility cabinets on the site shall be effectively screened to the approval of the Development
Review Board.
17. For purposes of planning and zoning, the lots in this subdivision shall be considered one (1)
lot. The applicant shall record a "Notice of Condition" to this effect which has been approved
by the City Attorney prior to recording the final plat plans.
18. Parking of recreational vehicles shall be prohibited within the PUD.
13
CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\7.5.11 Meeting
Decisions\SD_11_20_EastwoodDrive_FM Development _fiinal_ffd.doc
#SD-11-20
19. The plans shall be revised to show the changes below and shall require approval of the
Administrative Officer. Three (3) copies of the approved revised plans shall be submitted to
the Administrative Officer prior to recording.
a. The survey plat shall be revised to include the seal and signature of the land
surveyor.
20. The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit for the first building within six (6) months of this
approval. The Development Review Board grants a period of five (5) years for the second
building of the proposed development. At such time as the five years is reached and the
applicant has not sought a zoning permit for the second building, they shall be eligible, per
Section 17.04 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, for one (1) extension
to an approval if the application takes place before the approval has expired and if the
Development Review Board determines that conditions are essentially unchanged from the
time of the original approval. In granting such an extension, the Development Review Board
may specify a period of time up to one (1) year for the extension.
21. The mylar shall be recorded prior to permit issuance.
22. Any changes to the final plat plan shall require approval of the South Burlington
Development Review Board.
23. The final plat plan (sheets P 1 & C 1.0) shall be recorded in the land records within 180 days
or this approval is null and void. The plan shall be signed by the Board Chair or Clerk prior to
recording. Prior to recording the final plat plan, the applicant shall submit a copy of the
survey plat in digital format. The format of the digital information shall require approval of
the Director of Planning and Zoning.
Tim Barritt— yea/nay/abstain/not present
Mark Behr — yea/nay/abstain/not present
Matthew Birmingham — yea/nay/abstain/not present
Roger Farley — yea/nay/abstain/not present
Joe Randazzo— yea/nay/abstain/not present
Michael Sirotkin — yea/nay/abstain/not present
Bill Stuono — yea/nay/abstain/not present
Motion carried by a vote of 5-0-0.
Signed this 121h day of July 2011, by
Digitally signed by Mark C. Behr
Mark C. BehrBehArchitkCP.C.,00=RichardHenry
Behr Architect P.C.,
email=markprhbpc.co.com, c=US
Date: 2011.07.13 13:59:20-04'00'
Mark Behr, Chairman
Please note: An appeal of this decision may be taken by filing, within 30 days of the date of this
decision, a notice of appeal and the required fee by certified mail to the Superior Court,
14
CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\7.5.11 Meeting
Decisions\SD_11_20_Eastwood Drive_FMDevelopment_final_ffd.doc
#SD-11-20
Environmental Division. See V.R.E.C.P. 5(b). A copy of the notice of appeal must also be
mailed to the City of South Burlington Planning and Zoning Department at 575 Dorset Street,
South Burlington, VT 05403. See V.R.E.C.P. 5(b)(4)(A). Please contact the Environmental
Division at 802-828-1660 or http://vennontiudiciM.ora/GTC/environmental/default.aspx for
more information on filing requirements, deadlines, fees and mailing address.
The applicant or permittee retains the obligation to identify, apply for, and obtain relevant state
permits for this project. Call 802.879.5676 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist.
15
CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\7.5.11 Meeting
Decisions\SD_11_20_EastwoodDrive_FM Development_final_ffd.doc