Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-11-16 - Decision - 0080 Eastwood Drive#SD-11-16 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING F&M DEVELOPMENT CO LLC PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION #SD-11-16 FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION F& M Development Co. LLC, herein referred to as the applicant, is requesting preliminary 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 46 unit multi -family dwelling, 4) constructing a 63 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 June 7, 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 preliminary 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 46 unit multi -family dwelling, 4) constructing a 63 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 April 1, 2011. 4. The subject property is located in the C1-R15 Zoning District. 5. The plans submitted consists of a 30 page set of plans, page two (2) entitled "Proposed Eastwood Drive/Joy Drive PUD South Burlington, Vermont" prepared by Civil Engineering Associates Inc, dated April 1, 2011. CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\6.7.11 Meeting Decisions\SD_11_16_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment_prelim_ffd.doc #SD-11-16 Table 1. Dimensional Requirements C1-R15 Zoning District Re uired Proposed Min. Lot Size 40,000 SF 1.25 acres Max. Density***** 15 units/acre See note below �l Max. Building Coverage 40% 14.89% �l Max. Total Coverage 60% 50.14% Min. Front Setback Eastwood Drive 30 ft. 30 ft. �l Min. Front Setback (Joy Drive 30 ft. 30 ft. �l Min. Side Setback 10 ft. >10 ft. Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. >30 ft. Max. BuildingHeight 35 ft. 42.5 ft �l zoning compliance The coverage information has not been included on the plans. This information should be listed on the plans which have been stamped by a licensed engineer. **** The density allowed in the C1-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 139 units. This is within the 25% increase permitted via the Land Development Regulations cited above. As this increase creates an additional 26 units over the maximum allowed, 13 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. 2 CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\6.7.11 Meeting Decisions\SD_11_16_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment_prelim_ffd.doc #SD-11-16 (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 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 Affordability. 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. Building Height: South Building The applicant has stated that he is seeking a height waiver of 11.5 feet for a height of 46.5 feet. North Buildinq The applicant has stated that he is seeking a height waiver of 10.5 feet for a height of 45.5 feet. The Board discussed the applicant's request for a height waiver at the sketch plan review and preliminary plat hearing. The applicant submitted graphics and visualizations which CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\6.7.11 Meeting Decisions\SD_11_16_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment_prelim_ffd.doc #SD-11-16 depict the height of the buildings from several approaches, as well as a comparison of height to surrounding buildings. The Board is agreeable to the height. 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 11.0 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, in a memo from Justin Rabidoux, Director of Public Works, dated April 21, 2011. No changes to the plan are required per the Water Department comments; however, there are directions which shall be followed. The applicant shall comply with the requests of the South Burlington Water Department per the comments dated April 21, 2011. 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 notes seek answers to several stormwater questions, as well as in relation to stabilized construction entrances. The applicant should work with the Stormwater Superintendent and Public Works Director to address these issues. The applicant should address the stormwater and erosion control questions raised in the April 21, 2011 memo from Justin Rabidoux. 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. 4 CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\6.7.11 Meeting Decisions\SD_11_16_EastwoodDrive—FM Development_prelim_ffd.doc #SD-11-16 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 is a memo from Georges Jacquemart of BFJ, dated April 19, 2011.. 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 buildings. 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 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 C1 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 CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\6.7.11 Meeting Decisions\SD_11_16_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment_prelim_ffd.doc #SD-11-16 the accessibility and continuity of the C1 District. Also, the proposed development is part of a mixed use PUD, which is encouraged in the C1 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 April 22, 2011. Specifically, there are two items which should be addressed between the Fire Chief and the applicant: fire hydrants and cooking stations. The applicant shall work with the South Burlington Fire Chief to address questions and concerns. Where necessary the plans shall be revised. 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 in a letter dated April 21, 2011 from Justin Rabidoux (aforementioned). There are several questions which should be answered, as well as several plan changes which are necessary. The applicant should work with the director of Public Works to address these concerns and make plan changes to his satisfaction. The applicant shall work with the Director of Public Works to answer questions and make necessary changes, per the memo dated April 21, 2011. 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. The Recreation Path Committee discussed the project at their meeting on Monday May 2, 2011. Comments were available at the Development Review Board meeting. 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 has asked the applicant to look into the feasibility of a recreation path on the north side of Joy Drive, to connect to the section which is already in place. The applicant 6 CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\6.7.11 Meeting Decisions\SD_11_16_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment_prelim_ffd.doc #SD-11-16 shall work with the Director of Public Works as to its feasibility and report to the Board at the final plat level. 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 C1 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 REVIEW STANDARDS Pursuant to Section 14.03(A)(6) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any PUD shall require site plan approval. Section 14.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations establishes the following general review standards for all site plan applications: The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and adequate parking areas. The Board finds the proposed project accomplishes a desirable transition from structure to site and from structure to structure. The City worked with the applicant to calculate parking needs and asses parking provisions. The applicant 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 were reviewed by the Board. 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 7 CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\6.7.11 Meeting Decisions\SD_11_16_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment_prelim_ffd.doc #SD-11-16 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. The applicant has stated that there are 310 parking spaces on site (though a staff count of the plans show 312 parking spaces- a discrepancy which should be addressed). 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 recommend a large waiver of parking requirements. However, the 8 spaces or 2.6% is reasonable and the Board is very comfortable with the requested waiver and the proposed amount of parking. The Board recommends approval of an 8 space or 2.6% parking waiver. 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 requires 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 would be 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. CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\6.7.11 Meeting Decisions\SD_11_16_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment_prelim_ffd.doc #SD-11-16 (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, (u) 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. E CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\6.7.11 Meeting Decisions\SD_11_16_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment _prelim_ffd.doc #SD-11-16 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 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 amendment 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. 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. 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 The applicant submitted landscaping plans as part this application. The South Burlington City Arborist has reviewed the plans and provided comments as a part of the consolidated letter from Justin Rabidoux dated April 21, 2011. The applicant is seeking a credit of more than $58,000 for existing landscaping which is to be relocated or protected in place, including a very large red oak tree. The applicant has stated that he would like to review a 10 CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\6.7.11 Meeting Decisions\SD_11_16_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment _prelim_ffd.doc I #SD-11-16 transplanting plan. The applicant should work with the City Arborist and provide the necessary plans and other requested items prior to final plat approval. The applicant shall work with the City Arborist to address the questions raised in the memo dated April 21, 2010 from Justin Rabidoux, Public Works. The minimum landscaping budget, per $10.1 million in construction costs, shall be $108,500. The applicant is proposing $56,600 in new trees and shrubs, as well as a requested credit of $58,100 for six existing trees to be preserved or relocated. If a full credit were to be given, the landscaping would total $114, 700. The City Arborist is reviewing the requested credit and should report to the DRB when his assessment of the value is complete. The Board will consider the applicant's request for a landscaping credit of $58,100 for the protection or relocation of six existing trees on site after consultation with the City Arborist for a recommendation based on the preservation viability and tree value. 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 shown on site but appear to be very small. The applicant should address this concern or state whether snow will be trucked off -site. The plans shall be revised to show adequate snow storage areas or a plan for removal. 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. 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. However, the drawing has been reduced and it is not possible for the Board to assess whether the minimum dimensions are met on the smaller islands. Furthermore there is at least one area that does not meet the standard for being interior. The Board is confident that this can be worked out, but the applicant should address this and submit a revised plan before final plat approval. The applicant should submit additional information regarding the landscaping in the interior of the proposed parking area, to ensure that the requirements in Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations are being met. 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 11 CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\6.7.11 Meeting Decisions\SD_11_16_EastwoodDrive_FM Development_prelim_ffd.doc #SD-11-16 Motion by Gavle Quimby, seconded by John Dinklage, to approve Preliminary Plat Application #SD-11-16 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 final plat approval and pursuant to Section 13.14(D) the applicant shall submit a plan detailing the 13 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 plan shall also illustrate the distribution and minimum floor area proposed, to the satisfaction of the Development Review Board. 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 11.0 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%. 6. The plat shall be revised to show the changes below prior to final plat submission: a. The building and lot coverage information should be included on the site plan. b. The plans shall show adequate snow storage areas or a plan for removal. 7. The applicant shall comply with the requests of the South Burlington Water Department per the comments dated April 21, 2011. 8. The applicant shall obtain final wastewater allocation prior to issuance of a zoning permit. 9. The applicant should address the stormwater and erosion control questions raised in the April 21, 2011 memo from Justin Rabidoux. 10. The applicant shall work with the South Burlington Fire Chief to address questions and concerns. Where necessary the plans shall be revised. 11. The applicant shall work with the Director of Public Works to answer questions and make necessary changes, per the memo dated April 21, 2011. 12. 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. 13. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines shall be underground. 12 CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\6.7.11 Meeting Decisions\S D_11 _16_Eastwood Drive_F M Deve lopment_prelim_ffd.doc #SD-11-16 14. 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 buildings. 15. 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. 16. 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. 17. The applicant shall work with the Director of Public Works as to the feasibility of a sidewalk on the north side of Joy Drive to connect to the existing sidewalk, and report to the Board at the final plat level. 18. The applicant shall work with the City Arborist to address the questions raised in the memo dated April 21, 2010 from Justin Rabidoux, Public Works. 19. The Board shall consider the applicant's request for a landscaping credit of $58,100 for the protection or relocation of six existing trees on site at the final plat review level and after consultation with the City Arborist for a recommendation based on the preservation viability and tree value. 20. The applicant shall submit additional information regarding the landscaping in the interior of the proposed parking area, to ensure that the requirements in Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations are being met. 21. 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. 22. 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. 23. Parking of recreational vehicles shall be prohibited within the PUD. 24. The final plat application shall be submitted within 12 months. Mark Behr — yea/nay/abstain/not present Matthew Birmingham — yea/nay/abstain/not present John Dinklage — yea/nay/abstain/not present Roger Farley — yea/nay/abstain/not present Gayle Quimby — yea/nay/abstain/not present Michael Sirotkin — yea/nay/abstain/not present Bill Stuono — yea/nay/abstain/not present 13 CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\6.7.11 Meeting Decisions\SD_11_16_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment_prelim_ffd.doc #SD-11-16 Motion carried by a vote of 6 — 0 — 0 Signed this 10 day of June 2011, by Digitally signed by Mark C. Behr Mark C. BehrON e Mark C Behr, o=Richard Henry Behr Architect P.C., ou,email=mark@rhb ccom, c=US Date: 2011.06.14 13:14:50-04'00' 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, 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://vermontiudiciary.org/GTC/environmental/default.asi)x 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. 14 CADocuments and Settings\Mark C. Behr\My Documents\South Burlington DRB\6.7.11 Meeting Decisions\SD_11_16_EastwoodDrive_FMDevelopment_prelim_ffd.doc