Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-19-13 - Supplemental - 0180 Market Street (5)CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD-19-13_180 Market St_City of South Burlington_Sketch_2019-05-07.docx DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: May 3, 2019 Plans received: April 16, 2019  180 Market Street Sketch Plan Application #SD-19-13 Meeting date: May 7, 2019  Owner South Burlington City Center, LLC P.O. Box 2204 South Burlington, VT 05407 Applicant City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403  Property Information Tax Parcel 0450-00002 Form Based Code Transect Zone 5, Transect Zone 4 4.10 acres Engineer Latitudes Land Surveying 1 Mill Street, Suite 169 Burlington, VT  Location Map /   PROJECT DESCRPTION Sketch plan application #SD-19-13 of the City of South Burlington to subdivide a 4.09 acre lot into three lots of 0.27 acres, 0.61 acres, and 3.21 acres for the purpose of constructing a project on the 0.61 acre lot and dedicating the 0.27 acre lot as a public right of way, which will be reviewed under separate site plan application, 180 Market Street. CONTEXT The Applicant is proposing to subdivide one existing parcel into three lots in preparation for development on the western lot and creation of a public right of way on the central lot. The owner plans to further subdivide the larger remaining lot in the future. The development of the western lot will be subject to administrative review through the Form Based Code process. The DRB is responsible for review of subdivisions within the Form Based Code district to ensure that the proposed lots are legal and developable. Therefore these staff comments focus on those elements of the proposed subdivision and omits discussion of the proposed development except as relevant to the DRB’s authority. Two sketch plan applications for the existing lot are being reviewed concurrently by the DRB. Subdivision of the western portion of the existing lot (referred to as Lots B1, B2 and B by this applicant applicant) is the subject of this application, while subdivision of the eastern portion of the existing lot (referred to as Lots B1, B2 and B3 by a separate applicant) is being reviewed as application #SD-19-10. COMMENTS Development Review Planner Marla Keene and Planning and Zoning Director Paul Conner, hereafter referred to as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted by the applicant and have the following comments. ZONING DISTRICT & DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS There are no minimum lot dimensions within the T5 and T4 districts. Staff has no concerns with the proposed lot dimensions. Block lengths and perimeter standards are exempt for this location (LDR Section 8.04B(1)(a)). The applicant is proposing to access the site via a proposed driveway off the proposed City right of way. Curb cuts in the T4 and T5 are limited to a minimum 100-ft spacing on the proposed right of way. While Staff considers the planned access drive for the building on Lot B1 appears to be too close to the planned access drive for the school, the access configuration is not the subject of this application. Staff considers the proposed subdivision, which is the subject of this application, could not be reconfigured so as to better support the planned access therefore does not recommend the Board temper their endorsement of the subdivision because of potential planned access configuration issues. OFFICIAL MAP The Proposed City right of way is shown on the official map. Staff has no concerns with this project’s compliance with the official map. SUBDIVISION STANDARDS As discussed above, there are two concurrent subdivision applications for the subject property. Staff recommends the Board require the applications to be combined or reviewed consecutively without overlap for preliminary and final plat. Without such combination, there are numerous potential legal issues which could result from conditions of approval (such as those which address irrevocable offers and mylars) not being addressed in a timely manner. Staff considers the planned location of the access drive for the subdivided lot on an easement on the adjacent lot to the north may create challenges with meeting the minimum required frontage buildout requirements of the T4 zoning districts for the property to the north. However, as above, Staff considers the proposed subdivision, which is the subject of this application, could not be reconfigured so as to better support the frontage buildout on the adjacent lot therefore does not recommend the Board temper their endorsement of the subdivision because of potential planned frontage buildout issues. Roads, utilities, sidewalks, recreation paths, and lighting The applicant has proposed a 60-foot ROW for a future City street. The street does not have a designated type on the official map. 8.04B(2)(b) and (c) state that where the street is proposed to be public but a specific Street Type is not designated on the official map, the minimum street right-of-way width shall be as identified within Article 11. In the T5 district, the minimum ROW width for a qualifying street is 50-ft (“Neighborhood Street Narrow”). The applicant is proposing greater than the minimum ROW width therefore Staff considers the minimum PUD standards pertaining to roadways are met. 11.03B(3) requires the DRB to determine the applicable street type for the proposed ROW. The DRB should make its determination based on consideration of the applicant’s proposed street type and reasons for that proposal; the projected traffic volumes; and a statement of compatibility with the adjacent roadways. This street is proposed to be a “Support Street” type, selected for compatibility with similarly sized planned streets in the vicinity. Traffic volumes are not available at this time. Staff supports this designation. Staff recommends the Board familiarize themselves with the requirements of 11.03B(3) and provide preliminary feedback to the applicant on street type at this hearing. Protection of Natural Resource Areas Natural resource area impacts associated with Lot B were approved under #CU-18-01. Stormwater from the development associated with the proposed subdivision is proposed to be treated off-site. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board work with the applicant to address the issues identified herein. Respectfully submitted, / ____________________________________ Marla Keene, Development Review Planner