Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-18-16 - Supplemental - 0793 0907 Shelburne Road (2)#SD-18-16 Staff Comments CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Report preparation date: June 1, 2018 SD-18-16_793 907 Shelburne Rd_R L Vallee_Sk_2018-06- Plans received: May 7, 2018 05.docx 793 & 907 Shelburne Road Sketch Plan Application #SD-18-16 Meeting date: June 5, 2018 Owner Applicant 793 Shelburne Road: 907 Shelburne Road: R. L. Vallee, Inc. Phoenix 2, LLC, c/o Ernest Skipco Inc. c/o Skip Vallee Hoechner 793 Shelburne Road P.O. Box 192 79 Commerce St South Burlington, VT St. Albans, VT 05478 Hinesburg, VT 05461 05403 Property Information Engineer 793 Shelburne Rd: Tax Parcel 1540-00793 Civil Engineering Associates, Inc. 907 Shelburne Rd: Tax Parcel 1540-00907 c/o Christopher Galipeau Commercial 1 Residential 15 District 10 Mansfield View Ln 0.36 ac, 0.59 ac South Burlington, VT 05403 Location Map lJ i 707 I r Ila [L4 I 0 I I I u z :4 ■ southourtington PLANNING & ZONING 1of7 #SD-18-16 Staff Comments PROJECT DESCRIPTION Sketch plan application #SD-18-16 of R.L. Vallee, Inc. to demolish an existing hotel and a portion of an existing service station and create a planned unit development consisting of an expanded service station with four additional fueling positions for a total of twelve and associated 9,000 square foot retail sales building, 793 and 907 Shelburne Road. PERMIT HISTORY The proposed Project is within the Commercial 1 Residential 15 (C1-1115) district and the traffic overlay district. The parcel at 793 Shelburne Road is an existing non -conforming structure (the canopy having zero front yard setback) and two existing non -conforming uses: 1) an eight fueling position service station and 2) auto & motorcycle service & repair). The existing use also does not conform to the traffic overlay district, which is discussed in detail below. The parcel at 907 Shelburne Road is an existing extended stay hotel. This property is also non -conforming as the structure is located within the front yard setback. The existing structure does not conform to the front yard setback. COMMENTS Administrative Officer Ray Belair and Development Review Planner Marla Keene ("Staff") have reviewed the plans submitted on 5/7/2018 and offer the following comments. Numbered items for the Board's attention are in red. CONTEXT The proposed Project consists of creating a two -lot planned unit development for the purposes of expanding the existing service station and constructing a retail sale building. The applicant is proposing to combine the two presently separate and unconnected properties in a single PUD. Staff has several concerns about the application, covering the following general topics. 1. Overall Site Coverage 2. Nonconformity 3. Traffic 4. Relationship to Comprehensive Plan 5. Parking 6. Applicability of PUD designation southburlinoon PLANNING & ZONING 2of7 #SD-18-16 Staff Comments ZONING DISTRICT & DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Setbacks, Coverages & Lot Dimensions C1-R15 Required 793 Shelburne Road 907 Shelburne Road Existing Proposed Existing Proposed @Min. Lot Size 40,000 sq. ft. 15,800 sq. ft. 15,800 sq. ft. 25,700 sq. ft. 25,700 sq. ft. ✓Max. Building 40% 23% 16% 13% 18% Coverage *Max. Overall 70% 68% 77% 53% 66% Coverage @Min. Front 30 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. 9 ft. 61 ft. Setback ✓Min. Side 10 ft. 25 ft. 37 ft. 11 ft. 38 ft. Setback ✓Min. Rear 30 ft. 30 ft. 49 ft. 59 ft. 53 ft. Setback *Building Height 35 ft. < 35 ft. < 35 ft. Unknown Unknown (flat roof) @ Existing non -conformity ✓Meets standard * See discussion. 1. Overall Site Coverage The applicant has stated that their calculation of lot coverage excludes the proposed pervious pavers. While Staff generally supports pervious pavers as a stormwater BMP, Staff and the Board have consistently taken the position that pervious pavers count as overall lot coverage (see Findings of Fact and Decision for #SD-18-06 & #SP-17-82). Therefore the applicant's calculation of lot coverage is incorrect and the maximum overall coverages are not met, even when the two parcels are considered together. Zoning District Standards - Commercial 1 District Supplemental standards for the C1 district pertain to parking and access. Parking minimums maybe reduced depending on the extent of shared parking and pedestrian access. Curb cuts must be minimized. Parking is discussed below as it pertains to Site Plan Review Standards. Curb cuts are discussed below as they pertain to the Traffic Overlay District. 2. Nonconformities Nonconformities are addressed in Section 3.11, which states the following: 3.11 Nonconformities A. General Provisions. These provisions shall apply to all nonconforming uses, structures, lots, and parcels, except within the City Center Form Based Code District. See Article 8 for nonconformities applicable in that District. B. Continuance and Restrictions. (1) Any lawful structure or any lawful use of any structure or land existing at the time of the enactment of these regulations may be continued, although such structure or use does not conform with the provisions of these regulations, provided the conditions in this Section 3.11 are met. southburlinoon PLANNING & ZONING 3of7 #SD-18-16 Staff Comments (2) A nonconforming use may be continued provided that such structure shall not be enlarged or extended unless the use therein is changed to a conforming use. (3) A nonconforming structure that is devoted to a conforming use may be reconstructed, structurally altered, restored or repaired, in whole or in part, with the provision that the degree of nonconformance shall not be increased. (4) A nonconforming structure, or part thereof, shall be maintained, repaired, or restored to a safe condition as required by the Administrative Officer. (5) A nonconforming structure shall not have its degree of nonconformance increased. (6) A nonconforming use shall not be extended or enlarged, nor shall it be extended to displace a conforming use, nor shall it be changed to another nonconforming use, nor shall it, if changed to a conforming use, thereafter be changed back to a nonconforming use. (7) Nothing in these Regulations shall be construed to prevent the owner of a multi -tenant building containing one or more nonconforming uses from utilizing a portion of the building for a conforming use, provided there is no expansion or extension of a nonconforming use or uses as part of such a change in use. 2a. Nonconforming Canopy Structure The applicant has stated they believe removing the building and replacing it with gas pumps would be a reconstruction of a non -conforming structure. The proposed expansion appears to be conforming and Section 3.11D(1) states that a nonconforming structure may be altered provided such alteration does not exceed in aggregate cost twenty-five percent (25%) of the current assessed value as determined by the City Assessor. The current assessed value is approximately half a million dollars therefore the addition could not exceed approximately $125,000. 2b. Change of Nonconforming Use Auto & motorcycle service and repair. A business enterprise engaged in the servicing and repair of automobiles and/or motorcycles, including auto body repair or auto detailing, including the sale and installation of automobile and/or motorcycle parts and accessories. Includes Auto & Motorcycle Sales, Limited in conformance with these regulations. Service station. A building, place of business, land area, or other premises, or portion thereof, used or intended to be used for the retail dispensing of gasoline, oil and grease, and other vehicle fuels, and including, as an accessory use, the sale and installation of batteries, tires, lubricants, and other automobile accessories and retail items. Minor repair service may also be rendered. See service station. The free or retail dispensing of electricity for vehicles within approved on -street or off-street parking spaces shall not constitute a service station. The applicant has stated they believe the entire lot is in use as a service station. In reviewing the definitions of service station and auto & motorcycle service & repair, Staff considers there to be two separate uses on the site. The definition of service station speaks specifically to minor repairs, while based on existing signage the majority of the existing building meets the definition of auto & motorcycle service & repair. Neither Service Station nor Auto Service and Repair are allowed uses within the C1 R15 district. Staff considers the proposed removal of auto service and repair and replacement with service station to be a change from one non -conforming use to another, which is specifically prohibited under Section 3.11B(6). southburlington PLANNING & ZONING 4 of 7 #SD-18-16 Staff Comments 2c. Expansion of Nonconforming Use Regardless of the Board's interpretation of the change of use, Staff considers that the proposed addition of four fueling positions represents an expansion in use, which is specifically prohibited under Section 3.11B(6) because of the impacts to traffic. Regardless of the applicant's argument that the entire lot is one use, Staff considers that the use is not only a function of dimensions but also a function of the impacts to the neighborhood. According to methodology in the ITE Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition, the addition of four fueling positions would result in significantly higher vehicle trips, thus expanding the use. Traffic is discussed in detail below, but considered in terms of traffic, adding four fueling positions would increase the number of peak hourly vehicle trips by at least 92, thereby expanding the nonconformity of the use, even taking into account the removal of a portion of the non -conforming structure. 2d. Nonconforming Parking The applicant is proposing parking to the front of the building. Parking is discussed below as it pertains to Site Plan Review Standards. 3. Traffic The Project is located in Zone 1 of the Traffic Overlay District, which allows a maximum of 15 peak hour trip ends per 40,000 sq. ft. of land area. The Project consists of 41,500 sq. ft., therefore the allowable traffic generation (the "budget") for both properties together is 15.56 trips. Using the ITE Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition with the land use of Motel and of Gasoline/Service Station, Staff estimates the existing trip generation is 117.24 vehicle trip ends (VTEs). This figure of 117.24 is considered a pre-existing nonconformity. For the Project to go above this number, the applicant must first make physical improvements to provide adequate credits to offset the excess approximately 102 excess trip ends for the property, and then make additional improvements to offset any additional traffic proposed to be created by the Project. Specifically, Section 10.02H(2) states that no credits are given for improvements if the site already exceeds the maximum until the pre-existing nonconformity is overcome: in the event that the existing peak hour trip generation of the uses presently authorized and operating on the site exceeds the maximum allowable traffic budget for the site including credits, the existing peak hour trip generation shall be the maximum allowable for the site, and no additional credits shall be provided for site improvements or any other cause. Section 10.02H(1) states that the DRB may approve peak hour traffic volumes above the allowable maximum if sufficient improvements are made to provide credit for the additional trips. Credits can be in the form of reduction of the number of driveways/access points, connections to adjacent parcels, connection to other roadways, or raised medians preventing left turns. The applicant is proposing to remove the motel and construct a 9,000 sq. ft. convenience store and add four additional fueling positions to the two properties. Removing the motel would reduce the VTEs by 5. By adding a convenience store and four fueling positions, the applicable ITE land use for the service station changes. There are multiple potentially applicable categories under the proposed configuration. When appropriate, Staff will determine the appropriate number of VTEs. As an initial estimate, Staff considers the proposed configuration would generate between 243 and 656 VTEs depending on calculation method. The applicant would therefore need to make improvements to obtain credit for at least 227 VTEs in order to southburlinoon PLANNING & ZONING 5of7 #SD-18-16 Staff Comments be approved. Based on past experience, this number is substantial and significant. Staff considers the number of required credits would be difficult to achieve. Staff recommends that before proceeding, the Board require the applicant to provide a workable proposal to achieve the required number of VTE credits. SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS General site plan review standards pertain to relationship to the Comprehensive Plan, relationship of structures to the site (including parking), compatibility with adjoining buildings and the adjoining area. Specific standards speak to access, utilities, roadways, and site features. 4. Relationship to Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan states that one of the needs related to the City's housing stock is: Preserving and promoting the development of additional housing that is affordable to households of all income levels throughout the City. In the Southwest quadrant, a specific objective is to: Promote higher -density, mixed use development and redevelopment along Shelburne Road and foster effective transitions to adjacent residential areas. Staff considers that the removal of an extended -stay hotel and replacement with a convenience store is inconsistent with the needs and objectives of the comprehensive plan. S. Parking The minimum required parking spaces for the proposed service station with convenience store is 18 based on 2 spaces per 1,000 square feet gross floor area. The applicant is proposing 32 parking spaces, of which ten (10) parking spaces are proposed to be located in front of the proposed building. Parking must be located to the rear or sides of a building, with some exceptions. The Board shall approve only the minimum necessary to overcome the conditions which allow an exception. Champlain Water District owns a 20-foot wide easement along the north side of the parcel at 907 Shelburne Road, which widens to 40-feet for the 40-feet nearest to Shelburne Road (see Existing Conditions Plan). The applicant has indicated that they feel the exception allowing parking between the street and the building should be allowed because of exception (iii), which states: (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; Staff considers that while the utility easement does not allow the building to be located on it, the utility easement does not extend across the entire property and several configurations are conceivable which locate the parking to the rear. One configuration would be to make the building rectangular instead of square, but as the applicant has indicated the building will be uniquely designed for the site this should not be a problem. Two additional configurations would involve a parked ramp and retaining wall, either to the side or to the rear of the building, in lieu of using the building as a retaining wall. Therefore Staff considers that the utility easement does not sufficiently meet the standard allowing for an exception to the requirement that parking be located to the sides and rear. Further, Staff considers that there are sufficient parking spaces located to the sides and rear of the building that even if the utility easement warranted an exception, the Board would not be able to grant the spaces because they are beyond the minimum necessary for the use. southburlinoon PLANNING & ZONING 6of7 #SD-18-16 Staff Comments 6. APPLICABILITY OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The purpose of a PUD is, in part, "to encourage innovation in design and layout, efficient use of land, and the viability of infill development and redevelopment in the City's Core Area, as defined in the Comprehensive Plan." Staff does not consider that the layout presented thus far meets the criteria for classification as a PUD. The layout is not particularly innovative, it rather inefficiently uses the available space by increasing impervious, nor does it represent infill as both parcels are already developed. Staff considers that RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the applicant work with Staff and the Development Review Board to address the issues herein. Respectfully submitted, Marla Keene, Development Review Planner southburlington PLANNING & ZONING 7of 7