HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-15-30 - Decision - 0057 Hinesburg Road#SD-15-30
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
LEON BROWN — 57 HINESBURG ROAD
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION #SD-15-30
FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION
Leon Brown, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is requesting preliminary plat review for a planned
unit development on a 0.37 acre lot developed with a single family dwelling. The project consists of: 1)
razing the existing single family dwelling, and 2) constructing a four (4) unit multi -family dwelling, 57
Hinesburg Road.
The Development Review Board held a public hearing on Tuesday, October 6, 2015. Doug Henson
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
preliminarily finds, concludes, and decides the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. This application consists of a request for a planned unit development on a 0.37 acre lot
developed with a single family dwelling. The project consists of: 1) razing the existing single
family dwelling, and 2) constructing a four (4) unit multi -family dwelling, 57 Hinesburg Road.
2. The owner of record of the subject property is Brown Estates, LLC.
3. The application was submitted on July 23, 2015.
4. The subject property is located in the C1— R12 Zoning District.
5. The plans submitted consist of five (5) pages, page one (1) entitled "Lands of Brown Estates, LLC
Brown Estates 57 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Planned 4-Unit Development Site
& Utilities Plan" prepared by Lamoreux & Dickinson Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated 6-23-15
and last revised on 9-22-15.
Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements:
C1— R12 — Zoning District ''
Required
Existing
Proposed
Min. Lot Size (residential)
3,500 sq. ft./unit
16,025 sq. ft.
—4,006 s.f./unit
Max. Building Coverage
40%
8%
35%
Max. Overall Coverage
70%
22%
67%
*Min. Front Setback
(Hinesburg Road)
50 ft. + 7 ft. for
planned ROW
unknown
7 ft. from existing
& 0 ft. from
planned ROW
*Min. Side Setback
10 ft.
unknown
8 ft.
- 1 —
#SD-15-30
*Min. Rear Setback 11 30 ft. 11 unknown 23 ft.
� Max. Building Height 1 40ft. (pitched roof) 11 unknown 30 ft.
Zoning compliance
* Waiver required. The Planning & Zoning Department encouraged the applicant to consider and
advance the intent of the draft Form Based Code which this proposal approaches with regards to
setbacks and design.
The Department also encouraged the applicant to design the proposal consistent with Section 14.06 C.
(2) which reads:
(2) 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.
See discussion on page 4 (Section 14.06 (C) (2))
The Board notes that the front setback waiver request results in the building being four (4) feet from the
planned right-of-way (ROW). During the open session, the Board only discussed the setback from the
existing ROW and not the planned ROW. Given that discussion on the setback waiver from the planned
ROW needs to take place and that this waiver request results in the building being this close to the
planned ROW, the Board hereby defers to the final decision on the grant of a setback waivers. The
setback waivers requested are as follows:
-a 39 ft. waiver from the 50 ft. front setback requirement or four (4) ft. from the planned ROW.
-a two (2) ft. waiver from the side setback requirement of 10 ft. so as to allow the proposed building to
be setback 8 ft. from the side property line; and
-a seven (7) ft. waiver from the rear setback requirement of 30 ft. so as to allow the proposed building
to be setback 23 ft. from the rear property line.
5.08 Supplemental Standards for All Commercial Districts
A. Development according to commercial district regulations and multifamily development at the
residential density specified for the applicable district shall be subject to site plan review, as set
forth in Article 14, the purpose of which shall be to encourage innovation of design and layout,
encourage more efficient use of land for commercial development, promote mixed -use
development and shared parking opportunities, provide coordinated access to and from
commercial developments via public roadways, and maintain service levels on public roadways
with a minimum of publicly financed roadway improvements.
While not a mixed use development the proposed project uses most all of the lot and provides needed
housing within the City's core. Based upon the information submitted with this application and
information discussed and presented at the October 6, 2015 hearing, the Board preliminarily finds the
development to be consistent with this standard.
B. Multiple structures, multiple uses within structures, and multiple uses on a subject site may be
allowed, if the Development Review Board determines that the subject site has sufficient frontage, lot
size, and lot depth. Area requirements and frontage needs may be met by the consolidation of
contiguous lots under separate ownership. Construction of a new public street may serve as the
-2—
#SD-15-30
minimum frontage needs. Where multiple structures are proposed, maximum lot coverage shall be the
normal maximum for the applicable district.
Only one structure and one type of use (multi -family residential) is proposed. Based upon the
information submitted with this application and information discussed and presented at the October 6,
2015 hearing, the Board preliminarily finds that this criterion is not applicable.
C. Parking, Access, and Internal Circulation
(1) Parking requirements may be modified, depending in the extent of shared parking, the
presence of sidewalks or recreation paths, and residences lying within walking distance (defined
as no further than one -quarter ('4) mile for purposes of commercial zoning districts). Any
requirements for shared access and/or parking must be secured by permanent legal agreements
acceptable to the City Attorney.
(2) Parking areas shall be designed for efficient internal circulation and the minimum number
of curb cuts onto the public roadway.
(3) Access improvements and curb cut consolidation may be required.
The applicant is proposing to abandon its existing curb cut near the southeast corner of the property
and create a new one at the northeast corner. In response to the Board's request at the September 15tn
meeting, the applicant has added an entry sidewalk from Hinesburg Road to the entry porch of the
easternmost unit.
Based upon the information submitted with this application and information discussed and presented at
the October 6, 2015 hearing, the Board preliminarily finds criterion C above to be met.
Commercial properties that abut residential districts shall provide a screen or buffer along the
abutting line in accordance with Section 3.06(I) of these Regulations.
This criterion is not applicable.
SITE PLAN REVIEW
14.06 General Review Standards
The following general criteria and standards shall be used by the Development Review Board in
reviewing applications for site plan approval. They are intended to provide a framework within which
the designer of the site development is free to exercise creativity, invention, and innovation while
improving the visual appearance of the City of South Burlington. The Development Review Board shall
not specify or favor any particular architectural style or design or assist in the design of any of the
buildings submitted for approval. The Development Review Board shall restrict itself to a reasonable,
Professional review, and, except as otherwise provided in the following subsections, the applicant
shall retain full responsibility for design.
A. Relationship of Proposed Development to the City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan.
Based upon the information submitted with this application and information discussed and presented at
the October 6, 2015 hearing, the Board preliminarily finds the applicant's proposal to be generally
consistent with the goals, objectives and stated land use policies in the Comprehensive Plan.
-3—
#SD-15-30
B. Relationship of Proposed Structures to the Site.
(1) 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.
(2) Parking:
(a) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings. Any side of a building facing a
public street shall be considered a front side of a building for the purposes of this subsection.
No parking is proposed to the front of the building. The Board finds this criterion is met.
(3) 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 anticipated adjoining
buildings.
Based upon the elevations submitted and the nature of existing development in the area, while the
proposed units would be taller than those on adjoining residential parcels, the Board preliminarily
finds the proposed 30 ft. height and four -unit building to be compatible with this criterion.
Based upon the information submitted with this application and information discussed and
presented at the October 6, 2015 hearing, the Board preliminarily finds this criterion to be met.
(4) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior
alterations or building expansion shall, to the extent feasible, be underground.
The plans indicate that such services are located underground. The Board finds this criterion to be
met.
C. Relationship of Structures and Site to Adjoining Area.
(1) The Development Review Board shall encourage the use of a combination of common
materials and architectural characteristics (e.g., rhythm, color, texture, form or detailing),
landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between
buildings of different architectural styles.
Only one building is proposed. This criterion is not applicable.
(2) 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 proposed structure appears, at this stage, to be consistent with existing buildings in the
neighborhood. The front setback of the easternmost unit of the proposed building is slightly more
than the building to the north and slightly less than the building to the south. The layout of unit #4
(which will have a wrap around porch and an entrance walkway to the sidewalk along Hinesburg
Road) will serve to tie in the building with Hinesburg Road.
The side setback of the proposed building to its southerly side line is approximately the same
distance as the building to the south of this development is to its northerly side line but further from
its side line than the building to the north is to its southerly side line, thereby maintaining a similar
setback to the side as other buildings in the vicinity.
Based upon the information submitted with this application and information discussed and
presented at the October 6, 2015 hearing, the Board preliminarily finds this criterion to be met.
BEIM
#SD-15-30
14.07 Specific Review Standards
A. Access to Abutting Properties. The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision
of access to abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto
an arterial or collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to
improve general access and circulation in the area.
As the proposal is for a single driveway serving four (4) units, the Board, at this time, finds that the
reservation of land is not required.
B. Utility Services. Electric, telephone and other wire -served utility lines and service connections
shall be underground insofar as feasible and subject to state public utilities regulations. Any utility
installations remaining above ground shall be located so as to have a harmonious relation to
neighboring properties and to the site.
The applicant submitted a revised plan dated September 28, 2015 indicating that wire -served utility
lines would be underground. The Board finds this criterion to be met.
C. Disposal of Wastes. 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). Small receptacles
intended for use by households or the public (i.e., non-dumpster, non -large drum) shall not be required
to be fenced or screened.
The applicant's letter indicates that residents of the four (4) units will keep their trash, recycling and
compost containers in their garages and then put them out for pickup on collection days. The Board
finds this criterion to be met.
D. Landscaping and Screening Requirements. See Article 13, Section 13.06 Landscaping,
Screening, and Street Trees.
The applicant submitted a Landscaping plan and schedule. The minimum landscaping requirement,
based on building costs, is $12,515 which is being met.
In an email dated September 21, 2015, the City Arborist provided the following comments:
Roy, the landscape plan for Brown Estate, 57 Hinesburgh Rd look good.
Craig Lambert
South Burlington City Arborist
Based upon the information submitted with this application and information discussed and presented at
the October 6, 2015 hearing, the Board finds this criterion to be met.
E. Modification of Standards. Where the limitations of a site may cause unusual hardship in
complying with any of the standards above and waiver therefrom will not endanger the public health,
-5—
#SD-15-30
safety or welfare, the Development Review Board may modify such standards as long as the general
objectives of Article 14 and the City's Comprehensive Plan are met. However, with the exception of
side yard setbacks in the Central District 1, in no case shall the DRB permit the location of a new
structure less than five (5) feet from any property boundary and in no case shall be the DRB allow land
development creating a total site coverage exceeding the allowable limit for the applicable zoning
district in the case of new development, or increasing the coverage on sites where the pre-existing
condition exceeds the applicable limit.
As noted above, based upon the information submitted with this application and information discussed
and presented at the October 6, 2015 hearing, the Board preliminarily granted waivers to the front, side
and rear setbacks.
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:
(A)(1)Suf ficient 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.
According to Section 15.13 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, the subdivider or
developer shall connect to the public sewer system or provide a community wastewater system approved by
the City and the State in any subdivision where off -lot wastewater is proposed.
The Board finds that the applicant shall obtain preliminary water/ wastewater allocation approvals prior to
submittal of a final plat.
(A)(2)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 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 applicant's plan details the use of silt fencing. The Board finds this criterion to be met.
(A)(3)The project incorporates access, circulation, and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent
unreasonable congestion of adjacent roads.
The applicant is proposing to abandon its existing curb cut near the southeast corner of the property
and create a new one at the northeast corner. In response to the Board's request at the September 15tn
meeting, the applicant added an entry sidewalk from Hinesburg Road to the entry porch of the
easternmost unit.
S.
#SD-15-30
Based upon the information submitted with this application and information discussed and presented at
the October 6, 2015 hearing, the Board finds this Criterion to be met.
(A)(4)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.
The Board finds that the parcel contains neither resources identified in the Open Space strategy nor any
unique natural features.
(A)(5)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.
The proposed project will increase the overall density on the parcel from one residential unit to four
residential units. The scale and design of the building appears, at this stage, to be visually compatible with
the planned development pattern in the area and the purposes of the C-1 R-12 zoning district. Based upon
the information submitted with this application and information discussed and presented at the October
6, 2015 hearing, the Board preliminarily finds this criterion to be met.
(A)(6)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 property contains no large open space areas. Given the scale and location of the proposed project, the
Board preliminarily finds that no additional open spaces are required.
(A)(7)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.
In a letter to staff dated September 30, 2015 the Fire Department commented as follows:
We have reviewed the plans for the proposed construction of a 4 unit multi family dwelling at 57
Hinesburg Road. We have the following recommendations:
Compliance with all requirements of the Vermont Fire Building and Safety Code for any
applicable structures.
2. Trees, fences and floral outcroppings should be placed so as not to interfere with the
deployment of the aerial ladder, hoselines, portable ladders and other firefighting
equipment.
3. The dead-end driveway is an issue for us, but in addressing this the builders representative at the
staff review meeting indicated that the units would have residential sprinklers installed.
At this point these seem to be the major issues which present themselves. As this project moves forward
additional items may surface which could be dealt with as needed with the assistance of the developer
and the South Burlington Fire Marshal.
-7—
#SD-15-30
Should you need any further assistance on this project please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Douglas S. Brent
Douglas S. Brent
Fire Chief
The Board finds that the applicant shall comply with the Fire Chief's recommendations.
(A)(8)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.
(A)(9)Roads, utilities, sidewalks, recreation paths, and lighting are designed in a manner that is consistent
with City utility and roadway plans and maintenance standards.
See note above regarding sidewalk.
The Board finds that the final plat submittal should include details and locations of all exterior lighting
fixtures.
Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines
shall be underground. The plans submitted indicate that new utility lines will be underground.
(A)(10)The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected
district(s).
Based upon the information submitted with this application and information discussed and presented at
the October 6, 2015 hearing, the Board preliminarily finds the project, as currently proposed, to be
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
10.02 Traffic Overlay District
The property is located in Traffic Overlay Zone 3.
Based on a parcel size of 16,025 square feet, which is 40.10% of 40,000 SF, the maximum number of PM
peak hour vehicle trip ends allowed is 18.05.
According to the Institute of Traffic Engineers TRIP GENERATION manual (9"' edition), and based upon
the information submitted with this application and information discussed and presented at the October
6, 2015 hearing, the Board finds that the four (4) residential units would generate an estimated 3.12 PM
Peak Hour Trip Ends and therefore the project is consistent with the requirements of the Traffic Overlay
District.
MISCELLANEOUS
IN a
#SD-15-30
No snow storage areas are shown on the plan. The applicant's engineer has communicated to the Board
that the applicant will truck plowed snow off site.
In response to the Board's request at the September 15th meeting, the revised plans submitted
September 28, 2015 indicate the installation of two (2) ft. wide islands between the parking areas in
front of the garages. The applicant has recently indicated verbally to the Board that they would prefer to
use red pavers or another material flush to the ground to facilitate snow plowing in place of a
landscaped island.
The Board finds that the applicant should revise its plans to provide detail on how the two (2) ft. wide
areas between the parking areas in front of the garage will be delineated and constructed.
At the October 6, 2015 meeting the Board also expressed its desire to see windows installed along the
back of the garages so as to lower the amount of blank wall space and therefore directs the applicant to
revise its plans accordingly prior to submission for final plat.
STORMWATER
In an email to staff dated September 18, 2015 the Department of Public Works commented as follows:
The Stormwater Section has reviewed the "Planned 4-Unit Development Site & Utilities Plan" site plan
prepared by Lamoureux & Dickinson Consulting Engineer, Inc., dated 6123115. We would like to offer the
following comments:
1. The proposed project is located in the Potash Brook watershed.
2. The plans should indicate the total proposed impervious surface.
3. Provide a map showing the drainage area flowing to the proposed infiltration area.
4. if any hydraulic modeling has been developed for the infiltration practice, please provide it for
record.
5. Work in the City Right Of Way (ROW) requires a permit before construction can begin. A
"Permit to Open Streets or Right -Of -Way" can be obtained from the South Burlington
Department of Public Works on their web site, or by stopping by their office located at 104
Landfill Road.
6. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all
storm water treatment practice.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Dave Wheeler
Assistant Stormwater Superintendent
#SD-15-30
The Board finds that the applicant shall comply with recommendations #2, #3 & #4 of the Assistant
Stormwater Superintendent as part of the final plat submittal.
nFricinti
Motion by Matt Cota, seconded by John Wilking, to approve preliminary plat application #SD-15-30 of
Leon Brown, subject to the following conditions:
1. All previous approvals and stipulations, which are not superseded by this approval, shall remain
in effect.
2. This project must be completed as shown on the plans submitted by the applicant and on file in
the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning.
3. The plans must be revised to show the changes below prior to the submittal of the final plat
plans:
a. The plans must provide details on how the two (2) ft. wide areas between the parking
areas in front of the garage will be delineated and constructed.
b. The building elevation plans must be revised to add windows on the back of each
garage.
c. The plans must be revised to comply with recommendations #2, #3 & #4 of the Assistant
Stormwater Superintendent.
d. The plans must be revised to include details and locations of all exterior lighting fixtures.
e. The plans must be revised to comply with the Fire Chief's recommendations.
4. The applicant must obtain preliminary water and wastewater allocation approval prior to the
submission of a final plat application.
5. The final plat submittal must include a Letter of Intent (LOI) from the State Department of
Transportation.
6. The applicant must submit the final plat application within 12 months of this decision.
Tim Barritt
Yea
Nay
Abstain
Mark Behr
Yea
Nay
Abstain
Matt Cota
Yea
Nay
Abstain
Bill Miller
Yea
Nay
Abstain
David Parsons
Yea
Nay
Abstain
Jennifer Smith
Yea
Nay
Abstain
John Wilking
Yea
Nay
Abstain
Motion carried by a vote of 5— 0 — 0.
Signed this � day of / V0Ve Ac-2015, by
Not Present
IUn+ Pracant
Not Present
Not Present
Not Present
Not Present
Not Present
-10—
Q
#SD-15-30
-fim Barritt, Chair
Please note: You have the right to appeal this decision to the Vermont Environmental Court, pursuant
to 24 VSA 4471 and VRCP 76 in writing, within 30 days of the date this decision is issued. The fee is
$225.00. If you fail to appeal this decision, your right to challenge this decision at some future time may
be lost because you waited too long. You will be bound by the decision, pursuant to 24 VSA 4472 (d)
(exclusivity of remedy; finality).
- 11 —