HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 05A_SD-19-01_284 Meadowland Dr_SBRC_SCCITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
SD‐19‐01_284 Meadowland Dr_SBRC_SK_2019‐02‐19.docx
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
Report preparation date: February 15, 2019
Plans received: January 15, 2019
285 Meadowland Drive
Sketch Plan Application #SD‐19‐01
Meeting date: February 19, 2019
Owner/Applicant
SBRC Properties, LLC
PO Box 2204
South Burlington, VT 05407‐2204
Engineer
Civil Engineering Associates, Inc.
10 Mansfield View Lane
South Burlington, VT 05403
Property Information
Tax Parcel 1155‐00284
Industrial Open Space Zoning District; Hinesburg Road North View Protection District
5.84 acres
Location Map
#SD‐19‐01
2
PROJECT DESCRPTION
Sketch plan application #SD‐19‐01 of SBRC Properties, LLC to subdivide a 27.8 acre parcel into two lots
of 6.2 acres and 21.2 acres, and to construct a 25,560 sf building on the 6.2 acre lot, 284 Meadowland
Drive.
CONTEXT
The property to be subdivided has been the subject of several subdivisions over the years as
Meadowland Drive has been developed. None of the prior applications required review as a PUD. It
appears this application also does not require review as a PUD. The majority of the property is located
within the Hinesburg Road North View Protection District. There are Class 2 wetlands on the west of the
property, outside the area proposed for development. There is a 200‐foot open space buffer along the
south side of the property.
Fire and Police have not yet reviewed the application.
COMMENTS
Planning Director Paul Conner and Development Review Planner Marla Keene (“Staff”) have reviewed
the plans submitted on 1/15/2019 and offer the following comments.
INDUSTRIAL‐OPEN SPACE DISTRICT (IO)
The subject property is proposed to house Booska Worldwide Movers. The applicant has presented that
this business falls under the category of “Process and Storage”, which is permitted in the Industrial‐
Open Space District. Staff considers that this type of business may in fact be a “Motor Freight Terminal,”
which is not permitted in this District. See the two definitions below:
Motor freight terminal. A building, structure, or area in which trucks, including tractor or trailer
units, are parked, stored, or serviced, including the transfer, loading, or unloading of goods. A
terminal may include facilities for the temporary storage of loads prior to trans‐shipment.
Staff believes this definition of the use applies because the primary use of the property is the keeping of
vehicles and the transfer and loading of goods, with a secondary use being temporary storage of loads prior
to shipment for some clients.
The Applicant requests that the Board consider the use Processing and Storage, defined as follows.
Processing and storage. The storage of materials in a facility where such materials may be
combined, broken down, or aggregated for trans‐shipment or storage purposes where the original
material is not chemically or physically changed. Processing and storage is a single term and
refers essentially to a storage and shipment place as opposed to a manufacturing establishment,
distribution center, or truck terminal. Processing and storage shall not include the storage,
maintenance or repair of trucks on a site as a principal or accessory use.
Staff is not convinced that this is the correct use category because the primary focus of Processing and
Storage is storage, and while temporary storage is available to clients who hire Booska Movers as their
movers, it does not appear to be not the primary focus of their business.
#SD‐19‐01
3
The purpose of the Industrial‐Open Space District is as follows.
To provide suitable locations for high‐quality, large‐lot office, light industrial and research
uses in areas of the City with access to major arterial routes and Burlington International
Airport. The IO District regulations and standards are intended to allow high‐quality planned
developments that preserve the generally open character of the district, minimize impacts on
natural resources and water quality, and enhance the visual quality of approaches to the City
while providing suitable locations for employment and business growth. The location and
architectural design of buildings in a manner that preserves these qualities is strongly
encouraged.
The entire Industrial‐Open Space District is located within the Northeast Quadrant. The comprehensive
plan addresses the issue of warehousing in the Northeast Quadrant as follows.
Warehousing. Recently, there have been significant concerns about the suitability of this
quadrant for warehousing, particularly in areas adjacent to existing residential neighborhoods.
While this area is close to the Airport and the contemplated highway interchange at Route 116
and I‐89, the noise and visual impacts associated with truck traffic are potentially very disruptive
to residential neighborhoods. This issue has been discussed during the SEQ Concept Plan; among
the ideas evaluated was the creation of a warehousing sub‐district adjacent to the Interstate. In
any case, there was strong consensus that the zoning regulations for the IO district regarding
warehousing should be reevaluated.
Staff considers the allowable uses in the IO District, which include Motor Freight Terminal but exclude
Processing and Storage, as addressing the warehousing concerns of the Northeast Quadrant.
Staff considers that should the Board wish to classify the facility as processing and storage despite it’s
primary use as a “home base” for the company’s trucks, the Board should give consideration to the
warehousing concerns of the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose of the IO district and place
restrictions on noise and visual impacts of truck traffic. Staff reminds the Board that they would be
approving a use, and not a specific tenant, and any future change in tenant that fit the same use may
not conduct their operations in the same way.
1. Staff recommends the Board provide direct feedback on the subject of use prior to proceeding with
the remaining criteria to determine if the application is moot because it is for a non‐allowed use.
Staff considers this decision to be precedent setting as there are not yet similar uses within South
Burlington.
#SD‐19‐01
4
DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Industrial and Open Space
District
Required Proposed Lot 1 Proposed Lot
1F
Min. Lot Size 3 ac. 21.6 ac. 6.2 ac.
Max. Building Coverage 30% 0% 9.5%
Max. Overall Coverage 50% 0% 35%
Max. Front Setback Coverage 30% 0% 9%
Min. Front Setback 50 ft. N/A Appx 200 ft.
Min. Side Setback 35 ft. N/A Appx 75 ft.
Min. Rear Setback 50 ft. N/A Appx 350 ft.
Height (flat roof) 35 ft. N/A 25 ft.
2. The proposed site layout for Lot 1F has the building and parking area set back approximately 200 ft.
from the front lot line. While this is technically allowed, Staff considers that this results in excess
pavement that may be unnecessary and recommends the Board discuss with the applicant whether
they can move the development nearer to Meadowland Drive. This would increase the distance
from the adjoining residential district.
SUBDIVISION STANDARDS
Subdivision standards pertain to water and wastewater capacity, natural resource protection, traffic,
visual compatibility with the surrounding area, open space, fire protection, relationship to the
Comprehensive Plan, and public infrastructure.
The existing property is encumbered by a 26‐foot wide future roadway easement. Staff considers that the
purpose of the easement is to create a consolidated access to Meadowland Drive for several future
development parcels to be carved out of the subject property. The proposed lot and site configuration fails
to connect to the existing easement and fails to provide a substitute consolidated future access. Further,
the proposed configuration would create a parallel driveway approximately 50‐feet from the future shared
access connection to Meadowland Drive. Section 13.01C(4) states that driveway shall be located more than
two hundred (200) feet from signalized street intersections except upon recommendation by the Director of
Public Works. Section 13.01F states that all commercial lots located adjacent to other commercial lots must
provide a driveway connection to any adjacent commercial lot. If an actual connection is not available, the
applicant must at minimum provide an easement to the adjacent lot. The driveway connection or
easement should be located where the vehicular and pedestrian circulation is most feasible.
3. Staff recommends the Board discuss with the applicant how they can adjust the proposed property
layout to meet the above summarized roadway connection standards.
A 2014 subdivision approval for this property discussed traffic impacts at Hinesburg Road, and concluded
that the proposed project at that time would not adversely impact the traffic of adjacent intersections. That
application provided a traffic impact analysis. Based on a quick review of ITE Trip Generation using the
General Light Industrial category, Staff considers the project would generate approximately 15 trips per PM
peak hour.
4. Staff recommends the Board discuss, if the project moves forward, whether they will need a traffic
impact analysis in order to evaluate traffic impacts.
#SD‐19‐01
5
The Director of Public Works reviewed the application on February 11, 2019 and expressed a preference for
seeing the driveway align with the driveway from Logic Supply across the street for safety considerations.
5. Staff recommends the Board discuss the recommendation of the Public Works Director.
The Stormwater Section reviewed the plans on February 8, 2019 and offers the following comments.
The Stormwater Section (City) has reviewed the “Subdivision of Lot 1 – Meadowland Business Park”
sketch plan prepared by Civil Engineering Associates (CEA), dated Jan., 2019 and last updated on
1/15/19. We would like to provide the following comments:
1. The proposed project is located in the Potash Brook watershed.
2. The project proposes to create greater than 1 acre of impervious area and disturb greater than
1 acre of land.
3. As the project proposes to create more than one‐half acre or more of impervious surface, the
project is subject to the requirements of section 12.03 of the LDRs.
4. The cover letter provided with the application indicates that the dry stormwater basin located
on Lot 1 will be retrofit to a wet pond. The applicant is required to consider Tier 1 and Tier 2
stormwater treatment practices, in accordance with the Vermont Stormwater Management
Manual, prior to selecting a Tier 3 practice, such as a wet pond. Additionally, modifications to
Pond 2 may be required if this system is being proposed for use as stormwater treatment.
5. The applicant will be required to complete a downstream analysis for the 25‐year storm event
in accordance with §12.03.E.(3) of the City’s Land Development Regulations.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Regards,
Dave
6. If the project goes forward, Staff recommends the Board direct the applicant to address the
comments of the stormwater section at the next stage of review.
SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS
General site plan review standards relate 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.
Staff notes that the proposed building has an unusual parking configuration at the southwest corner of the
building. It appears this configuration was designed to accommodate movements of larger trucks.
7. Staff recommends the Board discuss whether all the proposed pavement is needed, and request a
truck movement plan if necessary. Staff considers that a reduction in pavement could have open
#SD‐19‐01
6
space, natural resource and stormwater benefits, especially if it allowed the developed portion of the
property to be more consolidated.
The minimum number of parking spaces for a motor freight terminal is one per employee, in addition to
the spaces needed as part of the operational function of the facility. The applicant is proposing 35
standard parking spaces.
8. Staff considers the configuration at the southwest corner of the building may result in conflicts
between parked cars and trucks recommends the Board discuss reconfiguring the spaces on the east
side of the building to make room for the standard parking spaces on that side instead. Staff notes
the applicant will need to demonstrate compliance with internal parking lot landscaping and shade
tree standards should the project proceed.
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.
(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.
No details of the proposed building or grading are provided to allow evaluation of visual compatibility. The
property contains a 200‐foot open space buffer at the south Staff has reviewed staff notes, minutes and
decisions from the late 1980s and early 1990s and understands this open space buffer served multiple
purposes. At that time, the Applicant was allowed to relocate an existing stream from the center of the
property to the southern boundary. The buffer includes a 20‐foot drainage easement, presumably to
protect the relocated stream, and a 20‐foot pedestrian easement. There is also a walking path within the
buffer. The applicant was previously required to construct a vegetated earthen berm to provide a buffer
from the neighboring residential development to the south.
9. Staff recommends the Board discuss the grading of the site and how the elements will relate to the
berm which was previously required to provide a visual buffer between Meadowland Drive and the
residential neighborhood to the South. If the Project goes forward, Staff recommends the Board
discuss what additional information beyond grading they would like to see at the next stage of
review to evaluate visual compatibility.
SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS FOR INDUSTRIAL AND AIRPORT DISTRICTS
C(3) Parking areas shall be designed for efficient internal circulation and the minimum number
of curb cuts onto the public roadway.
C(4) Access improvements and curb cut consolidation may be required.
There is an existing roadway easement located within the portion of Lot 1 proposed to remain
undeveloped.
10. Also related to the Site Plan standard addressing access, Staff recommends the board discuss
whether to require the applicant to provide an access easement on proposed Lot 1F to allow
connection to the future right of way.
#SD‐19‐01
7
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board discuss the Project with the applicant and close the meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Marla Keene, Development Review Planner