Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 10A_SP-19-28_635 Community Dr_SunCap_2019-08-20_SCCITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SP-19-28_635 Community Dr_SunCap_2019-08-20.docx DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: August 9, 2019 Plans received: June 20, 2019 635 Community Drive Preliminary and Final Plat Application #SP-19-28 Meeting date: August 20, 2019 Owner 55 Community Drive LLC 30 Community Drive South Burlington, VT 05403 Applicant SunCap Property Group 6101 Carnegie Boulevard, Suite 180 Charlotte, NC 28209 Property Information Tax Parcel 0438-00055 Mixed Industrial Commercial (IC) District 43.8 acres Engineer Cross Consulting Engineers, P.C 103 Fairfax Road St. Albans, VT 05478 Location Map #SP-19-28 2 PROJECT DESCRPTION Site Plan application #SP-19-28 of SunCap Property Group to construct a 144,000 sf, 35 ft high warehouse building, paved equipment storage and parking areas, and associated site improvements on a proposed 43.8 acre lot, and widen and signalize the east intersection of Community Drive and Kimball Avenue, 635 Community Drive. CONTEXT The applicant has concurrently applied for preliminary and final plat approval for a subdivision to create the lot on which this building is proposed under #SD-19-22. The Project is located in the Mixed Industrial Commercial Zoning District. It is also located in the Transit Overlay District, a portion of the property is located in the Flood Plain Overlay District Zone A, and a portion is located in the Interstate Highway Overlay District and the Airport Approach Cones. There are areas of class II and class III wetlands and wetland buffers located within the project area. COMMENTS Planning Director Paul Conner and Development Review Planner Marla Keene (“Staff”) have reviewed the plans submitted on 7/20/2019 and offer the following comments. Comments for the Board’s attention are indicated in red. ZONING DISTRICT & DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Mixed Industrial Commercial Zoning District Required Proposed Lot 9 Min. Lot Size 40,000 sf 43.8 ac Max. Building Coverage 40% 8% Max. Overall Coverage 70% 30% Min. Front Setback 30 ft. 283 ft. Max Front Setback Coverage 30% 17% Min. Side Setback 10 ft. 230 ft. Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. N/A* X Building Height (flat roof) 35 ft. 35.30 ft. plus 5.3 ft for roof equipment * The property does not have a rear yard as it abuts the interstate. The IHO district requires a building setback of 150 ft. 1. Applicant has verbally represented that roof equipment will consist of air handling equipment. Staff considers air handling equipment qualifies as a minor rooftop apparatus under the definition of “height”, which is excluded from the calculation of height. Staff recommends the Board confirm the applicant’s characterization of the roof equipment. 2. The applicant has calculated the average preconstruction grade at elevation 339.6 and the maximum roof elevation to be 374.90, resulting in a height of 35.3 feet. 3.07D(2) allows the DRB #SP-19-28 3 to approve heights above 35 feet within this zoning district by increasing front and rear setbacks one foot and by increasing side setbacks one half foot for each additional foot of height requested. The building is set back more than the required minimum on all sides, therefore Staff considers the Board may grant approval for the requested height but that the Board must do so explicitly. Mixed Industrial-Commercial District (IC) The purpose of the Mixed Industrial-Commercial District is as follows. The Mixed Industrial-Commercial District is formed to encourage general industrial and commercial activity in areas of the City served by major arterial roadways and with ready access to Burlington International Airport. The Mixed Industrial- Commercial district encourages development of a wide range of commercial, industrial and office uses that will generate employment and trade in keeping with the City’s economic development policies. These uses are encouraged in locations that are compatible with industrial activity and its associated land use impacts. Major commercial uses, such as supermarkets and shopping centers shall not be permitted. Any uses not expressly permitted are prohibited, except those that are allowed as conditional uses. The subject property is proposed to house FedEx Ground, which Staff considers consistent with the purpose of the district. Supplemental Standards for Industrial and Airport Districts A. Site plan or PUD review required. The applicant has requested site plan review. B. Multiple Structures and uses permitted. Only one structure containing one use is proposed. C. Parking, Access and Internal Circulation The applicant has proposed 296 standard parking spaces and 204 large spaces for commercial vehicle parking. (1) N/A (2) Parking shall be placed to the side or rear of the structures if possible. The applicant is proposing to locate 25% of parking to the front. This criterion is discussed further under 14.06 Site Plan General Standards below. (3) Parking areas shall be designed for efficient internal circulation and the minimum number of curb cuts onto the public roadway. One curb cut is proposed. Staff considers that the pavement appears to be appropriately scaled for the loading dock and commercial vehicle storage areas. (4) Access improvements and curb cut consolidation may be required. #SP-19-28 4 The applicant has proposed a 50-ft wide location for future connection to the adjacent undeveloped lot to the west. This connection is discussed in greater detail in the staff comments for #SD-19-28. 3. Staff notes that the proposed connection between Lot 9 and Lot 11 is shown on the survey plat but does not appear to be indicated on civil plan as a future connection. Staff recommends the Board discuss this with the applicant. Floodplain Overlay District No land development is proposed in the Floodplain Overlay District. Interstate Highway Overland District No building is proposed within the IHO district. An existing private recreation path, open to the public, is located in the IHO district. The applicant is proposing to modify the grading, add landscaping, and relocate the path. Staff considers these activities to be permitted within the district. SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS 14.06 General Review Standards A. Relationship of Proposed Development to the City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. Due attention by the applicant should be given to the goals and objectives and the stated land use policies for the City of South Burlington as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. The entire IC 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 that the location of this site relative to residential development adequately meeting this concern. Compliance with the objectives of the comprehensive plan is discussed in the staff comments for #SD-19-22. 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. The applicant has provided architectural renderings in support of their application. The building is proposed to be clad in brick with building breaks in the form of floor to ceiling pre-finished metal panels. The south elevation consists largely of loading docks which are proposed to be screened by #SP-19-28 5 a row of arborvitae, installed at 6-7 feet in height 6-feet on center. Pedestrian access is provided from Community Drive and the existing recreation path is proposed to loop around the building, relocated as necessary to allow for berming and stormwater treatment. The applicant is proposing 296 parking spaces, while the LDRs only require 72. Staff considers this criterion met. (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. (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) – (vi) N/A (vii) The lot is located within the Mixed Industrial-Commercial or Industrial & Open Space Zoning Districts, and it is clear that the circulation and layout of the lot cannot reasonably be designed in a manner to avoid conflicts between visitors / employees and the inherent operations of the use(s) on the lot; i. In order to further reduce the likelihood of such conflicts, this exception to the general requirements for parking is only available when the uses of the lot(s) are limited to: 1. Distribution and related storage 2. Light manufacturing 3. Manufacturing 4. Processing and Storage 5. Warehousing and Distribution The use is proposed to be warehousing and distribution. Staff considers this criterion met. ii. The parking shall be limited as follows: 1. No more than 25% of the total parking on the lot shall be located between a public street and the building(s); There are 296 parking spaces proposed. Of these, 74 spaces, or 25%, are proposed to be located between the public street and the building. Staff considers the proposal to be within the bounds of this criterion. 2. Parking shall be predominantly screened from the roadway with landscaping features, and separated from the roadway’s sidewalks or multi-use paths by one or more of the following Qualifying Open Spaces (as defined in Appendix F, except for the location standards which are superseded by this subsection): Pocket/Mini Park; Wooded area; Community Garden; Enhanced Rain Garden; or Streetfront Open Space. The size of this Open Space shall be sufficient to (1) create or extend a pleasant pedestrian experience on the adjacent public sidewalk or recreation path, #SP-19-28 6 (2) largely screen parking from the street right-of-way, and (3) provide for additional usable open space on the parcel. The open space shall represent a minimum of 35% of the total square footage of the parking spaces (not including circulation infrastructure) proposed to be located in front of the building. The applicant is proposing to locate a Streetfront Open Space between the parking area and the roadway. The applicant reports the total area of the parking spaces is 12,654 sf, and the area of the open space to be 62,324 sq. ft. Streetfront open space must exhibit the following landscaping design: Slight, gentle and undulating berms from 1-3 feet in height are encouraged to block views of parking areas. Ever-green landscaping is required. Include canopy trees whose branches are above the average visual line of sight, located throughout the space, with no more than 40 feet between any two such trees or between a tree and the street or parking area. Landscaping should aim to detract from parking beyond, but should not create dense walls of shrubbery or trees. Artwork is also highly encouraged. Staff considers this criterion met. The applicant is proposing a gravel walkway around the stormwater pond, a significant number of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs, and several durable metal benches for sitting. 3. The minimum required landscaping budget established by the Development Review Board pursuant to Section 13.06 shall increase by a percentage that is equivalent to the percentage of the total parking that is proposed to be located between a public street and the building(s) on a lot. Of this total increased landscaping budget, the percentage that must be dedicated to installation of landscaping in the front yard shall be equivalent to the percentage of the total parking that is proposed to be located between a public street and the building(s) (e.g., if the minimum required landscaping budget before any increase was $100,000, and if 10% of the total parking for the lot is proposed to be located between a public street and the building(s), then the minimum required landscaping budget shall increase by 10%, for a new total landscaping budget of $110,000, and no less than 10% of the new total landscaping budget, or $11,000, must be dedicated to installation of landscaping in the front yard). The minimum required landscape budget is $142,209. For 25% of parking in the front, the minimum landscape budget is increased to $177,761 and $35,552 must be dedicated to installation of landscaping in the front yard. The applicant has stated the value of landscaping in the front yard is $100,800. Staff considers this criterion met. 4. The applicant shall construct a safe, paved pedestrian access from the street to the building’s main entrance. The walkway through the open space is proposed to be gravel but the access from the street to the main entrance is proposed to be concrete. Staff considers this criterion met. #SP-19-28 7 5. The parking layout and circulation shall not interfere with safe pedestrian access from the street to the building’s main entrance. Staff considers this criterion met. Pedestrians utilizing this sidewalk do not need to cross the area proposed for access by large trucks, and only a small area proposed for access to employee parking. (c) N/A (d) For through lots, parking shall be located to the side of the building(s) or to the front of the building adjacent to the public street with the lowest average daily volume of traffic. Where a lot abuts an Interstate or its interchanges, parking shall be located to the side of the building(s) or to the front adjacent to the Interstate. Parking areas adjacent to the Interstate shall be screened with sufficient landscaping to screen the parking from view of the Interstate. As discussed above, parking is located to the side, front, and Interstate side. 4. See note #5 below concerning screening parking areas from view of the Interstate. (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. As discussed above, the building is higher than the maximum allowable in the zoning district, which the DRB may allow if additional setbacks are provided. The building, if approved, will be the third largest in South Burlington. However, Staff considers this an appropriate location for the building. 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. The proposed architecture for this building is consistent with the existing buildings on Community Drive. The applicant is proposing a mixture of deciduous and coniferous trees. Staff considers this criterion met. (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. 5. The applicant has provided earthwork sections showing how the building, commercial vehicle storage areas and parking areas will appear relative to one another. They have also provided a height diagram (Sheet H-2) which shows the view from the interstate. The applicant is proposing to construct a berm, but Staff considers the berm will do little to block views of the commercial vehicle storage area from the northbound lanes of the interstate. The berm is proposed to have a height an average of 8 feet above the average preconstruction grade. Staff recommends the #SP-19-28 8 Board consider Sheet H-2 and discuss whether additional screening of the commercial vehicle parking area is warranted. 14.07 Specific Review Standards In all Zoning Districts and the City Center Form Based Codes District, the following standards shall apply: 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. 6. As discussed in the staff notes for #SD-19-22, the applicant has provided a 50-foot easement for future connection to the adjacent property. Staff considers the proposed easement agreement does not meet the requirements of 13.01F, however, and recommends the Board require the applicant to address this issue prior to closing the hearing. 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. Standards of Section 15.13, Utility Services, shall also be met. Utility connections are proposed to be underground. A discussion of utility screening is provided under Site Plan Review Standard D below. C. Disposal of Wastes. All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling, composting, 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 (ie, non-dumpster, non-large drum) shall not be required to be fenced or screened. 7. The applicant has not provided a detail for dumpster screening nor shown proposed screening in the location of the dumpster on the plans. Staff considers the applicant must indicate how the proposed dumpster is to be screened prior to the Board closing the hearing. D. Landscaping and Screening Requirements. See Article 13, Section 13.06 Landscaping, Screening, and Street Trees. The minimum required landscape value for the Project, based on an estimated building construction cost of $13,470,900 is $142,209, plus an additional 25% for parking in the front, for a total of $177,761. The applicant is proposing $181,650 worth of landscaping on site in the form of trees and shrubs. 8. Other comments affecting landscaping layout will require the applicant to update their schedule of landscape values. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to update their landscape values prior to closing the hearing. The City Arborist reviewed the landscaping plan on August 1, 2019 and offered the following comment. #SP-19-28 9 The landscaping looks pretty good. The only spec I’d like to see added is that the parking lot islands contain uncompacted planting soil to a depth of 2.5 ft. to provide soil volume to support tree growth. It would be acceptable to utilize existing topsoil stripped from the site. 9. The applicant modified their plan to address this standard, but has only provided 2.0 ft of uncompacted planting soil, underlain by 0.5 ft of compacted planting soils. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to modify their detail to provide 2.5 feet of uncompacted planting soil to comply with the arborist’s comment. Several additional landscaping standards apply to this property, as follows. 13.06B Landscaping of Parking Areas All off-street parking areas subject to review by the Development Review Board shall be curbed and landscaped with appropriate trees, shrubs and other plans including ground covers as approved by the Development Review Board. (1) All off-street parking areas shall be landscaped around the perimeter of the lot with trees, shrubs and other plants. Perimeter planting shall be set back from the curb sufficiently to allow for snow storage. The purpose of perimeter planting shall be to mitigate the view of the parking lot from the public way and from adjacent uses and properties, and to provide shade and canopy for the parking lot. In some situations it may be necessary both for surveillance purposes and for the perception of safety to install the size and type of plants that leave visual access between the parking lot to the public way or other pedestrian areas. Staff considers the employee and visitor parking area adequately screened. Staff’s concerns with screening of the commercial vehicle parking area from the interstate are addressed in 14.06C(2) above. (2) In all parking areas containing twenty-eight (28) or more contiguous parking spaces and/or in parking lots with more than a single circulation lane, at least ten percent (10%) of the interior of the parking lot shall be landscaped islands planted with trees, shrubs and other plants. Such requirement shall not apply to structured parking or below-ground parking. The applicant is proposing 296 standard parking spaces. At sketch, the Board considered the commercial vehicle spaces as for operational purposes and therefore not requiring 10% interior landscaping for that portion of the property. The purpose of interior landscaping is to provide shade, reduce heat islands and glare. The applicant has indicated on sheet C-03 that 14.1% interior landscaping is provided. Staff considers this criterion met. (3) All interior and perimeter planting shall be protected by curbing unless specifically designed as a collection and treatment area for management of stormwater runoff as per 13.06(B)(5)(c) below. Interior planted islands shall have a minimum dimension of six (6) feet on any one side, and shall have a minimum square footage of sixty (60) square feet. Large islands are encouraged. Interior planting is protected by curbing. Perimeter planting is set back behind snow storage areas, fencing or drainage ditches. Staff considers this criterion met. #SP-19-28 10 (4) Landscaping Requirements (a) Landscaping shall include a variety of trees, shrubs, grasses and ground covers. All planting shall be species hardy for the region and, if located in areas receiving road runoff or salt spray, shall be salt-tolerant. (b) At least one (1) major deciduous shade tree shall be provided within or near the perimeter of each parking area, for every five (5) parking spaces. The trees shall be placed evenly throughout the parking lot to provide shade and reduce glare. Trees shall be placed a minimum of thirty (30) feet apart. There are 296 parking spaces. Therefore the applicant must provide 60 shade trees. The applicant has provided the required shade trees around the perimeter of the parking lot. 10. The fire inspector has indicated by email on 8/9/2019 that the proposed shade trees at the ends of the parking islands will interfere with fire truck access to the parking lot, and indicated it would be acceptable to replace the two trees with a single centrally located tree on the ends of each island. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to make this change and to replace the removed trees elsewhere around the perimeter of the parking lot. 13.06C Screening or Buffering (1) All off-street parking areas, off-street loading areas, outdoor storage areas, refuse, recycling, and compost collection (excluding on-site composting) areas, and utility improvements such as transformer(s), external heating and cooling equipment shall be effectively screened. (2) Such screening shall be a permanently maintained landscape of evergreen or a mix of evergreen and deciduous trees and shrubs, and/or a solid fence. (3) The landscaping shall be designed to minimize erosion and stormwater runoff, and to protect neighboring residential properties from the view of uses and parking areas on the site. The landscaping shall be of such type, height, and spacing, as in the judgment of the Development Review Board, will effectively screen the activities on the lot from the view of persons standing on adjoining properties. The plan and specifications for such planting shall be filed with the approved plan for the use of the lot. (4) A solid wall or fence, of location, height, and design approved by the Development Review Board, may be substituted for the required planting. (5) Modifications. Where the existing topography and/or landscaping provides adequate screening or would render the normally required screening inadequate, the Development Review Board may modify the planting and/or buffer requirements by, respectively, decreasing or increasing the requirements. Staff considers parking to be adequately screened. Screening of the commercial vehicle storage area from the interstate is discussed under 14.06C(2) above. 11. The applicant has not proposed any screening around the utility cabinet to be located on the west side of the access drive. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to fully screen the cabinet from the street. #SP-19-28 11 E. Modification of Standards. Except within the City Center Form Based Code District, 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, 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, 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. No modification of standards has been requested. Staff considers no modification of standards is necessary. F. Low Impact Development. The use of low impact site design strategies that minimize site disturbance, and that integrate structures, landscaping, natural hydrologic functions, and various other techniques to minimize runoff from impervious surfaces and to infiltrate precipitation into underlying soils and groundwater as close as is reasonable practicable to where it hits the ground, is required pursuant to the standards contained within Article 12. The applicant has provided an EPSC plan and stabilization notes. The project disturbs greater than one acre and will therefore be required to obtain either and Individual or General Permit for Construction. 12. Staff recommends the Board require the applicant to revise the plans to meet the requirements of Article 16, including that exposed soil be seeded and mulched or covered with erosion control matting within 48 hours of final grading, and that a minimum of four (4) inches of top soil be provided to cover overall finished slopes. G. Standards for Roadways, Parking and Circulation. Standards of Section 15.12 Standards for Roadways, Parking, and Circulation shall be met. Dimensional standards of 15.12 have been met. The applicant has submitted a traffic study which attempts to evaluate the impacts the proposed project will have on adjacent intersections. The traffic study estimates that the proposed project will generate 230 PM peak hour trips and that improvements are needed at the eastern intersection of Community Drive and Kimball Ave. Those impacts are addressed in the staff comments for #SD-19-22 and are included herein by reference. OTHER 12.01 General Stream and Surface Water Protection Standards These standards apply to all land within 100 feet horizontal distance of the centerline of Muddy Brook. The applicant is proposing to locate a stormwater outfall within 100-feet of Muddy Brook. The DRB may authorize encroachments for stormwater treatment facilities meeting the VT ANR stormwater treatment standards under 12.01C(4)(f) as a conditional use, or as part of a PUD review. #SP-19-28 12 13. Since the project is not a PUD, Staff considers the applicant must submit a conditional use application for their proposed stream impacts, or revise their plan to remove the impacts within 100 feet of Muddy Brook. As part of the conditional use application, the applicant must demonstrate they have submitted a complete application to ANR for coverage under a state stormwater permit. Alternatively, the applicant could revise the plans to remove infrastructure from this area. 12.02 Wetland Protection Standards Section 12.02 Wetland Protection Standards apply to all lands within 50-feet of a wetland. (1) Consistent with the purposes of this Section, encroachment into wetlands and buffer areas is generally discouraged. (2) Encroachment into Class II wetlands is permitted by the City only in conjunction with issuance of a Conditional Use Determination (CUD) by the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation and positive findings by the DRB pursuant to the criteria in (3) below. (3) Encroachment into Class II wetland buffers, Class III wetlands and Class III wetland buffers, may be permitted by the DRB upon finding that the proposed project’s overall development, erosion control, stormwater treatment system, provisions for stream buffering, and landscaping plan achieve the following standards for wetland protection: The applicant is proposing to impact two large Class III wetland areas and their buffers. The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has determined they have jurisdiction over the Class III wetland areas. USACE does not regulate Class III wetland buffers. (a) The encroachment(s) will not adversely affect the ability of the property to carry or store flood waters adequately; The USACE jurisdictional determination states the impacted wetlands do not function to retain or attenuate floodwaters. Staff considers this criterion met. (a) The encroachment(s) will not adversely affect the ability of the proposed stormwater treatment system to reduce sedimentation according to state standards; The Stormwater Section has reviewed the proposed plans and has not expressed any concern about this criterion. Staff considers this criterion met. (c) The impact of the encroachment(s) on the specific wetland functions and values identified in the field delineation and wetland report is minimized and/or offset by appropriate landscaping, stormwater treatment, stream buffering, and/or other mitigation measures. The USACE jurisdictional determination identifies the primary functions as water quality treatment through sediment/nutrient trapping. Stormwater treatment is provided for runoff from the impacted areas. Staff considers this criterion met. 12.03 Stormwater Management Standards #SP-19-28 13 The Assistant Stormwater Superintendent has reviewed the amended application materials on several dates, most recently August 6, 2019. The remaining comments from the Assistant Stormwater Superintendent are as follows. The Stormwater Section has reviewed the “SunCap Property Group - Distribution Facility” site plan prepared by Cross Consulting Engineers, dated 7/17/2019. We would like to offer the following comments: 1. The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance infrastructure. 14. Staff recommends the Board incorporate these comments as conditions of any approval. Lighting The applicant is proposing 88 building mounted and 33 pole mounted lights. Pole mounted lights are at the maximum height of 30 feet allowable under the LDR. Building mounted lights vary from 15 feet to 25 feet high. The following standard applies to lighting in parking areas. 13.07B Specific Requirements for Parking Areas. Light sources shall comply with the following: (2) Pole placement, mounting height, and fixture design shall serve to minimize lighting from becoming a nuisance. All light sources shall be arranged so as to reflect away from adjacent properties. All light sources shall be shielded or positioned so as to prevent glare from becoming a hazard or a nuisance, or having a negative impact on site users, adjacent properties, or the traveling public. Excessive spillover of light to nearby properties shall be avoided. Glare shall be minimized to drivers on adjacent streets. 15. A comment letter has been provided by a member of public who is a lighting professional, which concludes that the proposed lighting will be at a temperature and level resulting in nuisance impacts. Staff recommends the Board review the public comment letter and request necessary modifications to the proposed lighting plan. Bicycle Parking The proposed 143,979 sf. warehouse building will require eight short term and two long term bicycle parking spaces. The applicant is proposing eight inverted U type bicycle racks near the main pedestrian entrance providing parking for 16 bicycles, and an approximately 10-foot by 8-foot bicycle storage area near one of the building entrances. Clothes lockers are provided in proximity to the bicycle storage area. Staff considers the bicycle spaces and clothes lockers must meet the dimensional standards of 13.14. 16. The Board at Sketch Plan had discussed the possible installation of a cover over the outdoor bicycle parking. Staff recommends that the Board follow-up on this subject with the applicant. A.3 Noise Performance Standards The applicant has submitted a noise assessment to evaluate anticipated noise impacts when compared to the performance standards of LDR Appendix A. Appendix A provides the following limits on noise between midnight and 8:00 AM. #SP-19-28 14 a. 45 dBA based on a one-hour average measured at any point where the property on which the noise emanates adjoins any property used for residential purposes b. 60 dBA based on a one-hour average measured at any point where the property on which the noise emanates adjoins any property used for commercial purposes. The applicant’s study does not provide one-hour average values at the property lines. It only provides instantaneous levels. Instantaneous levels are predicted to be as high as 62 dBA. The sources of sound at or above 60 dBA are as follows. • Drop frame (short duration, 60 dBA at property line) • trailer connect/disconnect (short duration, 62 dBA at property line) • truck accelerating at gatehouse (continuous, 61 dBA at property line) Staff notes that noises are cumulative. In other words, if a truck is accelerating at the same time as a trailer is connected, the noise level will be somewhat higher than the noise level of each generator, though Staff does not have sufficient expertise to understand how much higher the noise might be. Staff anticipates based on the applicant’s description of their proposed operation that these noise levels could occur between midnight and 8:00 AM. 17. Staff recommends the Board consider whether they would like to see one-hour average noise levels for the property taking into consideration the provided sound barriers and the potential cumulative impacts of noise. Staff notes that this project is subject to Act250 review. Act 250 has its own noise limits which are higher than the South Burlington allowable noise levels. 13.17 Fencing A fence over eight (8) feet in height shall require approval by the Development Review Board as a conditional use subject to the provisions of Article 14, Conditional Use Review. The provided fence detail shows that the fence is to be 8 feet high at stations and 10 feet high at hubs. 18. It is not clear to Staff where “stations” are as opposed to “hubs.” Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to clarify this designation. If there are any sections over 8 feet in height, the applicant must apply for conditional use approval. 13.03 Airport Approach Cones A. General Restrictions. Notwithstanding the provisions of any other section(s) of these regulations, the uses permitted in any district in the Airport Approach Cones, as shown on the Official Zoning Map and Overlay Districts Map, shall be permitted subject to the following limitations: (1) No use shall be permitted which will produce electrical interference with radio communication or radar operations at the airport. (2) No use shall be permitted which could obstruct the aerial approaches to the airport. (3) All uses shall comply with applicable FAA or other federal or state regulations. (4) No lights or glare shall be permitted which could interfere with vision or cause confusion with airport lights. A portion of the project appears to fall within the Airport approach cones. The application materials do not address this subject. #SP-19-28 15 19. Staff recommends that the applicant provide information and evidence that the proposed project complies with the above-listed standards, or, alternatively, that the project is located entirely outside the Approach Cones. 3.05 Energy Standards Staff notes that all new buildings are subject to the Stretch Energy Code pursuant to Section 3.15: Residential and Commercial Building Energy Standards of the LDRs. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board work with the applicant to address the issues identified herein. Respectfully submitted, Marla Keene, Development Review Planner