Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBATCH - Supplemental - 0100 Dorset Street#DR-03-o5 Master Signage Permit, too Dorset Street DRC Meeting Monday, July 28, 2003 Application #DR-03-05 of Barlo Signs for a Master Signage Permit for too Dorset Street, including a new wall sign for Eastern Mountain Sports (EMS). Property: The ioo Dorset Street property is the brown building just north of the Barnes & Noble building. It is a two-story multi -tenant building with offices on the end floor and retail tenants, including The Rugged Bear and the Blue Heron Gallery, on the first. This MSP is being reviewed for the too Dorset Street building only as the Barnes & Noble and Healthy Living buildings are separate outparcels for purposes of signage. Applicable Provisions of the Ordinance: This is an application for a Master Signage Permit pursuant to Section 8(a) of the Sign Ordinance, which requires a new Master Signage Permit for properties applying after June 3, 2003. Previously, a sign permit but not a MSP had been issued for the Vermont Air National Guard tenant on this property. The property is also subject to Section 6(a) and 6(b) of the Dorset Street/City Center sign district, and Section io, Wall Signs. General Dimensional Limits on Signage: Section io, Table 10-1 contains the major dimensional limits for wall signs. This is a multi -tenant building with a master signage permit and no free-standing sign, so the applicant is allowed the following. (1) Total area of all wall signs: 15% of principal public facade or loo SF per sign with 2 signs per tenant, whichever is smaller. In this case the too SF per sign/2 signs per tenant rule controls. The total square footage of all existing and proposed wall signs is 329 square feet, which is well under the total allowable square footage for the building. (2) Maximum area of an individual wall sign: greater of 15% of fagade to which it is attached or too SF. For this application, because the fagade areas are very large, too SF per wall sign is the limit. (3) Up to 2 wall signs per tenant; this is met for all tenants (4) Signs may be attached to as many facades as have an actively used public entrance; this criterion is met, as there are no wall signs proposed on the east or north facades. 17ypes of Signs Included: The too Dorset property includes wall and directory signs only. There are no free-standing or incidental/directional signs in the application. The signs in the application, all of which count towards the allowable total area of all wall signs, are: (1) "The Rugged Bear for Children" wall sign, 47.25 SF, red cut-out letters (2) "ioo" number sign, roughly8 SF (3) The Rugged Bear wall sign, 18.38 SF, green cut-out letters (4) "Cork & Board Restaurant" wall sign, raceway with green cut-out letters, 50.25 SF; the raceway projects 8", and 9" is allowed. #DR-o3-05 Master Signage Permit, loo Dorset Street DRC Meeting Monday, July 28, 2003 (5) "Vermont Air National Guard Recruiting Service," internally illuminated sign with red and blue background and white translucent letters, 11 SF (6) "Dakin Farm" wall -mounted plaque, brown wooden background with small gold lettering, 4.2 SF (7) "Dakin Farm" wall sign, white and burgundy background with burgundy cut-out letters and logo, 8o SF. (8) "Blue Heron Gallery," wall mounted sign, blue background with white lettering, 20 SF. (9) "ioo Dorset" wall -mounted directory sign, 6.2 SF, dark green with white lettering; this is conforming with the provisions for multi -tenant directory signs in Section 11(a) and (b) of the Ordinance. Proposed EMS Signs: The proposed signs for Eastern Mountain Sports are: (1) WINDOW SIGN utilizing 23.75% of the window area (see illustration); this sign is allowed in addition to wall signage pursuant to Section 18(h) provided it does not exceed 25% of the area of the window to which it is attached. (2) New internally -illuminated neon channel letter sign over the principal entrance door; green lettering and logo; 48 SF (3) New internally -illuminated neon channel letter sign replacing the existing sign on the west -facing fagade of the building; logo and lettering total 36 SF. Standards for Review EMS Signs- Lighting: Section 21(e) allows internally illuminated signs in the Dorset Street district provided "...the lettering, logos and/or graphics are illuminated rather than the background." This appears to be met; however, the applicant should address the lighting for the "Eastern Mountain Sports" sign on the west -facing fagade that appears to have a white background rather than green. Open -tube neon lighting of the type proposed for the window sign is allowed under Section 21(g), "...provided the light source is covered with a clear, translucent or opaque material so that the light source is diffused and no glare is reflected." EMS Signs - Dimensional standards are met. Master Signage Permit Standards, Section 8(d): Applicants are "strongly encouraged" to specify parameters that will lead over time creating a strong consistency of shape, foreground and background color scheme, typeface, size, and installation in order ensure that all signage on a property is in accordance with the goals of the [district]." Recognizing that Barlo Signs is not the property owner, the Design Review Committee will need to discuss how to set parameters for this property. It 2 #DR-03-05 Master Signage Permit, ioo Dorset Street DRC Meeting Monday, July 28, 2003 appears to staff that the most effective way to ensure any consistency moving forward is to recognize the consistent signage on the property, which is the use of cut-out or channel -set lettering in red, green or blue, plus whatever logos are applicable. The ioo Dorset directory sign and Dakin Farms wall plaque are also consistently designed and sized, with complimentary colors. The Blue Heron Gallery sign, while not entirely consistent with the cut-out or channel lettering elsewhere on the building, does have a somewhat more complimentary feel to the other signs. The Dakin Farm sign uses cut-out letters, but on a bright white background that is out of character with the other signs on the building. As was the case in the last application reviewed by the DRC, the Vermont Air National Guard is the least consistent with the signage for the rest of the building. While the non -conformity requirements that plagued the last application have been eliminated from the Sign Ordinance, staff encourages the DRC to find that when altered or replaced, this sign (and the Dakin Farms white background) need to be replaced with cut-out or channel letters and logos with colors and styles in keeping with those used for the Rugged Bear, EMS, and Cork & Board. At the meeting, the DRC should also discuss whether any parameters with respect to color should be included in the permit for this property. Dorset Street/City Center Sign District Standards, Section 6(b): The Dorset Street standards are as follows: (1) Consistent Design: Consistency in terms of color, graphic style, lighting, location, material and proportions are encouraged. As discussed above, the most consistent elements for this property are green, red or blue colors; cut-out or channel -set lettering, rather than printed signs; internal illumination with opaque backgrounds or neon lighting; and proportions of roughly 40 to 6o SF per sign. Again, the VT Air National Guard sign, Blue Heron wall sign, and background of the Dakin Farm sign are somewhat out of step with the other signage on the building. (2) Promote City Center Goals, including high aesthetic quality and pedestrian orientation: This criterion is met by the proposed signage. (3) Color and Texture: The use of a maximum of 3 predominant colors is encouraged. The end of the building with the Rugged Bear, Cork & Board and EMS (existing and proposed) has the highest consistency of color and design, with green and red lettering and complimentary typestyles. The most jarring color features on the building are the bright red on the VT Air National Guard sign, and the large expanses of white under the Dakin Farms lettering. Again, staff encourages the DRC to condition this MSP with the requirement that future signage use red, green, and only ONE other predominant color of the applicant's or property owner's choosing. #DR-o3-o5 Master Signage Permit, 100 Dorset Street DRC Meeting Monday, July 28, 2003 (4) Materials used: These are to be complimentary to the building; this standard is principally met, although the use of metal cans such as the VT Air National Guard sign should in staff s opinion be discouraged or prohibited for all future signs. Recommendation Staff recommends the DRC approve Application #DR-03-05 and the EMS sign as proposed, with the following conditions: (1) For the EMS sign, the background and lettering colors on the small "Eastern Mountain Sports" sign on the west -facing fagade should be reversed so that the lettering is white and the background green. Staff would recommend this, but the decision rests with the DRC. (2) Future signage on the building shall be cut-out or channel -set lettering rather than flat wall signs. Internally illuminated cans shall be prohibited. (3) A maximum of one additional principal color besides green and red shall be utilized for lettering and/or background on future signage. The dark blue used by Blue Heron Gallery and the bottom half of the VT Air National Guard sign may be appropriate, or the burgundy used by Dakin Farms. (4) Wall plaques up to 6.5 SF with subdued colors may be used for directory or additional wall signage. (5) Any directional or incidental signs on the property are encouraged to use the same shape and subdued colors as the wall plaques currently on the building. (6) Design Review Committee approval shall be required for replacement of the Dakin Farms, Blue Heron Gallery and VT Air National Guard signs. The Code Officer may approve directional and incidental signs consistent with (5) above, and may approve new wall signs in red or green with cut-out or channel set letters, whether internally illuminated or not. El South Burlington Design Review Committee Minutes of Meeting Monday, July 28, 2003 • Present: Mary Benoit; Judy Barron; Michael O'Grady • Staff: Brian Robertson; Juli Beth Hoover • Applicants/Public: Paul Wamsganz, Champlain Oil Company; Suzanne King, Twin State Signs; Robert Gardner, University Mall; Tim Sullivan, Barlo Signs; Sheila McIntyre, Summit Engineering; George Khouri, University Mall. The meeting was called to order at 7:35 PM. Application #DR-03-05 of Barlo Signs for a Master Signage Permit for 100 Dorset Street, including a new sign for the Eastern Mountain Sports. Tim Sullivan introduced the application for a new sign for the EMS building. The new sign will be the same square footage as the existing ones. Mary Benoit said the DRC first needed to consider the master signage plan for the site. Juli Beth Hoover said that while Barlo Signs could not and should not create a MSP for the site, the DRC would need to condition the MSP so that more consistency was created. She recommended the DRC consider the recommendations in the staff memo regarding conditions for future signage. Ms. Benoit asked whether changing the background of one of the signs from white to green would be a problem for the applicant. Mr. Sullivan said yes, but they could agree to it. The DRC discussed whether it should be reversed. Ms. Hoover said dark backgrounds with white letters were encouraged throughout Dorset Street. Mr. Sullivan showed a print with a green background and white letters. Ms. Barron asked what a new tenant would be required to do and if they would have any flexibility. Ms. Hoover said they would be encouraged to use channel or cut-out letters in green, red or another principal color. Mr. O'Grady moved to approve the master signage permit and EMS store sign with the conditions outlined on page 4 of the staff memo. Ms. Barron seconded; motion carried 3-0. 2. Application #DR-03-o6 of Champlain Oil Co. for a Master Signage Permit for the Shell station at 155 Williston Road. Ms. Hoover asked Ms. King to discuss how the new requirements for gas stations were expressed in this permit. Ms. Benoit asked about lighting levels under the canopy because of her concern about generally very high lighting levels. Ms. Hoover said the City regulates light trespass beyond boundaries, but not maximum light levels at any one point under the canopy. She said the newer gas stations show much less light trespass than the older canopies. South Burlington Design Review Committee Minutes of Meeting Monday, July 28, 2003 Paze 2 Ms. King went through how the square footage of signs was allocated among the freestanding, canopy, point of purchase and wall signs. She said the point was to try to make gas stations look cleaner, with fewer signs throughout the property. Ms. Benoit said the application looked "tidy." Mr. O'Grady moved to approve the application as presented. Ms. Barron seconded. Motion carried 3-0. 3. Application #DR-03-03 of University Mall for a Master Signage Permit for the University Mall property at 155 Dorset Street. Ms. Benoit asked to consider the Master Signage Permit first. Ms. King said it is a tough property for consistency, and the major effort is to use illuminated (either reverse or internally illuminated) channel letters for all tenants. Most UMall tenants predate the sign design regulations. There is also concern about ensuring enough colors in the MSP to allow for multi -colored corporate logos. The flat cut- out "University Mall" signs are used for entrances throughout the property and are not illuminated. Ms. Benoit said it seemed that signage was planned around existing tenants; Ms. King said this was true, and was done at the Blue Mall so that changes were made over time. Ms. King said the Kohl's sign would be like the J.C. Penny and Bon Ton signs. It would be a block, corporate -style, cut-out internally illuminated white sign. She said it would be nearly identical to Bon Ton, but in a slightly different typestyle. The main issue is colors. Ms. Barron pointed out that the University Mall signs are teal, which is not in keeping with the primary -colored signs on the other buildings. George Khouri said he was not aware that the master signage plan was being resubmitted. Ms. King explained that the master signage permit had been resubmitted because of the new sign ordinance. Ms. Benoit said she felt the corporate colors should be allowed to be used on retail signs. Ms. Hoover said the three -colors guideline was not a rule, and the consistent use of cut-out letters can "count" for creating consistency. She noted that the size of the building also has an impact on how vital it is to have a more uniform color scheme; the UMall is the largest building on Dorset Street and unlike the smaller properties, cannot be viewed entirely from one point. The DRC clarified that conditions would only apply to new or changed signage. It was suggested that the proposed color guidelines apply to all prospective signs. Ms. Hoover asked if the permit could specify primary colors and white. Ms. Barron agreed that this would assist in cleaning up the color scheme. Ms. Benoit said the DRC would like to see the UMall live with this plan for a longer period of South Burlington Design Review Committee Minutes of Meeting Monday, July 28, 2003 Page 3 time. Mr. Khouri and Mr. Gardener said this was a sufficiently broad spectrum of colors to accommodate tenants. The DRC clarified that the applicant is seeking primary shades of red, blue, and green plus white as primary face colors, with varying accent colors, and consistent use of individual, wall -mounted, illuminated channel or cut-out letters. Ms. Barron made a motion to approve the MSP with the above -stated condition; Mr. O'Grady seconded; motion carried 3-0. 4. Application #DR-03-04 of University Mall for an individual sign for Kohl's Department Store at the University Mall at 155 Dorset Street. Ms. Barron asked about the colors. Ms. King said it will be like the Bon Ton sign, white during the day and illuminated white at night with a black return. Ms. Benoit said she had no issues with it. Ms. Barron moved to approve the application as presented; Mr. O'Grady seconded; motion carried 3-0. 5. Application #DR-03-07 of University Mall for design review of a new outbuilding along Dorset Street on the 155 Dorset Street property. Sheila McIntyre presented for the applicant. Ms. Hoover reminded the DRC that this is a "courtesy call" as this is outside the design review district, but that Mr. Khouri and Ms. McIntyre had been working with staff on this for several months. Ms. McIntyre said the existing, vacant DeLorme house and garage would be removed and replaced with landscaping around a slightly expanded parking area near the main mall entrance. The new restaurant would be built on an existing, under-utilized parking restaurant. This would use up some parking spaces, which would be replaced on the site of the DeLorme house. Increased landscaping and screening along Dorset Street is proposed. At this time, there is no tenant for the building. Mr. O'Grady asked what type of tenant was being sought; Ms. McIntyre said at this point, a "short-order" restaurant per the LDRs was suggested. Mr. Khouri said it could also be a "soft goods" retail shop. He asked the DRC for its thoughts on materials and design to give direction to whichever tenant is suggested. Ms. Benoit said the DRC will want to ensure excellent lighting of the entrance and walkways to Dorset Street and the parking areas. She reiterated that the DRC will look at four-sided design and particularly concealment of mechanical equipment and dumpsters. Ms. McIntyre said the dumpster would be screened and located out of the green strip. Ms. Benoit asked if equipment would be on the roof. Mr. Khouri said for a building of this size, it would have to be a design element but he would prefer it off the building. South Burlington Design Review Committee Minutes of Meeting Monday, July 28, 2003 Page 4 Ms. Barron asked about access. Mr. Khouri said that there would be at least one sidewalk access, and possibly in the corner as shown on the rendering. There would also be an access off of the parking lot in the center of the building (conceptually), but it would have steps so the corner entrance would be for Dorset Street and handicapped access only. Ms. Barron asked about lighting. Mr. Khouri said he didn't anticipate any additional lighting within the parking lot, in part because of the ambient lighting along Dorset Street already. Ms. Hoover said that the board had major problems with building designs that had doors along Dorset and San Remo, but then made them non-functional public entrances. Mr. Khouri said he understood, and that a principal public entrance would be on Dorset Street. Ms. Hoover said a corner entrance would be a good solution. Mr. O'Grady asked whether the materials for the building would change depending upon the tenant. Mr. Khouri said they understood the direction of the DRC and staff, and would use masonry or similar soft materials. Ms. Benoit said the landscaping and site plan looked like a good improvement to the area. The DRC thanked the applicants 6. Other business Ms. Hoover said the DRC probably would not meet in August. She said the Planning Commission was interested in doing design standards for the Commercial 1 district and the DRC expressed its support. Ms. Benoit said she would like to have elections in September. The DRC adjourned at 8:45 PM. Respectfully submitted, Juli Beth Hoover, AICP Director of Planning & Zoning MEMO South Burlington Planning &Zoning To: South Burlington Design Review Committee From: Juli Beth Hover, AICP Director of Planning & Zoning RE: Meeting Monday, July 28th, 7:30 PM Date: July 17, 2003 Greetings, Design Review Committee. We will be meeting on Monday, July 28th at 7:30 PM to review no less than FIVE applications in the Dorset Street district. (1) loo Dorset Street Master Signage Permit, including a new sign for EMS; we will need to discuss the conditions and design parameters for future signs on this property along with the EMS sign. (2) Shell Oil Station Master Signage Permit. This application is pursuant to the new Sign Ordinance requirements for gas stations. (3) University Mall Master Signage Permit (4) A new sign for the Kohl's department store at the U-Mall; this is a courtesy call, since the sign will be covered under their master signage permit. (5) Design review for a new outbuilding along Dorset Street at the University Mall; this is also a courtesy call, but staff has asked the applicant to go through the design review process and standards because of the high visibility of this parcel. I will be doing the memos next week away from the office, and will be mailing them to you. I wanted to send you a pre -memo with the agenda so you know what's coming a few days ahead of time. We also will be welcoming Brian Robertson, our new Associate Planner. Brian comes to us with a B.A. from the University of Vermont and experience at the Central Vermont Regional Planning Commission and Vermont Department of Housing & Community Affairs. We are delighted to have him on the team. Thanks & please call the office if you won't be attending on the 28th F/LC /6V .lpat5� AGREEMENT This Agreement, made this day of June, 2001, by and between Century Partners and Tekram Partners, a Vermont corporation with its principal offices in South Burlington, Vermont ("Partners"), and the City of South Burlington, a Vermont municipal corporation situated in the County of Chittenden and State of Vermont (the "City"). WHEREAS, Partners is the record owner of property located at 100 Dorset Street in the City (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Property is located in the Dorset Street/City Center Sign District; and , �. EIM.�'i' , 'ti`1� 'i operty is cui: re nt l y subject to a mast e_ Signage Plan; and WHEREAS, the Vermont Air National Guard leases office space on the Property; and WHEREAS, Vermont Air National Guard has applied, through its agent, Kershner Signs, for approval to amend the Master Signage Plan for the Property to install an eleven and one tenth (11.1) square foot internally illuminated wall sign; and WHEREAS, the South Burlington Development Review Board (the "DRB") has approved said Air National Guard application under the Ordinance by written decision dated March 19, 2001, subject to certain specified conditions; and WHEREAS, Condition 3(a) of said DRB approval, pursuant to §23(h) of the Ordinance, requires the applicant to "[i]dentify all nonconforming signs and include a schedule in which these signs will be brought into conformance with the master signage plan and Sign Ordinance" and further provides that 11[a]11 nonconforming signs must be brought into compliance within two years of approval;" and WHEREAS, the DRB approval identifies two wall signs currently located on the Property, owned by Dakin Farms and Blue Heron Gallery, as nonconforming under the Ordinance; and WHEREAS, in 1996 and 1997, respectively, the City approved the Blue Heron Gallery and Dakin Farms signs notwithstanding their nonconforming status; and WHEREAS, in 1999, the City approved an amended Master Signage Plan for the Property without requiring that the Dakin Farms and Blue Heron Gallery signs be brought into compliance with the requirements of the Ordinance; and WHEREAS, as a result of the City's prior approval of the Blue Heron Gallery and Dakin Farms signs, and its failure to require that said signs be brought into compliance with the requirements of the Ordinance at the time that it approved the 1999 Master Signage Plan amendment, Partners believed that these two signs would not be subject to the provisions of §23(h) of the Ordinance and claims they are not non -conforming signs and that they are permitted signs; and WHEREAS, a genuine dispute exists between Partners and the City regarding the applicability of §23(h) of the Ordinance to the Dakin Farms and Blue Heron Gallery signs; and WHEREAS, the parties hereto believe that it is in their mutual best interest to resolve this dispute by this Agreement rather than through litigation; NOW THEREFORE, based on the foregoing premises, the parties hereto stipulate and agree as follows: (1) Partners shall not be required to bring the Dakin Farm and Blue Heron Gallery signs into compliance as a condition precedent to the issuance of a sign permit for the Vermont National Guard sign or any other new or altered sign properly approved by the City as part of the master signage plan for the subject property; the Dakin Farms and Blue Heron signs may remain as they currently exist, subject to the limitations contained herein. (2)(a) If Blue Heron Gallery ceases to use the space that it leases at the Property, or if there is a relocation, substantial repair or alteration of the sign (defined as any repair or alteration affecting more than 50% of the sign area or having a cost equal to or exceeding 25% of the depreciated value at the time of repair) then the Blue Heron Gallery sign shall be brought into compliance with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance, including the requirements of §23(h), as amended from time to time. (2)(b) If Dakin Farms ceases to use the space that it leases at the Property, or if there is a relocation of or substantial repair or alteration of the sign (defined as any repair or alteration affecting more than 50% of the -sign area or having a cost equal to or exceeding 25% of the depreciated value at the time of repair) then the Dakin Farms sign shall be brought into compliance with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance, including the requirements of §23(h), as amended from time to time. (3) By this Agreement, the parties hereto waive any right that may exist to bring any claim or cause of action (including by way of defense to a claim) whatsoever, in law or in equity or E 2001. DATED at S Burlington, Vermont this q_'�ay of June, CENTURY PARTNERS AND TEKRAM PARTNERS By: PIt my aeorized agent STATE OF VERMONT ) COUNTY OF C'/= ) ss . Ar.w/� r�� on the day of ���,r. 20G1, rer=zonally appeared 75F -1 and he/she acknowledged this instrument by him/her, Zealv.ed and subscribed, to be his/her free act and deed. .��..�, ��t4-"5'. Before me, Notary Public My Commission Expires: z-> %tom son242.agr 4 in any other proceeding, specifically arising out of the above - described matter, and to seek costs or fees associated therewith, except that nothing herein shall preclude the City from enforcing the terms and conditions of the Ordinance, of this Agreement, or of any other applicable provision of Vermont law, the enforcement of which is entrusted to the City provided such enforcement shall not have the effect of nullifying or be inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement. (4) In any amendment to the Master Signage Plan to add additional signs or to modify signs other than the Dakin Farms or Blue Heron Signs, Partners shall include a schedule naming Dakin Farms and Blue Heron signs as "Subject to Agreement," and these signs shall be treated as complying for the limited purpose of reviewing the amendment application then before the City. (5) This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of Partners, and its successors and assigns, ans successors in title to the Property. DATED at South Burlington, Vermont this n`> day of June, 2001. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON B Its duly authorized agent A.; STATE OF VERM NT ) COUNTY OFC ) ss. A (,on the day of , 2001, personally appeared and he/she acknowledged this instrument by him/her, W o Aand subscribed, to be his/her free act and deed. %_ Before me, ° 22 N tary Pu 1' My Commission Expire_'_': , 9` 3 PLANNING (Y)MMISS ON FEBRUA RY 21�1h The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting or. Tuesday, February 24, 1976, in the Conference Room, Municipal Cffices, 1175 'Williston Road. MEMBERS PRESENT William Wessel, Chairman; James Ewini3, Frank Armstrong, Arlene P;rapcho, Ernest Levesque, Frank Lidral MEMBERS ABSENT None CTI'HERS PRESENT Stephen Page, Planning Assistant; Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator; Bryan Burke, Paul Sprayregen. Peter Judge, Carlo Wolff, Thomas Schmidt The meeting was opened by the Chairman at 7:33 p.m. Minutes of February 10, 19Z6 The following is to be inserted on page 5 after the sentence beginning "Mr. Diggle raid the developer..." atuart Ireland agreed to pedestrian use of the sewer easement runnin&_to the Knowland proper at the northeast corner of� Meadowood at Fr�r development. t was moved by Mr. Ewing and seconded by Mr. Armstrong and voted unanimously to accept the Minutes of February 1001976L with the above noted addition. SitE-2lan revs ew.-P—rop,)sed expansion of 100 Dorset .street Bryan Burke. using the site plan drawing displayed on the board for illustration, indicated the lower roof for the new building with a flat roof for, the a, an! th:, ralk:;ay throe , through the foul lin.= fiivin,q acce ,;t t<, lot. '.heY wa iter to ins--t a point which wc)uld be a primary entrance deliveries from this point. By readjusting the parking they have been able tc: maintain the same number of parking places that are on the site now. He indicated trees now in the parking spaces that will be moved to a new location. Mr. Armstrong asked about long range plans for the intersection to the Ramada Inn parking lot at the northeast corner. Mr. Judge said it is intended to be blocked off and "fir. Burke said they would rather hav%40 crossover where it is paved. Mrs. Yrapeho if the planting on the Model at the rear of the building is there now. and what new planting —would be proposed. Mr. Burke indicated the landscaping adjacent to the building, some more land- scaping at the southwest corner near the corner of the theater and said there pre a c^uple of treea oiit front. they want to move larlek. ske-1 bl urrn. 'ra,1:_ho is they would be thinning out the tree,7 in back of the building significantly or would there still be a fair amount of growth there, Mr. Burke said the birches will all remain. Mr. Judge said they di." have to move a flowering crab because it was; not doing well. 2. PLANNING COMnSSION EBRUPRY 24i lib Mrig. Krapcho asked Mr. Ward about the value of the landscaping. Mr. Ward said they hadn't talked about the estimated cost or what the project had for land:icaping. Mr. Judgevthen explained that in their own calculations they planned in excess of $4,000 of landscaping; the proposed addition would cost in the vicinity of $90,000; he would post a bond for it or put some money in escrow for $2700. He felt they had demonstrated their interest in landscaping prior to this and have spent a considerable amount. They would like to get some flexibility. The landscaping is an integral approach to the building but they would like to see how it works out when the building is up in order to do the best job. The trees indicated are mostly 3' 1n caliper and the ever- greens are 8' in height and there are also small plantings. Chairman Wessel asked if there was a list of tree species and the number and Mr. Judge said there was. Mr. Wessel asked Mr. Ward if he had any further comments. Mr. Ward explained the proposal was granted a variance on January 19th by the Zoning Board, a variance on the number of parking spaces required and a variance for the multiple uses. By the ordinance, with the addition, it calculates out to 448 spaces for parking. He said they had physically counted what was visible and found from 220 to 225 spaces in the lct. There is one area which will be removed, it is a large berm or landscaped island which when removed will allow for additional parking. The circulatior will change a bit but there will be no great effect or. the numbers of parking, spaces. The Zoning Board had a condition that no less than 21F Spaces be left there. The Board felt there waF an alternative Space which could be torn up hutthey didn't think it should be torn up now. He said they had some other '_nput nn parking requirements from different groups, different studies, etc.# and he personally felt that for this particular use 44,9 spaces was a bit high, but he didn't know what they could consider the status quo now. He said they talked with everybody who has anything to do with this mall and the only crunch they had was during the Christmas holidays. Mr. Levesque said he would like to see the parking kept down. The grass the Toning Board felt could hf� torn up f�r.iv give ;i bout 7 parking sl,.- oe! mr,... 1'ravch0 as' e,i how 1':Finy riVh+. nuw, and Yr. ,-rri 'pi i ­ they counted 220. The 218 was a condition of the Zoning Board. Mr. Burke said the number won't change at all. He indicated the areas where spaces would be added as a result of change, and the spaces lost, saying they would lose 23 and gain 21, and then by moving the two trees and making two spaces, they would come out with exactly the same number. Mrs. Krapcho asked about room- for a car to turn around when using a space at the north end of the building. Mr. Burke indicated on the drawing where A car would pull in and then back out. Asked by Mrs. Krapcho what was the width -of the driveway around the building, Mr. Burke said he thought it was 15 feet. Mr. Wessel asked where,unlooding would take place and Mr. Burke indicated the location for this, also the two shops which would be serviced by hand truck;; In the front. Mr. Wessel then asked about a. truck blocking the driveway so it wouldn't be possible for someone to go around with a truck there. Mr. Burke said they intended to -have this area for employee narking; shopper-; wouldn't go around back to park. Mrs. Krapcho asked Mr. Ward how much discretion the Flanning Commission has in this particular situation regarding �irking. =IAA'NING Ct?MPSISvlc�iv FiBRUtRY 24 ,1,. �16 Mr. ward said the Planning Commission can reduce it up to 1-01 of what is required. which would be 224. This is under variance to 219. Some people are now using.spare spaces in the back of the building which is on the Ramada Inn property. He said.he talked with Fir] Greer and he doesn't see any problem with taking some of the overflow though no one has talked about ii. !�,Lr. Wessel asked where was the undeveloped parcel. of Greer, and Mr. Ward said it was behind the Red Barn, and indicated on the drawing where it could be connected for additional parking if there erat a crunch and additional parking was needed. Mrs. Krapcho asked Mr. Judge if he was suggesting an area which should be paved and maintained the year round. Mr. Judge said it could be plowed, Mrs. Y-apcho asked about sidewalks. if they referred to'sidevalks which do exist nr sidewalks which are needed. Mr. Judge said he suggested sidewalks rather than a grass path because the people wanting to use it will increase when the motel is operating. Instead of having, people going across lots or through brush it would be a good idea to invite circulation and it would be of mutual benefit. Mr. Ward indicated the location of this on the drawing, saying it would be better than just beating the grass down and would prove to be beneficial. Mr. Wessel asked if that wasn't the same place where cars have tried to exit, that the tree isn't stopping people from going out. Mr. Judge said there is no curb and it isn't e problem. There is a well defined path there and he didn?t think it would be very attractive to put, concrete. could perhaps have flagstone. He said he was not concerned about the material but was concerned about it being; usable all the year round. Mr 1,r-api+,o ar,ked about the suggested ;,ath to the northeast. Mr. „urjge said this would be one that people could use to get to the 'Re:l Barn, etc., and that 100 Dorset Street stands to gain by it; people can go back and forth without using their cars, Mr. Levesque said this is very convenient. Ciairaan Wessel asked Mr. Page about the additional parking mentioned in his memorandum. Mr. Page explained the figures which have been shown to be exhorbitant and �•ai l'i -`sp'+ o` asphalt. This is a �.itur-,tion where there if: a ve-w con -,-;A .i.i"� ejefi.c{ Brit and C-ont Sl1Adt1 USi' �J situation than the typical shopping center; there isn't the r�,xxwtp,�; 2i7' or the traffic generated by a grocery store, hardware or drug store. The guidelines are based on a neighborhood shopping center having those kinds of facilities so that generates a high figure. With the size of this and the type of tenant he said he would suggest a total of 10 to 2C additional spaces be provided onsite. or offslte with some suitable agreement. The thinking is since it is not a typical shopping oenter you needn't require the 4 spaces per thousand square feetl on the other hand there should be some kind of reservoir because tenants can change, the parking demand can change; it is impo5eible to tell exactly what the parking demand is going to be or what the tenants are going to be. It would be a bad precedent to allow the expansion of the building without a commensurate amount of additional parking. He said he had talked.about the feasibility of conditional approval where the ,-ropotia! could be epproved with the condition that the applicant could cove back in a year or so, but it is pretty difficult to enforce conditions like that. PLANNING CCMK SSICCN FEBRUARY 24L_.1226 Mrs. Krapcho asked Mx. Page if he was suggesting that the Commission table this In order to ask the developer to go back and find the additional parking spaces or hove an arrangement with an abutting property owner.. Mr. T-dge replied that was what he was suggesting they consider., hit that he believed in a correlation for retail sales and parking demand that the parking Is adequate. Mrs. Krapcho said but. they are considering two additional retail spaces without additional parking. A Mr. Wessel asked in interviewing tenants it was found there was any overflow. Mr. Page said no one said that; they simply said that at Christmastime it was crowded. ir. Judge said the Ftiday and Lcaturday after Christmas were the most crowded with people spending their Christmas money and a Disney film showint3 at, the theater. Yx, Page said he had made the reference to the Greer property in his memo. thinking there was an entry to the north. Mr. Burke said there is an entrance at the northwest corner. Mr. Page also said the parking has to be in proximity to where the need is generated. Mr. Judge said they have kept a fairly careful watch on parking and have never experienced any parking difficulty. As pointed out to the Zoning Board they do have some commuter cars parked there. They have a fairly efficient use: of the parking lot and have control over the parking, but he didn't know if it would be possible to provide enough parking for something the ",odfather" being shown at both of the theaters which happened before the shopping center was b'_i"It and the. In the %iren. Light now If t:iey daria+ Fi�V•' the thNkter they wouldn't need more than 70 or RO spaces. The number of people working In the building is relatively small; the number of shoppers is small; it is not a typical shopping center; there is no discount store. Mrs. Krapcho asked about extending parking on the south end of the lot, if it would be to the east of the theater or to the southwest. Mr. page said he didn't want to be in the position of advocating more blacktop. There is room for diagonal or perpendicular. parking. The problem Is that the �. h co�T1 1<<! F'�t tflr �Oint fc.r?'t:t, i'��`Tl7tS iff1LT.;B 1s going to >e. ?o_>:sibiy the uhoie parkinf; et)ulk-i shift to the e,cuf.'.'.. Mrs. Krapcho asked if people parking at the north end of the buildint,; would have access to the north end of the building. Mr. Judge said that access was planned to facilitate pedestrian traffic along Dorset Street so people coming from Greer's could walk into the center. Mrs. Krapcho indicated on the drawing the area where she was asking about parking, if that was the only point of access. Chairman Wessel said the question remained, should they do with the current number of parking spaces or *hall they be increased, and if so, to what amount. Mr. Levesque said he would go with the existing parking; if it overflows people will tend to park at the Ramada lnn or across the street at the bank. He would rather see less parking. said the problem is that If there isn't any agreement },etween th•> adjoining oxners,the adjoining owners could put people off from their lot ; also if the uses change they would have to come back. Mrs. Krapcho said only if the structure changes, not if the use changes. '4r. ,yard :.aid if they go from one r,:tail u,,;e to another they don't h,ava. to come back, but If they have a lot of alterations then they would have to come int it depends on what kind of alterations, what kind of permit is needed, if there was a major change in the building and that particular use had a formula for parking, but that is not what is happening right now. Asked about a restaurant, Mr. Judge said they bought the property from the people who own Howard Johnson's and they insisted on a restriction against any motel or restaurant. r L PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 24, lib Mr. Levesque remarked the two areas complement each other. Mrs. Krapcho said the City has the responsibility to insure adequate parking, and basicly the Planning Cammission.is vulnerable if it doesn't enforce the requirements that were put on the books, in the case it turns out that the parking is not adequate and it does push parking on to adjoining property with- out agreements with those owners. Mr. Wessel asked Mrs. Krapcho if she felt parking is adequate if spillover is allowed on adjacent property. Mrs. Krapcho said she didn't think the Commission could look at that unless there is a formal agreement between 100 Dorset Street and the Ramada Inn that their parking could be used. Mr. Levesque said the aesthetics of 100 Dorset Street are far superior than anything on Shelburne Road. 100 Dorset Street has upgraded Dorset Street tremendously. Mrs. Krapcho said that has rothing to do with the Commission's responsibility to consider adequate parking. Mr. Levesque said that nationwide there has been a mistake in shopping centers. In creating a crass of hardtop and the trend now is to reduce parking. Mr. Judge said they were not a Mammoth Mart or Sears or Gaynes. They have basicly specialty shops and it is a kind of experiment; you can take care of the aesthetics without so much paving. They would like to derive a little bit more income from the property to use for the maintenance. One problem is that they have to do a better job of snow removal. This problem has compromised the parking spaces by about 10%; they have probably lost 10% of their spaces through the winter months. ��r. E;wina, asked If parking is aaequat nu,! for t ;e 16.00,) tiauare feet. r":r. Judge said it is more than adequate now. It. is here for the Commission to see by looking at it every day. The normal complement is about 60 cars. On Saturday afternoons the theater is open and the parking lot is full but the offices are not open. That allows a better use of the parking lot. Mrs. Krapcho said it is just a question of being somewhat apprehensive. Mr. Judge said they are forgetting; that the theater comprises most of the parking. Pastern Mountain ",portn is going to expand the rhoT- h,:t: wouldn't ?;e having any m`)r• >, ,,.. he oa.;,. Y 0.., person:.: Mrs. Krapcho asked 1°r. Ward if he thought the City engineer should review any aspect of this plan. Mr. Ward said No, that nothing is changing. But there is going to be an area of flat roof and Mr. Szymanski might want to see where the water is being carried rather than having it splashing on the ground. Mrs. Krapcho asked if there should be a further review by Mr.. Ward or anyone else of the landscaping. Mr. Ward said they wouldn't get involved in the inside court plan. but the Tree Committee might want to take a look at the rest of it. Mr. Armstrong said he didn't feel it was necessary, to look at it. The trees have done very well thus far and he thought they would survive. "r. Ward said there`are no plans to alter the entrance. or anything like that. all that is being done is moving a mound oA' dirt. Mrs. Krapcho asked Mr. Judge if he would agree to paving the access to the .'reer property. .-aid it would ben<;fit �;arl �;reer as much as it would themselves; they would like to see some effort on his parts actually he would be benefit- ing more than they would. Mr. '4ard said h,+ thought � t was a :,j-oblar. of* ccnrra:nl cation betweE`r. they" And Larl Greer. 6. PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUA RY 24 l ?-6 Mr. Ward said Mrs. Maher had pushed the idea a year ago of connecting parking lots; it does work. Chairman 'vessel arcked how many members would Like to leave parking as it Is. Mr. 'lard said the Commission has to consider there may be an additional. 10 to 12 spaces they could pick up. That may be something to leave as is or it could be put in a motion that they would have to pick that up. Mr. Wessel referred to the funeral home which war: required to come back An at the end of a year and Mr. Ward explained that was a condition by the Zoning Board that they come back in a year. The Board gave a variance and they have the power to withdraw it any time they want to. Mrs. Krapcho asked if the Board made a variance here, and Mr. Ward said only that there be a minimum of 218 spaces. Mr. Ewing said he would like to see them make an effort to try and increase it either through some agreement with Earl Greer or with the Ramada Inn. Chairman Wessel said the Cmhession wouldcould like somebut agreementcould ifnot possible.them to make an agreement, He said Mr. Levesque said he would go along with it as it is. Mrs. Krapcho said she would too, but she was not sure how it could be done other than by requiring additional. spaces, preferably through an agreement with the adjoining property owners. Mr. Lidral said he would like to see an agreement if possible. Mr. Armstrong said he was satisfied with it as it is; he wouldn't want them to take any more from the theater area. Mr. Wessel asked if they would be willing to contact the adjoining property owners, and Mr. Sprayregen said he tiouli be more than happy to try, asking what kinr, of agreement the Commis: A wcm., I •'. wan.. He Cali the property owner. next door might want to expand. If they are going to add parking spaces, it is going to be around the theater. If he were the adjoining property owner, he said, he would not want to sign any greement, would just say you are welcome to park here. Mr. Judge said that if Greer wanted to convert all his space to retail stores and were to ask them for the same thing, he would say Yes, go ahead and do it, but he would never sign: an agreement or anything. snl,-, actually "r� �:. ,,^Pr;-�'t ': ve ry tirr.e;:s it is frequently tied up. ':hey add� ional space Ramada. The Council would actually be approving the property as proposed and would be saying that they should be asked to acquire additional spaces. Mr. Wessel said they would be asked to attempt to make an agreement with the adjoining owners. Mrs. Krapcho moved that the Planning Commission table action on the site pltn� for 100 Dorset Street until_ ... Mr. Judge Interrupted, saying before a motion is made and passed he didn't feel. the Commission was giving them much guidance, how many spaces they wanted to have, so an attempt could be made to fulfill some criteria. Mr. Ward said he -could understand tabling it for two weeks but what would happen if they don't come up with any kind of agreement. they are not being told whether the Commission wants 12 more: spaces, which they could acid if they can't enter into an agreement. If they can't get anybody to agree, they are just wasting two weeks. . Mr. Page said the addition is 25% over the existing retail use. Cffices and the theater are perfectly complementary. Mrs. Yrapcho asked Mr. Page if he could be more specific than 10 to 20 spaces. PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 24, 196 Mr. Levesque asked Mr. Page if.he had checked out a ratio over what ie there. Mr. Page replied he tried to do that; that Is why 10 would be a lower range. Mr. Judge said this is not the slowest time of year. ;astern Mounttain ",worts had its annual sale and there were matinees going at the same time to get a lot of people out, and there really wasn't a parkin; problem. Mr. Page said it. was.a difficult situation; it is the kind of lend use to be encouraged, but he wondered about the principle of the thing if' the expansion is allowed without any additional parking. What klnJ of position will the Commission be in when Zayres comes in for an expansion; they could point to this kind of precedent. Mr. Levesque suggested taking a special look at it when they have their sales, there is a lot of space there. The rational tables are haled on peak periods like Christmas; the maximum is overbuilt. Mr. Page said parking is not based on the maximum. Mr. Judge said the Environmental Agency Is beginning to look at parking requirements and think the parking requirements are much too stringent. This kind of center is not a typical thing and that has to be recognized. Mrs. Krapcho asked if thpa glonal planning review covered this particular combination, and Mr. Page did not, not the site plan itself, and he was not convinced that it would be objective. Chairman Wessel said that because it is an additional percentage of retail space and their parking lot is at least once or twice a year full, he would like an increase in parking, but because he doesn't know how much that increase should be he would say the ten spaces that Mr. Page mentioned. Mr. Armstrong said if they require just 10 more spaces, then they can go right ahead and put them near the theetnr or get, an agreement with an ad join, nz property owner. If the Commission puts it on this basis then they wouldn't have to come back to the Commission. Mr. Levesque suggested putting it in the back but Mr. Judge said there is a really nice tree there. Mr. Armstrong said for 10 parking spaces he would let it go like it is now. Mr. Judge asked if the Commission would consider a compromise, to leave it that way, and if a Parking problem should develop they would certainly have hc,:ld btu dlft'jc.,.It to r.,,, . en l o .. �. �.. lr. Judge said they would agree to that. Mr. r`.wing suggested trying to work out some agreement With the adjoininv property owners; if they cant. to cone back in and the Commission will discuss putting additional parking in at one or both ends of the theater. He said it seemed to him the parking should be increased at least to take care of the additional help that is going to be in the new building. If the Com- mission doesn't require an increase in parking there are many other people who can come in with the same point of view. Mr. Judge said anyone willing to make this kind of investment in landscaping and construction wants sufficient parking. Mrs. Krapcho said .1 t is looking ahead to the problem that the City would be responsible for. coming up with purchasing lard to pravide parkinf4. ';(�ut.pi `�urlington is not involved in providing parking like Burlington. but somewhere along the way parking must be made available. She said she thoroughly ap- preciated what has been done at 100 Dorset Street an-'. it Is just a fi43tter of PLANNINNG gQMMIS5-Ii3N FEBRUARY 24L 1.976 adding 5% to the amount of parking now there, but it is. true that 25% is being added to the retail floor space. It is an uncomfortable position to In. She would say to require the addition of 10 spaces. Mr. Levesque said.many people who shop there would leave their car at the Ramada Inn. He couldn't see any problem with parking. Mr. Ewing said he would like to see -additional parking. Mr. Lidral said he agreed with Mr,-strbng. Mrs. Krapcho moved that h deve�oy of00 Doraet�teet be r�gu,,jx,ed to submit a narkina elan showinm 230 spaces as paaKt of the site plan for their Seconded by Mr. Ewing. motion was not carried. Mrs. Krapcho then moved a e be Armstrong voted against this. The to clan a e ndscaDing plan for ra 1 naK e be saved and g — ed; 3� that wmlktra be constructed across the ianasaapeu area at that west and.42&bgegt bornerst 4 thale-k2nd or egulyllent security be ated to an amount equal t4 2 00 for landscaping; that the developer make an a fort to secure additional psrkln& in the event that the need arises. Mr. Judge asked if she meant the northeast corner. because the northeast corner is rather ugly; they have a walkway to the east already paved that goes into the Ramada lot. He asked where the walkway was wanted. Mr. Page said there should be some sort of a formal connector between the Red Bern and the shopping center; there is sort of a path there now. Mr. Burke said most of the path referred to lies on the Greer property. Mrs. Krapcho amended stipulation 3) as follows, that walkways be constructed nnrnna t_na laritipt mnad area to the southwest corner and across the northeast Motion seconded by Mr. Ewing and voted unanimously for approval. After a short recess the meeting was reconvened at 9:05 P.M. C?rnali zf1nJ1 n(,,:: on A TI GON, Inn. site plan reVlew for '; erNo rft I n ustr" 8': D*velopmment Authority Chairman Wessel said this is required by the Vermont Industrial bonding authority. Mr. Judge said the building referred to is on Airport Parkway and was sold to AVICON for a manufacturing facility for the manufacture of component electrioal parts, perhaps employing ton,people. They are applying for Vermont Industrial Development Authority Wincing at a favorable rate. As part of their application for "a loan th O are required to have this statement filled out by the loci Planning Commission. There Is no cost to the City for the facilities and he thought a similar statement had been signed for Harry Behney for the City's Industrial Park., Chairman Wessel said,he bad no obJection to signing it but he recommended that a zero be typed.in to show there is no cost to the City. The statement was signed by the Commission members. ?ebruary- 26 , 1.976 I.C.V. i'r . Pe for Jud, e 1^0 ;>orset :'tr^et South Purlinrton, VT 05401 Dear ''r. Judge: advised that your proposed addition to 100 Dorset ::tr =?t was Granted site plan approval by the outh ' l�rlin-ton Pl�anninr- Commission on 7obruary 24, 197 with tl_e followin;. con'itlons: 1) tl.r;t the City ']n-ineer the pr^nos d plan or root' 2) teat ti-. aeces, iron th p,,r1 in:- lot t(: t ;r-��­ property to the nort,-. I_•? Traded and pav­_d; D 3) that v 11-grays be cons! ructed across the lard- scap-d area to th- south%..­est corner and across the northeast boundaries or th— nropprty at an appropriate place; 4) that a bond or equivalent security be posted to an amount equal to '02,700 for landscapini-; and 5) that the developer mak- an ei"ort to secure addit`onal parking in the evert that the nead arises. zoning perrit will be issued for the proposed addition subjr,ct to the above condit-fons. Very truly, Richard .-:ard Zoning 'administrative ",icer Parch 39 1976 Yr. . Peter Judge I. C.V V. 100 Dorset Straet ou th 7 ur 1 in£ ton , �, m 0 cl+nl D ar Peter: This is to formalize the findin:•s of the :Tanning Uor-irliss'on on the site plan review of the addition to 1cl0 Dorsr t. "'he Commission finds that traffic access, circul,-Aior- anO par}cir:t , lar_dscapinr ana sere- -:in - are adequatr ;s shoim on the plan approved by the 'or -mission, or ens otherwise, stipulated in its motion of approval. DYours truly, IF 1-tephen Page rlannina :,.ssistant Sr/j i ADMINISTRATIVE CHECKLIST PROJECT NAME/FILE REFERENCE 100 �P*Q.e4--*' ba,�VCTI C+4 1. LETTER OF NOTIFICATION & APPROVAL MOTION OR FINDINGS & ORDERYe � 2. BONDING OR ESCR W AGREEMENTS LANDSCAPING Z`7dU SEWER WATER STORM DRAINAGE ROADS CURBS (NOTE ALL RELEASES OR AGREEMENT REVISIONS) 3. LIST APPROVALS GRANTEDWITH DATES AND PERMITS G & SITE INSPECTIONS COMPLETED, ETC.: 4. UTILITY EASEMENTS *, BILLS OF SALE RECORDED ACCEPTED 5. CERTIFICATE OF TITLE x 6. ROADWAYS DEEDS FOR CITY STREETS ACCEPTED PRIVATE ROAD & WAIVER AGREEMENT x 7. FINAL PLAT OR RECORD COPY - STAMPEff :j, SIGNED, & FILED OR RECORDED B. PEDESTRIAN EASEMENTS ACCEPTED & RECORDED FILED 9. MISCELLANEOUS AGREEMENTS LAND FOR ROAD WIDENING OFFER OF IRREVOCABLE DEDICATION FUTURE ACCESS POINTS SHARED ACCESS POINTS OTHER 10. COPY_OF_SURVEY TO ASSESSOR (IF CHANGE IN PROPERTY LINES) 11, FEES - PAID/DATE HEARING BUILDING P E'RM IT ENGINEERING INSP. SEWER RECREATION (RECORD CALCULATIONS AND DEPOSIT IN ACCOUNT) 12. IMPACT FOLLOW UP i.e., "ON LINE" EVALUATION: SCHOOL KIDS CAR COUNTS 1. The appeal is for relief from the height limitations of the South Burlington Zoning Ordinance. The shape of the lot is such that the new retail building must be narrow and long to accommodate a private street to be constructed to service the rear areas as well as to provide sufficient parking for customers near the front door. The two story building thus presents a very large facade along the north and south sides. A variance is requested to permit the construction of gables, which are in scale with the building, to relieve what would otherwise be a flat and relatively unattractive building front. 2. A bookstore of the size contemplated requires ceilings to be proportionate with the floor area. Thus the two story elevation is relatively high. In addition, a small parapet is planned to hide the roof apparatus. The gables are absolutely necessary to relieve the facade and to harmonize the structure with neighboring buildings in the development and elsewhere along Dorset Street. 3. The hardship has been created by the zoning ordinance, not the appellant, since otherwise the building has been designed in conformance with zoning regulations. The operation of the zoning ordinance in this case would make the structure considerably less attractive and somewhat discordant with its neighbors. 4. The variance, if authorized, will permit the building to conform more closely with its neighborhood. It will not impair the appropriate use and development of adjacent property. To the contrary, the variance will enhance the character of the neighborhood and help maintain the traditional appearance of Dorset Street. Therefore, the proposed gables will contribute to the public welfare, and benefit the ongoing efforts to upgrade Dorset Street. 5. The variance, if authorized, will represent the minimum variance that will afford relief. Most of the roof is flat and at the required height. The gables are merely an architectural modification to enhance the appearance of the building and avoid an unrelieved flat roof line which would clash with the other buildings along Dorset Street. City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 October 10, 1995 Mr. Peter Judge Century Partners 100 Dorset Street, Suite #18 South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Zoning Appeal Dear Mr. Judge: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Be advised that the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington City Offices, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street on Monday, October 23, 1995 at 7:00 P.M. to consider your request for a zoning variance. Please plan to attend this hearing and be prepared to address the enclosed review criteria. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mcp 1 Encl B'4t ` a EXISTING �y SERER (PAN --J1200 —"out-JaS3 a 0 `= S E 2 1 1995 of So. Burling City ton �c EXISRNC GAig1 BASIN PAYED AREA EXISTING J ---' GRAIN M.H. AD=JIJ.J5 W n. -307.5 J� 4 AW 17010. � • ( UNITS PAYED AREA EXISTING 5"MER YAIWOLE _._.a7101C------:._ ..:( — J1J.20 ------------- _ nv./-I-JOI.6 _ _:: _- .:.:.: ( / IO ../4-39.5 N6iYFAFE--�w � _-____-_______-p PAYED ARFA - - --- h ; ©EXISTING DRAIN 4 r -J1121 EXISTING .-J07.7 EXISTING CA TC. BASIN CA Bo Im-J1288 -J J.1 -TDM. VED BIIOPA {__—----------- _ _F________ EJ(tSrWC 6_ MAIE)E YAEN _____ _ EXISTDIO 12' SEDER Ww ' ---_ 401,K-12_"_!nAIQE uAlN S----- `-------- --------- ' IXI H B CA TCl1 BASIN •• m1-JIJ.17 MERLIN ING LIGHTING NOTES DCMTV40 TYPE 157REET LIONTwO (TWICAIJ wu"c Ir _ -R- $PRM-I5/tBG/RW4A aN EXISTING TYK IT LIWTM (TWICAL) LWEC 761M1.ANDI< SRA(V}GN lAD42/LBC4/W4A fJ/ N PROPOSED TWE III LIOf NNO SAW AS EXISTING r&E 1 SIRMT5GVE OMCW GUIDELINES LUMEC NEW .ESIMp67ER TBOPS BX �•- WABIA ALLMIMIY — 1w PROPOSED T in LJOHRNG PER 5a 9BRwCTcN SIREETSCAPE OESION CUIDELDLES LUYEc NEW .ESMwSTER. I601PS LW( -W- RA6IA ALIMI.W PGLF EXISTING _ CATCH RAS -J12.14 M.-J105 E LISrIMG 12- .MUFTI YAW ExrsrwG rr -TER N-------______ _ __ r __ . ------_GAS ______--____. CHI7TEMEN BANK I© V STING j I111EES TOJ CC REI.00A IED ro SN of 1 CRIRANCC�_ ONLY (_DUSTINC S4, SEWER MANIOC" �'�. `i y en1-3I3.84 ne- ' �ijY-- ti✓ 'i / q l EXISTING CATCH BASIN -J1Z.W ilr.-J08.4 ^ / �PL�hRNc 1p\ TRANS -+oi -MAR, SHRIFT' 5[IBAL7f k � / DRAM M.N. -STEP. SIGN DRAM .: R4 ZONE / \✓ice �� Jr. /) ♦ 1 uARr STREET / Ex1ENSILXN 9E7lAOf 1 EXISTING I , m-3 M.H. let- br.-J070 So tY� ,d.• ;1 ;I / I Ex'sTrwc O� � sl'" I CATCH BASIN l H I -311.89 9 L IL pTNNHCE LEL 11 l! I ------------ uN / L CT/lDI Cl11WTIONAI�! dwAN¢ � � UEpER OECX J1� �� USE BOtMDAR ® RAW LEVEL a' Nick STOCKADE FENCED SERVILE AREA ANCHORAGE MOTOR INN PLANNING DATA AT FULL SUILDOUT AREA Cl ZOW PLUSNE CONDITIONAL GO ZONE- 4J ACRES gAREA LDI ZOE MINUS CODITILINAL CI ZONE - 1.8 ACRES C EASiwG LOT OOK1fAlE CI ZOl - 67 S PROPOSED LOi MV£RAIF CI 2OE - 84.SI n EXISTING LOT 00VfRAGE GOT ZONE - 0 S PROPOSED LOT COLERAGE C01 ROVE - 68.8B CI ZONE -ELDIAG GOVEENArt (27.0011 ff r T8,4e0 SF) - 45.4415 S /4J560 - 1.04 ACRES 1.0. ACRES / ..I AGES . 2. R BUILDING CO—IACE CDT ZOLE WELDING OOtERALE (J.600 5F . 0.Js0 SF . 24.000 W) - J6.9W SF 35.950 SF/4 W - 0.67 ACRES M83 ACRES / L8 AGES - 48 R BUILDING 00KRALE OVERALL LOT COVERAIE - 80.IS FRONTYARD AREA (70 5W SETBAOO - 29.9W S.F. FJ057DNG C AGE . 74.1i PROPOSED COVERAGE - 79.8X ' n COSTING 6' ----- MAIN � CATCH BASIN -- 1 BASIN (BOVERSMY MALL REALTY TRUST DORSET STREET EXISTING FAIN Y.M. -JIJ.08 O,[_ -JGS.e N_ GRAIN CATCH BASk.IN '�—J -12.10 Mv.-J06.9 EtIBTING /' MIOE Ww PAO=03D B WAIu IN ro NTORANr EXISTING lLL��� mR.ule wrm ORNER. CENTURY PARTNERS. A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 100 DORSET STREET SUITE 1e SOUTH BURLINGTON. VT. 05403 caaphk scam 40 0 40 so IIO "a -A TRLIDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. f4rma1 .d d = 140ma Varmint UP04M 9b D. 1 b f�Vf106 . PYnM4 �m" 100 DORSET STREET COMPLEX 100 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vt SfleetTxfG Shopping Center Site Plan Phase I fi..R+1�NI.mO.t: 9,02254 Gaerefta= 00 fY led ILOMO i YAW [1MR: MAN 174 D.a= 0/28/95 F1 I112 SGi: 1' - "0' Appmwed SP I Century Partners, L.P. JUDGE, Peter 100 Dorset Street Area zoned C-1 District. Section 25.113 Height of structures, subsection (a & b) pitched roof structures shall not exceed more than 40 feet in height. Planning Commission may approve an increase in height up to 45 feet under P.U.D. review. Request is to construct a 35,000 square foot two-story building with roof gables at 50 feet above finish grade. #3 Appeal of Jonathan and Suan Mclean seeking a variance from Section 25.00 Dimensional re- quirements and Section 3.10 Boundaries of Con- servation -Open Space District of the South Bur- lington Zoning Regula- tions. Request is for permission to construct a 24'x3 two story at- tachei garage with 720 SOUTH BURLIN TONGTONG square feet of living area to within fifteen (15) feet ZONING NOTICE of the rear yard and five In accordance with the I Burlington Zoning (5) feet of the northerly side yard. Setback from a South Reggulations and Chapter Title_ 24� V.S.A. the minor stream proposed at thirty-five (35) feet, lo- 117, South Burlington Zoning cated at 19 Sherry Road. Board of 'Adjustment will_ ConNnuea Next Column #4 Appeal of Arthur Tou- cant, John & Nancy Guyette seeking a van - hold a public hearing at ance from Section 25.00 Burlington Mu- Area, density and dimen- the South nicipal Offices, . Confer- sional requirements of the ence Room, 575 Dorset South Burlington, South Burlington Zoning Regulations. Request Is Street, on Monday, Oc- for permission to sub-di- Vermont 23, 1995 at 7:00 vide a 4.5 acre parcel with lobar P.M. to consider the fol- fifty (50) feet of frontage lowing: into three (3) lots. Two - lots containing 38,850 #1 Appeal of Century square feet with zero Partners, Peter Judge agent seeking a variance frontage (20 foot r.o.w.) and the third lot con - from Section 25.113 structures sub tainin 2.7 acres with fifty (50) feet of frontage, lo- Height of itched roof cated at 1398 Hinesburg section o the South structures ula- Zoning Reg Road. Burlington Request is for per- #5 Appeal of Ken Des - mission to construct a mission mond, Jeff Nick agent 35,000 square feet two building with roof seeking approval from Section 26.65 Multiple story ables at a height of fifty uses of the South Burling- 50) feet, located at 10U ton Regulations. Request DDorset Street: is for permission to con- struct a 6465 square foot #2 Appeal of Bernard seeking a varl- building and occupy with a dual use (general office Couillard from Section; 26.00 and equipment service) ance Non -conforming uses, ex Conditional on a lot containing 1. acres located at 2 Green tensions and use approval from Section Tree Drive, sof the 26.65 Multiple uses Bur on toning Plans are on file with the South SoutRequest is Regulations.. to operate South Burlington Planning and Zoning Office, lo- for permission rep iry shop cated at City Hall, 575 an automobile .repair and to. Dorset Street, South Bur - lington, Vermont. (windshield (w in conjunction placement). with an:, existing auto- sales & ssr'A ' Richard Ward, motive business' d.b.a. Befnle's located �--'O Zoning Administrative Officer Auto Sales, Williston Road ;>,i: 1150 October 7, 1995 C �cial Use City of South Burlington APPLICATION # Application to Board of Adjustment �- HEARING DATE Date 10/2/95 FILING DATE AppL i c ant Century Partners, A Limited PartnershAt Owner, leasee, agent ip FEE AMOUlff & U Address 100 Dorset Street, # 18 Telephone # 863-6500 South Burlington, VT 05403 Landowner same Address Location and description of property 100 Dorset Street (site of the existing Century Plaza theater building) --- a portion of a PCD. Type of application check one ( ) appeal from decision of Administrative Officer( )request for a conditional use (XXXX) request for a variance. I understand the presentation procedures required by State Law (Section 4468 of the Planning & Development Act). Also that hearings are held twice a month (second and fourth Mondays). That a legal advertisement must appeal a minimum of fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing. I agree to pay a hearing fee which is to off -set the cost of the hearing. Provisions of zoning ordinance in question Section 18.112 Height of Structures Reason for appeal (Please see attached.) Request is to raise'the roof gables to 50 feet above ground level. The owner or applicant should, submit along with this application (8 copies) plans, elevations, landscaping diagrams (drawn to scale) traffic data and any other additional information which will serve as support evidence to the Board. i1 Hearing Date ' / Sfignatpre/of Appellant Do not write below t1his line SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE In accordance with the South Burlington Zoning Regulations and Chapter 117, Title 24, V.S.A. the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington Municipal Offices, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on e1^1"'ix, Day of Week at %��00 to consider the following: Month and Date Time Appeal of seeking a //f ,fit from of the South Burlington Regulations. Request is for �-permission ' to r js Section000, ... ryY9 /1-G.- ��- � � Gam. /�-�/� 6� �' Gv.�` �'�-;dam OPI JUDGE COMPANIES Amy Lindsay, Agent 100 Dorset Street & 2 Corporate Way Article 29 District boundaries, Sub -section 29.007 extension of a district line not to exceed fifty (50) feet. Proposal to extend C-1 District boundary southerly a distance of fifty (50) feet into an area zoned CD1. Total area of land involved 20,250 square feet. Extension of C-1 District will increase lot (100 Dorset Street) to 4.15 acres. Section 29.007 permtis extension as a conditional use. 100 DORSET STREET Area Calculations Existing 3.5 acres 152,418 s.f. (originally 162,936 s.f., Dorset St. taking was 10,518 s.f.) Triangle of CW land that falls within C1 District 14,566 s.f. (total currently in C1 3.83 alias, ol, 160,584 s.f.) 50' Additional Strip -w- Zoning Boundary Adjustment 14,000 s.f. New Total: 4.155 acres 180,984 s.f. Square Footage Retail 23,598 s.f. (includes restaurant & storage) Office 15,409 Theater 8,200 Total 47,207 s.f. City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 March 13, 1995 Ms. Amy Lindsay Judge Companies 100 Dorset Street, Suite 18 South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Zoning Application Dear Ms. Lindsay: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Be advised that the South Burlington Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the Municipal Offices, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street on Monday, March 27, 1995 at 7:00 P.M. to consider your request to extend a district boundary line on a parcel of land located at 100 Dorset Street and 2 Corporate Way. Please plan to attend this meeting and be prepared to address the enclosed review criteria. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mcp Encl 80ZOUTNNINBO URLINOTONNOTICE In accordance with the South Burlington Zoninc, Reeggulations and Chapter 117, Title 24, V.S.A. the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington Mu- nicipal Offices, Confer- ence Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on Monday, March 27, 1995 at 7.4 P.M. to consider the fol- lowing: #1 Appeal of Judge Com- panies, Amy Lindsay agent seeking approval from Section 29.007 Dis- trict Boundary adjust- ments of the South Burlington Zoning Regula- tions. Request is for per- mission to extend a Commercial 1 District boundary souther)y a dis- tance of fifty (50) feet into a area Zoned Central Dis- trio fora total lot area of 20.250 square feet on a property located at 100 Dorset Street and 2 Cor- porate Way. #2 Appeal of Wesco, Inc. David Simendinger agent seeking a variance from Section 12.10 Permitted uses and approval from Section 26.65 Multiple uses of the South Burling- ton Zoning Regulations. Request is for permission to operate a truck/trailer rental business in con- junction with " a service station on a lot containing 23,250 square feet lo- cated at 1118 Williston Road. #3 Appeal of Timberlake Associates, David Simen- dinger agent seekingg ap proval from Section 26.65 Multiple uses and Section 12.20 Conditional uses of the South Burlington Zon- ing Regulations. Request is for permission to con- struct a mini -mart con- taining 1750 square feet to include a gasoline op- eration with three auto- matic dispensers (canopy 32'x60') and a interior au- tomatic bank teller ma- chine on a parcel of land containing 1.8 acres lo- cated at 801 Williston Road. Plans are on file with the South Burlington Planning and Zoning Office, lo- cated at City Hall, 575 Dorset Street, South Bur- lington, Vermont. Richard Ward Zoning Administrative Officer March 11, 1995 JUDGE C O M P A N I E S March 8, 1995 Mr. Richard Ward Zoning Administrator City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Zoning Boundary Request Dear Dick: 100 Dorset St, Suite #18 South Burlington, VT 05403 802/863-6500 Fax 802/862-5828 As you requested, attached please find calculations of areas and square footage totals with respect to our recently submitted request for a conditional use/zoning boundary adjustment. Please feel free to call me should you have any questions. Sincerely, Amy Lindsay Official Use APPLICATION # City of South Burlington Application to Board of Adjustment Date March 3, 1995 Applicant Judge Comptaaaies Owner, leasee, agent Address 100 Dorset St. Suite 18 Telephone So. Burlington, VT 05403 Landowner Century Partners, LP HEARING DATE FILING DATE FEE AMOUNT # 863-6500 Address Same Location and description of property 2 Corporate Way 2.6 acre parcel of land, partially improved Type of application check one ( ) appeal from decision of Administrative Officer( X )request for a conditional use ( ) request for a variance. I understand the presentation procedures required by State Law (Section 4468 of the Planning & Development Act). Also that hearings are held twice a month (second and fourth Mondays). That a legal advertisement must appeal a minimum of fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing. I agree to pay a hearing fee which is to off -set the cost of the hearing. Provisions of zoning ordinance in question Section 29.007 Section 26.052 Reason for appeal Attached The owner or applicant should submit along with this application (8 copies) plans, elevations, landscaping diagrams (drawn to scale) traffic data and any other additional information which will serve as support evidence to the Board. ,� Q � Hearing Date Signa re fo App lant Do not write below this line ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE In accordance with the South Burlington Zoning Regulations and Chapter 117, Title 24, V.S.A. the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington Municipal Offices ,,, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on ,. Day of Week 02%/ %, at �- 11 �� - to consider the following: Month and Date Time Appeal of V seeking� G��0`0 -A from Section - of the South Burlington Regulations. Request is for permission to t r ♦ � /0' - -.k- .41 0/%, .H Official Use // City of South Burlington APPLICATION # /", Application to Board of Adjustment Date September 13, 1991 HEARING DATE. � �� Applicant Judge Development Corporation FILING DATE Owner, leasee, agent FEE AMOUNT Address P.0. Box 515, Willisto,Fdl14 ephone9#F 779-6500 Landowner Judge Development Corporation Address P.O. Box 515, Williston, VT 05495 Location and description of property Portion of land between Century Plaza Theater and Dorset Street. Part of 100 Dorset Street complex. Type of application check one ( ) appeal from decision of Administrative Officer( )request for a conditional use ( X ) request for a variance. I understand the presentation procedures required by State Law (Section 4468 of the Planning & Development Act). Also that hearings are held twice a month (second and fourth Mondays). That a legal advertisement must appeal a minimum of fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing. I agree to pay a hearing fee which is to off -set the cost of the hearing. Provisions of zoning ordinance in question C1 District front setback Reason for appeal Provide location for portion of telephone vault structure to be installed as part Ot Dorset Street widening project. The owner or applicant should submit along with this application (8 copies) plans, elevations, landscaping diagrams (drawn to scale) traffic data and any other additional information which will serve as support evidence to the Board. Hearing Date igndttfre of Appellant Do notw to Belo this line ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE In accordance with the South Burlington Zoning Regulations and Chapter 117, Title 24, V.S.A. the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington Municipal Offices, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on _ Day of eek at "' to consider the following: Month and Date Time `. Appeal of seeking a'�Q,�.,� Il.�,�r from Section of the South Burlington Regulations. Request is x 0 or permission 4.00 ' 6a, y � f �,,, '9r."..., r. ,. LA' � .��✓ �f�,N `+� �a:�^°j� �� ham'✓P"e�'N �.. /�TMA -.. a.. Pursuant to Section 26.052 of the City of South Burlington Zoning Regulations: Stated purpose of conditional use request: A zoning boundary adjustment is sought by the applicant pursuant to Section 29.007 of the Zoning Regulations. The applicant seeks to extend the regulations of the C1 portion of 2 Corporate Way approximately 50' to the south, thereby reducing the portion of the lot which falls within the CD1 district. The purpose of the request is to allow the applicant to complete a lot line adjustment between 100 Dorset Street and 2 Corporate Way, such that the proposed area which would fall within the C1 District may be combined with the area of 100 Dorset Street to create a lot which is in excess of four (4) acres, the required minimum acreage necessary for Planned Unit Development consideration. Demonstrate that the proposed zoning boundary adjustment will not adversely affect: (a) The capacity of existing or planned community facilities: The zoning boundary line adjustment will have little, if any, impact on existing or planned community facilities. C1 and CD1 Districts are quite similar in terms of permitted use. Both are compatible with the commercial surroundings of the area. The site will continue to be easily accessed by City services. (b) The essential character of the neighborhood or district in which the property is located, nor the ability to develop adjacent property for appropriate uses. The character of the area is almost entirely commercial. The zoning boundary will increase the C 1 district and decrease the CD 1 district. The proposed adjustment will not jeopardize the ability of adjacent properties to development appropriate uses. (c) Traffic on roads and highways in the vicinity. The zoning boundary adjustment would not affect traffic. The proposed adjustment increases the area of C1, which is subject to the Traffic Overlay District, while decreasing area in the CD1 District, which is not subject to the Overlay District. The effect is to increase City control of traffic generation for this property. (d) Bylaws in Effect. Should the boundary adjustment be approved, PUD status will be sought by the Applicant for its 100 Dorset Street property. The property is by zoning definition a shopping center, which is a permitted use under a PUD in the C 1 District. The property is currently a non- complying use, constructed prior to zoning regulation. Slightly higher lot coverage will be required with the adjustment. Overall, the City will gain greater flexibility in its application of bylaws. (e) Utilization of renewable energy resources. Applicant knows of no reason why the proposed adjustment would affect renewable energy resources in any way. (f) General public health and welfare. Applicant knows of no reason why the proposed adjustment would affect public health and welfare in any way. JUDGE DEVELOPMENT JUDGE, Peter 100 Dorset Street Area zoned C-1 District. Section 18.00 Dimensional requirements, minimum setback 50 feet. Proposed 101x171 telephone equipment -vault to within forty seven (47) feet. Existing use shopping complex, location of vault front of Century Plaza ( theater). City of South Burlington - 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 September 23, 1991 Mr. Peter Judge Judge Development Corporation P.O. Box 515 Williston, Vermont 05495 Re: Zoning appeal Dear Mr. Judge: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Be advised that the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the City Offices, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street on Monday, October-7, 1991 at 7:00 P.M. to consider your request for a zoning variance. Please plan to attend this hearing. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer 1 Encl RW/mcp LEGAL NOTICES djustmenttwilI hold of Anin r a of dj public hearing at the South Burlington Mnicl- once pal Offices, Room, 575 Dorset StVer, South Burlington, mont on Mondayy, October 7, 1991 at 7:00 P.M. to consider the following: #1 Appeal of Judge De- velopment Corporation seeking a variance from Section 18.00 Dimensio- nal requirements of tha South Burlington Regula- tions. Reguest is for per- mission to el hone construct. telephone see vault feet to loftn forty - the e seven ( and at 100 quired front y Dorset Street. EOZON N NG NOTICE In accordance with the South Burlington Regula- tions and Chapter 117, Title 24, V.S.A. the South Continued Next Column #2 Appeal of Independent Mobile Home Sales, Rich- ard Goldstein seeking a variance from Section 13.10 Permitted uses and 19 6oval from 5 Multiple uses oftthe South Burlington Regula- tionsRequest is for per- mission to operate a in- cludemobile ome sale, o a display of five models and abusiness office on a parcel located at taining 2 acres, 2069 Williston Road. Richard Ward, Zoning Administratoffive September 21, 1991 ..�-.yam, �� - v U` ���� �� �� ,�' l�,��7, ,��.w� � �1'r./ ,a-.-ter,,-� � A variance from the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance is respectfully requested. The purpose of the variance is to permit the installation of a small telephone vault to be unoccupied at all times except for the equipment contained therein and an occasional technician to service the equipment. In support of this request we offer the following; 1) There are unique physical characteristics which create the need for the variance. The telephone vault is of a standard manufactured dimension, designed carefully to accommodate the particular equipment to be located within the structure. Because the installation by other utilities in the immediate vicinity, it is necessary to locate the vault in front of the theater. While the vault is narrow enough to otherwise remain beyond the 50' setback line from Dorset Street, the equipment requires that a subterranean ground wire be installed outside the perimeter of the structure, a circumstance which pushes the building approximately three feet closer to Dorset Street. 2) Because of the physical circumstances described in 1) above, there is no possibility that the vault can be located in strict conformity of the Zoning Regulations. Were it to be placed beside the theater, and thus further from Dorset Street, the vault would encroach within the sideyard setback. It is not possible to place the vault in this area in any event because the power company will be installing additional above ground equipment in this location and because extensive powerlines below ground will interfere with telephone company lines to the building. Were the building to be moved into the parking lot established for the benefit of the 100 Dorset Street complex, it would reduce the required parking spaces for the complex. Accordingly, the authorization of a variance is necessary to enable the reasonable use of the property for telephone company equipment. 3) Hardship has not been created by the appellant. Improvements to Dorset Street require that telephone equipment and lines be removed from pole structures and placed either below ground or in vaults similar to the one proposed. Also, land taken from the 100 Dorset Street property created the need for this appeal. Therefore, municipal actions have created the need for the variance. 4) The variance, if authorized, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The neighborhood consists of commercial structures and accessory uses. More immediate neighbors include other telephone, cable television and power company installations. Installation of the vault will further the Dorset Street Improvement Project which is of great benefit to the neighborhood and district. The public welfare will be served, both now and in the future, by the installation of the vault which will allow future adaptability to the changing needs of the neighborhood without additional construction. 5) The variance, if authorized, represents an encroachment of a maximum of three feet within the front yard setback area. Other structures on Dorset Street are now located much closer. Engineers for New England Telephone have found no way to reduce the encroachment further. The vault represents the minimum standard design to meet code and grounding requirements. 21 Lavigne Road Essex Junction, VT 05452 August 27, 1984 Mr. Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator City of South Burlington City Hall South Burlington, VT 05401 Dear Dick: On behalf of Champlain Valley Broadcasting Corporation, I hereby request that our application for a Zoning Permit at 100 Dorset Street be withdrawn as we have decided against using that facility for our studio facilities. We are currently nego_._ating for a new site and will make proper application to the Board for a Zoning Permit for whatever new site we decide upon. I appreciate your cooperating with us and I will be in touch again in the near future. Sincerely, Howard M. Ginsberg Vice-President/Chief Engideer Champlain Valley Broadcasting Corp. No Text August 13, 1984 Mr. John Nichols Champlain Valley Broadcasting Corporation 16 Waybury Road Colchester, Vermont 05446 Re: zoning appeal Dear Mr. Nichols Be advised that the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the City Offices, Conference Room, on Monday, August 27, 1984 at 5:00 P.M. to consider your request for a zoning variance. Please plan to attend this hearing. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mcg v 6"Li'' mTON ZONING NOT1O9 In accordancewiththe Sou* orid ChapterZ117, Title 4i Vt S,A, the South Burling" Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold o public hearing at the South &w- knQtOO om Nrence Room, 5773 Offices. Street, South Burlington, Vetmom on Monday, August 27, 1984, at 5 00 consider the follow- ing 01 Appeal of Gordon Jarvis seeking o variance, from Section 19.65, Multiple uses of the South Burlington Regulations. Request is for rmission to operoN a con- $toro in conjunction with a service station, at flue Interstate Texaco, 1055 WiNston Road. e2 Appel of S.B. Collins, Mi- choel Smith, agent seeking a variance, from Section 18.00, sun section 18.101 Dimensiwwl requirenwnts of the South Bur- lington Regulations. Request is for perm"on to construct a 25'x 8S canopy to within four (4) foot of the required from yard at the Short Stop Getty, 1830 Sheibume Road. e3 Appeal of Charles T. Shea seeking appll'gproval, from Section of the South Burlingtowith n~ Mons. Request is for permissionto extend an axishng 12" culvert by an odditiond fihy (50) feet and fill an area of approximately 8,000 square feet, area in tion is a Conservation and Spoce District, located at 23 brewer Parkway. 04 of Champlain Valley asl" Corporation seek. {rip o variance, from Section 1 f.10, Pernrtted uses of the South Burlington Regulations. Re - guest is for permission to open• at* a rodio studio, in conjtmcNon with other retoiloffice uses, at 100 Dorset Street. Richard Ward Zoning Administrative Officer August 11, 1984 SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Name, address and telephone lI of applicant por Name, address of property owner f` f� l/tiG2'9Q `kz2 'Y15 loe Property location and description I hereby appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for the following: conditional use, variance or decision of the administrative officer. I understand the meetings are held twice a month (second and fourth Mondays). The legal advertisement must appear a minimum of fifteen (15) days before the hearing. I agree to pay the hearing fee of $30.00 which is to off -set the cost of the hearing. Hearing Date gnature of Appellant Do not write below this line ' --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE In accordance with the South Burlington Zoning. Regulations and Chapter 117, Title 24 V.S.A. the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington Municipal Offices, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on at (day of week) (month and date) time to consider the following: �J / // seeking a +,a4--44 . � -n .-c " from Section of th" "outh Burlington Regulations. Roqut'st is for prrtill ssion to ELECTRON SCALA CORPORATION I POST OFFICE BOX 4580 MEDFORD, OREGON 97501 (503) 779-6500 APPLICATIONS: P R-450 U PARAFLECTORTM • UHF -TV RECEPTION • UHF -TV TRANSLATORS • TELEMETRY • CATV SYSTEMS • POINT-TO-POINT COMMUNICATIONS • AURAL BROADCAST STL SYSTEMS klta >0 Frequency Range: Impedance: Gain: Maximum VSWR Polarization: Front -to -Back Ratio Input Power Rating; Termination: A3' 1,10J, - ELECTRICAL SPECIFICATIONS Any specified frequency 350 to 1000 MHz Any UHF -TV channel 470 to 890 MHz (14-83) 50 or 75 ohms (See gain curve overleaf) 1.2:1 at specified frequency 1.2:1 over UHF -TV Channel (6 MHz) 1.5:1 over bandwidth of Fc ± 2% H or V (Patented Universal Mount allows either) 20 db (25 db on special order — model PR-450CU) 100 Watts Type N Female (50 or 75 ohm type) MECHANICAL SPECIFICATIONS Net Dimensions: 18" x 36" x 68" (less dipole feed assembly) Net Weight: 32 pounds Shipping Weight: 62 pounds Shipping Dimensions: 21" x 37" x 70' (Approximately 32 cubic feet) Wind Load: 304 pounds (100 MPH with 1/4" radial ice) Note: Two Scala PR-450U Paraflectors can be nested in a single crate with a total weight of 94 pounds in order to minimize shipping costs. PARAFLECTOR-" i ' 4 RFGjSTFPED TRADEMARK, i n.9r) L�Am w, i � �✓ �2 POYJ[: /2 PC1 i.,.rTS r/u�.> i Z-, . aL , _ � p{ j RADIATING PLOTS — ELATIVE VOLTAGE 450MNx 950MHz �m i w r � 148 >.. 04�14+50 MH= 12, 94 03O MNz600 100 _. GAIN vs FREQUENCY r 03 r - :ro• Z SCALA PARACLECTOR OP �` 1 i 6a MODEL PR-45OU 4 >. // `—DfPOLE ZDIPOLE - FREQUENCY - MH. - y p.a. 0 150 350 450 _ — 550 W _ 750 250 ff9_ Gain curve \ d Model PR 450U Horizontal plot Model PR•450U Horizontal plot Horizontal polarization Vertical polarization The Scala PR-450U ParaflectorT"' is widely used in point-to- point communications, telemetry and UHF -TV systems in the 1� 350 to 1000 MHz spectrum. ParaflectorTM performance approxi- mates that of a parabolic dish of the same aperture, and is l �� easier to assemble and install. The PR 450U offers rugged construction for reliable long-term service, even in severe envi- ronmental conditions. E e The PR-450U is fabricated using anodized 6061-T6 aluminum ~I'C/=L3/fir pipe and tubing, heavy aluminum castings, and stainless steel — fastenings and hardware. Screen elements are laminated to dampen vibration and reduce metal fatigue. All elements, Mounted for vertical polarization including the driven element, are at DC ground potential for maximum lightning protection. The ParaflectorT"' uses Scala's exclusive balun feed, engineered to assure equal distribution of current to the driven element and greater electrical and mechanical stability. The metal dipole support boom is filled with dielectric foam to prevent moisture absorption and insure reliability. The internal balun allows the driven element to be supported by metal a rather than insulators, providing more strength. Scala's unique universal mount allows the ParaflectorT"' to be installed with vertical or horizontal polarization. Mounting castings and stainless steel U-bolt assemblies are designed for attachment to a circular support with an outside diameter 2 to 2%' . For applications requiring higher front -to -back ratios, Scala offers the Model PR-450CU, with additional screen elements. Coaxial cable harneses are available for stacking ParaflectorsT11 for increased gain and directivity. Mounted for horizontal polarization SCALA ELECTRONIC CORPORATION POST OFFICE BOX 4580 MEDFORD, OREGON 97501 (503) 779-6500 ORDERING INFORMATION: Specify operating frequency or UHF -TV Channel, and desired impedance (50 or 75 ohms) PUBLIC 1EMING SOUPii BUIZLINGI`ON CITY COUNCIL In accordance with Section 4443 (c) , Title 24 the South Burlington City Council will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington City Hall, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on MDnday, February 1 1982 at 7:30 P.M. to consider the following: The application of Donald J. Weinreich of South Burlington, Vermont for approval to convert an additional 800 square feet (presently occupied by Feeney & Daughters) into a dining area with a seating capacity of fifty people, said conversion will enlarge the existing Cork & Board, located at 100 Dorset Street. Copies of the application are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall. Paul A. Farrar, Chairman, South Burlington City Council • January 16, 1982 February 4, 1982 Kr. Donald Weinreich Cork & Board 100 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Mr. Weinreich: The City CDuncil granted approval of your request to expand your operation by 800 square feet. All state and local permits must be obtained prior to construction. If you have any questions don't hesitate to call me. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mcg January 7, 1981 Donald J. Weinreich The Cork & Board 100 Dorset Street South BLirlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Mr . Pieinreich, Thank you for submitting the requested traffic data for your proposed expansion of the Cork & Board into space previously occupied by Feeney and Daughters. Based on this information plus the calculating described below I U am now of the opinion that your expansion does not have to be reviewed by the Planning C ictission under the City's traffic criteria. Let me preface my remarks by saying that traffic projections are an inexact science. Our goal is too prevent traffic conditions in congested areas of the City -from getting worse, =-; and to achieve this end we ,nust combine a certain ariount of traffic knowledge, U c-cr en sense, and awareness of the degree of inpact of any proposed new use. 1) The proposed expansion is within an established shopping center (100 Dorset Streit). In such cases we evaluate traffic for the entire shopping center. Based on you,- noon hour anti p.m. peak hour counts plus a previous p.m. peak hour count of mine, I estimate the peak traffic period for 100 Dorset Street to be the noon hour during which there are approximately 250 trips (total trips, in plus out) . 2) Based on your estimates of previous and proposed traffic for Cork & Board and Feeney & Daughtesrs plus my calculating from national standards, previous Ltraffic during the noon hour would have been approximately 18 trips, or 7.2% of the entire shopping center. Proposed traffic will be approximately 23.5 trips, or 9.4`i; of the shopping center. The increase will be 5.5 trips, or 2.2%. 3) .You rave assumed that 60% of existing food take-out customers consists of foot traffic from nearby offices, stores, and motels. If this assumption is also true for the deli restaurant addition, it will reduce the anticipated in- crease in vehicular traffic. 4) Since you already have a deli operation, since there will be no additional floor space inthe shopping center, and since the traffic increase (if any) will be marginal I do not feel any further review under traffic criteria is warranted.- 5) Becuase of growing traffic on Dorset Street there may eventually be a need for a traffic signal at the entrance to 100 Dorset Street, however, it is un- realistic to connect that traffic improvement with this particular application. Donald J. Weinreich January 7, 1981 Page 2 G) You must still appear before the City Council since a restaurant is a permitted use (subject to traffic limitations in the Cl zone proposed zoning ordinance but not in the existing ordinance. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, David H. Spitz, City Planner MEMORANDUM To: South Burlington City Council From: Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer Re: Cork & Board, 100 Dorset Street Date: 1/28/82 Proposal is to increase the size of the existing Cork and Board. The present facility contains approximately 1000 square feet. The expansion will be 800 square feet which is presently occupied by Feeney & Daughters. The expansion will permit a deli type restaurant with a seating capacity of no more than 50 people. The area is presently zoned Commercial I District, prohibiting the use, under the proposed regulations the use would be permitted if it conforms to the traffic criteria. This addition does meet the criteria (see attached letter from David Spitz). January 21, 1982 Mr. Donald J. Weinreich Cork and Board .� 100 Dorset Strut South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Mr. Weinreich: Be advised that the South Burlington City Council will hold a public hearing at the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street on Monday, February 1, 1982 at 7:30 P.M. to consider your application to increase the size of your operation at D100 Dorset Street. Please plan to attend this hearing. Also, please forward the plans to this office by Monday, January 25, 1982. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mcg h THE CORK & BOARD CHEESE - BAKERY - DELICATESSEN 100 DORSET ST. - SO. BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 - (802) 864-5656 January 5, 1982 City of South Burlington Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05401 Attention: Mr. Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator Subject: Traffic Study Reference: Expansion of The Cork & Board Dear Mr. Ward: In accordance with our earlier telephone conversation, en- closed are the figures, both actual and estimated, pertaining to the referenced expansion at the 100 Dorset Street Shopping Center. The Cork & Board will enlarge its present facility from 1000 square feet to 1800 square feet incorporating the space now occupied by Feeney & Daughters. This expansion will permit operation of a deli type restaurant seating no more than 50 persons. The enclosed data hopefully provides the information you need for your review. If there are any questions or further information is desired, please contact the undersigned. Very,truly yours, Do ald J. Weinreich Enclosure r TRAFFIC DATA EXPANSION OF THE CORK & BOARD Average Daily CORK & BOARD (1000 sq.ft.) # of Visitors (1) Ratio Retail 160 49% Food Take-out Service 115 (2) 36% FEENEY & DAUGHTERS (800 sq.ft.) Retail 50 15% Present Total 325 100% EXPANSION (1800 sq.ft.) (3) Retail 170 47% Food Take-out Service 90 25% Restaurant 100 28% Total 360_. 100% Net Increase 35 11% NOTES: 1. Daily averages based on 9 month historical data. 2. 60% of existing food take-out service customers are foot traffic from offices and stores at 100 Dorset Street, University Mall employees, and nearby motels. 3. Anticipated store/restaurant hours would be from lam until 1Opm, Monday thru Saturday, and from lam until 3pm on Sunday. Daily average would decrease approximately 50% on Sundays. No Text No Text (.,)V;; wn� LP 91A -- - LVOP r — :ip 'J TIM _ l Pill / r} 't,") '��%111f!r -45 ,.. �-+ �G����' /O'er'✓ Y a A. Required Number of Spaces From Parking PrinciRles Highway Research Board 1971. P. 399 table 3.2- "Zoning Standard Guidelines.' Us e -offices and banks -general retail -shopping centers -auditoriums & theatres Min. # of _parking spaces reouirec 3.3/1000 sq. ft. of gross floor area of building 4.0/1000 sq. ft. of gross floor area of building 5.5/1000 sq. ft. of gross less - able area .3/sea t -Parking Requirements of 100 Dorset Street Using these Standards- ist floor retail (including addition) approx. 21,300 GFA-85 spaces 2nd floor offices approx. 17,000 GFA-56 spaces 2 theatres 600 seats-3�.80 spaces 121 spaces B. Employees and Hours of Operation Approx. 58 people working in offices, located on second floor Hours of operation: Decorative Things Cork & Board Company Store Audio Den Eastern Mountain Sports 9:30-9:00 Mon/Sat. 10:00-6:00 p.m. Thurs.-Fri. 9:00 p.m. 10:00-9:00 Mon/Fri. 10:00-6:00 p.m. Sat. 9:00-9:00p.m. Mon/Fri 10:00-6:00 p.m. Sat. 9:00-9.-00 p.m. Mon/Sat. J I 3',parch 3, 1976 Yx. Peter Judge. 1. C.V. 100 Dorset Strnet 1 C5401 -) `'outh -�-urlinf-,ton, %,7 D,-.,ar Peter: ,his is to formalize thr, lindin-s of the Planning Fomimiss4--on on the site plan review of the addition to 100 rjorsrA. The Commission finds thLA traffic access, circulation and parkin.F, landscapinF and are adequatp as shown on the pl-,-:n. approved by the ?.or,^,riission, or cis otheritiise stipulated in its motion of approval. SP/J Yours truly, Stephen Page Plannin,7 !'{ssistant MEM ORA NI? UM TO: SOUTH BURLING TON PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: STEPHEN S. PAGE, PLANNING ASSISTANT RE: SITE PLAN REVIEW, PROPOSED ADDITION TO 100 DORSET STREET DATE: FEBRUARY 24, 1976 I. Par i, gg I have made an estimate on how much parking is needed at 100 Dorset tt with the proposed addition. This estimate is based on llaccepted references, 2)actual counts (over a 1 month period), correlated with retail sales figures of Eastern Mountain Sports, the "anchors' tenant, 3)interviews with tenants, and 4)a general evaluation of the site and surrounding land uses. 1. Additional parking for 4.300 sq.ft. of retail space in a shopping center ranges from 17,` to 43 spaces (South Burlington Zoning). 2. Counts of parked. cars show the peak demand for parking generally occurs Saturday afternoons, with high demands also on Thursday and Friday evenings. Over the last month, at these peak hours, 115-180 cars were parked on the lot, which presently has about 218 spaces. Using retail sales figures of Eastern Mountain Sports as a rough guidelinefparking demand, the peak parking months at 100 Dorset are December, followed by April, October, November, January. (These four months about the same). Consequently, it could be inferred that the actual counts (taken during January and February) indicate that parking at 100 Dorset is generally adequate throughout the year except for the Christmas shopping season. 3. All tenants (excepting upstairs offices) were inter- viewed and there was unanimous agreement that parking is adequate at 100 Dorset except during Christmas. Several tenants expressed concern over cars parking in the primary aisle, which disturbs the internal circulation pattern. 4. Present parking is adequate for the existing uses at 100 Dorset. Improvement of internal circulation would be desirable. Additional on site parking spaces (at varying costs)could come from the areas to the east and the west of the theatres, relocation of landscaping, or rearrange- ment of existing aisles and islands. Off site parking may be available nearby from the Ramada property or Greer's. Substantial pedestrian and/or vehicular travel can be expected between 100 Dorset and all abutting land uses. Conclusion -Parking The present use of the parking area is more sustained, intensive, and efficient than most other facilities in the City. The proposed. addition should be accompanied by 10- 20 new parking spaces and 1 loading space to maintain the status quo in terms of parking supply and demand. These spaces could be provided. on site at the South end of lot, by the theatres, or possibly by an agreement with an abuttor who has excess parking area. The demand for the additional spaces will occur at the north end of the property, around the addition, and will probably have some impact on Greer Is, directly to the north. Finally, it should be noted that because parking or shopping trends may change, as well as the tenants themselves, some reserve in ultimate parking capacity should be maintained. This would be possible, whether the additional, recommended spaces come off -site or on site. II. Circulation Access to Greer's should be paved and maintained year-round. Sidewalks at the southwest (to Zayres, possibly the Anchorage) and northeast (to Red Barn, Ramada) corners of the property will satisfy pedestrian demands and reduce unnecessary driving. -2- S. T. GRISWOLD & CO., INC. GRISWOLD INDUSTRIAL PARK Williston, Vermont 05495 Tel. 802 — 658-0201 CP S. T. GRISWOLD & CO., INC. GRISWOLD INDUSTRIAL PARK Williston, Vermont 05495 Tel. 802 — 658-0201 i No Text I" T -- ���'► 1�, ago , 04 ac-�cc= o 8cb -,ate Iv 04 J:-jT C-L-,�'q C. (00c) ir -zz7 o - s5-0' 15-0.0 3 31 1 4,0 Ot57- S. - cro" a a;a 4� JL (a5' 4-K —5-0 I op I No Text A �& 11A.RJUNG CONS IDERAT IONS FOR 100 DORSET STREET ADDITION It is the. concern of both :1CV and South Burlington that any proposed addition to 100 Dors)t Street not result in a parking shortage for that facility. ICV lwis considered the j,,.:ote3.Aia1 probR,-,,ms carefully and submits these conclusions for the Zov:dxg Board's cozisideration. Present Parkincr is arnple for -the existing facilities a,�L 3.00 Dors. ,.7,,,t Strt;,,,tat. for the few days prior to Sao crowdi7ST has been exi:)-arienced, and ICV has bet:,ni able to extend the courtesy of coxinnmitex parking for between 3.0 and 20 automobiles daily. 1CV feels it unwise to bace parking plans on the few days prior to Christman lf,,.^,aving sizoable areas of vacant parking surface during the rest of the year. Plans for ex� �ansion show a-,,'i increzl.s(� of seven parking ,?,pacas from 218 to 225. 1CV feels that with this increase, will continue to be adequate for the� J:, following rensonn. ():[." -the 4300 square feet of new flo(,,)r sp,,,ice being adeledo 1550 square feet comprises an addition to the Eastern Mlountain 13ports facility to correct an overcrowded condition. Th,,hu .,hould b.ave no significant impact on he parkin,q reguired.. t - The rertaining 2750 square feet would require 11 parking space�-.,, if the 4.0/1000 square feet standard from Parkina Principles�, Higlxway Reaearch Board is a-pplied. By adding seven parking spaces said is�ccontinui6�thle ccomuteer parki orthan wj 1 11. new ppaces wil au A second line of reasoning may be applied which riore carefully considers the bof urae of activity the new space wil,'I, �:,,,�anerate. Since present parki 01 SYM,"C' it should provide a more accurate parking space to gross floor Page 2 area ratio than the general. retail figure foLind in Parkin(:I, which accounts, for ue:mt,.; not ga:Y"o;se%'st at 100 Calculation of this ratio results in a figure of 2.3 spaces/1000 square feet~ implying the need of 7.7 spaces to support the roposed addition ( see Parking considerations For 100 Dorset Street Addition Calculation Sheet Cal"lati-0111 Of Parking space to gross floor area ratio, based 0", 'present local conditions. Present conditions: 218 parking spaced 17,000 square feet of GFA retail space Assupjc,� the, relative demands for various tppes of space in Parking Priaciples are Correct. 68 spaces require,d for 17,000 square feet Of GFA retail 304 total spaces required (a6w"-111 1:--Kz-;I kkoV451W, 68/304 = 22% of parking now devoted to retail space or (218) (.22) = 48 spaces 48/17 - 2.8 sPaces/1000 square feet Of GFA retail Z2381) (2750/1000) 7.7 new spaces requiked 4 8 A F"0�1 l , t s 4-7 7,7 a� I!I tr17` © j J ` `1J «,..c�c czM .o Parkinn- Va iance Rennest A. Required Humber g f Spaces From Parking PrinciUies Highway Research Board? 1971. P. 399 table 3.2- "Zoning Standard Guidelines.' Us e -offices and banks -general retail -shopping centers -auditoriums & theatres Min. #,{ of _parking spaces reauirec 3.3/1000 sq. ft. of gross floor area of building 4.0/1000 sq. ft. of gross floor area of building 5.511000 sq. ft. of gross less - able area .3/seat -Parking Requirements of 100 Dorset Street Using these Standards - 1st floor retail (including addition) approx. 21,300 GFA-85 spaces 2nd floor offices approx. 17,000 GFA-56 spaces 2 theatres 600 seats-180 spaces 21 s aces B. Emi)loyees and Hours of Operation ('')' a J. Approx. 58 people working in offices, located on second floor Hours of o era i : Decorative Things 2t1 I rk & Board Pony •Lore udio Den ,.t' has tern Mountain Sports Cv bul i 9:30- :00 Mon/Sat. 10:00-6:00 %�: p.m. Thurs.-Fri 00.00 P.M. 16:fl0- :00 Mon/Fri. 10:00-6:00 p.m. Sat. j Mon/Fri Ake 10 : GO --6 : 00 p . m p.►n. Mon/Sat. 'may q � - -i-, ��=�,Q� ►2-�' � t®--(o t,.110`1 4- Ove1z -* I-._ ";, �, -Lc L,,A State of Vermont AGENCY OF DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (802) 828-3211 DEPARTMENTS OF: Economic Development 828-3221 Housing & Community Affairs 828-3217 January 27, 1976 Stephan Page, Planning Assistant City of South Burlington 1175 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Steve: MONTPELIER, VERMONT 05602 DIVISIONS OF: Administration 828-3231 Historic Preservation 828-3226 Information / Travel 828-3236 Vermont Life Magazine 828-3241 Outdoor Advertising 828-3215 Thank you for your January 22, 1976 letter outlining the controversy over the waiving of parking requirements for the 100 Dorset St. shopping center proposed expansion. Unless I misunderstand the facts, this is a relatively straight forward problem. Presumably the project is a permitted use in a commercial district and subject to site plan review by the planning commission with respect to traffic access, circulation and parking, and land- scaping and screening. Under section 13.40 of the South Burlington zoning ordinance, the planning commission is authorized to waive the required ordinance parking requirements if it finds and establishes for the record substantial evidence to justify such a decision. However, it's determination must be guided by responsible planning considerations that would require adequate and appropriate parking for all present and anticipated needs. It could waive certain ordinance parking requirements where there is to be little or no generation of need [§13.40 (a) and (c)] or where different uses within a complex generate a parking need at different times of the day or week so that a given space could serve for both [§13.40 (b)]. But it could not legally waive ordinance requirements for an alleged personal hardship in order to allow a developer to exact a higher return from his land at the expense of the municipality or others who would be faced with the cost or inconvenience of absorbing the traffic and parking impact of a poorly planned proposal. Mr. Page Page 2 January 27, 1976 Incidentally, the 50% waiver limitation is an arbitrary and irrelevant cutoff that has no bearing on the complex of facts and circumstances that should be considered by the planning commission under site plan review. Nor do I interpret the ordinance to say that up to 50% of the required parking can be waived by the planning commission "provided the applicant can prove unique or extenuating circumstances." The language of the second paragraph of §13.40 simply says that the minimum parking requiremnts may be waived if found to be unnecessary as they relate to a specific proposed use. Any deferment of ordinance parking requirements riot related to the staging of development would not only be undesirable, but also improper, for it is unlikely that the planning conmiission or any interested party could bring successful enforcement action retro- actively. From your letter, I can discern no basis for board of adjustment involvement in this matter. The ordinance basically delegates this responsibility to the planning commission under site plan review, whereas the board of adjustment has jurisdiction under Chapter 117 only over unique site hardship variances that, if not authorized, would result in denying reasonable use of the land. This is not the case here, for the property is being used intensively and reasonable expansion could probably take place by reducing the pro- posed floor space sufficiently to allow for more parking, or at least so as not to overburden the existing facilities. As I read your letter, Steve, the board has no jurisdiction to consider or waive parking requirements, for none of the conditions enumerated under §4468 (a)(1-5) apply. I hope to have adequately answered your questions about this matter, Steve. Should you have further questions or need clarification of the above comments, please let me know. Enclosed is a package of materials that was handed out at the municipal planning law conference in June. (Sending materials under separate cover.) Sincerely, H. William Mitchell Chief of Technical Services HWM/lp ?bri)ary 26, 1976 I.C.V. !,'x. Pe ter Ju(,:-e 1'�0 Dorset ', trEet 'South T,,urlington, VT 05401 Dear "r. Judge: th,-.,.t ynur proposed adel jt4 Lon to 100. Dorset ­;tr­--,t ,,,:.Ls Orantpl site plan approval by the oath 7'urlin,.-ton Planninp Commission on "r,bruary 24, 1976 with tree followinr. con,lit.7-ons: J 1) thit the City E'nrine�r review the propos.­}d plan ' for roof nrainal- 2) that the aocess- from the p�)rkin;,- "Lot to the Grerr property to the nort'I'. be €,raded and paved; 3) that be constructed across the land- s cap�d area to th- southvest corner and across the northeast boundaries of thQ property at an appropriate place; 4) that a bond or equivalent security be posted- to an amount equal to e2,700 "or landscapin�-,; and 1/7 that the developer mak,,� an efort to secure adiit`onali narking, ir the event that the need arises. of zonJ.n,- permit be issued for the proposed addition subjrct to the above cond-itlons. Very truly, Richard ",Ward Zoning Administrative , "icer Rl,,T/j PLANNING cOMMISSION F_EBRUA RY 241_12Z6 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, February 24, 1976, in the Conference Room, Municipal Offices. 1175 Williston Road. MEMBERS PRESENT William Wessel, Chairman; James Ewing, Frank Armstrong, Arlene Krapcho, Ernest Levesque, Frank Lidral MEMBERS ABSENT None OTHERS PRESENT Stephen Page. Planning Assistant; Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator; Bryan Burke, Paul Sprayregen, Peter Judge, Carlo Wolff, Thomas Schmidt The meeting was opened by the Chairman at 7:33 p.m. Minutes of February 10. 1976 The following is to be inserted on page 5 after the sentence beginning "Mr. Diggle said the developer..." Stuart Ireland aRreOd to�edestrian use of the s_exer easement running to the Kno_xland properiy at the northeast corner of Meadowood at Spearpm develoent. - — It was moved by Mr. Ewing and seconded by Mr. Armstrong and voted unanimously to accept the Minutes of February 1Os_19Zbs with the above noted addition. Site plan reviews proposed exTansion of 100 Dorset Street Bryan Burke, using the site plan drawing displayed on the board for illustration, indicated the lower roof for the new building with a flat roof for the transition area, and the covered walkway through the building giving access to the parking lot. They wanted to get a point which would be a primary entrance and exclude deliveries from this point. By readjusting the parking they have been able to maintain the eaae number of parking places that are on the site now. He Indicated trees now in the parking spaces that will be moved to a new location. Mr. Armstrong asked about long range plans for the intersection to the Ramada Inn parking lot at the northeast corner. Mr. Judge said it is intended to be blocked -off and Mr. Burke said they would rather haves crossover where it is paved. Mrs. Krepcho f the planting on the model at. the rear of the building is there now, and what new planting would be proposed. Mr. Burke indicated the landscaping adjacent to the building, some more land- scaping at the southwebt corner near the corner of the- theater and said there are a couple of trees out front.they want to move back. Asked by Mrs. Krapcho if they would be thinning out the trees in back of the building significantly or would there still be a fair amount of growth there, Mr. Burke said the birches will all remain. Mr. Judge said they did have to move a flowering crab because it was not doing well. 2. FLANKING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 24L 12Z6 Mrs. Krapcho asked Mr. Ward about the value of the landscaping. Mr. Ward said they hadn't talked about the estimated cost or what the project had for landscaping. Mr. Judge then explained that in their own calculations they planned in excess of $4,000 of landscapingt the proposed addition would cost in the vicinity of 00,000; he would post a bond for it or put some money in escrow for $2700. He felt they had demonstrated their interest in landscaping prior to this and have spent a considerable amount. They would like to get some flexibility. The landscaping is an integral approach to the building but they would like to see how it works out when the building is up in order to do the best job. The trees indicated are mostly 3" in caliper and the ever- greens are 8' in height and there are also small plantings. Chairman Wessel asked if there was a list of tree species and the number and Mr. Judge said there was. Mr. Wessel asked Mr. Ward if he had any further comments. Mr. Ward explained the proposal was granted a variance on January 19th by the Zoning Board, a variance on the number of parking spaces required and a variance for the multiple uses. By the ordinance, with the addition, it calculates out to 448 spaces for parking. He said they had physically counted what was visible and found from 220 to 225 spaces in the lot. There is one area which will be removed, it is a large berm or landscaped island which when removed will allow for additional parking. The circulation will change a bit but there will be no great effect on the numbers of parking spaces. The Zoning Board had a condition that no less than 21P spaces be left there. The Board felt there was an alternative space which could be torn up but they didn't think it should be torn up now. He said they had some other input on parking requirements from different groups, different studies, etc., and he personally felt that for this particular use 44,9 spaces was a bit high, but he didn't know what they could consider the status quo now. He said they talked with everybody who has anything to do with this mall and the only crunch they had was during the Christmas holidays. Mr. Levesque said he would like to see the parking kept down. The grass the Zoning Board felt could be torn up would only give about 7 parking spaces. Mrs. Krapcho asked how many spaces are there right now, and Mr. Ward replied they counted 220. The 218 was a condition of the Zoning Board. Mr. Burke said the number won't change at all. He indicated the areas where spaces would be added as a result of change, and the spaces lost, saying they would lose 23 and gain 21, and then by moving the two trees and making two spaces, they would cope out with exactly the same number. Mrs. Krapeho asked about room for a oar to turn around when using a space at the north end of the building. Mr. Burke indicated on the dra king where a car would pull in and then back out. Asked by Mrs. Krapeho what was the width -of the driveway around the building, Mr. Burke said he thought it was 15 feet. Mr. Wessel.asked where,unloading would take place and Mr. Burke indicated the location for this, also the two shops which would be serviced by hand trucks in the front. Mr. Wessel then asked about a.truck blocking the driveway so it wouldn't be possible for someone to go around with a truck there. Mr. Burke said they intended to have this area for employee parking= shoppers wouldn't go around back to park. Mrs. Krapcho asked Mr. Ward how much discretion the Planning Commission has In this particular situation regarding parking. PLANNING COMPASSION FEBRUARY 241__1276 Mr. Ward said the Planning Commission can reduce it up to 50% of what is required, which would be 224. This is under variance to 219. Some people are now using spare spaces in the back of the building which is on the Ramada Inn property. He said he talked with Ear] Greer and he doesn't see any problem with taking some of the overflow though no one has talked about it. Mr. Wessel asked where was the undeveloped parcel of Greer, and Mr. Ward said it was behind the Red Barn, and indicated on the drawing where it could be connected for additional parking if there was a crunch and additional parking was needed. Mrs. Krapcho asked Mr. Judge if he was suggesting an area which should be paved and maintained the year round. Mr. Judge said it could be plowed. Mrs. Krapcho asked about sidewalks, if they referred to sidewalks which do exist or sidewalks which are needed. Mr. Judge said he suggested sidewalks rather than a grass path because the people wanting to use it will increase when the motel is operating. Instead of having people going across lots or through brush it would be a good idea to invite circulation and it would be of mutual benefit. Mr. Ward indicated the location of this on the drawing, saying it would be better than just beating the grass down and would prove to be beneficial. Mr. Wessel asked if that wasn't the same place where cars have tried to exit. that the tree isn't stopping people from going out. Mr. Judge said there is no curb and it isn't a problem. There is a well defined path there and he didna t think it would be very attractive to put concrete, could perhaps have flagstone. He said he was not concerned about the material but was concerned about it being usable all the year round. Mrs. Krapcho asked about the suggested path to the northeast. Mr. Judge said this would be one that people could use to get to the Red Barn, etc., and that 100 Dorset Street stands to gain by it; people can go back and forth without using their cars. Mr. Levesque said this is very convenient. Chairman Wessel asked Mr. Page about the additional parking mentioned in his memorandum. Mr. Page explained the figures which have been shown to be exhorbitant and would give a sea of asphalt. This is a situation where there is a very consistent and efficient and continual use of the parking area; a different situation than the typical shopping center; there isn't the parking demand or the traffic generated by a grocery store, hardware or drug store. The guidelines are based on a neighborhood shopping center having those kinds of facilities so that generates a high figure. With the size of this and the type of tenant he said he would suggest a total of 10 to 20 additional spaces be provided onsite, or offaite with some suitable agreement. The thinking is since it is not a typical shopping oenter you needn't require the 4 spaces per thousand square feet; on the other hand there should be some kind of reservoir because tenants can change, the parking demand can change; it is iMpos4ble to tell exactly what the parking demand is going to be or what the tenants are going to be. It would be,a bad precedent to allow the expansion of the building without a commensurate amount of additional parking. He said he had talked.about the feasibility of conditional approval where the proposal could be approved with the condition that the applicant could come back in a year or so, but it is pretty difficult to enforce conditions like that. 4. PLANU G COMMISSION FEBRU .EY_24L_12Z6 Mrs. Krapcho asked Mr. Page if he was suggesting that the Commission table this In order to ask the developer to go back and find the additional parking spaces or h4ta an arrangement with an abutting property owner.. Mr. Page replied that was what he was suggesting they consider, but that he believed in a correlation for retail sales and parking demand that the parking Is adequate. Mrs. Krapcho said but they are considering two additional retail spaces without additional parking. If Mr. Weasel asked in interviewing tenants it was found there was any overflow. Mr. Page said no one said that; they simply said that at Christmastime it was crowded. Mr. Judge said the Friday and Saturday after Christmas were the most crowded with people spending their Christmas money and a Disney film showing at the theater. Mr. Page said he had made the reference to the Greer property in his memo, thinking there was an entry to the north. Mr. Burke said there is an entrance at the northwest corner. Mr. Page also said the parking has to be in proximity to where the need is generated. Mr. Judge said they have kept a fairly oareful watch on parking and have never experienced any parking difficulty. As pointed out to the Zoning Board they do have some commuter cars parked there. They have a fairly efficient use of the parking lot and have control over the parking, but he didn't know if it would be possible to provide enough parking for something the "Godfather" being shown at both of the theaters which happened before the shopping center was built and filled the parking lots in the area. Right now if they didn't have the theater they wouldn't need more than 70 or 80 spaces. The number of people working in the building is relatively small; the number of shoppers is smalls it is not a typical shopping center; there 1s no discount store. Mrs. Krapcho asked about extending parking on the south end of the lot, if it would be to the east of the theater or to the southwest. Mr. Page said he didn't want to be in the position of advocating more blacktop. There is room for diagonal or perpendicular parking. The problem is that the additional parking is coming at the point farthest away from where the demand is going to be. Possibly the whole parking could shift to the south. Mrs. Krapcho asked if people parking at the north end of the building would have access to the north end of the building. Mr. Judge said that access was planned to facilitate pedestrian traffic along Dorset Street so people coming from Greer's could walk into the center. Mrs. Krapcho indicated on the drawing the area where she was asking about parking, if that was the only point of access. Chairman Wessel said the question remained. !should they do with the current number of parking spaces or *hall they be increased, and if so, to what amount. Mr. Levesque said he would go with the existing parking; if it overflows people will tend to park at the Ramada Inn or across the street at the bank. He would rather see less parking. Mr. Wessel said the problem is that if there isn't any agreement between the adjoining owners.the adjoining owners could put people off from their lots; also if the uses change they would have to cone back. Mrs. Krapcho said only if the structure changes. not if the use changes. Mr. Ward said if they go from one retail use to another they don't have to come back, but if they have a lot of alterations then they would have to come in; It depends on what kind of alterations. what kind of permit is needed, if there was a major change in the building and that particular use had a formula for parking, but that is not what is happening right now. Asked about a restaurant, Mr. Judge said they bought the property from the people who own Howard Johnson's and they insisted on a restriction against any motel or restaurant. PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 24 1276 Mr. Levesque remarked the two areas complement each other. Mrs. Krapaho said the City has the responsibility to insure adequate parking, and basicly the Planning Commission.is vulnerable if it doesn't enforce the requirements• that were put on the books, in the case it turns out that the parking is not adequate and it does push parking on to adjoining property with- out agreements with those owners. Mr. Wessel asked Mrs. Krapcho if she felt parking is adequate if spillover is allowed on adjacent property. Mrs. Krapcho said she didn't think the Commission could look at that unless there is a formal agreement between 100 Dorset Street and the Ramada Inn that their parking could be used. Mr. Levesque said the aesthetics of 100 Dorset Street are far superior than anything on Shelburne Road. 100 Dorset Street has upgraded Dorset Street tremendously. Mrs. Krapcho said that has m thing to do with the Commission's responsibility to consider adequate parking. Mr. Levesque said that nationwide there has been a mistake in shopping centers, in creating a mass of hardtop and the trend now is to reduce parking. Mr. Judge said they were not a Mammoth Mart or Sears or Gaynes. They have basicly specialty shops and it In a kind of experiment] you can take care of the aesthetics without so much paving. They would like to derive a little bit more income from the property to use for the maintenance. One problem is that they have to do a better job of snow removal. This problem has compromised the parking spaces by about 10%1 they have probably lost 10% of their spaces through the winter months. Mr. Ewing asked if parking is adequate now for the 16.000 square feet. Mr. Judge said it is more than adequate now. It is here for the Commission to see by looking at it every day. The normal complement is about 60 cars. On Saturday afternoons the theater is open and the parking lot is full but the offices are not open. That allows a better use of the parking lot. Mrs. Krapcho said it is just a question of being somewhat apprehensive. Mr. Judge said they are forgetting that the theater comprises most of the parking. Eastern Mountain Sports is going to expand the shop but wouldn't be having any more people. The other shops will be small operations employing one or two persons. Mrs. Krapoho asked Mr. Ward if he thought the City Engineer should review any aspect of this plan. Mr. Ward said No. that nothing is changing. But there is going to be an area of flat roof and Mr. Szymanski might want to see where the water is being carried rather than having it splashing on the ground. Mrs. Krapcho asked if there should be a further review by Mr. Ward or anyone else of the landscaping. Mr. Ward said they wouldn't get involved in the inside court plan, but the Tree Committee might want to take a look at the rest of it. Mr. Armstrong said he didn't feel it was necessary. to look at it. The trees have done very well thus far and he thought they would survive. Mr. Ward said there are no plans to alter the entrance, or anything like that, all that is being done is moving a mound of dirt. Mrs. Krapcho asked Mr. Judge if he would agree to paving the access to the Greer property. Mr. Judge said it would benefit Earl Greer as much as it would themselvest they would like to see some effort on his part; actually he would be benefit- ing more than they would. Mr. Ward said he thought it was a problem of communication between them and Earl Greer. FLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUA RY _24L_1 2'6 Mr. Ward said Mrs. Maher had pushed the idea a year ago of connecting parking lots; it does work. Chairman 'Wessel asked how many members would like to leave parking as it is. Mr. Ward said the Commission has to consider there may be an additional 10 to 12 spaces they could pick up. .That may be something to leave as is or it could be put in a motion that they would have to pick that up. Mr. Wessel referred to the funeral home which was required to come back in at the end of a year and Mr. Ward explained that was a condition by the 'Zoning Board that they come back in a year. The Board gave a variance and they have the power to withdraw it any time they want to. Mrs. Krapcho asked if the Board made a variance here, and Mr. Ward said only that there be a minimum of 218 spaces. Mr. Ewing said he would like to see them make an effort to try and increase it either through some agreement with Earl Greer or with the Ramada Inn. Chairman Wessel said the Commission could ask but it could not force them to make an agreement. He said he would like some agreement if possible. Mr. Levesque said he would go along with it as it is. Mrs. Krapcho said she would too, but she was not sure how it could be done other than by requiring additional spaces. preferably through an agreement with the adjoining property owners. Mr. Lidral said he would like to see an agreement if possible. Mr. Armstrong said he was satisfied with it as it is; he wouldn't want them to take any more from the theater area. Mr. Wessel asked if they would be willing to contact the adjoining property owners, and Mr. Sprayregen said he would be more than happy to try, asking what kind of agreement the Commission would want. He said the property owner next door might want to expand. If they are going to add parking spaces, it Is going to be around the theater. If he were the adjoining property owner. he said, he would not want to sign any greement, would just say you are welcome to park here. Mr. Judge said that if Greer wanted to convert all his space to retail stores and were to ask them for the same thing, he would say Yes, go ahead and do it, but he would never sign an agreement or anything. Mrs. Krapcho said actually Greer doesn't have any additional space, at certain times it is frequently tied up. The additional space could cone from the Ramada. The Council would actually be approving the property as proposed and would be saying that they should be asked, to acquire additional spaces. Mr. Wessel said they would be asked to attempt to make an agreement with the adjoining owners. Mrs. Krapcho moved that the Planning Commission table action on the site plan for_100 Dorset Street until_ ... ~� Mr. Judge interrupted. saying before a motion is made and passed he didn't feel the Commission was giving them much guidance. how many spaces they wanted to have, so an attempt could be made to fulfill some criteria. Mr. Ward said he could understand tabling it for two weeks but what would happen if they don't come up with any kind of agreement. they are not being told whether the Commission wants 12 more spaces, which they could add if they can't enter into an agreement. If they can't get anybody to agree, they are just wasting two weeks. Mr. Page said the addition is 25% over the existing retail use. Offices and the theater are perfectly complementary. Mrs. Krapcho asked Mr. Page if he could be more specific than 10 to 20 spaces. L� PLANNING CO"'OMISSION FFEEBRUARY 241L 12Z Mr. Levesque asked Mr. Page if.he had checked out a ratio over what is there. Mr. Page replied he tried to do that; that is why 10 would be a lower range. Mr. Judge said this is not the slowest time of year. Eastern Mountain Sports had its annual sale and there were matinees going at the same time to get a lot of people out, and there really wasn't a parking problem. Mr. Page said it was.a difficult situation; it is the kind of land use to be encouraged, but he wondered about the principle of the thing if the expansion is allowed without any additional parking. What kind of position will the Commission be in when Zayres comes in for an expansion; they could point to this kind of precedent. Mr. Levesque suggested taking a special look at it when they have their sales. there is a lot of space there. The national tables are based on peak periods like Christmas; the maximum is overbuilt. Mr. Page said parking is not based on the maximum. Mr. Judge said the Environmental Agency is beginning to look at parking requirements and think the parking requirements are much too stringent. This kind of center is not a typical thing and that has to be recognized. Mrs. Krapeho asked if th gional planning review covered this particular combination, and Mr. Pages R did not, not the site plan itself, and he was not convinced that it would be objective. Chairman Wessel said that because it is an additional percentage of retail space and their parking lot is at least once or twice a year full, he would like an increase in parking, but because he doesn't know how much that increase should be he would say the ten spaces that Mr. Page mentioned. Mr. Armstrong said if they require just 10 more spaces, then they can go right ahead and put them near the theater or get an agreement with an adjoining property owner. If the Commission puts it on this basis then they wouldn't have to come back to the Commission. Mr. Levesque suggested putting it in the back but Mr. Judge said there is a really nice tree there. Mr. Armstrong said for 10 parking spaces he would let it go like it is now. Mr. Judge asked if the Commission would consider a compromise, to leave it that way, and if a parking problem should develop they would certainly have the 10 spaces. Mr. Wessel said that apparently that would be difficult to enforce. Mr. Judge said they would agree to that. Mr. Ewing suggested trying to work out some agreement with the adjoining property owners; if they cant to come back in and the Commission will discuss putting additional parking in at one or both ends of the theater. He said it seemed to him the parking should be increased at least to take care of the additional help that is going to be in the new building. If the Com- mission doesn't require an increase in parking there are many other people who can come in with the same point of view. . Mr. Judge said anyone willing to make this kind of investment in landscaping and construction wants sufficient parking, Mrs. Krapaho said•it is looking ahead to the problem that the City would be responsible for.coming up with purchasing land to provide parking. South Burlington is not involved in providleg parking like Burlington, but somewhere along the way parking must be made available, She said she thoroughly ap- preciated what has been done at 100 Dorset Street and it is just a matter of PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 24, 191,16 adding 5% to the amount of parking now there, but it is, true that 25%Is being added to the retail floor space. It is an uncomfortable position to be In. She would nay to require the addition of 10 spaces. Mr. Levesque said,many people who shop there would leave their car at the Ramada Inn. He couldn't see any problem with parking. Mr. Ewing said he would like to see additional parking. Mr. Lidral said he agreed with kr..�:strong. Mrs. Krapcho moved that thgdeve]op of_100 Dorset Street be reaulred to submit a parki�lan show111g_230 Vices _as paaKt of the site plan for their addition. y -- Seconded by Mr. Fwing. Mr. Lidral and Mr. Armstrong voted against this. The motion was not carried. Mrs. Krapcho then moved that the proposed site plan and landsaa ink-Rlan for the addition to 100 Dorset Street be approved subJ ect to the following stipu-_ lations: 1 that the City EWneer review the proposed plan for roof drains el that the access from the parkIng lot to the GreerproPerty to the north_ be_av_ed and graded; )that walkways be constructed across the landscaped area at the southwest _and -northeast corners k that a bond or a uivalent_ security be noted to an amount equal to 2700 for lands ca pithat the developer make an effort to secure additional parking in the event that the need arisesi Mr. Judge asked if she meant the northeast corner. because the northeast corner is rather ugly; they have a walkway to the east already paved that goes into the Ramada lot. He asked where the walkway was wanted. Mr. Page said there should be some sort of a formal connector between the Red Barn and the shopping center; there is sort of a path there now. Mr. Burke said most of the path referred to lies on the Greer property. Mrs. Krapcho amended stipulation 3) as followsi that walkways be constructed across the landscaped area to the southwest corner and across the northeast boundaries of t e ropert.y at an appropriate p1acQ__ Motion seconded by Mr. Ewing and voted unanimously for approval. After a short recess the meeting was reconvened at 9:05 p.m. Formalise findings on AViCON. Inc. site plan review for Vermont Industrial Development Authority Chairman Wessel said this is required by the Vermont Industrial bonding authority. Mr. Judge said the building referred to is on Airport Parkway and was sold to AVI CON for a manufacturing facility for the manufacture of component electrioal parts, perhaps employing ten people. They are applying for Vermont Industrial Development Authority financing at a favorable rate. As part of their application for a loan they are required to have this statement filled out by the local Planning Commission. There is no cost to the City for the facilities and he thought a similar statement had been signed for Harry Behney for the City's Industrial Park., Chairman Wessel said -he bad no objection to signing it but he recommended that a zero be typed.in to show there is no cost to the City. The statement was signed by the Commission members. PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 24L 1976 Discussion with Mr. Thomas Schmidt, Airport Manager, regarding rezoning of A�ili it land' Mr. Schmidt said it had come to their attention that some incorrect property lines were used in regard to the airport industrial zone classification and they were requesting a corrections they are asking for a correction to match the true boundary lines of the airport. Unknown to the airport people, the Information provided to the Zoning Board was incorrect at that time, when the ordinance was passed. Mr. Schmidt posted a drawing showing the access road to the Air Guard area and indicated the correct boundary line, pointing out the difference in the lines. Asked if there were any other errors. he replied not to his knowledge. The Planning Commission studied the drawing and discussed it with Mr. Schmidt. Mr. Schmidt explained the area in question would be used strictly for a service facility for rental cars, the general public having no access to it. Mr. Wessel asked Mr. Page about similar errors that had been discovered and should be corrected. saying he was talking about the stoning map only. Mr. Page said by the time the -Commission gets around to warning. there would be; he knew of at least a handful right now. Mr. Wessel asked what the status was of the car rental service facility. was it about to happen right now. Mr. Schmidt said it would be a late Spring start. There was a question as to whether they should go to the Zoning Board for a variance or go through this procedure. Asked how long it would take, Mr. Page said he could have something prepared in a day or two but he didn't know how many mapping errors there are. Mrs. Krapcho asked if the Commission would be considering the area Mr. Schmidt was asking for a correction on, or f� all the land lying north of Williston Road. Mr. Page said whatever area the Commission chose. He said the airport industrial zone relates most of the uses to the airport facility. Mrs. Krapcho said it allows for business retail types of uses related to the airport operation which would not be permitted in a regular industrial area, such as financial offices or business offices, motel accommodations. etc. The type of traffic could differ materially. Mr. Wessel asked if anyone objected to this proposal and also to thelude the area that Mr. Schmidt did not present, the westerly edge of the airport cone easterly over to the property boundaries of the airport which roughly follow the Air Guard roadway. Mr. Schmidt said Mr. Ward had mentioned that there is a provision that they could as property owners request that the change be made on the land owned by them but they cannot request on land not owned by them. They are asking that the land owned by.them be rezoned but he would suggest that the Commission also look at the rest of,it. He indicated on the drawing what he was interested in. Mr. Ewing offered to abstain if the Commission was going to discuss property up to Muddy Brook. The Chairman asked if the Commission wanted to look at all the land up to Muddy Brook and Mr. Lidral replied they might as well. Mr. Wessel said the proper thing was to ask Mr. Page to come up with a pro- posal for that area plus other adjustments in the map and report back to the Planning Commissions he would like a formal statement saying that the Com- mission in principle accepts this proposal. PLANNING COMMISSION F®RUA RY 24, 1976 10. Mrs. Krapcho moved tbat the Pla rlg_1,�o sslon L egto a tertaln a_foz�eal proposal for the zone change to the property 1 b tween W1 1 stop oad and the southern boundary of the aiUort, such zone an a tg-b�from the present industrial district to s_possible airport industrial classifications Seconded by Mr. Lidral. Mr. Page said the motion should mention that the northerly boundary of that area, be the airport boundary. Mrs. Krapcho amended her motion to include: "and the boundaries of the B}Lz1�t3Bton In 4�aS, rLal� ort as shown on the existin$zonirig_1!�.� Amendment accepted by Mr. Lidral. Motion voted unanimously for approval with Mr* hiring abstaining. a I „ Mr. Page said he would like to find out more about the Airport Plan, mentioning the plan to interfere with the City's plan to connect Kirby Road with Airport Drive, and saying there are other areas of conflict. Mr. Levesque said they are talking about traffic incfeasing at least 70% by 1985; they are talking of increased uses there, even saying Chamberlin School is in the wrong place. In too many places airports have had complete control when they were put in the wrong places originally. Mr. Page said he could see that the zone change would be in accord with the airport's plan but it sight not be in accord with the City's plan. Mrs. Krapcho asked if it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission go go over the airport plan and then schedule a meeting with the airport management. #ddendum to approval of Stuart Ireland subdivision Mr. Page reviewed the Addendum he had submitted to the Planning Commission. saying this was a sort of technicality, that several points needed to be clarified and he had talked with Dick Trudell who tentatively agreed with them. Mr. Page said he would like to explain these points and propose that the Com- mission consider adopting them. that Dick Spokes agreed this was an appropriate method. Regarding item 1) the problem is that the boundaries of that piece of property are not accurately showns the line separating R-4 from BPD went from the north- eastern boundary of the church to the extreme north east corner of that CO district. Mr. Levesque commented it was very difficult to decide where that line should go within 100 feet. Mr. Page suggested that the Planning Commission make a resolution interpreting this boundary, that the Commission is given the power to do so under the zoning ordinance administration section. He said the line would start at the same point as shown on the map but it should be extended to this corner of the CO District (indicating on the drawings that he didn't think it was intended to have a sliver of BPD in the R-4 District. It would be a map changes the Planning Commission could adopt a resolutions there would be slightly less BPD and slightly more R-4, a very long wedge-shaped sliver of land. It would be mueh.mcre logical.. Mrs. Krapcho said if the Commission were just to interpret where the land is now, there could be a question, there could be another later controversy. Mr. Wessel suggested the Commission could adopt this and later on change the map. Mr. Page referred to the ordinance allowing this to be defined to be different from what was shown on the zoning map. Mrs. Krapcho said the problem is not resolved by changing the boundaries of the CO District and she would feel more comfortable with a zoning amendment. Mr. Page said it should be done in the most appropriate manner. PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUA RY 24. 1976 Regarding item 2) Mr. Page said it would be preferable to identify the lots through which the Commission feels those drainageways are part of the CO District, where there is a 50 foot setback on either side. ' In the approval, these lots should be identified, saying that nobody could build closer than 50 feet to the center line of the drainagexay. Mr. Ewing said this should be in the deed, and Mr. Wessel asked if that sort of thing could be put in the deed. Mrs. Krapcho said all the Commission could be sure of is that the final plat on those lots indicate the presence of a minor drainageway on these lots with the stipulation that the setback be 50 feet, that the final plat should stipulate that these lots contain minor drainageways. Mr. Page felt that in item 3) "Neighborhood Park" was a little more specific than the term "Recreation." Item 4). a pedestrian way is shown along the easement in the northeast corner. Chairman Wessel said he personally favored adopting this addendum, that Dick Spokes doesn't feel it is a problem. Later on a change can be made in the map. Mr. Levesque moved that the Planning Commission accept the addendum to the Stuart Ireland proposal for Meadowood at Spear. Seconded by Mr. Lidral. Mrs. Krspeho offered an amendments That under pUUI_Z , thatth2 final rlat indicate that lots 10, 11, 13, 15Land the area designated as parkland contain minor drainageways and appropriate portions of trig_ nse vatlon en ce District. Amendment seconded by Mr. Lidral and the entire motion voted unanimously for approval. Mrs. Krapcho stated she wished to indicate that strictly on the basis of item 1) she did not feel this was the appropriate method by which to handle a zoning boundary adjustment. "Shopping List" of projects for consideration by the Planning Commission A ninth item was added to the list submitted by Mr. Page, namely, the Airport Plan. Regarding item 4 it was generally agreed that not much could done about it (low cost housing), that it was an area of concern for both Planning Commission and the City Council. After each member listed three priorities it was generally agreed that items 1 and 2 deserved first priority: Compile and Review "laundry list" of Zoning Amendments; and to Review sections of the Comprehensive Plan. Referring to the Zoning Board stipulations, Mrs. Krapcho said the Board does not seem to have a very strict understanding of what areas of jurisdiction the Planning -Commission has, what decisions the Commission can make. what it is allowed to do in approving various types of development proposals. Williston Road Task Force Report Mr. Ewing, the Planning Commission's representative to the Williston Road Task Force, displayed a sketch showing a proposed intersection with a traffic light, saying they would recommend to the Zoning Board that if it approves the variance for the Lamplough proposal that they stipulate that the most easterly entrance be used. He then sketched in a long-range proposal for a new road going around from Dorset Street to Williston Road, coming out at the proposed intersection. Mrs. Neubert explained this could be extended through to Patchen Road and could serve all the other parcels of land, it would be the begining of a new City street. The meeting was declared adjourned at 1oi912kp:sa. FLA NNI NC_COM.'11. r",3I ON MARCH _9L 1276 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, March 9, 1976, in the Conference Room, Municipal Offices, 1175 Williston Road. MEMBERS PRESENT William Wessel, Chairman; James Ewing, Arlene Krapcho, Ernest Levesque MEMBERS ABSENT Frank Armstrong, Frank Lidral O'I'HERS PRESENT Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator; Stephen Page, Planning Assistant; Wm. J. Schuele, George Voland, Mike Pedan, Jim Wallace, Peter M. Collins, S. Pelton, C. C. Jackson, R. Derry, Gretchen Grant, Carlo Wolff, Alex J. Blair, Fred Blais The meeting was called to order by Chairman Wessel at 7:30 P.M. Minutes of February 24, l2z Page 4, line 7 the words two additional retail spaces should be changed to a_ 2increase in retail syace. �~ Page, line 1 between the words would and too, the words like an agree- ment tooshould be inserted. Page 6,_ line 17, the word Council should be changed to Planning_ Commission. Page 8, line 11, the name of Mr. Levesque should be added after Mr. Lidral and Mr. Armstrong. Page 11, line 24, the word unanimously should be deleted and the following words added with Mrs. Krapcho7fasenfin$. It was moved by Mrs. Krapcho, seconded by Mr. Levesque, and voted unanimously to accept the Minutes Z6 as amended. Public hearing on proposed zoning amendments The Chairman asked if there was any discussion on the proposed zoning amendments. Mr. Schuele stated his objections, saying one of the basic concepts of the Master Plan was to maintain existing neighborhoods. and changing the area from R-4 to R-7 will not protect the present neighborhood integrity. This was a basic concept which he had helped get into the Master Plan and was accepted by the public at that time. The Chairman asked if he was objecting strictly on the increase in density or on the other uses that might,be allowed in the area. Mr. Levesque asked if he was looking at Patchen Road as being a collector street for internal neighborhood districts. Mrs. Krapcho asked what specific problem he saw in changing that particular area into an R-7 zone. Mr. Schuele replied he thought R-7 to be too high a density and essentially what was being done was zeroing in on a little patch and giving it a high density zone. Wizard to Investors Corp Dead File Vol 107 Page 71 App 4.35 Acres 618.71 x 357 N x 458.39E rear 2'78.23 S 9-29-72 Office & Retail Stores building City Center 5-5-76 Add to retail complex 3,800* 100 Dorset Street 8-28-78 Remodel interior Audio Den 2-3-82 Expand Cork & Board into former 90000d ffX91Y0Rags&Riches Convert to 42 seat restaurant w/de 7-6-82 Expend Downs etal into former Alpha Hair Design shop B-10-82 Enclose 10x10 room - Audio Den 10-25-85 Add 9x20 stornne space for Rago P, Riches 3-20-86 Walk in cooler"(10x10 addition) Net Result 6-6-86 Renovate former Net Result to Meggie's Children Shop 9-30-87 Remodel former Green Mt Camera to expand The Net Result 4-14-88 Remodel 4200*2nd flr for Community Collene of Vermont 100 Dorset Street 17-01-28 OYMER DATE OF SALE TRANSFER PRICE VOL PAGE One Hundred Dorset (ICcfV 9 H Corman) 2-12-75 950 00 118 510 Investors Management Co Inc 6-29-87 Title 247 149 State of Vermont AGENCY OF DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (802) 828-3211 DEPARTMENTS OF: Economic Development 828-3221 Housing & Community Affairs 828-3217 January 27, 1976 Stephan Page, Planning Assistant City of South Burlington 1175 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Steve: MONTPELIER, VERMONT 05602 DIVISIONS OF: Administration 828-3231 Historic Preservation 828-3226 Information / Travel 828-3236 Vermont Life Magazine 828-3241 Outdoor Advertising 828-3215 Thank you for your January 22, 1976 letter outlining the controversy over the waiving of parking requirements for the 100 Dorset St. shopping center proposed expansion. Unless I misunderstand the facts, this is a relatively straight forward problem. Presumably the project is a permitted use in a conmrcial district and subject to site plan review by the planning commission with respect to traffic access, circulation and parking, and land- scaping and screening. Under section 13.40 of the South Burlington zoning ordinance, the planning g commission is authorized to waive the required ordinance parking requirements if it finds and establishes for the record substantial evidence to justify such a decision. However, it's determination must be guided by responsible planning considerations that would require adequate and appropriate parking for all present and anticipated needs. It could waive certain ordinance parking requirements where there is to be little or no generation of need (913.40 (a) and (c)] or where different uses within a complex generate a parking need at different times of the day or week so that a given space could serve for both [§13.40 (b)]. But it could not legally waive ordinance requirements for an alleged personal hardship in order to allow a developer to exact a higher return from his land at the expense of the municipality or others who would be faced with the cost or inconvenience of absorbing the traffic and parking impact of a poorly planned proposal. Mr. Page Page 2 January 27, 1976 Incidentally, the 50% waiver limitation is an arbitrary and irrelevant cutoff that has no bearing on the complex of facts and circumstances that should be considered by the planning commission under site plan review. Nor do I interpret the ordinance to say that up to 50% of the required parking can be waived by the planning conmission "provided the applicant can prove unique or extenuating circumstances." The language of the second paragraph of §13.40 simply says that the minimum parking requirements may be waived if found to be unnecessary as they relate to a specific proposed use. Any deferment of ordinance parking requirements not related to the staging of development would not only be undesirable, but also improper, for it is unlikely that the planning commission or any interested party could bring successful enforcement action retro- actively. From your letter, I can discern no basis for board of adjustment involvement in this matter. The ordinance basically delegates this responsibility to the planning commission under site plan review, whereas the board of adjustment has jurisdiction under Chapter 117 only over unique site hardship variances that, if not authorized, would result in denying reasonable use of the land. This is not the case here, for the property is being used intensively and reasonable expansion could probably take place by reducing the pro- posed floor space sufficiently to allow for more parking, or at least so as not to overburden the existing facilities. As I read your letter, Steve, the board has no jurisdiction to consider or waive parking requirements, for none of the conditions enumerated under §4468 (a)(1-5) apply. I hope to have adequately answered your questions about this matter, Steve. Should you have further questions or need clarification of the above comments, please let me know. Enclosed is a package of materials that was handed out at the municipal planning law conference in June. (Sending materials under separate cover.) Sincerely, H. William Mitchell Chief of Technical Services HWWlp I La.mplounh Property Area zoned BR District depth of 200 feet from Williston Road from 200 feet depth northerly to Patchen Road zoned R4-PUD. Proposed uses, motel, restaurant and retail shops not allowed under R4-PUD or R4 (see section 6.00). Proposed uses are BR District uses (see section 7.00). Planned Unit Development allowed in R4-PUD (see section 12.00). Proposal to occupy approximately 10.5 acres from a 60 plus acres parcel? a depth of approximately 710 feet northerly from Williston Road. Proposed uses 150 unit motel, with 30' x 601 swimming pool. Restaurant & lounge (lobby & kitchen) contains approximately 6050 square feet. Retail shops contains approximately 91350 square feet. Parking not computedg seating capacit,, etc. not available. Two hundred forty eight (248) spaces proposed. Additional area available. Section 11.15 Multiple- one use per one lot. Complex as proposed will reouire subdivision application if approved by Zoning Board also site plan review. 1.00Dorset Street` Shopping Mall Area. zoned BR District. Section 11.25 Multiple uses; more than one use per lot. Proposed addition 4300 scuare feet;EMIS ex.pansicn 1536 Square feet. plus for (4) additional retail shops. Section 13.40 Cff street. parkin- (Table I) Retail area: One (1) space per 200 scuare feet first floor lst floor 16,980 f ret.. 17C �•cE's One (1) space per 200 square feet second floor �, 2nd floor 160900 square feet. 85 spaces Places of indoor amusement: One (1) space per eac 1+ fixed seats Plaza 1 & 2- 600 seats 150 spaces Retail space; proposed addition one story; 1+300 square feet 1+3 spaces Total spaces 448 spaces Proposed parkin 209 spaces (new plan �3a® s•� To%Q!� .00" 4., 7::v l G 7::�/s Xc 'T 7 �ti � //J s/o cis. E C �v �G /a' • J : -� /��` ��o a.0 s . 7e e�•vr= f/ / S�i9 � F ,�� t'ct < �a � t /.Y t�.� S'e� i'�s 9� L compliments of The Leahy Press 9 Franklin St. Montpelier, Vermont 05602 tel. 223-2100 or 229-0818 "'he Professional Touch in Printing" M E M O R A N D U M TO: SOUTH BURLING TON PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: STEPHEN S. PAGE, PLANNING ASSISTANT RE: SITE PLAN REVIEW, PROPOSED ADDITION TO 100 DORSET STREET DATE: FEBRUARY 24, 1976 I. Parking I have made an estimate on how much parking is needed at 100 Dorsett with the proposed addition. This estimate is based on 1)accepted references, 2)actual counts (over a 1 month period), correlated with retail sales figures of Eastern Mountain Spports, the "anchor" tenant, 3)interviews with tenants, and 4)a general evaluation of the site and surrounding land uses. 1. Additional parking for 49300 sq.ft. of retail space in a shopping center ranges from 17, to 43 spaces (South Burlington Zoning) . PO R-r/-r LO A4 2. Counts of parked cars show the peak demand for parking generally occurs Saturday afternoons, with high demands also on Thursday and Friday evenings. Over the last month, at +'hPGe peak 1hoursi 115-180 cars were parked on the lot, which presently has about 218 spaces. Using retail sales figures of Eastern Mountain Sports as a rough guide ine o parking demand, the peak parking months at 100 Dorset are December, followed by April, October, November, January. (These four months about the same). Consequently, it could be inferred that the actual counts (taken during January and February) indicate that parking at 100 Dorset is generally adequate throughout the year except for the Christmas shopping season. 3. All tenants (excepting upstairs offices) were inter- viewed and there was unanimous agreement that parking is adequate at 100 Dorset except during Christmas. Several tenants expressed concern over cars parking in the primary aisle, which disturbs the internal circulation pattern. 4. Present parking is adequate for the existing uses at 100 Dorset. Improvement of internal circulation would be desirable. Additional on site parking spaces (at varying costs) could come from the areas to the east and the west of the theatres, relocation of landscaping, or rearrange- ment of existing aisles and islands. Off site parking May be available nearby from the Ramada property or Greer's. Substantial pedestrian and/or .. vehicular travel can be expected between 100 Dorset and all abutting land uses. Conclusion -Parking The present use of the parking area is more sustained, intensive, and efficient than most other facilities in the City• The proposed addition should be accompanied by 10- 20 new parking spaces and 1 loading space to maintain the status quo in terms of parking supply and demand. -- These spaces could be provided on site at the South end of lot, by the theatres, or possibly by an agreement with an abuttor who has excess parking area. The demand for the additional spaces will occur at the north end of the property, around the addition, and will probably have some impact on Greer's, directly to the north. Finally, it should be noted that.because parking or shopping trends may change, as well as the tenants themselves, some reserve in ultimate parking capacity should be maintained. This would be possible, whether the additional, recommended spaces come off -site or on site. TT_ ri Y-niil n +i on Access to Greer's should be paved and maintained year-round. Sidewalks at the southwest (to Za.yres, possibly the Anchorage) and northeast (to Red Barn, Ramada) corners of the property will satisfy pedestrian demands and reduce unnecessary driving. -2- Investors Corporation Mr. Peter Judge 100 Dorset -troet South Burlington, VT Dear "'Ir. Judge: January 20, 1976 of Vermont 05401 Be advised that your request for a zoning variance has been ,ranted by the - oning 17,oard of :1.djustment based on the follow - in; findints: that the proposed addition is a reasonable C�' use of the property, will not change the character of the area; that evidence indicates parking-, has be gin adequate and that granting o-,.' a variance conforms with Section 446F of the Planning and revelopment -,'Ict. Your proposal will be scheduled for site plan review by the Planning (:ommission on Tuesday, :"ebruarY 31 197":* Very truly, lichard IJard Zoning Administrative "ficer R- W/j PARKING CONSIDERATIONS FOR 100 DORSET STREET ADDITION It is the concern of both ICV and South Burlington that any proposed addition to 100 Dorset Street not result in a parking shortage for that facility. ICV has considered the potential problems carefully and submits these conclusions for the Zoning Board's consideration. Present parking is ample for the existing facilities at 100 Dorset Street. Except for the few days prior to Christmas, no crowding has been experienced, and ICV has been able to extend the courtesy of commuter parking for between 10 and 20 automobiles daily. ICV feels it unwise to base parking plans on the few days prior to Christmas. leaving sizeable areas of vacant parking surface during the rest of the year. Plans for expansion show an increase of seven parking spaces from 218 to 225. ICV feels that with this increase, parking will continue to be adequate for the following reasons. Of the 4300 square feet of new floor space being added, 1550 square feet comprises an addition to the Eastern Mountain Sports facility to correct an overcrowded condition. This should have no significant impact on the parking required. The remaining 2750 square feet would require 11 parking spaces if the 4.0/1000 square feet standard from Parking Principles Highway Research Board, is applied. By adding seven parking spaces and discontinuing the commuter parking more than 11 new spaces will become available. A second line of reasoning may be applied which more carefully considers the volume of activity the new space will generate. Since present parking is adequate for existing space, it should provide a more accurate parking space to gross floor Parking Considerations For 100 Dorset Street Addition Page 2 area ratio than the general retail figure found in Parking Principles, which accounts for uses not present at 100 Dorset Street. Calculation of this ratio results in a figure of 2.8 spaces/1000 square feet implying the need of 7.7 spaces to support the proposed addition (see calculation sheet). In conclusion, ICV feels that it is essential to provide adequate parking to support its shopping facility and would propose only those additional facilities that it feels could be adequately supported. Parking Considerations For 100 Dorset Street Addition Calculation Sheet Calculation of parking space to gross floor area ratio, based on present local conditions. Present conditions: 218 parking spaces 17,000 square feet of GFA retail space Assume the relative demands for various types of space in Parking Principles are correct 68 spaces required for 17,000 square feet of GFA retail 304 total spaces required 68/304 = 220 of parking now devoted to retail space or (218) (.22) = 48 spaces 48/17 = 2.8 spaces/1000 square feet of GFA retail (2.8) (2750/1000) = 7.7 new spaces required NOTICE OF APPEAL SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT I hereby appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for the following: conditional use, variance, decision of administrative officer. Property Owner Property location & description Variance of Section numbI title of section Basis of appeal I understand the regular meetings are held twice a month on Monday at 5:00 p.m. at the City Hall, Conference Room. The legal advertise- ment must appear in the Burlington Free Press a minimum of fifteen (15) days before the hearing, I agree to pay a fee of $30.00 which fee is to off -set the costs of advertising --end the hearing. Hearing Date Signature of/Appellant SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE i In accordance with the South Burlington Zoning Regulations and Chapter 91, Title 24 V.S.A. the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington City Offices, Conference Room, 1175 Williston Road, South Burlington, Vermont on , day of week) month and date , at (time) to consider the � following: 44.Z_ Appeal of seeking a i1from Section of the South Burlington Zoning Regula- tions. Request is for permission to &.Oe�"-.,.„10 vo ,++`. f SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE In,accordance with the South Burlington Zoning Regulations and Chapter 91, Title 24 V.S.A. the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington City Offices, Conference Room, 1175 Williston Road, South Burlington, Vermont on 'Fonr'.av , Januarti 19. 1q76 at 5-00L .._`'..: to consider the (day of week ._.. (month and date) (time following: Appeal of Evelyn '.nmplough seeking a Variance , from Section 6— 00 .._� Permitted Uses of the South Burlington Zoning Regula- tions. Request is for permission to construct a on'e hundred and fifty (150) unit motel, a restaurant -containing approximately 6050 square feet anr. associated retail shops*cont ining`appro irately 9350 square feet, in addition requiring a variance of Section 11.15 rlultiple uses, parcel of land in question is located within the R4PUD District, located at 1076 Williston Road bounded by properties of Dennis larber, Northern Terminals, Bernard Couillard, Vaughn Mather, Wesley Cilley, Gulf Oil Corp. and Normand ,116,Tsey. #2- Appeal of I. C. V. Constru^tion, Peter Judge seeking a variance , from Section 11.1"; , Multiple uses of the South Burlington Zoning Regula- tions. Request is for permission to construct an addition containing 4,300 square feet, proposed uses retail slops also requiring a variance from Section 13.40, off-street parking, Table I requesting to set off a parking area containing 192 parking spaces, at 100 Dorset Street. Richard A. Myette, Chairman Zoning Board of Adj�Lb tment January F, 1976 Mr. Peter judg, I.W. 'onstruction 100 Orn-t Ar-pt -ou'I, : 'Ltrl in,(; ton, VT 05,01 Dear 11. Judge: Be advised that the South 7urlin,ton Zoning ?car- of djust- ment will YoN a public A:Kn, t the City "a!2, Con foronce -00DI 1775 7i7liston Foad on 'knKy, January 19, 1976 at 5:00 p.m. to consider your rrqu` st for a zoning variance. Please plan to attend this hearing. very truly, ''Ohard ;arc . oning AdYnistrative Nficei F? q/ j A. Required Maber pf Spaces From Parking PrinciLl2s Highway Research Board 1971. P. 399 table 3.2- ""Zoning Standard Guidelines.=' Us e -offices and banks -general retail -shopping centers -auditoriums & theatres MIn. # of parking spaces recauirec 3.3/1000 sq. ft. of gross floor area of building 4.0/1000 sq. ft. of gross floor area of building 5.5/1000 sq. ft. of gross less - able area .3/seat -Parking Requirements of 100 Dorset Street Using these Standards- lst floor retail (including addition) approx. 21,300 GFA-85 spaces 2nd floor offices approx. 17000 GFA-56 spaces 2 theatres 606 seats�-�80 spaces 121 spaces B. &jol�,,yges and Fours, of Operation Approx. 58 people working in offices, located on second floor Hours of operation: Decorative Things Cork & ,Board Company Store Audio Den Eastern Mountain Sports 9:30-9:00 Mon/Sat. 10:00-6:00 p.m. Thurs.-Fri.. 9.-00 p.m. 10:00-9:00 Mon/Fri. 10:00-6:00 p.m. Sat. 9:00r9:00p.m. Mon/Fri 10:00-6 #00 p.m. Sat. 9:00-g.00 p.m. Mon/Sat. M E M O R A N D U M TO: Planning Commission FROM: William Szymanski, Town Engineer RE: Merlin Plaza Drainage DATE: September 29, 1970 I have investigated in detail an alternate plan for draining the above' referenced plaza with the Architect, Mr. Methot, and find that the southwest portion of the property does drain into the existing storm system. I have no objection to an additional area of about an acre added to the Dorset Street system draining southerly and the northerly section of the property piped to the Williston Road system. The area being so flat, the parking lot may pond water for a short duration during a severe storm. To improve flow characteristics, a smooth pipe such as asbestos cement should be used. William J. Szymanski Town Engineer LAW OFFICES OF JOHN T. EWING t 86 ST. PAUL STREET�� O BURLINGTON. VERMONT 05401 V /7 JOHN T.EWING September 4, 1970 AREA CODE 802 RICHARD A. SPOKES l' 863-2 $77 Robert M. Janes, Town Manager Town of South Burlington 555 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Merlin Plaza Development Dear Bob: I have reviewed your letter of September 2, and the letter of Jere Meserole as President of Merlin, Inc., concerning their proposal to loan to the town certain funds for the construction of a trunk storm sewer on Dorset Street, to be repaid, interest free, within a five year period. It is my opinion that this arrangement would not be permitted under the Town Charter and the Vermont Statutes, without a vote of the town. Title 24 VSA Chapter 47 permits towns to borrow, without the vote of the town, only for temporary loans to pay current expenses in anticipation of taxes (24 VSA Section 1783). The Town Charter provides: "The issuance of bonds or notes, except notes in anticipation of revenue to be paid within the fiscal year in which issued, shall be authorized by Australian ballot at a town meetinq�" (Section 504.) Therefore, the Board of Selectmen would not be authorized to enter into this proposed arrangement. Very truly yours, C/ JTE/p John T. Ewing cc: Mr. William J. Szymanski MEMORANDUM TO: ''fanning Commission T oning Administrator TIRO""I: Richard Ward, 7 SUBJECT: Merlin Plaza DATE: August 14, 1970 Area zoned 71>usiness D.-Istrict A ,,ection 7.10 Use regulations Retail businesses okay ,I I ,:usiness offices okay Place of indoor amusement okay "ectinn 7.20 Lot area requirement o'Kay w/ 619!73" frontac on Dorset Street Section 7.30 Lot coverage okay Section 7.40 Yard requirement 1-kuilding set -back 75' okay Rear yard and siJe yard requirements 115 feet T-) ,rint shows 15 feet or more Section 7.50 Height requirements okay Office building (2stary building) Section 7.60 Off-street parking One spaco per 200 square feet or floor space. Office building A Two stories (6,,050 square feet) each floor Retail center B 12,500 square feet Theatre C 8,700 square feet Total 33,70C) square feet 'paces.required 169 Print shows over 160 spaces. section 7.61 Location of parking Print shows 25 feet of buffer zone. Sectior 7.62 '"'urface and screening of parking area okay Section 7.63 Lighting of parking area N.,ot shown on print. Section 7.64 Access to parking space okay '.ection 7.61 Not appl. Section 7.66 Off-street loading facilities Quest'Lonable: Bay, door or opening not shown - 2 - Section 7.67 Vehicle entrance See Town Engineer report Section 7.70 Accessory buildings None shown Section 7-P0 Sign requirements Sign (fre-., standing) location okay • No other details shown. LICENSEE BURLINGTON — SO. BURLINGTON CLOVERLEAF INTERCHANGE P. O. BOX 893 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 (802) a63.5541 August 28, 1970 Mr. C. H. Behney, Chairman Board of Selectmen Town of South .Burlington, Vt. RE: Merlin Plaza Development. Dear Mr. Behney: As you know, the one block to start of construction of this development is the undersized storm sewer now in exist- ance along Dorset Street. It is our understanding that the cost of replacing the existing sewer pipe with a new 24 inch pipe should not ex- ceed $20,000. and could be considerably less. It is also our understanding that, while the Selectmen know it is the town's responsibility to provide the necessary public facilities for orderly development of the town, the money for this construct- ion is not in the budget and therefor the town could not under- take this project for at least a year. As it is quite import- ant to Merlin, Inc., to be able to start construction as soon as possible, we would like to present for your consideration the following proposal: That Merlin, Inc., provide the town with the necessary funds to lay down the necessary trunk storm sewer on Dorset Street under an interest free loan to be repaid within five years (sooner, if possible). Of course, the town's acceptance of such an arrangement would be of immediate advantage to Merlin, Inc. However, we feel that this arrangement would also be in the public interest in that it would, provide immediately better drainage facilities for this area and future development by others would not be prevented by an inadequate drainage system. Also, the cash savings to the town would be substantial: there is no interest expenbe and doing the job now eliminates the increased future cost resulting from inflation. Hoping that this will be given your careful consideration and that approval will be given, we are Very'truly yours, LIN, INC. ,!Jere S. Meserole ✓ President TOVN OF SOUTH BUR LINGTON, VERt•ZONJ- TO: PLANNING COM14ISSION RE: 14ERLIN PLAZA SIiOPPING CENTER FROM: WILLIAM J. SZYMANSKI, TOWN ENGINEER DATE: AUGUST 18, 1970 1. To facilitate snow removal, the turning lane island should be eliminated, and the four foot width placed between the curb and sidewalk. 2. The natural drainage is toward the south --east. To divert this toward the street would require a new storm drain on Dorset Street approximately 1300 feet long. Assuming no adjustment of existing utilities is required and depth is not greater than 10 feet, the cost would be approximately $15,000.00. tiailliam J. �y i, To Engineer Merlin, Inc. Stipulations I 1 1. That a 1011 asbestos cement pipe be installed to the north and south of the parking lot for drainage. 2. That buildings A and. F as shown on plan be re- submitted to this Board prior to application for a building permit. 3. A bond be submitted for drainage, landscapping; and an entrance cost to be determine by the Town Engineer. It. Investigation of on site trees by town tree warden, Town Manager and Developer be conducted to determine retention of existing trees in conformance with plans and specifications. 5. Grass or attractive area created around future brilding locations. Landscapping as submitted on plan with exception of that around buildings A and B. SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 1970 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting at the South Burlington Middle School Cafeteria, Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on Tuesday, August 18, 1970. Mr. Lamphere, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. MENTERS PRESENT, James A. Lamphere, Chairman; Joseph L. Allard, J. Richard Haigis, Leon P. Ignaszewski and C. H. Behney, Chairman, Board of Selectmen, Ex-Officio. MEMBERS ABSENT Douglas I. Tudhope OTHERS PRESENT Frederick J. Fayette, Robert J. Methot, Charles Munson, ,Tames Pizzagalli, Hilton Wick, William Szymanski, Town Engineer; and Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator. MERLIN PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER SUBDIVISION Mr. Ward said the proposed center on Dorset Street would consist of a two story office building, a retail center, and two cinema theaters, and these three uses are allowed under the present Business A zoning classification. The plan meets satisfactorily the requirements for lot area, lot coverage, yards, building height, off-street parking spaces and location, surface and screening of parking area, access to parking space. Mr. Ward said the lighting of parking area is not shown on plan. The location of free standing sign is satisfactory, but other details not shown on plan. The bay, door or opening for off-street loading facilities also not shown on plan. Mr. Szymanski said to facilitate snow removal, the turning lane island SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION 2. AUGUST 183 1970 MERLIN PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER SUBDIVISION CONTINUED l_ y should be eliminated, and the four foot width placed between the curb and sidewalk. He said the natural drainage is toward the south-east. To divert this toward the street would require a new 24" storm drain on Dorset Street approximately 1300 feet long, assuming no adjustment of existing utilities is required and depth is not greater than 10 feet, the cost would be approximately $15,000.00. Mr. Allard asked what would be the cost of retaining natural drainage and linking a covered pipe into Ramada drainage line. Mr. Methot estimated a total of $12,500, including a privilege fee of $7,500 to Ramada. Mr. Haigis asked if Merlin, Inc. would be receptive to sharing cost of drainage system on Dorset Street with the Town. Mr. Methot said up to $5,000 plus a tax rebate over five years. Mr. Haigis asked what is value of building C (theaters) and parking lot. Mr. Methot extimated $2007000 without buildings A and B, and the entire project about $700,000 - $750,000. Mr. Methot said he has definite leases only on theaters at the present. M.r. Haigis estimated the tax return for the first phase (theaters & parking lot) to be about $61P00 annually. Mr. Lamphere called a short recess. Mr. Lamphere called the meeting to order. Mr. Allard stated he was shocked at the request for a tax rebate. He said costs for water drainage are less than 2% of the subdivision's total cost, and he is against the developer paying for only half of drainage costs plus receiving tax relief. Mr. Behney said to the best of his knowledge the Town has never given consideration to tax relief for development costs. He indicated that a decision of sharing expenses with Town would be the jurisdiction of the Board of Selectmen• Mr• Haigis said the Commission can't approve the plan, until SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 19703. MERLIN PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER SUBDIVISION CONTINUED it is known how drainage will be handled. Mr. Allard made the motion to table a decision until solution of drainage is brought before Planning Commission, and that a copy of the minutes be sent to the Board of Selectmen. Mr. Haigis seconded and there was unanimous approval. Mr. Haigis asked about refuse disposal, lighting, and landscaping. Mr. Methot said an enclosed incinerator would be in office building, an enclosed area and boiler in retail center, and metal containers in separate room in theater building. All refuse areas would be ventilated and fireproofed. Concerning lighting, Mr. Methot said directional lights would be on side of theater building, but not on site because of snow removal problems. At entry to lot, lighting would be directed toward sign with eight down lights in parking lot. CONSIDERATION OF REZONING OF FAYETTE PROPERTY Mr. Fayette said he is requesting that his entire property of 40 acres on Shelburne Road be rezoned from Business A and Industrial A to Business B. He said there are no specific plans at present other than two possibilities. First, relceating his house from Shelburne Road to a southern location on his property, behind Park Hill Apartments to which there would be an access road. Secondly, he has granted an option on a northern section of his property fronting on Shelburne Road and opposite Baldwin Avenue to Chrysler Realty, Inc. The present zonin¢ classification does not include some of these possible uses. Mr. Fayette said a portion of his land is reserved for a planned sewer line, and uses on this portion would be restricted to parking, land- scaping, or park. Before possibly committing this portion to the Town for park use, he wants to be sure he can use remainder of land as would be beneficial to him as well as the Town. I. SOUTH BURLINGTON PtLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 8, 1970 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting at the South Burlington Middle School, Room 142, Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on Tuesday, September 8, 1970. Mr. Joseph Allard, Vice - Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 P." MEMBERS PRESENT Joseph L. Allard, Leon P. Ignaszewski, J. Richard Haigis, Douglas I. Tudhope, C. H. Behney, Chairman of Selectmen, ex-officio, and Robert Janes, Town Manager, ex-officio. MEMBERS ABSENT James A. Lamphere, Chairman. OTHERS PRESENT Karen Larson, Robert J. Methot, Robert H. Ray, Brewer Motors, Inc.; James Pizzagalli, Pizzagalli Construction Co.; Ralph A. Whitney, Green Mt. Power; William Szymanski, Town Engineer, and Richard Ward, Code Officer. MERLIN, INC. Mr. Allard read a letter addressed to the Town Manager from the 'sown Attorney concerning the proposal by Merlin, Inc. to initially provide the necessary costs to put in storm drainage on Dorset Street, to be repaid, interest free, by the town within five years. The letter advises that this arrangement can be approved only by a vote of the Tcwn. h copy is attached to the original minutes. Mr. Methot asked the Commission if it could suggest alternatives. Mr. Janes suggested that a copy of Mr. Ewings letter be sent to Mr. Mezerole and that an alternative plan be presented b Merlin, Inc., to the Selectmen at their next meetinY. Mr. Ignaszewski and Mr. Pi�zagalli also believed the next step was to wait for another proposal from the developer. Mr. Allard SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 8, 1970 2. MERLIN, INC., CONTINUED said the Commission has approved of Merlin's subdivision plan except for the method of providing storm drainage. Mr. Ignaszewski made the motion that any further action be tabled until such time as the developer submits further proposals concerning storm drainage. Mr. Haigis seconded the motion and there was unanimous approval. GREEN MOUNTAIN PDWER Mr. Allard stated the Planning Commission has on record a motion that all power lines in the town be underground in the future. In a letter dated August 12, Green Mountain Power requested the commission to grant permission to replace an underground transformer servicing six homes on Scotsdale Road with a two foot high pad mount transformer. Mr. Whitney, representing Green Mountain Power, explained that the under- ground transformer on Scotsdale Road rusted out 11 years after installa- tion due to the highwater table. He said some locations in the county have pad mount transformers and that Green Mountain Power does not stock the underground transformers anymore. He said that underground transformers which don't hold up are an inconvenience for the customer and that the pad mount transformer is the best alternative until engineering improves. At this point Commission members asked Mr. Whitney many questions to which he replied as follows. Possible hazards of rusted transformers are fire from leaking oil or explosion if there is an arc, but that to his knowledge therehave been no incidences. Vaulting underground transformers with concrete or installing a pump or expanding a nearby transformer is expensive and believes this would not be economically feasible for six homes. Plantings could be used to camoflauge the pad mount transformer, but he questioned upkeep and possible damage by house pets. Stainless steel underground transformers SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 29, 1970 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting at the South Burlington Middle School, Room w1I+2, Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on September 29, 1970. James A. Lamphere, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:35 P.M MEMBERS PRESENT James A. Lamphere, Chairman; Leon Ignaszewski, Douglas I. Tudhope, Joseph Allard, J. Richard Haigis, C. H. Behney, Chairman, Board of Selectmen, cx-officio and ?"obert Janes, Town Manager, c,x-cfficio. MEMBERS ABSENT None 07u! RS PRESENT William Szymanski, Town Engineer; Richard lf,ard, Zoning Administrator; , Inc.; Robert Methot, Dorothy Guilford, Jean. Jere Meserole, Merlin Hildick and Patricia Fastiggi, L.W.V. RENDING 017 MINUTES O7, AUGUST 4, 18, and September 8, 18, 1970 On a motion made by Mr. xllard, seconded by Mr. Ignaszewski and unanimously passed the minutes of August 4 and 18, 1970 and September 8 and 18, 1970 were approved as read. GREEN MOUNTAIN POIdER No action taken, due to the fact that no representative was present from Green Mountain Power. MERLIN, INC. Mr. Robert Methot Stated that he was representing Merlin and submitted an alternate plan to the Board. He commented that they proposed to use existing facilities. f 2. ` SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 29, 1970 MERLIN, INC.. CONTINUED • Two new catch basins would be installed to the north and south sides of the parking lot and with the use of a ten inch smooth pipe they would tie in to existing line on Dorset Street. They expected some pending at the high peaks of a storm. Total cost would be borne by the developer. General discussion proceeded in regard to the side yards and the pond- ing problems. Mr. Szymanski commented that he was satisfied with this plan and that pending is not an irregular problem. On motion made by Mr. Allard, seconded by Mr. Ignaszewski it was decided to accept the Perlin Plan as submitted with stipulations that: 1) A bond be submitted by the developer. 2) Cost set by Town Engineer to cover the entrance, drainage and landscapping plan. Mr. Janes questioned the future possibility of constructing a roadway to the Ramada property. Mr. Meserole commented that it was a prcsibility at a future date. Mr. Janes was also concerned that the undeveloped area be reseeded. Iie was informed by Mx. Meserole that this definitely would take place. Discussion stemmed from Board members concerning the landscapping plan. Mr. Tudhope expressed that he was not satisfied with small amounts of landscapping in the parking lot.area. Mr. Ignaszewski was concerned with landscapping along the frontage stating that he would prefer an additional 4 - 5 trees approximatley 40 - 50 foot on center be planted. Im SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION 3. SEPTEMBER 29, 1970 MERLIN, INC., CONTINUED Mr. Ward commented on the possibility of saving existing growth and also the allocation of 12% of the total construction costs towards a landscapping plan. Mr. Haigis questioned cost of total project and was informed that the theater would run an approximate cost o`_' $180,000.00 and total project about 4 of a million dollars. Mr. Allard questioned the siding on all buildings to be built. Mr. methot informed that a pre -cast material would be used on all 4 sides. The Board was informed by Mr. Meserole that at this time it would not be possible to determine the entire cost of all buildings because there is a possibility that this project may extend for 3 - 5 years. Mr. ,,lard informed the Board that in regard to this a developer has 2 years to complete a project and that after this period it would be necessary to re -submit a new plan to this Board. Mr. Allard then requested to reword his motion stating that the motion is to read: That the town of South Burlington enter into agreement with the Merlin Corp., that the plan be adopted as submitted with the following stipulations: 1. That a 10" asbestos cement pipe be install-d to the north and south of the parking lot for drainage. 2. That buildings A and B as shown on plan be re -submitted to this Board prior to application for a building permit. 3. A bond be submitted for drainage, landscapping an entrance cost to be determined by the Town Engineer. 4. Investigation of on site trees by Town Tree Warden, Town Manager and developer be conducted to determine retention of existing trees in conformance with plans and specifications. , SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MERLIN, INC., CONTINUED 4. SEPTEMBER 29$ 1970 5• Grass or attractive area created around future building locations. Landscapping as submitted on plan with exception of that around buildings A and B. Seconded by Mr. Tudhope and passed unanimously. ZONING AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS Mr. Allard explained that this Beard has adopted a scope of work to be done in the rewriting of these regulations also a budget has been adopted and that this Board has recommended a professional planner to draft a new set of regulations. Mr. Allard commented that he was presented letters by several members of the League of Women Voters which pointed out a concern for the expedence of new requirements, these letters also brought out good ideas that could be applicable to this area. Mr. Allard stated he would go on record in support of th(-! concept being taken by the Planning Commission as for building set -back and landscaped areas. The Foard was informed by Mr. Lamphere that a tentative completion date of 4 months has been set, also that ti:� oard would have an opportunity to review any and all work done by the planner and that also all the support from interested citizens would definitely be welcomed. MILLEROOK P.-BEAD Mr. Pehney reported that his Roard has received complaints from area residents of Bartletts Flay who are concerned with the existing curb cuts on the Shelburne Road in front of the Millbrcok building. He stated that the southerly drive is definitely a problem with the flow of traffic. It has been suggested to close this southerly driveway and enter SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING OCMIISSION MEETING - 10 - June 13, 1972 Dr. Brown moved that the Planniinrn Commission accent the plan as presented by Mr. Steady for the office complex at the corner of Willis Grove_ Avenue with the Proposed change of the green area on the front buffer strip on the southeast corner of the lot; the green area to b e put in to match the entrance on the other side of Williston Road. 1,r. rziley seconded the motion. Approval was unanimous. SITE PLA1,T REVjoi - MERLIN PLAZA - INVESTORS CORP. OF VEINONT Vice -Chairman James Lamphere wantbd the 1.Iinutes to show that he turned the Chair over to Dr. Brown for this item and that he would not participate in any discussion, since he is the architect for the proosed plan. A site plan was presented by Peter Judge, Realtor, showing plans for construction of three buildings, two story, wood exterior, with approximately 28,000 square feet. Developer Paul Spreyregan is purchasing the theater property and plans to continue the development. Mr. Ward referred to Planning Commission Minutes of 1970 in which original approval of this development was given and said he was quite sure approval was niven on the condition all three buildings would be of stone or brick. He suggested these Minutes be checked before final ap proval is given. After a brief consultation, it was unanimously agreed that this item be tabled until Thursday, June 15. SITE PLAN REVIE4: - J&DIPROP - TIMBER LANE - toBj;I�T BURLEY AND JERRY S.I II-LI "Y Mr. Burley, Robert Burley 1=ssociates, stated he proposes to build a medical building at Timber Lane and nennedy Drive on the southeast corner of the intersection. His purpose tonight is to get the Commission's reaction to different aspects of the proposal such as height restriction, set back requirements, and how they feel about a medical facility in this location. IIe proposes to retain as many trees as possible; there will be parking for about 121 cars. SOUTH BURLINGTON pjA.1d,,ING CON'�•iISSION MilLTING - 12 - June ?_7, 1972 tit because of our parking restrictions. A vote on tl-ie motion was called. It Maas approved unanimously. Additions to the A ends On a motion duly moved, seconded and unanimously approved, the following items were added to the agenda: Investors Corp. of Vermont - Landscaping Plan Discussion of Meeting with Laurel Hill and Laurel Hill South Residents Re: Potter (Yandow) Development I.TVr STORS C01:tPORATION OF VE",ZjOirT L,1d:DSCAPING PIATJ - (DORSLT ggr,17T ) r, j•tard el:plained this item had been tabled at the last meeting of the Commission on June 13. Mr. Richard Ileineman showed three site plans with different ideas on TTe raj_d 1,-!Y caring will conform to the 1 requir. errant. Tl'.e Commission studiedA the three plans. A motion was made by Mr. Bailey that the Planning COT_A'X.issiOn accent Drawing lA as far as landsc__inZ of the border area is concerned on the north k side of the max'?cir� lot and that the plan include exi sting plantin s in the par.�ng area, hrs. rlaher seconded the motion. It was approved unanimously. I-^IURT L BILL ATtD Lt"iUli Z BILL SCUTIi RF.SID .` ^iS - ice:__ -'a: _D-�r:;T,c?�, T^- i Joel Bunter, Yandota Drive, representing residents of Laurel Bill and Laurel Bill South, requested the Cormission to meet with his group to discuss the Potter Develop - vent. IIr. Lamphere had previously told a representative of the ;group that a few mem- bers of that group might meet with the Con .fission on Thursday evening, June 29. It was later learned that the Commission was holC1ng a work session with Dr. Kent to discuss this development on Friday at 4 o'clock. Attempts to contact Mr. Lamphere about the meeting on Thursday evening were unsuccessful because he was out of town. mmission agreed to meet with tn(- residents on Wednesday, After discussion, the Co July 5 at Central School at 8:30 P•I• Terrence Boyle took exception to the CoTrmi.ssion meeting privately with the group of residents, stating he felt it unfair to the developer and asked that the same privil- South Burlington Legal Notice Subdivision Hearing The South Burlington Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington Middle School Library, Dor- set Street, South Burlington, Vermont on Tuesday, August 18, at 7:30 P.M. to consider the following: Appeal of Merlin, Inc. of South Burlington for approval of a shopping center on a parcel of land bounded on the west by Dorset Street; on the north by the Victory property; bound- ed on the east by Ver-mado, Inc. property and on the south by the Wright property, as per plan on file in the office of the Zoning Administrator. August 4, 1970 James A. Lamphere, Chairman South Burlington Planning Commission DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Re: APPEAL OF TEKRAM PARTNERS, CENTURY PARTNERS & JUDGE COMPANIES This matter came before the South Burlington Development Review Board pursuant to the provisions of 24 VSA§ 4464(a) on appeal of Tekram Partners, Century Partners and Judge Companies, hereinafter "Appellants," appealing the issuance of a Notice of Violation dated 9/26/00 by the Administrative Officer for property at 100 & 102 Dorset Street and 4 Market Street. The Appellants were present at the public hearing held on 12/5/00 relative to this appeal. Based on evidence submitted at the hearing and as part of this appeal, the South Burlington Development Review Board hereby renders the following decision: 1. The owners of record of this property are Tekram Partners, Century Partners and Judge Companies. 2. On 5/12/98 the Planning Commission granted an "as -built" approval for the 100 Dorset Street complex which includes 102 Dorset Street and 4 Market Street. On 12/24/99 the Development Review Board approved a revised plan for mezzanine space at 4 Market Street (Healthy Living). The 1999 approval required that certain modifications be made to the site which have yet to be implemented. 3. A comprehensive review of the property revealed that site modifications were made since the 1998 plan was approved without approval. This review also revealed that conditions of the 1999 approval have yet to be met. The Administrative Officer listed conditions not implemented or site modifications maG : without approval in the three (3) separate Notices of Violation dated 9/26/00. Mr. Judge submitted a letter dated 10/3/00 in response to these Notices of Violation. 4. On 10/25/00 staff and the City Attorney met Peter Judge and his attorney on the site and reviewed each of the items listed in the Notices of Violation. The purpose of these Notices of Violation is to bring the property into compliance with past approvals and the zoning regulations. 5. On October 5, 2000, the three (3) Appellants filed one (1) Notice of Appeal appealing the decision of the Administrative Officer to issue the three (3) Notices of Violation. 1 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The South Burlington Development Review Board, based on the facts of the matter, concludes that the Administrative Officer acted properly in determining that the Appellants are in violation of the zoning regulations for making site modifications to the property without approval and permits and for non-compliance on an approval granted on 12/24/99. DECISION Based on the above Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law, the South Burlington Development Review Board denies the Appellants request to vacate and reverse the Administrative Officer's decision of 9/26/00 and affirms said decision. Dated this day of December, 2000 at South Burlington, VT Chairman or Clerk South Burlington Development Review Board 2