Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBATCH - Supplemental - 0909 Dorset StreetNOTICE OF APPEAL SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING BOARD Or ADJUSTMENT I hereby appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for the following: conditional use. variance. decisions of administrative officer. Property Owner Property location & description ! 09 phe5e-i S / Variance of Section t ` O 0 , number title of section Basis of appe 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 and the Inring. (�) I � 01 V1 AV1- /. -_ Hearing Date Signature of Appellant l SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE In accordance with the South Burlington Zoning Regulations and Chapter 91, Title 21+- 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 I at _ day of week month and date time to consider the following: -4 q.. Appeal IM variance from eeking a (name) Section / oo ��-�.,, �2._._a <_.>,,.,� , ,:,- Hof runber ) 7itle of section the South Burlington Zoning R gulatio s. Request i far permission to Gam.lir.A-r I � I 1 I ( I I I LEGALS I I' SOUTNBURLINGTONZO ING I NOTICE I I Cro accordance with the[ South' 1 + gurlington zoning Regulations I an hapter 91, Title 24 Y.S.A. the South ) ¢¢urlingtorr Zoning Boe4rd oJI �+ Ad)ustment Will hold p publiclhearing t the South ,Burlington City I011ices} I onference ;Room, 1175 WIIIIstah Road, South ,Burlington, Verjnont oq I I ondsy,Apr)1 15, 1971 et S: p.m. tbnidr the /,ollowing: Appeal of Norman and All fo Wheel eking a variance from Section 11,00, Dimensional, requirements of thf South Burlington Zoning RwV lot ions, Request is forr permission to c nstruc 20' x 22' garfage f the wester to within si y side yard line, (6) fee it 16 Ib I ( i trcet. Appeal of Rpderlek Bryant seeking iI I I Irom Section 11.00 I mensional requirements of th iariance ouch Burlington Zoning RegulationsI [ cCuesf is for permission toe 3nstructI 1 x 24' g rage to :within fight (8� Let of the esIerly, side y Let rd on dvithin twent seven UP fe t of Ih 3 ear yard lin , at 16 Sunset Av nue. I + Appeal of San I Remo Re Corporation seeking variance is fa Iro 1;1.00, 'Dimer slonao II I cquirement of the �ulh 8 rlingto ) I oning Reg Iations. I Request is fo rmission t construct a 1 0' x 2S� Storage bull inq to within fiv (5) fe , pf the south rly property Iln et th i +zzagalll &rehouse, Sa Rem I I t give. I I }} Appeal 6eCking f Wlll am R lance from Sect enstel IL a va pimenslonaI requir,lements on of th I South Burlington Zoning Regulations. Request is for permission to construct ; d single family dwelling, containing )735 square feet to within fyfty (50) ' feet of the northerly side yard and fifty-seven (57) feet of the southerly side yard, at 909 Dorset Street' 5 Appeal of Shell OII Co.,,.. H. I Roerden seeking a ;varlan�,frortl •� ;� Section 13.00, Nomconformipg uses w and structures of the South B rlinglon Zoning Regulations. Reques� Is for I l [ ermisslo to improvje and deconstruct t�e Interigr of the exlstinq building, (said alterations do not GoMorm to subsection 2) at P essey'> I ' 1hell Station„1830 Shelburne oad. Zoning Board of AdjFF++stmenr Richard A. Myette, Coalrman i March 28, 1974 I I I I ; [ 1 I i i I i II I j If i I , i i The two story traditional home has been an A merican favorite since the pilgrim days of old Cape Cod, and for good reason --economy of space and practical design are never out-of-date. The two story divides living and sleeping areas easily and with maximum privacy. It provides advantages in lower construction costs and in heating and cooling efficiency. Flexibility of design and size makes possible a two story style to please almost anyone. NOHTHeR.'4 HOMES HUO6Or4 FALLS. N `/. CHAMOEIMISOURG. PA. T7 The time tested cape cod design with extra innovations. Outside theie's a porch sheltering a breezeway entrance between the kitchen and a two -car garage. Also, notice the imposing entryway, the authentic dormer design, and an especially good-looking garage entrance. Step inside the Duxbury; you'll like it even morel Who could resist the living room with its fireplace, the separate din ill room or the large kitchen with dining area? Wait till the man of the house secs the den, near the center of everything, yet private —just what Dad's always wanted) Upstairs are 4 bedrooms, a convenient bath, and lots of closet space. The early cape cod builders had a good thing — and now Duxbury makes it even betterl TOTAL LIVING AREA 1764 SO. FT. OVERALL DIMENSIONS 68' x 28' - DINING -ROOM \ /D-- �. 1OTOHEN AND EATING J ( 21'd•• x 10' 1 77 wywa GARAGE BATH BREEZEWAY WAY 21Y" x 21'4' f0'1" x 114 - 0 0 •f LIVING ROOM 13'8" x 17• -1 - •t:9RCH O DEN 7 C 68' 0XIC"ALMI NORTH):RWHOME5,1NC. 77- � ' ` ----" ` n , ~ U_..-~.._-=| ' �]S • 1 qb ►. , , A k ,,, ; , 5 i 8 -- 28 S,O��tHAN ,jj9yy rr• I ✓ * No. 2849 '07- # pFCfSTER���\ty�+ � fov L / 738 W w i Vv w DbQSCT Si�e-ie 7" TOLERANCES 1 (EXCEPT AS NOTED) DECIMAL SCALE DRAWN BY OF AD.PJSTYENT APRIL 15. 1274 OM WILLIAM ROi37"ISTEIN 00. Dimensioranl of �rilxiam Robenstein seeking a variance from Section 11, rr.-,Are=tuts of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations. Request is for perr,ission to construct a single family dwelling, containirg 1735 square feet to within fifty (50) feet of the northerly side yard and fifty-seven (57) feet of the southerly side yard, at 909 Dorset Street. This at, eal was read aloud by the Chairman, Mr. Page stated the area is now zoned Agricultural, minimum lot ten acres. This lot.was set off prior to the passage of the approved subdivision regulation in 1969 and was a conforming lot under the old ordinance, that Dick Ward had said it was conforming. Is considered to be a part of the Southeast Quadrant. Y . Page presented a plot plan to the Board. Mr. Martineau raised the question of the warning not having included the variance from the ten acre minimum. Mr. Fayette felt there was no need to get involved in the acreage question because - _.. it is an existing lot. The lot is presently set off; itis not as though they wee,- asking for a variance to set off a lot of less than ten acres. Chairman Myette conmented that this is the first time tie Board has worked with the new Zoning Ordinance and because there is some confusion he would defer to the legal members of the Board. Mr. SYlve3ter said he felt all Mr. Robenstein is asking is a variance on the side line and that is all the Board can act upon._~ air-=n N4yette said he beilieved th.:^,t both the minimum ten -acre lot and the set- _ backs should have been warners, according to his interpretation. Mr. Robenstein felt this was a valid lot with the only problem being able to con- form to the set back and side yard requirements and still make use of the land for whatever district and zone it is in. The lot was sqt off well before the present ordinance; had been zoned all this period of time and appraised as such. He is only asking for a relaxation of the side line requirements so he can rake some use of the property. Mr. Robenstein explained he is negotiating with Fred Blais regarding obtaining a right of way from him which he could use as a driveway, thus eliminating the nerd for a curb cut in the vicinity of the church. He said he had not arrroachei the Church Board to find oat how they wcsld feel, but the people who own property on the other side have no objection to the variance. He repeated ttvat all he was asking is to use the property for the residential purpose at which it is appraised in the tax book as Residential A. He also said it had been approved with a curb cut independent of anything else, but he would hope to not have a curb cut. The Chairman said he was reluctant to allow a curb cut in that section, parti- cularly on the hill. Mr. I°yette then asked Mr. Blais about granting the, right of way, as eventually it would be a right of way to the land which Nx. Blais's corporation owns. Mr. Blais replied the land utilization of tzis acreage is not at all definitive at present. Theyoriginally h.3d a private driveway of 45 feet and purchased an additional 15 feet to wake it a leE�,-a1 ri..7ht of y; they also o:an about 1700 feet of frontage on Swift Street. They would not be adverse to granting a right of way to Mr. Robenstein but not until they have in writing a definite plan of what he has to do, something from his legal counsel. When asked by Mr. Myette if he thought they would use this right of way the^. -elves within the next few years, Mr. Blass said it would be used as an egress. 'I':.v 4• ,� . - gmp t'D CF ANLISTMET�'T APRIL 1� 1974 F W 1 L LIAM RCBIEVSTElNCCNTINUED { r1ve► the frontage on Swift Street but more than one access might be desired for the property. "r. Elvis stated their land abuts Mr. Robenstein's lot to the rear and to the south. Mr. Gordon Haldeman announced he was a trustee of the church (Faith Methodist) that he represented the Board of Trustees, and that they have no objection to the granting of the variance. _!i,,;9/i) The Chairman t1mt first the Board could wake it a conditional approval based on Nx. Skokeu's ruling as to whether or not the ten acre minimum should have been warned. The second thing to considor is the granting of a curb cut with the possibility of a street being put in ad„Aacent to his lot, putting in a stipula- tion that this right of i<%y must be used. Mr. Robe^.stein objected to this, saying he was not asking for a curb cut, and asked if they were prohibiting a curb cut in case he and Mr. Blais could not agree on a right of way, Nx, Sylvester suggested that the Board consider a stipulation that the right of way would rave to be used. Mr. Robenstein objected again, that this would be an impossible condition if the price of the rif-,ht of way was unreasonable. Mr. Sylvester said the Board should be receptive to a change in the, stipulation :If cir=11stance3 developed that mde the right of way impossible,. Q Mr. Myette asked why Mr. Robenstein hadn't negotiated with Mr. Blais before asking for the variance. Mr. Robenstein explained he had no idol what the Planning Com- mission might do to Mr. Blais's proposal; also he wanted to see what the Board might want as specific conditions that might be incorporated into the agreement. Mr, Martineau felt that because they were only considering side line variances# the curb cut, whether it was on the property or the right of ways would not be a function of the Board to consider this question. Mr. Sylvester said he felt that Mr. Robenstein has a non -conforming, approved lot, and if it was non -conforming as to the ten acres, why should the side -line requirements have to be complied with-- why with some requircments and not all of them. Mr. Fobenstein has made some commitments and has planned a renidence. He felt it was inconsistent and that perhaps a Table might be in order until Dick Ward returns to explain. Mr. Robenstein said it would be an extreme hardship to have any delay. The reason the lot didn't come under the ten acre minimum was because it was a pre- existing lot, but that the Board does have to have srme control over the place- ment of the building on the lot which makes the request for variance necessare Chairman Myette thought it should be cleared up by legal coansel. This section of the City is extremely restricted by the ten -acre minimum and the Board could be open to criticism. He said he was reluctant to proceed until he was on legal ground. • - RCARD OF ADJUSTMENT' APRIL 151„ 1 _?! 1 J L?. L OF WIL•LIAM ROBENSTEIN. (CONTINUED) Teo members felt the Board could vote on just what was before them. ;mac Chairman suggested voting or. the warning, but with a stipulation that Mr. Robenstein negotiate some agreement as to the right of way; also to vote pending the approval of a legal opinion. Yr. Robenstein offered to come back with an agreement and said he would appreci- ate the Board voting with those conditions naffed. Mr. Sylvester said he felt the side lines were all the Board could act upon. He added that if he were the Chairman and concerned about whether or not the proper procedure was being followed, he would opt for a Table until he had the legal opinion.. Mr. Fayette suggested a compromise in that if there is undue hardship, the legal opinion be rendered before the building permit is granted. Mr. Reed felt the Board should vote on the appeal, but should get a legal opinion. Chairman Myette said the vote would be taken with the stipulations that: 1) if the appeal is granted the legal opinion shall be -forthcoming from the City Attorney specifically determining whether the ten acre minimum lot size and the 200 feet frontage requirements in AR District should be Wnrned and duly heard by the Board; and 2.) the granting of the variance is predicated on an agreement for the use of a right of uay as access to the subject property to be granted by CBC Realty and Development Corporation. The issuance of a building permit shall be predicated on the City Attorney s opinion that th-e-arbove--two stipula-tiGns. are ,not required to be heard by the Zoning Board of Adjustment. J ._ ( _70 _ The Board voted unanimously to approve the variance with the above stipulations. APPEAL OF SHELL OIL CO. Appeal of Shell Oil Co., Mr. H. Roerden seeking a variance from Section 13.001, Non -conforming uses and structures of the South Burlington Relations. Request is for permission to improve and reconstruct the interior of the existing building, -(said alterations do not conform to subsection 2) at Pressey's Shell Station, 1830 Shelburne Road. This appeal was read aloud by the Chairman. Mr. Page stated the area is zoned Planned Business Development with a minimum lot size of two acres. Also, the alterations must not exceed 25% of the fair market value of the property. The fair market value is $11,000 and the estimated cost of the proposed alterations is $7,000, thus exceeding the 2;% limitation. Mr. Chris Christensen said he was representing Shell Oil in place of Fr. Roerden who was unable to attend. He explained how they plan to do whit is basically :maintenance work, re -doing the rest rooms, putting up paneling in the sales area, and building a storeroom inside. Mr. Pressey needs the storeroom in order to control his inventory. Shell Oil leases the land and sub -leases both land and building to Mr. Pressey; their property line ends with the back of the building. They have no control over the unsightly appearance of the back yard as that is leased by someone else from the Joly Estate. Shell has tried several times to get the land but is (the Estate is) being contested back and forth in court. April 17, 1974 Mr. Richard Ward Zoning Administrator City Hall - Williston Rd. So. Burlington, Vermont RE: Driveway Permit Dear Dick, On my submittal plan before the So. Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment on April 15, 1974, a proposed access to my property was shown using a 60 foot right-of-way. This right-of-way is part of the C.B.C. property which borders my parcel. I felt that if a permanent easement could be obtained over this private right-of-way, that both the City and I would benefit from such an agreement. However, I have been unable to obtain a permanent easement from the C.B.C. Corporation and, therefore, it is necessary for me to have access to my property directly from Dorset Street. I would be more than willing to close my driveway on Dorset street and gain access from the 60 foot right-of-way presently owned by C.B.C. Corporation when it becomes a City right-of-way. If C.B.C. is not required to have access to their land from Dorset Street and would consider sale of the 60 x 250 foot right- of-way, I would try to purchase it. Attached is a revised copy of my plot plan showing the driveway access point. Sincerely, 'a William A. Robenstein WAR/mkb April 18, 1974 Mr. 'iillian Robenstein. 16 qua Ave. South Eirlington, A. 05401 Dear Bill, To clarify any possible misunderstanding regarding our mutual negotiations for an easement for right of way on our property, please be adivsed we have no objections to granting such an easement to you as long as the property is considered a right of way. Given the fact that no plans to date have been presented to the Planning Commission by our Corporation under the current law, I can not poeitively assure that the City will require this land to be used as a street. If in fact your opinion is correct that perhaps the Planning Commission might frown on a street in said right of way, I would not want to be in a position to be unable to dispose of the piece of land because of a permanent easement granted to you in perpatuity. For the Nominal sum fo $10.00, an easement is available to you provided said land rervee as a right of way or street now and in the futur. Our Corporation has no objections to your variance and land use and wishes to cooperate with you in a reasonable manner as a good neighbor. If we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Respectf Subm e C .`B . Fteralty and Ds�lopment Inc. P;ederick G. Maio cc: Bill Olzmanski, City HawWr cc: Dick Ward, Zoning Administrator fgb REVISION RECORD /'f6- =5a�� 5 # No. 2849 A �FCWEF�� �sio� 4r ; 793 TOLERANCES (EXCEPT AS NOTED) DECIMAL SCALE DRAWN BY APPROVED BY 1 FRACTIONAL TITLE �� s TE-i.v ANGULAR DATE DRAWING NUMBER JunE 7 '72