HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP-78-0000 - Decision - 0068 Nesti Drive,fix t 1 t -._,
-W
r I
S`T'r.TF OF VERMONT 0
COUNTY OF ChImTENDEN
CITY OF SCUTF EURLINGTON
DLCISICN & FINDINGS OF FACT
. i
tee: Appeal of Lakeland Cor oration, Attorne Peter Collins ,A ent
On the 17th day of April � 1 7.9 the South Burlington
Sonang L:oard of Adjustment aorroved or)UMXNX the appeal of
Lakeland Corporation, Afforney Peter Collins; Agent
Lased on the folloking facts:
l) Plan represents a reasonable use of the land in keeping
i
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APRII, 17 J97
a
Na: 5 ,Appeal of Sam .,and Jacky Barone
A e.
Appeal ;.of: -Sam and Jacky -Barone* •seeking a...variance from Section-11.00.,
Dimensional requirements and Section 13.00, Non -conforming structures of the
South Burlington Zoning Regulations:: Request is for permission to conswruoa
_a 14' x 30' addition -(two additional motel units) to within five (5) feou
of the northerly side yard, at the Harbor Sunset Motel, 1700 Shplburno Road.
Mr. Ward said the area was zoned BPD and"that the existing structure
vhs non -conforming to Section 11.00 dimensional requirements. The use is
also conditional under Section 8.10 subsection_8.114.;. The existing motol
is located within 19' of the required front yard (minimum 75') and 5 fcot
of the northerly side yard'(minimum.30'). The proposed 14' x 30!;,addita
will be on the easterly side of the structure. Mr. Barone said that they
operated 10 units now and they felt this was the least expensive way to
expand the business now. They are presently turning away business and
extra units will make the business more viable. There is a largo r,aviry^
the north side of the motel, so no one could build there anyway,.he sail,
Nor. Martineau said they might have a'few more cars per day coming ,in n:nd olxt
but Mr. Barone said.that they got the traffic now, but it went out agnin.
Mr. Reed said the addition would be placed at the end farther from Shelburne
Road. -Mr.,Barone said.they.needed the extra units to be able to make a good
livings aMr. Fayette asked how long they had been there and ;was told three
years and that the facility.was about 25 years old.. `
The appeal was granted unanimously.
Appeal of Aim4 and Gertrude Perreaulta(tabled April 3. 1978)
Mr. Ward said this appeal had been withdrawn.
Appeal -of Lakeland•Corporation-(Passett's), (tabled Mrch!20, 1978
Mr.. Martineau said the Board had been concerned about the .location of
the South Burlington Southern.Connector and had wanted a letter from the City
Manager to the -effect that sewer and water for the project would be available
and would not exceed the;city's,:ability_to provide them. He said they had
received a letter ,from the.City,Manager; to .that effect (copy with Zonir�a;
Administrator) and that they could'deal.with location of .the Southern
Connector. Mr.-.Perkett said .he,was- not -at the last meeting but he had boon,
at the first one and had read the minutes, ,_Mr. Martineau said that tn,meotin.
planned for discussion of the location.of the road had not.taken plece and
that he herikc�A�ntpelier to see what things looked like.; He was told
that it did not seem that the highway would conflict with the,plant except',
perhaps for the entrance road. Mr. Fayette said theme were three.quentionp:
1) where the Southern Connector would go, 2) a concern about traffic from
the retail outlet, and 3) a connector street across from this location,,., which
Faosett's has agreed to match up with. He felt they could not ask tho
appellant to wait another two weeks for the State to decide the location of
theroad when it might not be resolved then. Mr. Martineau said that at
>> 75-190 estimated cars per day going to the outlet, he did not feel the amount
of traffic was a serious consideration. He also pointed out that the curb
cut for the plant would be decided by the :hate as would the location of the
Southern Connector and the appellant has expressed his willingness to shift
the road as necessary so n3 to not conflict with the Connector. Mr. Bouyca
confirmed this, saying they would be willing to accomodate the needs:of the
Highway „Department a.n.d the Southern Connector.bq putting,th8_drive anywhere
on the property.
The appeal was approved unanimously.
Appeal of Brassard brothers .(tabled February 212 1970..-.
The Planning Commission has approved the 2 lot subdivision of the
Morgan property with the conditions set forth in the agreed statement of
facts. They have also submitted a memo saying they did not favor the appeal
because the use might set a precedent for the entire area's character. I1r.
Fayette said the Brassards had felt that almost any use permitted in the
zone of this parcel of land would not be allowed because it would generate
too much traffic on a congested highway. 14r. Martineau said the hardship
was not the Brassards'. Mr. Schmucker said Mrs. Morgan would Find it hard
to develop the property because any BR use would probably be a high traffic
generator. Mr. Martineau felt there were reasonable uses which would not
generate a vast amount of traffic. Mr. Schmucker said they expected only
50-60 trips per day, which is lower than most viable businesses which would,
go on the lot. He said they were grandfathered for interim zoning but that
if they are denied they go back to ground 0 and the property cannot be
developed for at least one year and perhaps 3. He said this was Mrs. Morgan
last chance to actualize the property and she needed to financially. Ile felt
this use was not out of character with the neighborhood and the Brassards will
develop the rest of the lot in strict conformance with the zoning, he said.
Kr. Martineau did not quarrel with the use but was troubled by what might
happen if this piece was developed. He asked about the curb cuts, feeling
that it might be best to have just one. Mr. Schmucker said Mrs. Morgan' did'
not want to do that and Mr. Houghton had not felt it was necessary and, might
not make the situation any better. Mr. Martineau said they needed to separate
the needs and preferences of the Brassards from those of Mrs. Morgan. Mr.
Gravel said he was Mrs. I:organ's lawyer and that she has been trying to sell
the property for a long time and this is the only use she felt she could sell
it to. It is the lowest traffic generator in the area. She wants to retire
end.this land has been listed for 2 or more years without a buyer getting '
this interested in it. Mr. Peterson said he had had the property listed for
a long time and that this was the only offer with a lot of potential. I1r.
Martineau said the request was for a use variance and the city did have areas
where the use was permitted without a variance. Mr. Reed asked what_ the
Commission had approved and was told it was just the subdivision. Mr.' Schmucker
said they would be willing to impose by contract the line that existed for
the Midas lot when it was a three lot subdivision so that the variance would
not apply to the entire area, just to that lot. Mr. Ward said the,'ad had.
referred to a 1.1 acre parcle and there could be a atipulation.that;the variance
was only for that. Mr. David Brassard said the rest of the land would be BIi
and he did not think any more auto -related services in there would be requested.
Mr. Martineau needed more time to think about the appeal and Iir. Fayette felt
there were things that had not been addressed yet. He asked that Yr. Boughton
come to the next meeting to discuss the curb cuts. Mr. Fayette asked the
Prassards for a statement about how they would develop the rest of the land.
Mr. Perkettlrioved to table the appeal until the next reKularly scheduled