The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMS-08-07 - Decision - 0003 Pavilion Avenue#MS-08-07 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING YIOTA AHLADAS - 3 PAVILION AVENUE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION #MS-08-07 FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION Yiota Ahladas, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking to expand a non- complying single family dwelling by: 1) expanding the previously approved enclosure from 12' x 14' to 13.5' x 16', and 2) adding a second story 13.5' x 16' addition, 3 Pavilion Avenue. The Development Review Board held a public hearing on Tuesday, September 2, 2008. The applicant was present at the hearing. Based on testimony provided at the above mentioned public hearing and the plans and supporting materials contained in the document file for this application, the Development Review Board finds, concludes, and decides the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The applicant is seeking to expand a non -complying single family dwelling by 1) expanding the previously approved enclosure from 12' x 14' to 13.5' x 16', and 2) adding a second story 13.5' x 16' addition, 3 Pavilion Avenue. 2. The owner of record of the subject property is Yiota Ahladas. 3. The subject property is located in the Queen City Park (QCP) Zoning District. 4. The plan submitted is a hand drawn plan prepared by the applicant. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements: QCP Zoning District Re wired Proposed Min. Lot Size 7500 S.F. 2195 S.F *** Max. Building Coverage 40% 39.3% ***Max. Overall Coverage 60% 45.2% #. Min. Front Setback loft 8 ft w► Min. Side Setback 5 ft. Approx 2 ft. �► Min. Rear Setback 10 ft. Approx 17 ft. Max. Building Height 25 ft. 23 ft. 4 Pre-existing non-compliance ****Many of the homes in the Queen City Park neighborhood are eligible for relief from setbacks and coverages under Section 3.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations for pre-existing non -compliant lots which existed prior to February 28, 1974. #MS-08-07 Lots smaller than 5000 square feet in size may exceed the maximum allowed for the district up to a maximum of forty percent (40%) for buildings and sixty percent (60%) for overall coverage. This appiication has been reviewed under Section 4.08 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. A. Purpose: A Queen City Park District is herby formed in order to encourage residential use at densities and setbacks that are compatible with the existing character of the Queen City Park neighborhood. It is designed to promote the area's historic development pattern of smaller lots and reduced setbacks. This district also encourages the conversation of seasonal homes to year round residences. The proposed addition is in compliance with the purpose of the QCP Zoning District. B. Comprehensive Plan The proposed addition is harmonious with the City's Comprehensive plan. C. Permitted Use The proposed residential addition is a permitted use in the QCP district. D. Conditional Uses The proposed project does not require conditional use review. E. Area, Density, and Dimensional Requirements ****Many of the homes in the Queen City Park neighborhood are eligible for relief from setbacks and coverages under Section 3.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations for pre-existing non -compliant lots which existed prior to February 28, 1974. Lots smaller than 5000 square feet in size may exceed the maximum allowed for the district up to a maximum of forty percent (40%) for buildings and sixty percent (60%) for overall coverage. F. Height of Structures The maximum height for all structures shall be no more than twenty-five feet above the average pre -construction grade adjoining such structure. The existing height of the roof is 23'. This is within the standard allowable use in the district. This application does not seek to increase this height. G. Non -Complying Structures Structures in the Queen City Park District are not subject to all provisions of Article 3, non -complying structures shall be subject to the following requirements and restrictions: -2- #MS-08-07 (1) Any non -complying building or structure may be altered provided such work does not: a. Exceed in aggregate cost thirty-five percent for residential properties and twenty five percent for non-residential properties of the fair market value as determined by the City Assessor or by a separate independent appraisal approved by the Administrative Officer; or b. Involve an increase to the structures height or footprint, or otherwise involve an increase to the square footage of the building or structure. The applicant has proposed a building cost of $18,000 and is thus in compliance with part `a' of this criterion. However, the square footage of the building will be increased. Therefore, Section 4.08(G)(2) applies: (2) The Development Review Board may approve any alteration which exceeds the thirty-five and twenty-five percent rule described above or which involves an increase to the structure's height, footprint, or square footage subject to the provisions of Article 14, Conditional Use Review. The Board has evaluated compliance with the criteria in the section of this report titled `Conditional Use Review'. (3) In addition to the provisions set forth above, the DRB shall determine that the proposed alteration or expansion will not adversely affect: a. Views of adjoining and/or nearby properties; b. Access to sunlight of adjoining and/or nearby properties; and c. Adequate on -site parking. These criteria are evaluated below as part of conditional use review. CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA Pursuant to Section 14.10(E) of the Land Development Regulations, the proposed conditional use shall meet the following standards: 1. The proposed use, in its location and operation, shall be consistent with the planned character of the area as defined by the City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. The proposed addition is not in conflict with the planned character of the area, as defined by the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed use shall conform to the stated purpose of the district in which the proposed use is located. According to Section 4.08(A) of the Land Development Regulations, the QCP Zoning District is formed in order to encourage residential use at densities and setbacks that are compatible with the existing character of the Queen City Park neighborhood. It is designed to promote the area's historic development pattern of smaller lots and reduced setbacks. This district also encourages the conversation of seasonal homes to year -3- #MS-08-07 round residences. Again, the proposed addition is in compliance with the proposed purpose of the district. 3. The Development Review Board must find that the proposed uses will not adversely affect the following: (a) The capacity of existing or planned municipal or educational facilities. The proposed addition will not adversely affect municipal services. (b) The essential character of the neighborhood or district in which the property is located, nor ability to develop adjacent property for appropriate uses. The proposed addition does not adversely affect the character of the neighborhood. The QCP district is historically a very dense neighborhood. The proposed addition is to the rear of the property and will be largely unseen. (c) Traffic on roads and highways in the vicinity. The proposed addition will not affect traffic in the vicinity. (d) Bylaws in effect. The proposed addition adheres to the applicable regulations in all instances except for consideration of the existing structure as a pre-existing non -conforming structure. (e) Utilization of renewable energy resources. The proposed addition will not affect renewable energy resources. (0 General public health and welfare. The proposed addition will not have an adverse affect on general public welfare. Pursuant to Section 3.06(J)(3) of the Land Development Regulations, the proposed building expansion shall meet the following standards: (a) views of adjoining and/or nearby properties; It is difficult to assess how this proposal will affect the views of adjoining and/or nearby properties. This neighborhood is located very close to Lake Champlain and so it is possible that some favorable views exist. Based on testimony given at the hearing, it does not appear that this addition would impact those views. (b) access to sunlight of adjoining and/or nearby properties; It is also difficult to assess this criterion. This neighborhood is very dense and homes are very close together. Based on testimony given at the hearing, it does not appear that this addition would deny neighboring property owners' access to sunlight. -4- #MS-08-07 (c) adequate on -site parking; and The proposed addition will not have an undue adverse affect on adequate on -site parking. (d) safety of adjoining and/or nearby property. The proposed addition will not have an undue adverse affect on the safety of adjoining properties. DECISION Motion by V u(lrlM�j seconded bY leKa r—"f4G---Xto approve Miscellaneous Applica ion #MS-08-07 of Yiota Ahladas, subject to the following conditions: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not superseded by this approval shall remain in effect. 2. This project shall be completed as shown on the plat submitted by the applicant and on file in the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning. 3. The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months pursuant to Section 17.04 of the Land Development Regulations or this approval is null and void. 4. Any change to the site plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Development Review Board. Mark Behr —nay/abstain/not present_ Matthew Birmingham — yea/nay/abstai not res t John Dinklage — yea/nay/abstain not presence Roger Farley — nay/abstain/not present Eric Knudsen —yea/nay/abstain o resen Peter Plumeau —4ea/nay/abstain/not present Gayle Quimby —0/nay/abstain/not present Motion carried by a vote of 1- v - v Signed this day of 2008, by Mark Behr, Vice Chair Please note: You have the right to appeal this decision to the Vermont Environmental Court, pursuant to 24 VSA 4471 and VRECP 5 in writing, within 30 days of the date this decision is issued. The fee is $225.00. If you fail to appeal this decision, your right to - 5 - #MS-08-07 challenge this decision at some future time may be lost because you waited too long. You will be bound by the decision, pursuant to 24 VSA 4472 (d) (exclusivity of remedy; finality). rem