HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-88-0000 - Decision - 1342 Shelburne RoadPLANNING COMMISSION
1 NOVEMBER 1988
PAGE 3
do not repair wrecked cars and there will be no sale or
storage of cars. They also will not sell gasoline. Junk
tires are taken to a site in Shelburne. The Zoning Board has
said they must build a fenced area to store the tires in till
they go to Shelburne. They also have a box -type trailer
where they store new tires. They don't plan to move it.
Mrs. Maher noted that means additional square footage. Mr.
Burgess aid there are a lot of places with a trailer as a
permanent facility which was not counted into the square
footage. He added these trailers are usually an eyesore. He
felt the Commission could prohibit them. Mr. Craig said he
would like to hear from the City Attorney on this. Members
agreed they wanted the lot paved. Mrs. Maher said they would
need a revised plan for that. The plan should also show ad-
equate landscaping and drainage. Mr. Burgess noted there is
an on -site sewage system and it should be noted the
leechfield is on a different lot. Mr. Rochefort said they
have an option on the property which expires tomorrow.
Members felt they could give the applicant an idea of what he
would have to do to get approval, and he could decide about
his option based on that. Ms. Peacock raised the question of
front yard coverage. Mr. Burgess said the front yard would
have to be defined and there would have to a paving plan
showing 70% green space. Mr. Weith noted 37% is covered in
the present plan. Members had no problem on this lot because
so much of the lot is unusable. Mrs. Maher said she would
like to see a true reflection of what trees are actually
there.
Mrs. Maher moved to continue the application. Mr. Belter
seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
4. Public Hearing: Final Plat application of Dennis Blodgett
for a 2-lot subdivision of a 7.3 acre parcel located at 1342
Shelburne Rd.
Ms. Peacock moved the Planning Commission approve the Final
Plat application of Dennis Blodgett for subdivision of a 7.3
acre parcel into 2 parcels of 2.9 acres and 4.4 acres as de-
ip cted on a plan titled "Composite Surve for Blodgett Prop-
erty Development, South Burlington, Vermont," prepared
Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn, Inc, and dated 10/19/88 with the fol-
lowing stipulations:
1. The plat shall be revised to show the northern boundary of
the proposed Holmes Road Extension right-of-way continuing in
a straight line to the southeast corner of lot 2 as shown in
the approved plan titled "Blodgett Property Development, Res-
idential Portion, South Burlington, Vermont," prepared
Fitzpatrick Llewellyn, Inc, dated 8/17/88.
PLANNING COMMISSION
1 NOVEMBER 1988
PAGE 4
2. That portion of the Holmes Road Extension serving lot 2
shall be complete prior to issuance of any building ermit
for lot 2.
3. The Final Plat shall be recorded within 90 days or this
approval is null and void. It must be approved 12y the
Planner and signed 12y the Chairman or Clerk of the Planning
Commission prior to recording. _
4. All stipulations from previous approvals of 5/10/88 and
8/17./88 for both of the new lots shall remain in effect.
Mrs. Maher seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
5. Discussion
his _approved
unit planned
with Dennis Blodgett regarding a revision of
Final Plat application for construction of an 18
residential development, 1342 Shelburne Rd.
Mr. Blodgett indicated he wanted to discuss offices in the
back portion of the land. He has spoken with some neighbors
who are interested in the new plan. Some buildings would be
removed and there would be more green space. The cul de sac
would also be removed. Mr. Blodgett said he is not asking
for an R-7 zoning but is thinking of 10,000-12,000 sq. ft. of
Office space with the rest residential. Theycurrently have
approval for 36,000 sq. ft. of residential space. Mr. Belter
asked if Mr. Blodgett would be willing to slide the buildings
down to Holmes Rd. and construct the road to the end of his
property to get further from the neighbors. Mr. Blodgett
said he would. He said he has worked with the neighbors to
come up with a specific plan. Neighbors were concerned be-
fore because there was just carte blanche approval asked for
in an R-7 zoning request. Mr. Burgess said if Mr. Blodgett
could get the neighbors to support him in a request, he would
be willing to go back to the City Council. Mr. Mansfield,
an abutting owner, said he was against the first proposal as
he couldn't see the reason for R-7 zoning without a plan and
was concerned about the enjoyment of his residential neigh-
borhood. He now sees a more flexible approach by Mr.
Blodgett as to square footage and parking, and wants to co-
operate with him. He said if there can be unanimous approval
by the neighbors of a specific plan, he would go for it;
until then, he wanted it to remain R-4. Mrs. Snyder, another
neighbor agreed. Mrs. Farrington said she would rather see
development closer to Shelburne Rd, leaving more green space
near the residences. Mr. Brennan asked if a zone can be
created with stipulations and restrictions. Commission
members did not think this is possible. Mrs. Maher said she
would like to see the Commission again recommend R-7 to the
Council. Mr. Llewellyn suggested a subdivision for the com-