The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSP-80-0000 - Supplemental - 0040 IDX Drive� •'>'T Tdn n 1•••rT; C 7 � 0 ,,. 3ER 14, 10 o8C 'r:r. ..ona moved that on the drawinF entitled Preliyinar slat :ate^ehed�e South. 3urli^,7ton, last revised 312 79, the con-nection between the south: ends of the 2 access roads of Cluster E be designated as an area to be ke?t .nee of obstructions and that that be noted on the plan of record. i:r. levesoue seconded the motion and all voted in favor. A :)lication by BD-.- Realty Association for site elan ao::roval of a 4,S00 seuare foot addition to an existing office buildin-- at 153J Shelburne cad Gordon goods noted that last year BD? .-.ad cc.^.structed a Cu:ild�rig next to Nordic Ford and t'at they noi.: want to add an addition 60' x 5::' with the same tyre construction and architecture. 13J: will use t.e addition. 35 yore Parking s zaces will be added along the side of the building and More landscapir_f, will be yrovided. _•s. Seitz said this was an office use, w1:ic_^. is-eryitted in that area. "�. Ewing warned Mr. roods that if they wanted to use the land in front of the building in the future, they =L;7ht need subdivision at: rcval and '.•:r. Loger added that the Cl1C2 zoning might cause some-roble=s at a later date. 1-jr. Spitz said parking seemed•to be more than adeouste. ':r. EwinU _oved that the South Burlingom Burlington F1anninF Cc ission approve the site clan anolication cf BD. Realty Association for a 4,80C square fact addition to an existin 7 off ice bui ldinF at 1500, Shelburne i:oad as depicted cr. a -•lap. entitled ".yew Addition to existing Cffice Building,, =urlin-ter. Data Trocessiaf", �Teoared by Gordcn G. Woods Associates an - d dted 9,12/80, su -ect to the fcllowin€ stioulations: 1. The narking lot yust be graded, and thlat €radin- noted cr. the :lard of record, so that stor- water will not drain on tiFthe adjacent ^-car r. 2. The final site plan shall indicate t::e location of five additional Norway Maples to be relocated from the proposed new parking area. 3. A landscaping bond of 7;3,000 shall be provided. 4. This ap�rcval expires 6-months from this date. The motion was seconded by Mr. ?:alsh. Kr. woods said there was a swale in the middle of the new parking lot, with a 6" drop in the -center. The motion carried unanimously. A lication by Juster Asscciates; for an:.roval of a conversion and ex; a.^.sion of a Previous bakEry and card shot "to a Wellb- ..� D- 't^re in the sho7-1'^ center on .lam J ._ el bur:_e Road south of I -log Dcuz 1,en.,;ed y said: ti:E raque2t was is cc:.vErt a card store of' 3203 sq. ft. and a ba.=:er;,r, of 1cCC se. ft., as well as t: e exlct_nC encicsC3 si3ewE` area in front of both stores, into Dr.:g:tare. The CG—iLCio -,.-ass Concer:%Q4 H. '1t t::� S-f Et. of _ E:'.Ctrian2 if t e __ U: USES were : �i;0' a did.:ant 2^.'Jt :Er S: n_C': .-:Uld Ca-1�E -co- �f to cross to _wo y` trL-ff IC, a_` tar s,,=c AAti.- cr�� . yr t :E b':.i _ C.E E� mn-4 t:.ct t'.f c.'_trc:.Ce to j r L G5E a - n _ -� t tI.E '--epF:.'.v-_li fro- i.-.._rt .-e ::_cd. -.hay al_o W&:.tE� t: 5�_ ...E _. tl. �':= tiellby a7r::�£'CCntE=_. a door. _. .,ell'�ir:0 C n t wa11r1 }.E . .EC . it out. PLANNING COMMISSION 3. JA1'U 1Y 26, 1982 comply with ordinance requirements such as setbacks, etc. Mona asked why Mayo's had applied for additional signs when it seemed that the request made the situation one of non-compliance. Mr. Webster replied that the city had a procedure for applying for signs and Mayo's was just trying to follow that procedure. Mr. 'lard noted that if cut-out letters were used instead of block letters for the "Subaru" sign, they could have double the square footage. Mr. Poger asked for additional comments, and when there were none, Mr. Ewing moved to close the public hearing. Mr. Mona seconded the motion and all voted for it. Mr. Mona said the Commission was reviewing here whether they felt the Code Officer had denied an application which was, in fact, in compliance. If the Commission feels the application is not in compliance, he felt the path was clear. 'Xr. Poger felt there were two issues - that of the addition to the freestanding sign and that of additional wall signs because of the possibility of separate uses. He felt the freestanding sign, if approved, would be a variance, which is not permitted. The existing sign is the allowed size. Mr. Ewing did not feel there were separate businesses here, and Mr. Woolery felt that part of the purpose of the sign ordinance was to inhibit the proliferation of signs. He felt this business was clearly defined by the existing signs. Mr. Poger felt that the appeal process to the Commission in the ordinance was designed to give relief in regard to interpretation of the language, rather than for exceptions to the ordinance. Mr. Mona moved to uphold the action of the Zoning Administrator on January 5, 1982 in denial of the application for more signs at Mayo's Subaru. Mr. Levesque seconded the motion and it carried 5-0. Findings of fact will be signed in two weeks. Site plan application by BPD Realty for a 4.800 sg. ft. addition to an existing office building at 1500 Shelburne Road Mr. Spitz noted that this application was almost identical to one previously approved by the Commission. The time limit on the approval has expired since, though. Mr. Poger asked whether there were traffic problems in the area which were not present when the previous plan was approved. Mr. Spitz said they were well within the traffic figures. Mr. Woolery moved that the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the site plan application of BPD Realty for a 4,800 sq. ft. addition at 1500 Shelburne Road as depicted on a plan entitled "New Addition to Existing Office Building", prepared by Gordon G. moods Associates, last revised 12/17/81, subject to the following stipulations: 1. Stipulations from the approval dated 10/14/80 shall remain in effect. 2. This site plan approval expires in 6 months. Mr. Mona seconded the motion. Mr. Levesque felt the approval should expire in 1 year, given the bad economic conditions existing now. Mr. Poger felt the 6 month period was fine. Mr. Levesque mentioned talking to the City Council about changing the tax rate on the property but Mr. Ewing noted that if, over time, the Commission applied stricter traffic controls which caused the value of a particular property to decrease, that devaluation would show up in the fair market value of the property and eventually be reflected in the taxes. The motion passed unanimously.