The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutVR-75-0000 - Supplemental - 1820 Shelburne RoadNo Text LAW OFFICES OF EWING & SPOKES 86 S"1. PAUL STREET BURLINGTON. VERMONT 05401 June 3, 1975 Edward J. Costello, Judge Vermont District Court Unit 2, Chittenden Circuit Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: State of Vermont v. Lake Champlain Motors Dear Judge Costello: Can you give me an indication of when to expect a decision in the above cause? Thank you. Very truly yours, Joseph F. Obuchowski City of South Burlington Grand Juror JFO:nm cc: Richard R. Ward William G. Congleton, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF EWING & SPOKES 86 ST. PAUL STREET BURLINGTON, VERMONT O54O1 JOHN T. EWING RICHARD A. SPOKES December 22, 1975 AREA CODE 802 863-2857 JOSEPH F. OSUCHOWSKI Richard R. Ward Zoning Administrator 1175 Williston Road So. Burlington, Vt. 05401 Dear Dick: Enclosed is a photocopy of the amended Findings of Fact and Judgment issued by the District Court in the State of Vermont vs. Lake Champlain Motors case. Very truly yours, Joseph F. Obuchowski JFO:nm Enclosure cc: William J. Szymanski STATE OF VERMONT CHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS. STATE OF VERMONT VERMONT DISTRICT COURT CHITTENDEN CIRCUIT, UNIT NO. 2 VS DOCKET NO. 513-75CnCr LAKE CHAMPLAIN MOTORS, INC. FINDINGS OF FACT AND JUDGMENT The above -entitled matter came on for trial by Court, jury having been waived, on April 2nd, 1975. The State of Vermont was represented by South Burlington Deputy Grand Juror Joseph F. Obuchowski; the respondent was represented by William Congleton, Esquire. It was stipulated by the respondent that the Ordinance to Regulate Signs in the City of South Burlington was validly adopted and was in effect on the date of the alleged violation, and further that the prosecutor, Joseph F. Obuchowski, was validly qualified as Deputy Grand Juror of the City of South Upon consideration of the evidciice aid 6f the ldtq, the Court finds that: 1. On March 18, 1974 Richard Ward, Code Officer of the City of South Burlington, rejected an application filed by Lake Champlain Motors, Inc.(Charles L. Robitaille) for the erection of a sixteen square foot Peugeot sign with an estimated cost of $475, the reason for the rejection being the sign with a presently standing sign exceeds forty square feet. 2. On March 27, 1974 the respondent was notified by letter, sent by certified mail, that it was in violation of the City Ordinance and was directed to take corrective action with ten days of said receipt. 3. On April 16, 1974 a second notice was sent identical with the first. 4. On May 13, 1974 Richard Spokes, Attorney for the City of South Burlington, notified the respondent of the violation of the ordinance and ordered the removal of the violating sign. 5. On September 30, 1974 notice was given to the Lake Champlain Motors, Inc., by Richard Ward, the Zoning Officer, of violation of Section 8 of the City Ordinance. 6. On February 5, 1975 the respondent was sent a citation directing him to appear in Court together with a copy of the information which was filed and the affidavit of probable case. I State vs Lake Champia.Ln -:uto;s, inc. Page 2 7. The sign in question is fifty inches square, and this Peugeot sign with the Fiat sign previously erected is in excess of the forty square feet allowed by the City Ordinance. 8. The Peugeot sign is on a flat trailer connected electrically to the Fiat sign and the trailer staked into the ground as shown on State's Exhibit F. 9. The Peugeot sign as shown in State's Exhibit F constitutes a violation of the Ordinance to Regulate Signs in the City of South Burlington, Section 8. 10. The erection of the sign in question without first obtaining a sign permit from the City Code Officer was contrary to the City Ordinance and as such, constitutes a violation of the Ordinance to Regulate Signs in the City of South Burlington, Section 4. The Court finds the Respondent guilty and assesses a fine of $100.00. Dated at Burlington, County of Chittenden, this 15th day of December, 1975. C District Judge VERMONT CONVICTION REPORT Docket No: 513-7ta- For Dept. Use (COUNTY) (DISTRICT) (JUSTICE) COURT Located at A2i'iingtIl]t'it , Vermont RESPONDENT 1AKE GAM) tMr M. (last name) (first) (middle) Aliases Social Security # R (street) (city or town) (state) Date of birth Age Place of birth: Respondent's Operator's Lic. No. State: ❑ YES Injury Property Damage Was there an accident? ❑ NO Accident? Accident? Date of Offense F*Cuwy 5 S Time: Place: so. 3 Date of Arrest Time: Place: Arresting Officer Department: SRO, BlXling%Xx? 'P:) OFFENSE: (Note original charge if amended) Vljoaatim of City E%mUnmcw Felony ❑ Misd. IN TRIAL DATA Prosecuting Officer: J. 0budwWOU Judge: Costsuo Date of Arraignment: FebtuaZy 2Ss WS Plea: wt quty Trial by Jury? Court? X DISPOSITION Sentence: Fine: $ 100•00 Costs: $ NOW Case ADDealed: O Sentence Suspended? Date of Conviction: is* Lm Disposition of Prisioner? Plea: not guilty Verdict: Axjg• of CAd1ty U&MARKS Ate t Ungletm Signed (Judge) (Justice of Peace) (Clerk) DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE 20M DMVA-s 7-75 To be forwarded to the Department of Motor Vehicles, Montpelier, Vt. 05602 December 19, 1975 !')istrict ('curt of ',,'ermont ox 268 3� P'e�arl Street Purlington, VT 05401 At-tention: l-',rs. ,`mn 'Ireene Doar i7rs. Grfzene: Subject: State of Vern--ont vs. Lakf- Champlain 71otorsj Inc. Docket #513-75 CNf%.'14R if Possitle, would you please T,iturn to this office all of the exhibits presentee as evi6ence by the City in the above referenced case. Tank you for your cooperation. t r u 1:i Richard ',%ard Zoning Administrative fficer RW/j DISTRICT COURT OF VERMONT Unit No. 2, Chittenclen Circuit Edward J. Costello, Chief District Judge December 3, Joseph F. Obochowski, Esq. Deputy Grand Juror 86 St. Paul Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 William Congleton, Esq. Attorney at Law 152 Bank Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 (802) 863-3465 P. O. Box 268 39 Pearl Street Burlington, Vermont 1975 05401 re: State of Vermont vs Lake Champlain Motors, Inc. Docket No. 513-75CnCR Gentlemen: Enclosed please find Findings of Fact and Judgment issued by the Court this date. As you will note on Page 2 of the Findings counsel have ten days to request additional findings. If there are no such requests filed with the Court, the matter is set for sentencing on Monday, December 15, 1975 at 9:00 o'clock in the forenoon. V truly yo I (Mrs.) Ann L. Greene Senior Clerk �.I7111zLN1 LiN I.UULV 1 Y , JJ . STATE OF VERMONT VERMONT DISTRICT COURT CHITTENDEN CIRCUIT, UNIT NO. 2 VS DOCKET NO. 513-75CnCr LAKE CHAMPLAIN MOTORS, INC. . FINDINGS OF FACT AND JUDGMENT The above -entitled matter came on for trial by Court, jury having been waived, on April 2nd, 1975. The State of_ Vermont was represented by South Burlington Deputy Grand Juror Joseph F. Obuchowski; the respondent was represented by William Congleton, Esquire. It was stipulated by the respondent that the Ordinance to Regulate Signs in the City of South Burlington was validly adopted and was in effect on the date of the alleged violation, and further that the prosecutor, Joseph F. Obuchowski, was validly qualified as Deputy Grand Juror of the City of South Burlington. Upon consideration of the evidence and of the law, the Court finds that: 1. On March 18, 1974 Richard Ward, Code Officer of the City of South Burlington, rejected an applicatWn filed by Lake Champlain Motors, Inc.(Charles L. Robitaille) for the erection of a sixteen square foot Peugeot sign with an estimated cost of $475, the reason for the rejection being the sign with a presently standing sign exceeds forty square feet. 2. On March 27, 1974 the respondent was notified by letter, sent by certified mail, that it was in violation of the City Ordinance and was directed to take corrective action with ten days of said receipt. 3. On April 16, 1974 a second notice was sent identical with the first. 4. On May 13, 1974 Richard Spokes, Attorney for the City of South Burlington, notified the respondent of the violation of the ordinance and ordered the removal of the violating sign. 5. On September 30, 1974 notice was given to the Lake Champlain Motors, Inc., by Richard Ward, the Zoning Officer, of violation of Section 8 of the City Ordinance. 6. On February 5, 1975 the respondent was sent a citation directing him to appear in Court together with a copy of the information which was filed and the affidavit of probabl( case. "4 7. The sign in question is fifty inches square, and this Peugeot sign with the Fiat Sign previously erected is in excess of the forty square feet allowed by the City Ordinance. 8. The Peugeot sign is on a flat trailer connected electrically to the Fiat sign and the trialer staked into the ground as shown on State's Exhibit F. 9. The Peugeot sign as shown in State's Exhibit F remains permanently attached to the stake and to the pole despite the appearance of being a mobile sign and as such it is a permanent sign and constitutes a violation of the Ordinance to Regulate Signs in the City of South Burlington, Section 8. Attorneys have ten days to request additional findings. Dated at Burlington, County of Chittenden, this 3rd day of December, 1975. Chief Dist V Judge April 19, 1.974 Attorney Richard Spokes 86 �''t. Paul street Furlington, VT 05401 Dear "lick: Sut�ect: Violations of --ity Fign Ordinance Or. 'larch 27, I.971+ tho - aloe rhamplain Motors Co. 1820 Shelburne ".oad was alaced in violation of the sign ordinance, (violation: srected an additional si-n without a ;cermit - : e:nied permit because of its size). Lake Champlain. Totors acknowledtad receipt oCm letter or April ?, 1974 and re -roved the sign on +aril � 1974 ( (forwarded another letter attesting; to that factj. On Thursday ,'April 11, �074 1 noticed the sign back up, and again 31accd Lake Champlain "otors in violation, the letter was roceiv^d on .`'1pril 1p, 19V+. I feel Lake Champlain ;"otors is now playing games with the sign ordinance. On file in my office are letters by Lake Champlain Motors and also my letters to them. Should we treat this as a continuing violation? Hopefully, you can do something to prevent this fro�:i happeni1.g 44,th other businesses. Another problem is that of the Ledwood 14otel. Fack on January 31, 1.974 Mr. Pr. emo thanked his non -conforming sign, and as of this d _te the sign is still in violation. Maybe you should take action with the City Council, by tryin}-, to clean up $one of the housekeeping problems within the Sign ordinance. I predict '`r. V'aTne :ilson of the Reed Motel will be directly violatinnp the sign ordinance within the week. This is the one we discussed over the phone. It is a never ending battle, keep the faith. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning, Ak-,---dnistr:.tor