Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBATCH - Supplemental - 0045 Central Avenue- f,4K, � rt.�r- z- 0i Ilk Subject Pro �erty 'i6 Lt L CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\misc\provencher\misc2.doc Mary Provencher, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking approval to amend a previously approved second story addition to a non -complying structure. The amendment consists of raising the height by one foot to 25.5 feet above pre -construction grade, 45 Central Avenue. Associate Planner Cathyann LaRose and Administrative Officer Ray Belair have reviewed the plans submitted on April 20, 2006 and have the following comments. This application shall be 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 height of the roof is 256". As this is higher than the standard allowable use in the district, the application shall be reviewed under Article 14, Conditional Use Review. These standards are outlined below in this report. E. Area, Density, and Dimensional Requirements The existing property is a non -complying structure in the QCP District and thus shall be reviewed under Section 4.08(G) of the SBLDR. The applicant is not proposing any changes to the footprint of the structure. Compliance with area and density standards remains unchanged. 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. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\misc\i)rovencher\misc2.doc The applicant has proposed a height of 256" and thus is not in compliance with this criterion. However, Section 4.08 (F)(2) allows that the maximum height of a structure may be increased to thirty five (35) feet if approved by the Development Review Board subject to Article 14, Conditional Use Review. Again, the standards for this review are outlined below. G. Non -Complying Structures Structures in the Queen City Park District are not subject to all provisions of Article 3, Section 3. 11, non -conforming uses and non -conforming structures and lots. Non -complying structures shall be subject to the following requirements and restrictions: (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 $30,000 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. Staff 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 andlor nearby properties; b. Access to sunlight of adjoining andlor 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. Staff does not feel that the proposed addition is in conflict with the planned character of the area, as defined by the Comprehensive Plan. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\misc\Provencher\misc2.doc 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 round residences. Again, staff finds the proposed addition to be in compliance with the proposed use 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. Staff does not feel that the proposed addition adversely affect the character of the neighborhood. The QCP district is historically a very dense neighborhood. The addition of a second story addition will not impact this criterion. (q) 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 is not in keeping with applicable regulations because it is a pre-existing non -conforming structure. However, as the project does not propose to increase the non- conformity, staff finds it acceptable in relation to the bylaws. (e) Utilization of renewable energy resources. The proposed addition will not affect renewable energy resources. (t) General public health and welfare. The proposed addition will not have an adverse affect on general public welfare. Pursuant to Section 3.060)(3) of the Land Development Regulations, the proposed building expansion shall meet the followinq standards: CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\misc\provencher\misc2.doc (a) views of adjoining andlor 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 somewhat possible that some favorable views exist. However, from Staff's site visit to the property, it does not appear that this addition would impact those views. The Board should carefully consider any testimony on this matter presented from neighboring property owners who may present a clearer picture. (b) access to sunlight of adjoining andlor nearby properties; It is also difficult to assess this criterion. This neighborhood is very dense and homes are very close together. However, from Staff's site visit to the property, it does not appear that this addition would deny neighboring property owners' access to sunlight. Again, the Board should carefully consider any testimony on this matter presented from neighboring property owners who may present a clearer picture. (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 andlor nearby property. The proposed addition will not have an undue adverse affect on the safety of adjoining properties. Staff recommends that the Development Review Board approve miscellaneous application #MS-06-04. Respectfully submitted, I/ 14A_� CAathy �n LaRose, Associate Planner Copy to: Mary M. Provencher, Applicant PC Alr it /0 1 Subject Pro�erty 7 Ak Ali / -P4 I CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\misc\i)rovencher\misc.doc Mary Provencher, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking miscellaneous approval to construct a second story addition to a non -complying structure. Associate Planner Cathyann LaRose and Administrative Officer Ray Belair have reviewed the plans submitted on March 3, 2006 and have the following comments. This application shall be 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 addition is not a conditional use and thus this criterion is not applicable. E. Area, Density, and Dimensional Requirements The existing property is a non -complying structure in the QCP District and thus shall be reviewed under Section 4.08(G) of the SBLDR. The applicant is not proposing any changes to the footprint of the structure. Compliance with area, density, and dimensional standards remain unchanged. 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. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\misc\Provencher\misc.doc The applicant has proposed a height of 24 feet and is thus in compliance with this criterion. G. Non -Complying Structures Structures in the Queen City Park District are not subject to all provisions of Article 3, Section 3. 11, non -conforming uses and non -conforming structures and lots. Non -complying structures shall be subject to the following requirements and restrictions: (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 $30,000 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. Staff 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 andlor nearby properties; b. Access to sunlight of adjoining andlor 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. 1 O(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. Staff does not feel that the proposed addition is 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 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\misc\proyencher\misc.doc 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. Again, staff finds the proposed addition to be in compliance with the proposed use 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. Staff does not feel that the proposed addition adversely affect the character of the neighborhood. The QCP district is historically a very dense neighborhood. The addition of a second story addition will not impact this criterion. (q) 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 is not in keeping with applicable regulations because it is a pre-existing non -conforming structure. However, as the project does not propose to increase the non- conformity, staff finds it acceptable in relation to the bylaws. (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 3.060)(3) of the Land Development Regulations, the Proposed building expansion shall meet the following standards: (a) views of adjoining andlor 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 somewhat possible that some favorable views exist. However, from Staff's site visit to the property, it does CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\misc\Provencher\misc.doc not appear that this addition would impact those views. The Board should carefully consider any testimony on this matter presented from neighboring property owners who may present a clearer picture. (b) access to sunlight of adjoining andlor nearby properties; It is also difficult to assess this criterion. This neighborhood is very dense and homes are very close together. However, from Staff's site visit to the property, it does not appear that this addition would deny neighboring property owners' access to sunlight. Again, the Board should carefully consider any testimony on this matter presented from neighboring property owners who may present a clearer picture. (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 andlor nearby property. The proposed addition will not have an undue adverse affect on the safety of adjoining properties. Staff recommends that the Development Review Board approve miscellaneous application #MS-06-03. Respectfully submitted, �/Cathy n LaRose, Associate Planner Copy to: Mary M. Provencher, Applicant December 4, 1984 Mr. Charles Desso 45 Central Avenue South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Mr. Desso: Be advised that the Zoning Board of Adjustment has granted your request for a zoning va,�iance. Formal findings will be issued at a later date. This office will issue a permit upon your request. If you have any questions please don't hesitate to call me. very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mcg NOTICE OF APPEAL —77--1 _V/_ 1, Name, address and telephone # of applicant SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 5�s' Name, address of property owner Property location and description - Or &_6 U �� 6- 5�� I hereby appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for the following: conditional use, variance or decision of the administrative officer. I understand the meetings are held twice a month (second and fourth Mondays). The legal advertisement must appear a minimum of fifteen (15) days before the hearing. I agree to pay the hearing fee of $30.00 which is to off -set the cost of the hearing. Mari g� D te Signature of Appellant Do not write below this line -------- --------------------------- SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE In accordance with the South Burlington Zoning Regulations and Chapter 117, Title 24 V.S.A. the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public' hearing at the South Burlington Municipal Offices, Conf#,rence Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on 4 e_,e le e i I-, I? at (day of week� (month and date) timi to consider the following: Appeal of seeking a froin Section of the South Burlington Regulations. Request is for permission to 711 e k� e. M No Text O'G- "Vt-- �,4" Yr.- 04 J� 3p 2 November 19, 1984 Mr. Charles L. Desso 45 Central Avenue South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Zoning appeal Dear Mr. Desso; Be advised that the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street on Monday, December 3, 1984 at 5:00 p.m. to consider your request for a zoning variance. Please plan to attend this meeting. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mcg SOUTH 9URLINGTON ZONING NOTICE In accordance with the, South burl I z R gKilations or 1*1"7, itl.*24 V.S.A. and pt the South Burlington Zoning "ord of Adjustm*nt will hold a ,.blic hearing of the South Bur- .ngton Municipal Offices, Con. ference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on Monday, December 3, 1984 of 5:00 P.M. to consider the following: # I Appeal of Charles L, Desso seeking a variance, from Section 18.00, Dimensional requirements of the South Burlington Rogulo- tions. Request is for permission to c�nstruct a 20'x24' garage to within fourteen 1141 feet of the front yard, five (5) feet of the rear yard and nine (9) foot of the northerly side yard, of 45 Con- tral Avenue. 02 Appeal of Homer Thorioult and Shirley Duchaine seeking a variance, from Section 11.10, Permitted uses of the South Bur- lington Regulations. Request is for permission to construct an office complex containing 7500 square feet in a operational cen- ter 10,000 square foot to include repair, maintenance and ware- housing for Vermont Gas Sys- tems, Inc., on a lot containing 4.2 acres, located at 85 Swift Street. Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer November 17, 1984 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTI-1 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 February 21, 2007 Mary Provencher 80 Fields Farm Road Charlotte, VT 05445 Re: Zoning Violation - 41 Central Avenue - Fence Dear Ms. Provencher: I was recently presented with a survey Of 39 Central Avenue which depicted the location Of Your fence at 41 Central Avenue. This survey showed that Your fence encroaches on the adjacent property in two (2) locations. The encroachments are a violation Of Section 13.17(1) of the Regulations (copy enclosed). Land Development Please relocate Your fence in the spring so that it is wholly within but not on Your property boundaries. Please contact me when You have completed the relocation. Sincerelv,--7 KaYrfid'hd I Belair Administrative Officer HARRIS SURVEYING & LAND DISPUTE RESOLUTION 83 Heron Pond Road Hinesburg, Vermont 05461 Telephone 802-482-3284 Facsimile 802-482-3285 Email awharrisCa_)gmayt. net LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Date: 20 February 2007 To: Ray Belaire, City of South Burlington From: A.W. (Terry) Harris Project No: 0541 Re: Mary Provencher fenceline location, Central Avenue, South Burlington We are sending you the following items: Copies: 2 Date: 1/ 15/07 & revised 2/19/07 No: 0541b Description: "Fenceline Location at Lands of A. Scott Logan, Trustee and Diane deTerra 39 Central Avenue" Remarks: Ray: Diane deTerra asked me to deliver these to you for your review and action. Please contact me if you have any questions. Terry Harris LEGEND 314" diameter iron pipe set at grade with identification cap iron pipe found without identification #4 reinforcing rod found without identification subject parcel property line existing 2 story wood frame dwelling edge of existing walk Lisa A. Yankowski Volume 718, Page 26 end post offhigh high lattice fence extends over the property line 0.23' el fide `� h�a %e; CO oo \ P Q P,t 8' high wood fence comes as close as 0.10' to the property line here Mary M. Provencher Volume 314, Page 553 r , 2 story wood frame dwelling with attached garage 4' high wood fence (cya constructed by Provence Mary M. Pro, Volume 277, P GRAPHICAL S 10 0 Bearings are based on Magnetic North, 2006 Scale 1 " = 16 / Burlington a / / ay ell , parcels 1189 i Swift Street Shelburne Bay Diane deTerra and Scott Logan, Trustee l ume 272, Page 498 encher ige 195 CALE t0 20 • ll NTS • • ' LOCATION MAP • l l NOTES 1. This plat is to illustrate the location of a wood fence constructed in 2006 and ' previously constructed lattice fence by Mary Provencher relative to her comet property lines with the deTerra/Logan parcel shown hereon. 2. A horizontal control traverse was conducted in January 2006 using a theodol electronic distance meter, and steel tape. f 3. Certain survey data shown hereon may vary from recorded data due to differ( in declination, orientation, or methods of measurement. • 4. Unless otherwise noted, property monuments described hereon were found in stable condition, the reported diameter is inside diameter, and the reported h above or below grade is approximate. 5. The following survey was relied upon to retrace the property lines shown her 1 'Plan of Northern Section of Queen City Park - South Burlington, Vermont" June 1947, prepared by Arthur W. Hoag, and recorded at the end of Volume of the city land records. 6. The following surveys were reviewed in the course of this survey: 'Plat of Survey - 2 Lot Sub -division - Mary M. Provencher Prop. No. 41-,., Ave. - Queen City Park North - So. Burlington, Vermont" dated June 1972 ay revised 1119194, prepared by Warren A. Robenstien and recorded in Map Sli 1 / 'Property Plan - Vilas A. & Josephine C. Gentes - Queen City Park North, C ' Ave., So. Burlington, VT. " dated June 1972, prepared by Warren A. Robenst recorded in Map Slide 52. "Land of Queen City Park Association - South Burlington, Vermont" dated A recorded in Map Slide 66. Revision: added Provencher lattice fence and label - AWH - 2111 MUMVP Fencel ine Location at Lands c AI.B�E "r A. Scott Logan, Trustee HA c ,° and Diane deTerra W. 39 Central Avenue, Burlington, Ve Proj. No. 0541b Fb. file HARRIS SURVEYING & Hinesburg, F:ae1Dwn. AWH Ckd. A"LAND DISPUTE RESOLUTION Vermontcale: SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4io6 July 20, 2006 Mary Provencher 88 Fields Farm Road Charlotte, VT 05445 Re: Central Avenue Dear Ms. Provencher: For your records, enclosed is a copy of the approved minutes from the May 16, 2006 Development Review Board meeting. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, I Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 16 MAY 2006 4. Continued site plan application #SP-06-20 of Eugene Ward to amend a prevsiouly approved plan for a 3,243 sq. ft. general office building. The amendment consists of establishing an access drive to Shunpike Road through 3065 Williston Road, 3069 Williston Rd: Mr. Howley said the Board had been concerned with a parking space in the northeast corner that didn't have enough aisle width. They will eliminate that space and restripe the parking. The removed space will be relocated to be perpendicular with Williston Rd. Ms. LaRose noted that the coverage issue has been resolved. Mr. Behr asked about striping the existing asphalt. Mr. Ward said he would lose 1 parking space and didn't want to have to dig that up. Mr. Howley said it was approved that way. Members were OK with leaving it. Mr. Behr noted that staff has asked for 6 trees to fill in the space instead of the 3 that are proposed. Mr. Ward wasn't sure there would be enough room for 6. Mr. Belair said he scaled the plan and feels there is room. Mr. Ward suggested staff come and look at the site and do some measurements. He said he understood staff wants the line of trees to continue across the back and he was OK with that. He agreed to come back to the Board if there can't be an agreement with staff. Stipulation 3a was revised to read: The plan shall be revised to show additional evergreen trees, 4-6 feet in height, as agreed upon by applicant and administration. Mr. Kupferman moved to approve Site Plan SP-06-20 of Eugene Ward subject to the stipulations in the draft motion as amended above. Ms. Quimby seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Kupferman stepped down during the next item due to a potential conflict of interest. 5. Miscellaneous application #MS-06-04 of Mary Provencher seeking approval to amend a previously approved second story addition to a non -complying structure. The amendment consists of raising the height by one foot to 25.5 feet above pre -construction grade, 45 Central Avenue: Ms. Gale said this will match the existing ridge height. No issues were raised. Ms. Quimby moved to approve Miscellaneous Application #MS-06-04 of Mary Provencher subject to the stipulations in the draft motion. Mr. Bolton seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Kupferman rejoined the Board. -2- CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4io6 May 5, 2oo6 Mary Provencher 88 fields Farm Road Charlotte, VT 05445 Dear Property Owner: Enclosed is a draft agenda for the May 16, 20o6 Development Review Board Meeting. It includes an application for development on your property. This is being sent to you and the abutting property owners to make aware that a public meeting is being held regarding the proposed development. Under Title 24, Section 4471 of State law, participation in a municipal regulatory proceeding is required in order to preserve your right to appeal a local development approval to the Vermont Environmental Court. State law specifies that "Participation in a local regulatory proceeding shall consist of offering, through oral or written testimony, a statement of concern related to the subject of the proceeding." If you would like to know more about the proposed development, you may call this office at 846-41o6, stop by during regular office hours, or attend the scheduled public meeting. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. 4,ITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTO(. DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4lo6 May 5, 2oo6 Larry & Susan Kupferman 47 Central Avenue South Burlington, VT o-5463 Dear Property OyA'er: Enclosed is,dcopy,o6' e draft agenda (please check our website www.sburl.com for the offic�genda, posted the Friday before the meeting) for the May 16, 20o6 Development Review Board meeting. It includes a proposal that abuts your Property Under Title 24, Section 4471 of State law, participation in a municipal regulatory proceeding is required in order to preserve your right to appeal a local development approval to the Vermont Environmental Court. State law specifies that "Participation in a local regulatory proceeding shall consist of offering, through oral or written testimony, a statement of concern related to the subject of the proceeding." If you would like to know more about the proposed development, you may call this office at 846-41o6, stop by during regular office hours, or attend the scheduled public meeting. Sincerely, Betsy Mc onough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. i� 1„ PbNenc:. k r I-Iar�c� �io\tenche` <7 033o - mo4s 03-So — a 4 ;k.--- Cn A-ff- 1 �nncy �a�ni� IAU jdb { CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4io6 March 10, 20o6 Mary M. Provencher 88 Fields Farm Road Charlotte, VT 05445 Dear Property Owner: Enclosed is a draft agenda for the March 21, 20o6 Development Review Board Meeting. It includes an application for development on your property. This is being sent to you and the abutting property owners to make aware that a public meeting is being held regarding the proposed development. Under Title 24, Section 4471 of State law, participation in a municipal regulatory proceeding is required in order to preserve your right to appeal a local development approval to the Vermont Environmental Court. State law specifies that "Participation in a local regulatory proceeding shall consist of offering, through oral or written testimony, a statement of concern related to the subject of the proceeding." If you would like to know more about the proposed development, you may call this office at 846-4106, stop by during regular office hours, or attend the scheduled public meeting. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. "ITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTO . DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4io6 March 10, 2oo6 Larry & Susan Kupferman 47 Central Avenue South Burlington, VT 05403 Dear Property Owner: Enclosed is a copy of the draft agenda (please check our website www.sburl.com for the official agenda, posted the Friday before the meeting) for the March 21, 2o06 Development Review Board meeting. It includes a proposal that abuts your property. Under Title 24, Section 4471 of State law, participation in a municipal regulatory proceeding is required in order to preserve your right to appeal a local development approval to the Vermont Environmental Court. State law specifies that "Participation in a local regulatory proceeding shall consist of offering, through oral or written testimony, a statement of concern related to the subject of the proceeding." If you would like to know more about the proposed development, you may call this office at 846-4io6, stop by during regular office hours, or attend the scheduled public meeting. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 May 17, 2oo6 Mary Provencher 88 Fields Farm Road Charlotte, VT 05445 Re: Central Avenue Dear Ms. Provencher: R��u� uES�Ea REQ Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision of the above referenced project approved by the Development Review Board on May 17, 20o6. Please note the conditions of approval including that you obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT: 7005 1820 0004 3158 0123 SOU4t1 BURLINGTON PLANNING k ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802) 846-4io6 May 17, 2006 Pamela Galeup ii Pavilion Avenue South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: 45 Central Avenue Dear Ms. Galeup: Pursuant to 24 VSA 4464(b)(3), enclosed please find a copy of the Development Review Board decision regarding the above referenced matter. You are being provided a copy of this decision because you appeared or were heard at the hearing. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact this office. Sincerely Betsy cDonough South Burlington Planning & Zoning Department t t 7 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Interested Persons Record and Service List Under the 2004 revisions to Chapter 117, the Development Review Board (DRB) has certain administrative obligations with respect to interested persons. At any hearing, there must be an opportunity for each person wishing to achieve interested person status to demonstrate compliance with the applicable criteria. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b). The DRB must keep a written record of the name, address and participation of each person who has sought interested person status. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b). A copy of any decision rendered by the DRB must be mailed to every person or body appearing and having been heard by the DRB. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b)(3). Upon receipt of notice of an appeal to the environmental court, the DRB must supply a list of interested persons to the appellant in five wD-99) rking days. 24 V.S.A. § 4471(c). ?,I, /V HEARING DATE. NAME MAILING ADDRESS PROJECT OF INTEREST C SWFVENS V IStdN ,R]t �� C1/EI�LS Al le KIP, c S 4� o 'L 1 S Z©2 N kok.'Cr.� a (�Ir^XJS- k t13 �sr�,� ,� �{v�c �i- +)oct - Are- 1�Yna/o�y �2Y1�, M,QV' r0V-ehG 6 �a,qts P© /Z� 74, 3;ogy Ajt-�-:574W C I CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Interested Persons Record and Service List Under the 2004 revisions to Chapter 117, the Development Review Board (DRB) has certain administrative obligations with respect to interested persons. At any hearing, there must be an opportunity for each person wishing to achieve interested person status to demonstrate compliance with the applicable criteria. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b). The DRB must keep a written record of the name, address and participation of each person who has sought interested person status. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b). A copy of any decision rendered by the DRB must be mailed to every person or body appearing and having been heard by the DRB. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b)(3). Upon receipt of notice of an appeal to the environmental court, the DRB must supply a list of interested persons to the appellant in five working days. 24 V.S.A. § 4471(c). -DR HEARING DATE: i NAME MAILING ADDRESS PROJECT OF INTEREST /1�L1�� s• �' � c9 �11iV1 11Z S gv�� , V T L l fB�3 sp�u`. I,AvN,4CL J!� -DyZ , RSA-iY to S C XAI-- f 0 04 A,A'n C' I C 0, kr. %q-jV1 C�19( 6 60 l aq 4r (/g,1'e- Tf6i("� 3 � r CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Interested Persons Record and Service List Under the 2004 revisions to Chapter 117, the Development Review Board (DRB) has certain administrative obligations with respect to interested persons. At any hearing, there must be an opportunity for each person wishing to achieve interested person status to demonstrate compliance with the applicable criteria. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b). The DRB must keep a written record of the name, address and participation of each person who has sought interested person status. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b). A copy of any decision rendered by the DRB must be mailed to every person or body appearing and having been heard by the DRB. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b)(3). Upon receipt of notice of an appeal to the environmental court, the DRB must supply a list of interested persons to the appellant in five working days. 24 V.S.A. § 4471(c). HEARING DATE: IMAV NAME MAILING ADDRESS PROJECT OF INTEREST f CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 May 9, 2oo6 Mary Provencher 88 Fields Farm Road Charlotte, VT 05445 Re: 45 Central Avenue Dear Ms. Provencher: Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Development Review Board meeting and staff comments to the Board. Please be sure that someone is at the meeting on Tuesday, May 16, 2oo6 at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, 4e�l iG— Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. 'C`ITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ?LA1NNE'1G & ZONUIG 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VER1_VtOI'sT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 Permit # 4�- 3G _—�— APPLICATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. I understand the presentation procedures required by State Law (Section 4468 of the Planning & Development Act). Also that hearings are held twice a month. That a legal advertisement must appear a minimum of fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing. I agree to pay a hearing fee which is to off -set the cost of the hearing. Type of application (check one)- ( ) Appeal from decision of the Administrative Officer (includes appeals from Notice of Violation ( ) Request for a conditional use ( ) Request for a variance Aebther PROVISION OF ZONING ORDINANCE IN QUESTION (IF ANY): WHAT ACTION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER ARE YOU APPEALING'? 1) OWNER OF REORID (Name as � shown on deed mailing address, phone & fax #): AtkkAL�ru- :-o J Div rl-ram`�(d — 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (book & page #) 3) APPLICANT-ki ame, marlin address, hone and fax #) 4) CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive staff correspondence. Include name, mailing address, phone & fax # if different from above): r�!5 "j L"`_ 5) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: ql�— C�—+�T2 �r�_ ( �(� I- j 6) TAX PARCEL ID #: o O b L�S- 7) PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Existing Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use): B. Proposed Uses on Property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain): dV a e"k sfay �,c s'13 c C. Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings & existing building to remai ): NcJ �vGLs�F} i�i Am/, D. Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement & mezzanine): E. Number of residents Units (if applicable, new units &existing units to remain): fV F. Number of employees & company vehicles (existing & proposed, note office vs. non -office employees): � G. Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if overlay districts are applicable): 8) LOT COVERAGE A. Total parcel size: j 11 A6Pf- Sq. Ft B. Buildings: Existing r, D 71 % / Sq. Ft Proposed % / �� y n Sq. Ft. C. Overall impervious coverage (building, Existing % / Proposed % / y J bv� S �p4" parking, outside storage, Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. etc) D. Total area to be disturbed during construction: 3 4C) Sq. Ft. * * Projects disturbing more than one-half acre of land must follow the City's specifications for erosion control in Article 16 of the Land Development Regulations. Projects disturbing more than one acre require a permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. 9) COST ESTIMATES A. Building (including interior renovations): $ C)D B. Landscaping $ r/Lo'> � 'C C. Other site improvements (please list with cost): 10) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC: A. Average daily traffic for entire property (in and out): / B. A. M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): C. P.M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): /147 11) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION Jvl4- 12) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION [�✓ 13) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE�C'. 14) LIST ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNERS: (list names and address of all abutting property owners, including those across any street or right-of-way. You may use a separate sheet of paper if necessary): I hereby certify that all the information requested as park of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT SIGNATUR OF PROPERTY OWNER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: Y 0� REVIEW AUTHORITY: Er Development Review Board ❑ Director, Planning & Zoning I have reviewed this application and find it to be: [:rCOMPL E ❑ Incomplete c irector of Planning & Zoning or Designee Date EXHIBIT A SITE PLAN The following information must be shown on the plans. Please submit five (5) copies and one reduced copy (11" x 17") of the plan. Failure to provide the following information will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. o Lot drawn to scale (20 feet scale if possible). o Survey data (distance and acreage). o Contours (existing and finished). o Proposed landscaping schedule (number, variety, and size) as required in Section 13.06(G) of the Land Development Regulations. o Location of streets, abutting properties, fire hydrants, existing buildings, existing landscaping. o Existing and proposed curb cuts, pavement, walkways. o Zoning boundaries. o Number and location of parking spaces (as required under Section 13.01(b) of the Land Development Regulations). o Number and location of handicapped spaces (as required under Section 13.01(I) of the Land Development Regulations). o Location of septic tanks (if applicable). o Location of any easements. o Lot coverage information: Building footprint, total lot, and front yard. o North arrow. o Name of person or firm preparing site plan and date. o Exterior lighting details (cut sheets). All lights should be down casting and shielded. o Dumpster locations (dumpsters must be screened). o Bicycle rack as required under Section 13.01(G)(5) of the Land Development Regulations. o If restaurant is proposed, provide number of seats and square footage of floor area provided for patron use but not containing fixed seats. APPLICATION FEE ❑ Appeal of Administrative Officer $ 110.00* ❑ Conditional Use $ 135.00* Miscellaneous $ 85.00* ❑ Variance $ 135.00* *includes $10.00 recording fee CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLAla11NING & ZON E14 G 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERTIVIONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAY, (802) 846-4101 Permit # M S- ()6- '�)-3 APPLICATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. i understand the presentation procedures required by State Law (Section 4468 of the Planning & Development Act). Also that hearings are held twice a month, That a legal advertisement must appear a minimum of fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing. I agree to pay a hearing fee which is to off -set the cost of the hearing. Type of application (check one): ( ) Appeal from decision of the Administrative Officer (includes appeals from Notice of Violation ( ) Request for a conditional use ,Request for a variance (p,CTer PROVISION OF ZONING ORDINANCE IN QUESTION (IF ANY): WHAT ACTION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER ARE YOU APPEALING "? 1) OWNER OF R D (Name as shown on deed, mailing add,re s, phone & fax #): oz `-�Z� L`i / c5 �AtJ v�c�YX1k1) 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (book & page #) 3) APPLICANT Waaje, mailing address, phone a 9s )rA7-2� 44, 1 /T� _A--0 d in b aAt 4 U -t'. 0 c_.-�- 4) CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive staff correspondence. Include name, mailing address, phone & fax # if different from above): '.9 "e>NGr 5) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: S" c �2,�� AU e% 6) TAX PARCEL ID #: _ b _3r:2 `-' ®CO 4-S 7) PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Existing Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use): B. Proposed Uses on Property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain): 1. 1 A C. Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings & existing building to remain): 141( h cyt W__11w �YLt /F 5 l�i �� Se C'Yt� SR D. Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement & mezzanine): E. Number of res remain): al Units (if applicable, new units & existing units to 4- O F. Number of employees & com any vehicles (existing & proposed, note office vs. non -office employees): �1 �A— n G. Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if overlay districts are applicable): 8) LOT COVERAGE A. Total parcel size: P. Sq. Ft. } B. Buildings: Existing lip % / Sq. Ft Proposed _� % / !-_Sq. Ft C. Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing % / Sq. Ft. Proposed _% / Sq. Ft. D. Total area to be disturbed during construction: # 3qQ Sq. Ft. * * Projects disturbing more than one-half acre of land must follow the City's specifications for erosion control in Article 16 of the Land Development Regulations. Projects disturbing more than one acre require a permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. 9) COST ESTIMATES A. Building (including interior renovations): $ 3 D, ayc, B. Landscaping $ r C. Other site improvements (please list with cost): 10) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC: ' r A. Average daily traffic for entire property (in and out): B. A. M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): U/4 C. P.M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): /1/4- 11) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION /I/f 4- 12) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION c/,,± 13) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE (jm k�71 Z 9t,oWK,5 14) LIST ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNERS: (list names and address of all abutting property owners, including those across any street or right-of-way. You may use a separate sheet of paper if necessary): I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: REVIEW AUTHORITY: ❑ Development Review Board Wirector, Planning & Zoning I have reviewed this application and find it to be: .�OMPLETE ❑ Incomplete or of Planning & Zoning or Designee ,/ Dafe EXHIBIT A SITE PLAN The following information must be shown on the plans. Please submit five (5) copies and one reduced copy (1 I" x 17") of the plan. Failure to provide the following information will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. o Lot drawn to scale (20 feet scale if possible). o Survey data (distance and acreage). o Contours (existing and finished). o Proposed landscaping schedule (number, variety, and size) as required in Section 13.06(G) of the Land Development Regulations. o Location of streets, abutting properties, fire hydrants, existing buildings, existing landscaping. o Existing and proposed curb cuts, pavement, walkways. o Zoning boundaries. o Number and location of parking spaces (as required under Section 13.01(b) of the Land Development Regulations). o Number and location of handicapped spaces (as required under Section 13.01(I) of the Land Development Regulations). o Location of septic tanks (if applicable). o Location of any easements. o Lot coverage information: Building footprint, total lot, and front yard. o North arrow. o Name of person or firm preparing site plan and date. o Exterior lighting details (cut sheets). All lights should be down casting and shielded. o Dumpster locations (dumpsters must be screened). o Bicycle rack as required under Section 13.01(G)(5) of the Land Development Regulations. o If restaurant is proposed, provide number of seats and square footage of floor area provided for patron use but not containing fixed seats. APPLICATION FEE ❑ Appeal of Administrative Officer $ 110.00* ❑ Conditional Use $ 135.00* C Miscellaneous $ 85.00* ❑ Variance $ 135.00* *includes $10.00 recording fee 1 e!z> 7' -s4i 1v n 10, C } DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOAD 21 MARCH 2O06 Ms. Quimby moved to approve Preliminary Plat #SD-06-09 and Final Plat #SD-06-10 of Charles & Judith Scott subject to the stipulations in the draft motion. Mr. Kupferman seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Continued Public Hearing: Preliminary Plat Application #SD-06-04 and Final Plat Application #SD-06-05 of Stephen Moore for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) a 10,064 sq. ft. mixed use commercial building, 2) a 3100 sq. ft. short order restaurant, and 3) a 5007 sq. ft. mixed use commercial building. The request involves: 1) razing the 5007 sq. ft. building, and 2) constructing a 24-unit multi -family dwelling, 388, 400, and 410 Shelburne Rd: Mr. Moore said this will be a 2-story building on top of parking. Ornamentation originally proposed on top of the building has been removed, so there is no height waiver required. Mr. Belair noted that a few more parking spaces than required are being provided. Mr. Behr said he would prefer the original building design even though it required a height waiver as it was more aesthetically pleasing. He noted this is an entrance to the city and should be a nice looking building. Other members agreed. They felt the only thing over the height limit should be the ornamentation. Mr. Dinklage showed the applicant the drawing of the building that the Board would accept. All of that building meets the height requirement except the ornamentation. An area of 2-way traffic between the 2 buildings was pointed out. The applicant noted they shifted parking and enhanced a treed buffer with the residential property to the east. The area between the sidewalk and the building was shortened to provide the added space. There will be no retaining wall. Members felt the application should be continued to allow a submission of a plan showing the enhanced building design with rooftop ornamentation. Ms. Quimby moved to continue Preliminary Plat #SD-06-04 and Final Plat #SD-06-05 until 4 April 2006. Mr Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. C� Miscellaneous application #MS-06-03 of Mary Provencher to construct a \\ second story addition to a non -complying structure, 45 Central Avenue: Mr. Kupferman stepped down during this application due to a conflict of interest. Ms. Provencher showed the location of the house. She said they want to enlarge the kitchen and upstairs bedroom and will be adding 320 sq. ft. There will be no change to the footprint of the house. -3- DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOJD 21 MARCH 2O06 Mr. Belair said the proposal meets the requirements for this district. There are no view issues. Ms. Quimby moved to approve Miscellaneous application #MS-06-03 of Mary Provencher subject to the stipulations in the draft motion. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed 4-0. 7. Continued Public Hearing: Appeal #AO-06-01 of Technology Park Associates, Inc., PMF Energy, Inc., and Annix-Vermont, Inc., appealing decision of the Administrative Officer dated January 3, 2006 that subdivision approval has expired, Community Drive: Mr. Illick reviewed the history of this appeal. He noted that in January, Mr. Belair issued a memo stating that subdivision permit for Technology Park had expired and cited the regulations that applied. An appeal of this decision was subsequently filed. Mr. Illick noted that the subdivision approval was conditioned on bringing Community Drive up to standard within a certain schedule. This would be a substantial investment, and they were told they didn't have to make the improvements until 2 additional buildings were constructed. Mr. Belair said the condition stated that the road had to be upgraded when either 2 buildings were built or by Spring, 2001. This did not happen. There were several amendments to the subdivision approval, but there was never an extension of the subdivision approval. Mr. Illick said he did get 2 buildings approved in 2000, but those buildings were never built. He also said that the city now owns the road. Mr. Dinklage said part of the transfer of ownership of the road requires that the developer bring it up to city standard. Mr. Illick said it is their contention that the subdivision would only expire if there were no "consequential action" taken. He felt that there has been consequential action. The road exists and has been taken over by the city. He also noted that as of September, 2005 subdivision cannot expire. Mr. Hall, representing Mr. Illick, said it is their contention that deeding the road to the city is "consequential action." Mr. Belair said the city's approach is that each amendment that the applicant got restarted the clock. The last amendment was gotten in March 2001. The subdivision approval is deemed to have expired threes years later. Mr Dinklage asked what specific construction has moved the project forward. Mr. Hall said there doesn't have to be construction, just "action toward construction." Mr. Behr asked how the applicant's actions with respect to the site corresponds to the stipulations in the subdivision approval. Mr. Illick said they did landscaping, put in new SOdTH BURLINGTON PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4io6 April 20, 2006 Mary Provencher 88 Fields Farm Road Charlotte, VT 05445 Re: Minutes - Central Avenue Dear Ms. Provencher: For your records, enclosed is a copy of the approved minutes from the March 21, 2006 Development Review Board meeting. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, �rI Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. 11 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 March 23, 2006 Mary Provencher 88 Fields Farm Road Charlotte, VT 05445 Re: 45 Central Avenue Dear Ms. Provencher: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision of the above referenced project approved by the Development Review Board on March 21, 2006 (effective March 21, 2006). Please note the conditions of approval including that you obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, A j ler"_ Cath ann LaRose Associate Planner Encl. CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT: 7005 1820 0004 9293 7997 Page 1 of 1 Betsy McDonough From: Betsy McDonough [emcdonough@sburl.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 8:36 AM To: 'randm@gmavt.net' Subject: Staff Comments for Central Ave Hi Mary — Attached are the staff comments for your Central Avenue project. Also attached is the draft agenda. The only thing that may change on the agenda is whether or not the Board has minutes to review. Please make sure someone is at the meeting on Tuesday. If you have any questions, please give us a call at 846-4106. -Betsy Betsy McDonough South Burlington Planning & Zoning 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 (802)846-4106 3/14/2006 t Burlington rk i on _ r m �f l O ,a 4.321 Acea�f c rc trvstjon \ ,.� r� _..--- -- B .D •16 ..... �rQ23O / `.�'. ._Torraro Trvsr mo ��• a �`'.. a: �. . - "'¢ v ..--D. Le 3`EFra cr; 04 �--1,34$.Sp 1 � ,�„`r`":.,. �' .'� � .i;'. v ,� P ,i {rp'i/'ar G �I,P•rr m ,.. `"a,. . -- H vie - No.45--_ .✓i _ s0 - 14 HOvSe=^ I M�Prn eorher � _D•v7.Ac. .., *. ,.v ,. - - _. - - ' -NO .4 _. c T ___•IV 3237. 59 ft• ' I RECEIVED n• wsa- s` �4 MAR 0 3.2006 City of So. Budington Ido '70Q. /✓ 39'SB 6—ate � W'' 1• J W_.-------- 6 — C'6.vTlA pn" PLAN_ S_HOWINfz7__H_F_LOCASION Of HOUSE. NM45 ,�.•�f��V&lq ,CIA RYPROV EN CHER PROPERTY EN RA VE_.5Q.L3UR=T0 .YT.—_..-_--_—. _ of •: onnww �r DATE: Eai2420O6. SCALE L Id �n sUVN, WARREN A. ROBENSTIEN, REG. VT A NH LS. P.0- BOX 171 WINOOUL VT 05484 o uv wo races (8021878-2359