The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCU-87-0000 - Supplemental - 0059 Swift StreetPLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 July 13, 1987 Easy Self Storage 46 Swift Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Zoning appeal Dear Mr. Anderson: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Be advised that the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the Municipal Offices Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street on Monday, July 27, 1987 at 7:00 P.M. to consider your request for a zoning variance. Please plan to attend this meeting. Very truly, 4-�& Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mcp ST. AMAND, Albert ANDERSON, Charles 59 Swift Street Area zoned C-1 District Section 11.10 Permitted uses - proposed use storage facility is prohibited Storage facility is conditional use in C-2 District Section 19.65 Multiple use - two 30' x 167' buildings are proposed --� Same two buildings were granted a variance 9/22/86 Parcel contains 1.07 acres with 50 foot frontage SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE In accordance with the Soul Budinggton Zoning Regulatior and Chapter 117, Title 24 V.SJ the South Burlington Zonin Board of Adjustment will hold Public hearing at the South Bui ngtan Mun cipal Offices, Car Terence Room, 575 Dorse Street, South Burlington, Vermor on Monday, July 27, 1987, c 7:00 P.M. to consider the follow ing: R1 Appeal of Charles And—soand Albert St. Amand seek"t variance, from Section 11.1gg 0 Permitted uses and Sectiot 19.65 Multiple uses of the Soutl Burlington Regulations. Request is for, permission to construct twc 30' x 167' buildings, occupyinC said buildings as a mini -storage facility, d.b.a. Easy Self Storage, on a parcel containing one acre, located at 59 Swift Street. N2 Appeal of Richard & Linda Chasse seeking a variance, from J Section 18.00, Dimensional re. quirments of the South Burlington Regulations. Request is for per- ' mission to construct on B' x 10' porch to within sixteen (16) feet of the required front yard, at 19 Henry Court. N3 Appeal of Edmund Chastenay $ George Trono seeking a vari- ance, from Section I I A 0, Per- : miffed uses and Section 19.65 Multiple uses of the South Bur- lington Regulations. Request is for permission to convert on existing structure into a bakery and restaurant of approximately 2900 square feet (seating capac- ity df 50 seats). Present structure and parking area having total 100 percent lot coverage, on a lot containing 14,000 square feet located at 35 White Street. N4 Appeal of Davis Company, Larry Williams, agent seeking a variance, from Section 18.00, Dimensional requirements of the South Burlington Regulations. Re- quest is for permission to con- struct a 54' x 96' building with approximately 120 square feet in area, located to within ninety (90) feet of the centerline of Potash Brook, located of 20 Far- rell Street. Richard Word Zoning Administrative Officer July 11, 1987 NOTICE OF APPEAL of the South t••...d.."�i''I.t..C.yli� � CJ SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Nammee-,� a� $s-s --te, ephone 11 of applicant Se Lr ?QR1 Name, address roperty ner 1 A `f� r -" � Ri _ By r I. Property location and descriptionq 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. Hearing Date Signature of Appella t J 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,_Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont onlr," I I I I I+ �) at 0 U - /14 . (day of week) (month and date) time to consider the following: Appeal of /�-'�' 4 n••- a ...- %�% / "f// L��a-r 4-t, seeking a from Section , /1-is' Burlington Regulations. �rRequest is for permission to emu_ _��2_ �- I -2- Mr. Ward said this area is zoned x-4 District. section lu.uu liimensionat requirements: minimum side and rear yard - 10 feet - proposed 16' x 20' workshop to within 4 feet of rear yard and within 4 feet of easterly side yard T` - lot size 75' x 165'. Mr. Ward read letters from neighbors (rear yard and side yard neighbors) who had no objections to this building. Mr. Mitchell said he would like to get all of his workshop equipment which he now has in his cellar into this building. This would be a garage type pre-fab building. He said his electrical tools are too noisy for the basement. This would be the most convenient place for this building and he said he plans to use it for storage and a workshop. When asked what he uses his workshop for Mr. Mitchell replied that he makes models, chairs, etc. - like a hobby shop. Mr. Dinklage asked if he sells any of the items he makes and Mr. Mitchell said he didn't - he makes things for his family. Mr. Thibault asked what was in back of the house and Mr. Mitchell replied that it's a paved basketball court. Mr. King asked if this could be moved and he said he would rather not tear up his back yard. Mr. Dinklage asked why he wished to retain the court and Mr. Mitchell said his grandchildren use it all the time. After more discussion about where this building could be re -located to be within compliance, Mr. Thibault moved that we table Mr. Mitchell's appeal until our next meeting so that the board can take a further look at the property before the next meeting which will be October 20th. The motion was seconded by Mr. King and all voted aye. No. 3 Tabled Appeal of Donald and Arnold Marek Mr. Dinklage reviewed the appeal and the discussions of the zoning board meeting on September 8th with Mr. King and Mr. Graf who were absent from this meeting. Mr. Amidon, Atty. for Mr. Marek, advised the board that<Mr. Don Marek was on vacation and he was representing him. He asked if the board would consider this as a Conditional use. Mr. Amidon said we are talking about two buildings which are 9' high 30' x 180 to be used for mini -storage not commercial warehouses. This would be more in line with frozen food lockers which is listed as a permitted use in the C-1 District. They do not have the traffic, they do not have the people - an average of 5 vehicles per'day so that from that point of view there would be less use than a motel. Mini -storage is retail storage on a small scale not storage by industrial users with large buildings with big trucks picking up. They will have 72 units with an average of two visits a month. This whole industry is new. Mr. Amidon reviewed what Mr. Marek had told the board at the September 8th meeting - that their office will be in their existing facility, that the proposed buildings would not alter the character of the neighborhood and would not create any hardships to the existing businesses surrounding the area, and that there were no objections from the neighbors - that they lived up to their agreements. Mr. Dinklage said that with respect to the type of use I have a hard time differentiating what is being proposed from a frozen food locker. Mr. King said that the mini -storage facility on Williston Road creates very little istraffic. Mr. Boehm said do we agree that the use is not permitted and Mr. Dinklage said I can interpret it as a permitted use and there was more -3- discussion regarding permitted use in the C-1 District and C-2 District. . Mr. Thibault made a motion that we consider this under 19.057 as a multiple use. It was seconded by Mr. King Mr. Boehm said he thought this should be discussed further and Mr. Dinklage advised that this had to do with the use only and that he would like to bring this to a vote. Mr. Dinklage asked what new arguments they would like to bring forth and Mr. Boehm asked why they couldn't discuss it. Mr. Jarrett said something is included in one place and not in another place - there is an omission of mini -storage facility in C-1 District although it is included in C-2 District. Mr. Boehm asked why they couldn't go to the Planning Commission to make a text change and Mr. Dinklage said we're talking of a minimum of two months, if you're lucky, to get a text change as the Planning Commission is very busy. Mr. Amidon said it's a legal interpretation and he urged the board to use its discretion of the examples to say that retail does include a small mini -storage operation. The motion passed 4 - 2. Mr. Dinklage said to clarify the points that Mr. Boehm has raised let's determine whether we should continue to hear this appeal as presented. Mr. Thibault made the motion that we consider this as a conditional use under 19.057. Mr. King seconded the motion and it passed 4 - 2. Mr. Thibault left the meeting at 8:25 PM. Mr. Dinklage said we now have two remaining requests before us one is a variance from Section 19.104 landscaping requirements. Mr. Amidon described the landscaping and there was some discussion about making the buildings smaller. Mr. Dinklage said we are going to send you to the Planning Commission per 19.653 which states the Planning Commission must approve two or more buildings in a commercial or industrial complex for one user. Mr. Amidon said that Mr. Marek already had an appointment to meet with the Planning Commission. Mr. Ward said if you're going to send it back to the Planning Commission I think it would be just as well to withdraw this request. Mr. Amidon consulted Arnold Marek and said we will withdraw the request for the variance on the rear setback. Mr. Dinklage said the request has been withdrawn by the appealant. Mr. Graf made the motion that the appealant go to the Planning Commission for the approval of two buildings per 19.653. This was seconded by Mr. Jarrett and all voted aye. The minutes of September 8, 1986 were approved on a motion by Mr. King and a second by Mr. Boehm and a unanimous vote. Mr. Dinklage said I suggest that we send to the Planning Commission the following statement: "The Zoning Board requests that we meet with the Planning Commission to discuss their recommendation to delete Section 19.057, and second that it would be helpful prior to that discussion if they would enumerate for us the instances where they think the Zoning Board has abused the rerogatives allowed by 19.057." All in favor of this request say, ay%. All the aye. The meeting adjourned at 8:45PM. i �\ Clerk