HomeMy WebLinkAboutAO-07-01 - Decision - 0070 Joy DriveCITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
HALL COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
APPEAL #AO-07-01
FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION
The Development Review Board held a public hearing on Tuesday, May 15, 2007,
regarding appeal #AO-07-01 of Hall Communications, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as the
applicant). John Ponsetto, Esq. represented the applicant.
Based on testimony provided at the above mentioned public hearing and the supporting
materials contained in the document file for this application, the Development Review
Board finds, concludes, and decides the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On April 10, 2007 the appellant, Hall Communications, Inc. filed an appeal of the
Administrative Officer's decision (copy enclosed).
On March 12, 2007 the Administrative Officer met with the appellant's attorney,
John Ponsetto, Esq., and Lance Llewellyn, the property owner's engineer, to
discuss a potential proposal by the appellant to construct an addition to an
existing radio station and office building located at 70 Joy Drive. Hall
Communications, Inc., did not submit a complete application.
3. At the March 12, 2007, meeting, the Administrative Officer explained to Mr.
Ponsetto and to Mr. Llewellyn that the proposed addition is located in the
Interstate Highway Overlay District (IHO). The IHO does not allow any buildings
of any kind except as specifically provided in Section 10.04 of the Land
Development Regulations and a radio studio and offices are not listed as allowed
(Section 10.04 enclosed). Therefore, as the staff for the Development Review
Board, I informed appellant's attorney that the Development Review Board would
not have the authority to approve the proposed building addition. However, once
appellant submitted a complete application, the Development Review Board
would determine its jurisdiction and the scope of its authority.
4. Hall Communications Inc. has not submitted a complete application for a permit.
At no time has the Administrative Officer rendered a decision with regards to any
addition at 70 Joy Drive. No zoning permit or any other type of application has
been approved or denied by the Administrative Officer.
- 1 -
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
5. Since the appellant has not submitted a complete application and since the
Administrative Officer has not rendered a decision with regard to the proposed
development, the appeal should be dismissed.
6. If, for the sake of argument, the Administrative Officer made a decision at the
3/12/07 meeting, the appeal taken is untimely since it is more than 15 days from
3/12/07 to 4/10/07 when the appeal was filed. 24 VSA 4465(a) requires that a
notice of appeal be filed within 15 days of the date of the decision.
7. No decision was made on 3/29/07 by the Administrative Officer. On 3/29/07 the
Administrative Officer spoke with the appellant's attorney and informed him that
he would not be responding in writing to Mr. Ponsetto's letter of 3/26/07 (copy
enclosed), because to do so would be rendering an advisory opinion.
DECISION Q {�
Motion by G L�- i�U IW , seconded by ���'_�\ ���1 = to
dismiss Appeal AO-07-01 of Hall Communications, Inc.
Mark Behr —"/nay/abst in/not present
Matthew Birming —nay/abstain/not present
John Dinklage — e nay/abstain/not present
Roger Farley — e nay/abstain/not present
Eric Knudsen — e nay/abstain/not present
Peter Plumeau — e nay/abstain/not present
Gayle Quimby — e /nay/abstain/not present
Motion approved by a vote of I- o - v
Signed this /day of 2007, by
John Dinklage, Chair
Please note: You have the right to appeal this decision to the Vermont Environmental
Court, pursuant to 24 VSA 4471 and VRCP 76 in writing, within 30 days of the date this
decision is issued. The fee is $225.00. If you fail to appeal this decision, your right to
challenge this decision at some future time may be lost because you waited too long.
You will be bound by the decision, pursuant to 24 VSA 4472 (d) (exclusivity of remedy;
finality).
-2-