HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 06A_AO-19-01_146 Market St_Allard Square_SC
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
TO: South Burlington Development Review Board
FROM: Marla Keene, Development Review Planner
SUBJECT: AO‐19‐01 146 Market Street Appeal
DATE: February 19, 2019 Development Review Board meeting
Allard Square Limited Partnership, hereinafter referred to as the applicant, is appealing the decision of the
Zoning Administrative Officer to deny the Certificate of Occupancy, 146 Market Street. A memorandum
describing the background and facts of the case is included in the packet for the Board. This cover
memorandum summarizes the question to be decided by the Board.
The State statute governing appeals of the administrative officer’s decisions is as follows.
24 V.S.A. § 4465. Appeals of decisions of the administrative officer
(c) In the exercise of its functions under this section, a board of adjustment or development review board
shall have the following powers, in addition to those specifically provided for elsewhere in this chapter:
(1) To hear and decide appeals taken under this section, including, without limitation, where it is alleged
that an error has been committed in any order, requirement, decision, or determination made by an
administrative officer under this chapter in connection with the administration or enforcement of a
bylaw.
(2) To hear and grant or deny a request for a variance under section 4469 of this title.
In other words, the Board must determine whether an error has been made by the Zoning Administrative
Officer in enforcing the Land Development Regulations. The appellant has not requested a variance.
The subject property received site plan approval on September 15, 2017. The Administrative Officer denied the
certificate of occupancy application on the basis that the property, as constructed and operated, does not meet
the required public entrance standard for the T5 zoning district. The applicant has declined to amend the
construction or operation of the property to comply with the standard, and requested the administrative office
deny the application for certificate of occupancy in order to allow the matter to be presented to and decided by
the Development Review Board.
A summary of the LDRs governing public entrances and the approved public entrance configuration follows.
Please note first stories in the T5 zoning district are required to be non‐residential.
Public entrance. An entrance to a building that is useable and open to the public during business hours. Any
such door must, at a minimum, be useable and open to the public for entry. Distances between and average
#AO‐19‐01
2
frequency of public entrances shall be measured per building.
8.14(C)(6) Entrances
Requirement Approval Field Condition
Primary
Façade
Secondary
Façade
Primary
Façade
Secondary
Façade
Primary
Façade
Secondary
Façade
(a) Average frequency of
public entrances, non‐
residential first story use
30’
max
45’ max 28’ 34’ 83’ Indeterminate
1
(b) Maximum distance
between public entrances,
non‐residential first story use
40’
max
60’ max 38’ 38’ 115’ Indeterminate
1
1. The secondary façade contains two (2) separate entries from Mary Street. In communication with the
appellant, one of these entries is generally locked from the outside and the other, which provides
access to an office space, is at times locked and at time unlocked during business hours. Because the
administrative officer determine that the primary façade was non‐compliant, the building is non‐
compliant and they did not find it necessary to determine if the secondary façade is compliant. The
secondary façade would need to have one public entrance based on a width of 68 ft.
Staff notes the Board is not required to develop a solution to the public entrance standard identified herein; it
merely must decide whether to uphold the administrative officer’s decision that the property is not eligible for
a certificate of occupancy because it does not meet all requirements of applicable ordinances.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board discuss the Project with the applicant and close the meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
____________________________________
Marla Keene, Development Review Planner