TOWN OF SHELBURNE

MEMBERS PRESENT:       Tom Koerner, Chairperson; Boris Funtow, Steve Waltien, Gwen Webster.

ADMINISTRATION:           Cindy Tyminski, Zoning Administrator.

OTHERS PRESENT:            Denise Myers-Demers, Eric Smith, Jim Olson, Jack Millbank, Patricia O’Brien, James Rameaka, Monique Rameaka, David Marshall, Margery Sharp (Shelburne News).

 

Mr. Koerner called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m., and explained the resignation of Milton Edelman results in a four member board. A majority vote of the four member board is needed to carry a decision on an application. Deliberative session may be held at the end of the hearings. The definition of “interested parties” and the public hearing procedure were reviewed.

 

MOTION by Ms. Webster, seconded by Mr. Waltien, to review CU/C05-31 under ‘Old Business’ and be placed after all the hearing for ‘New Business’, and to move A05-37 to the end of the agenda and place under ‘Other Business’. VOTE: unanimous (4-0); motion carried.

 

Denise Myers Demers, owner, appeared on behalf of the application.

 

STAFF REPORT

Mr. Koerner read the warned notice for conditional use approval of an increase in seating from 36 to 50 seats by Catamount/Shelburne LLC and David Demers of Z New England LLC, d.b.a. Z Pizza.

 

APPLICANT COMMENTS

Ms. Myers Demers stated Z Pizza will offer a California-style, natural, organic pizza cooked in a brick oven. Salads and sandwiches will also be offered. An increase in seating is requested. Parking calculations based on 50 seats for a total of 31 spaces. Six spaces in the rear will be reserved for employees. There are currently 33 parking spaces. The Planning Commission approved the parking plan. Mr. Funtow advised that at some point a  master parking map should be submitted for the entire PUD.

 

Mr. Koerner questioned the need for the approval since there is not a change of use (restaurant is a permitted conditional use in the Jelly Mill Common). Ms. Tyminski explained approval is need for an increase in intensity of use. There was discussion of the proposed floor plan for the increased seating, signage (will be changed), hours of operations (until 10:00 p.m. with the existing drive-up window for take out), screening for the dumpster, and a lighting plan to bring the existing exterior lights into compliance. It was noted the swings installed by Ben and Jerry’s are gone. Z New England, LLC is leasing space from Catamount/Redstone.

 

PUBLIC COMMENT

None.

 

MOTION by Mr. Waltien, seconded by Mr. Funtow, to approve the request by Catamount/Shelburne, LLC (owner) and David Demers (applicant) of Z New England, LLC, d.b.a. Z Pizza, to increase seating from 36 to 50 seats (§820.7) on property at 4066 Shelburne Road, formerly the location of Ben and Jerry’s, in the Residential-Commercial District (Article VIII) subject to the conditions set forth in the Staff Report and as follows:

1.      The changes to and uses of the site shall occur as indicated on the site plan as submitted/prepared by the applicant, date stamped August 31, 2005. The above-mentioned plan was submitted with the conditional use application and approved by the Board during the public hearing on October 3, 2005.

2.      Within sixty (60) days of this approval, the property owner shall record a “MEMORANDUM OF MUNICIPAL ACTION” with the Shelburne Town Clerk’s office. This document will notify future property owners of the approval and conditions.

V05-38: Application by the Paul L. Handy Trust (owner) of Shelburne Travelodge and Civil Engineering Associates (agent) for a variance to reduce the landscaping coverage to 45.6 percent from the allowable minimum of 50 percent (§1600.3B) and a variance to increase the lot coverage to 74.8 percent from the allowable maximum of 40 percent on property at 2572 Shelburne Road is in the Residential-Commercial District (Article VIII)

Jim Olson, Civil Engineering Associates, appeared on behalf of the application.

 

STAFF REPORT

Mr. Koerner reviewed the variance requests by Travelodge to reduce landscaping coverage and increase lot coverage.

 

APPLICANT COMMENTS

Mr. Olson stated the variance requests are a direct result of the Route 7 reconstruction project. The State of Vermont eliminated one of the three curb cuts to the property. The center entrance no longer exists. The southern curb cut is the widest. Also, the state turned a strip of landscaped area into stone and pavement.  Changes to the site plan and traffic circulation on the site were reviewed. A circular traffic pattern in front of the existing lobby/canopy will be created. Options for customers to access rooms on the north side of the property were shown. Without the changes as proposed, patrons will be forced to back out onto Route 7 and make two u-turns to return to the property. The lot is 1.97 acres due to the loss of a 7’ strip to the Route 7 reconstruction project. A small amount of green space was gained, but the business will lose some landscaping. Landscaping will be established along the proposed new driveway.

 

Mr. Funtow mentioned closing two curb cuts and adding a drive along the lower level of the site (by the pool). Mr. Olson stated there is a 20’ setback from the pool building and the lower level units in the back of the property. In addition, the existing slope will not allow a driveway on that portion of the property. Mr. Koerner asked if all options were explored to avoid the need for a variance. Mr. Olson pointed out it makes sense to have the traffic flow in front of the lobby so patrons can easily come in and register for a room. The Route 7 reconstruction took the strip of land and that created the problem. The narrowest portion of land out front is no wider than 11’. Landscaping will be added and as many of the existing trees as possible will be re-located. Mr. Funtow asked how patrons would access their rooms from the registration office prior to the Route 7 construction project. Mr. Olson stated past practice was patrons would go onto Route 7 to access their rooms. Now with the reconstruction, this is not possible.

 

Mr. Olson reiterated the request to increase lot coverage from 71.3% to 74.8% and allow a decrease in the minimum coverage requirement of 50% for landscaping.

 

There was discussion of reasonable use of the property. Ms. Webster noted the safety issue of people backing out onto Route 7 to turn around. It was noted that the Handy Trust was a participant in the court case to stop the land acquisition by the state.

 

PUBLIC COMMENT

None.

 

Variance, Reduce Landscaping and Increase Lot Coverage, Shelburne Travelodge, 2572 Shelburne Road (V05-38)

MOTION by Mr. Waltien, seconded by Ms. Webster, to approve V05-38, request by Paul L. Handy (owner) of Shelburne Travelodge and Civil Engineering Associates (agent) for a variance to reduce landscaping coverage to 45.6 percent from the allowable minimum of 50 percent (§1600.3B) and a variance to increase lot coverage to 74.8 percent from the allowable maximum of 40 percent on property at 2572 Shelburne Road in the Residential-Commercial District (Article VIII) subject to the conditions set forth in the Staff Report and as follows:

 

It was noted Finding of Fact #2 applied due to safety issues created by VTrans taking the 7’ strip of land from the lot.

 

V05-39: Application by Gabriel Handy (owner and Trustee) of Econo Lodge and Suites and Civil Engineering Associates (agent) for 1) a variance to reduce the landscaping coverage to 45.6 percent from the allowable minimum of 50 percent (§1600.3B); 2) a variance to increase the lot coverage to 41.5 percent from the allowable maximum of 40 percent; 3) a variance reduce the lot size area requirement to 4.71 acres from the minimum requirement of 4.82 acres on property at 3164 Shelburne Road in the Residential-Commercial District (Article VIII)

Jim Olson, Civil Engineering Associates, appeared on behalf of the application.

 

STAFF REPORT

Mr. Koerner reviewed the requests for variances by Econo Lodge and Suites to reduce the landscaping coverage, increase lot coverage, and reduce lot size area. Ms. Tyminski noted that after Planning Commission approval, the site plan changed and a smaller variance is now needed for lot coverage.

 

APPLICANT COMMENTS

Mr. Olsen explained the proposal to move the registration office was a direct result of the loss of 17.5’ of land to the Route 7 reconstruction project. The building will either be torn down and rebuilt in the new location or moved onto a newly built foundation. Parking will be reoriented for traffic circulation. The landscape plan includes planting trees and shrubs as approved by the Planning Commission.  Mr. Funtow observed if a small amount of pavement were returned to green space, a variance would not be necessary. Mr. Olson noted there is not much new pavement, and the green space will meld with the green space on the adjacent site. The existing parking spaces behind the building will remain. There is an excess of parking on the site. There was further discussion of parking in the back of the lot, reducing setback impacts by moving the building to create an area in front to register, and parking on the west side of the building. It was noted the main patron activity is registration.  Patrons will want to park in front to register versus parking in back of the office and walking around to the front entrance. Mr. Olsen stated per the regulations, 4.28 acres are needed for the existing lot coverage. Prior to the acquisition of land by the state for the Route 7 project, there was 4.89 acres (4.71 acres presently). There was further discussion of the need for a variance. Mr. Koerner pointed out the landscaping coverage needs to be brought up to 50 percent. Mr. Olson referred to the area by the front door where a 5’ wide grass strip by the sidewalk will be planted by VTrans. Ms. Tyminski observed that moving the building back reduced the nonconformance. Tearing the building down is considered modification to a nonconforming structure. Ms Tyminski suggested the applicant submit a conditional use application to move the building back as a modification of a non-complying structure.

 

PUBLIC COMMENT

None.

 

DELIBERATION/DECISION

Variances, Reduce Landscaping, Increase Lot Coverage, and Reduce Lot Size, Econo Lodge, 3164 Shelburne Road (V05-39)

The applicant will submit a conditional use application related to modifying a non-complying structure (moving the building).

 

CU05-40: Application by James and Monique Rameaka to expand a non-complying structure (§1620.2) with an addition onto an existing deck while not diminishing any required yard or setback areas except a setback encroachment equal to the existing building line on property at 34 Richmond Drive in the Residential I District (Article IX)

James and Monique Rameaka, owners, appeared on behalf of the application.

 

STAFF REPORT

Mr. Koerner reviewed the request for expansion of a non-complying structure by adding onto an existing deck.

 

APPLICANT COMMENTS

Mr. Rameaka submitted color photographs of the deck and explained the existing deck was removed due to rotting and unsafe conditions. There is a question of the one-foot jog out from the footings (11’ from the property line). The property line has not been surveyed and the tax assessor’s information is incorrect (the jog is on a 45-degree angle and is original to the house). The request before the Board is for a 16’ deck on the original footprint, stated Mr. Rameaka.

 

Ms. Webster requested a copy of the tax map be included with the application with all future applications for review.

 

PUBLIC COMMENT

None.

 

Conditional Use, Addition to Deck, Rameaka, 34 Richmond Drive (CU05-40

MOTION by Ms. Webster, seconded by Mr. Funtow, to approve CU05-40, request by James and Monique Rameaka to expand a non-complying structure (§1620.2) with an addition onto an existing deck while not diminishing any required yard or setback areas except a setback encroachment equal to the existing building line on property at 34 Richmond Drive in the Residential I District (Article IX) subject to the conditions set forth in the Staff Report and as follows:

1.         The changes to and uses of the site shall occur as indicated on the site plan prepared and amended by the applicant at the October 3, 2005 meeting. The above-mentioned plan was submitted with the conditional use application and approved by the Board during the public hearing on September 12, 2005.

2.         The deck shall not be any closer than the line of the pre-existing deck at 11’ from the southern boundary.

3.         Within sixty (60) days of this approval, the property owner shall record a “MEMORANDUM OF MUNICIPAL ACTION”       with the Shelburne Town Clerk’s office. This document will notify future property owners of the approval and conditions.

 

 

STAFF REPORT

Mr. Koerner reviewed the request for expansion of a non-complying structure for the addition of a 600 square foot accessory apartment. Ms. Tyminski noted there is some question as to whether there is one or two front yard setbacks.  The application before the Board has assumed two front yard setbacks.

 

APPLICANT COMMENTS

Mr. Millbank stated the existing non-conforming structure will be removed and a new garage with the accessory apartment will be built. The main house has no windows on the west elevation. There will be a set of stairs to the apartment over the garage. The stair tower space is not included in the square footage calculation for the apartment. Storage under the stairs is for the owner’s use.  There was discussion of the amount of square footage proposed for a 25’ x 25’ apartment space and whether a proposed exterior deck is counted in the square footage calculation. Ms. Tyminski suggested the 600 s.f. space to defined as “livable space”. The applicant was advised that four parking spaces are required and parking must be shown on the site plan.

 

PUBLIC COMMENT

None.

 

DELIBERATION/DECISION

MOTION by Ms. Webster, seconded by Mr. Funtow, to approve CU05-41, a request by Patricia O’Brien to expand a non-complying structure (§1620.2) with the addition of a garage and 600 square foot accessory apartment (§920.19) by replacing the existing garage with a less non-complying structure on property at 89 LaPlatte Circle in the Village District (Article IX) subject to the conditions set forth in the Staff Report and as follows:

1.         The applicant shall provide calculations that show a 600 square foot accessory apartment.

2.         The changes to and uses of the garage shall occur as indicated on the site plan prepared and amended by the applicant at the September 23, 2005 meeting. The above-mentioned plan was submitted with the conditional use application and approved by the Board during the public hearing on October 3, 2005.

3.         The applicant shall provide a site plan that shows parking spaces for the accessory apartment and main house.

4.         Within sixty (60) days of this approval, the property owner shall record a “MEMORANDUM OF MUNICIPAL ACTION” with the Shelburne Town Clerk’s office. This document will notify future property owners of the approval and conditions.

 

No one appeared on behalf of the application.

 

STAFF REPORT

Mr. Koerner reviewed the continuation of the conditional use and variance application. It was noted an increase in lot size is needed for a commercial business in the district Mr. Funtow commented the application has been continued twice and the applicant has not appeared.

 

PUBLIC COMMENT

Eric Smith, neighbor, expressed concern the use, if approved, may create a precedent in the area. The lot adjacent to Mr. Smith’s property is vacant presently. Mr. Koerner pointed out according to the minutes and Findings of Fact from a previous hearing indicated that the use is residential only. Mr. Funtow explained that the application before them now is for expansion of a residential building (a den), and a variance which increases the building coverage.  There is not an appeal of any violations before the board at this time.

 

A05-37: Appeal by Paul L. Handy (owner) of Shelburne Travelodge and Ponderosa to contest the denial of a sign permit by the Zoning Coordinator on 09/02/2005 for directional and establishment signs not on the premises at 2572 and 2522 Shelburne Road in the Residential-Commercial District (Article VIII); relief is sought under §1680.12B which allows for particular situations not set forth in the sign regulations (§1680) whereby the Zoning Board of Adjustment may approve the sign(s) provided all other provisions of the section are satisfied.

David Marshall, Civil Engineering Associates, appeared on behalf of the appeal.

 

STAFF REPORT

Ms. Tyminski explained if an application for a sign is denied by the Zoning Coordinator, the Zoning Board, the applicant can appeal the decision to the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Furthermore, in this case, currently to be heard by the Board under 1680.12B the only vehicle for the applicant to be heard by the Zoning Board is via an appeal.

APPELLANT COMMENTS

Dave Marshall stated the challenges on Route 7 related to the property are outlined in a letter submitted to the Zoning Board. Shelburne Travelodge and Ponderosa lost curb cuts and on-site traffic circulation ability due to the reconstruction of Route 7. Directional signs are needed to access the businesses from the north bound traffic lanes, and the directional signs need to be greater than two square feet in size in order to be seen by travelers. The appellant owns two abutting properties and must route people safely to manage internal traffic circulation. The regulations do not allow off-site signage. One suggestion is to combine a directional sign with a business sign. Ms. Webster expressed concern about other businesses along Route 7 requesting larger signs as well. Mr. Waltien asked if the sign would be temporary. Mr. Marshall stated the sign would be permanent. The suggestion is for a sign not exceeding eight square feet in size to contain the name of the business and directions to the access from the north bound lanes. Application for the sign would be under Section 1680.12B. There was further discussion of the wording on a sign, and whether VTrans should provide the signs. The Board suggested that the businesses along Route 7 submit a cumulative request of what is needed for signs.

 

DELIBERATION/DECISION

Appeal, Denial of Sign, Shelburne Travelodge and Ponderosa, 2572 and 2522 Shelburne Road (A05-37)

MOTION by Ms. Webster, seconded by Mr. Funtow, to overturn the action of the Zoning Coordinator and approve A05-37, appeal by Paul L. Handy (owner) of Shelburne Travelodge and Ponderosa of the denial of a sign permit by the Shelburne Zoning Coordinator on 9/2/05 for directional and establishment signs not on the premises at 2572 and 2522 Shelburne Road, and to provide relief under Section 1680.12B of the regulations provided all other provisions of the section are satisfied subject to the conditions set forth in the Staff Report and as follows:

1.         The proposed signs shall be located as indicated on the site plan as prepared by the applicant, date stamped September 1, 2005. The above-mentioned plan was submitted with the conditional use application and approved by the Board during the public hearing on October 3, 2005.

2.         Within sixty (60) days of this approval, the property owner shall record a “MEMORANDUM OF MUNICIPAL ACTION”       with the Shelburne Town Clerk’s office. This document will notify future property owners of the approval and conditions.

 

Mr. Koerner stated the Findings of Fact should note the request is beyond the scope of the Zoning Board; it is a planning issue.

 

 

Deliberative session was convened at 9:10 p.m.

 

 

 

 

Dated at Shelburne, Vermont this 7^th day of  November, 2005 for the meeting on October 3, 2005.

 

_________________________________      _________________________________

Thomas Koerner, Chair                                    Gwen Webster

 

 

_________________________________      _________________________________

Steve Waltien                                                   Boris Funtow