Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Violations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board continues appeal of retail‑use violation at 279 East Main Street pending site plan and city text amendment
Summary
The Board of Zoning Appeals granted a continuance of an appeal of a notice of violation tied to operation of a retail sales use and unpermitted signage at 279 East Main Street, after the applicant requested more time to pursue a site plan and await a pending city text amendment that may affect the use.
The Westminster Board of Zoning Appeals on Nov. 5 agreed to continue an appeal of a notice of violation related to 279 East Main Street, weighing requests from the property’s representatives for additional time while a site plan review and a pending mayor-and-council text amendment are resolved.
The notice of violation, issued Sept. 27, 2024, cited operation of a retail sales establishment, installation of an unpermitted sign and obstruction of the public sidewalk. Attorney Matthew Kirkpatrick, representing the property owner and tenant, asked the board for a continuance while the site plan review proceeds and while the mayor and common council consider a text amendment that would define certain uses (including vape/bait shop definitions referenced in counsel’s argument).
Kirkpatrick said the applicant has removed the disputed signage and submitted a site plan; he asked the board to allow time for the plan-review process and for city code text changes that could determine whether the use is permissible. “We intend to make this facility, bring it up to code and satisfy the zoning administrator and the director of planning,” Kirkpatrick told the board, arguing a continuance would permit remediation rather than immediate enforcement that could close the business.
City staff opposed an indefinite delay and noted the board’s role in reviewing the notice of violation issued in September, but acknowledged that continuances are sometimes appropriate where applicants are pursuing compliance through technical submittals. Elizabeth Sullivan, the city attorney, confirmed for the record that an appeal generally stays enforcement actions while the appeal is pending; staff emphasized the violation itself — not any future zoning or text amendment outcomes — was the core issue before the board.
After discussion the board voted to continue the hearing to a later meeting date to allow the parties time to work through the site plan review and to await the mayor-and-council action. The board recorded the continuance motion as made, seconded and approved on the record. The parties were told staff will set the continuation date and advise the board and parties when the matter will return to the agenda.
What happens next: staff will coordinate with the applicant to set a return date; the site plan review process and any mayor-and‑council action on the pending text amendment may affect the scope of the appeal or lead the appellant to withdraw the appeal if the code changes and site plan resolve the cited issues.
