Share this:

A group of neighbors from the Town of Dorset (collectively, “appellants”) seek reversal of a lower court decision granting Tyler’s application for a zoning permit for construction of a self-storage facility in the Dorset Village Commercial District (“VC district”).  Appellants challenge the lower court’s decision, claiming that the court erred 1) by ignoring the plain meaning of “retail rental” in the applicable ordinance and 2) by finding the facility would serve individual uses even though Tyler’s affidavit indicated that most customers would be businesses.  

This appeal asked the Supreme Court of Vermont to consider the lower court’s construction of “retail rentals.”  It found that the lower court overemphasized the distinction between “retail” and “wholesale,” which had led to the conclusion that as long as a facility rents to individuals rather than industrial customers or on a wholesale basis, it was permissible in the VC district.  However, the Supreme Court found that the lower court’s broad construction of the statutory language “shop” and “store” allowed virtually all businesses in the VC district and ignored the most ordinary interpretations of such terms.  The Supreme Court also found that the lower court failed to consider certain subsections listing numerous permitted uses in the VC district. 

The statutorily permissible uses all require direct, face-to-face transactions in their daily business operations.  Absent from the list are those involving commercial uses without customer-merchant foot traffic.  Because Tyler’s proposed facility essentially boasts mini-warehouses, the Court found it inconsistent with the wording and structure of the Bylaws.  The Court further found that interpreting “personal service establishment” and “retail sales/rentals” to allow this type of use contradicts the express purpose of the Bylaws.  The Bylaws purport to “retain[] the residential character of the villages” and if the lower court’s construction was used, it would allow any business of any type as long as it wasn’t engaged in wholesale transactions, thus seriously undermining the “residential character” of the area.  

In re Tyler Self-Storage Unit Permits, 2011 WL 2474277 (Vt., 6/23/11) 

The opinion can be accessed at: http://info.libraries.vermont.gov/supct/current/op2010-307.html