The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutVR-87-0000 - Supplemental - 0011 Mills Avenue"OU"'H. HUHLINGTON %Oi4ING ifU,;i:U 0" Findings in acr.ordnnec with section 141+6P of the i'l;rnnlni:4 Dovelopinont. Act (1) That there are unique physical circumstances or conditions, Including irregularity, narrowness, or shallowness of lot size or shape, or exceptional topographical or other physical conditions Peculiar to the particular property, and that the unnecessary hardship is due to such conditions, and not the circumstances or conditions generally created by the provisions of the zoning regulations in the neighborhood or district in which the property Is located; (2) That because of such physical *circumstances or conditions, there is no possibility that the property can be developed in strict conformity with the provisions of the zoning regulations and that the authorization of a variance is therefore necessary to enable the reasonable use of the property; (3) That such unnecessary hardship has no.t;,been created by the appellant; T71 (4) That the variance, if authorized, will not alter the essential' character of the neighborhood or district in which the property is located, nor substantially or permanently impair the appropriate use or development of adjacent -property, nor be detrimental to the public welfare; and.,(f (5) That the variance, if authorized, will represent the minimum variance that will afford relief and will represent the least modification possible. of the zoning regulations and of the plan. Appeal # %' IC)V� Da t e 4 ,Appellant 1P--O S0K — :'ore: yes No n 3. - ;UUiI'. HUHI,iNGTON ZONING iWAI—..0 W., Findings. in accordance with Section 1 46P of the i"nnnitiv Ik•velonlnorit. Act (1) That there are unique physical circumstances or conditions, including irregularity, narrowness, or shallowness of lot size or shape, or exceptional topographical or other physical conditions peculiar to the particular property, and that the unnecessary hardship is due to such conditions, and not the circumstances or conditions generally created by the provisions of the zoning regulations in the neighborhood or district in which the property Is located; (2) That because of such physical 'circumstances or conditions, there is no possibility that the property can be developed in strict conformity with the provisions of the zoning regulations and that the authorization of a variance is therefore necessary to enable the reasonable use of the property; (3) That such unnecessary hardship has no•t;,been created by the appellant; n (4) That the variance, if authorized, will not alter the essential' character of the neighborhood or district in which the property is located, nor substantially or permanently impair the appropriate use or development of adjacent property, nor be detrimental to the public welfare; and.,0 (5) That the variance, if authorized, will represent the minimum variance that will afford relief and will represent the least modification possible. of the zoning regulations and of the plan. a Appeal LJ Date' LU� r. Appellant �f1 '�' �E�� ►^J , Vo�c: ye N'o---�- : OWL 1'. HUI' 1,1 NG'rO,'4 %oid l h(; i3 ,r.1) o"' r%!)J O,) l :.:.:•1 indlnl,s in :1ccordance with Section 14146P of the illrrnnlnl' 4 I)rvc-lopinont. Act (1) That there are unique physical circumstances or condition::, Including irregularity, narrowness, or shallowness of lot size or shape, or exceptional topographical or other physical conditions peculiar to the particular property, and that the unnecessary hardship is due to such conditions, and not the circumstances or conditions generally created by the provisions of the zoning regulations in tje neighborhood or district in which the property is located; (2) That because of such physical circumstances or conditions, there is no possibility that the property can be developed in strict conformity with the provisions of the zoning regulations and that the authorization of a variance is therefore necessary to enable the reasonable use of the property; (3) That such unnecessary hardship has no•t;, been created by the appellant; E / (4) That the variance, if authorized, will not alter the essential' character of the neighborhood or district in which the property Is located, nor substantially or permanently impair the appropriate use or development of adjacent property, nor be detrimental to the public welfare; and. (-;-.-�/ (5) That the variance, if authorized, will represent the minimum variance that will afford relief and will represent the least modification possible. of the zoning regulations and of the plan. Appeal Date ,Appellant i Vote: Yes No-- M.,t `11"d111,•., i'olow: 3. :;UUTH HURLiNGTON ZONING BOA1:U U`. Findings, in accordance with Section 1446P of the i'inrnnin,, ."i Oovelopmont. Act (1) That there are unique physical circumstances or cond1tlons, including, irregularity, narrowness, or shallowness of lot size or shape, or exceptional topographical or other physical conditions peculiar to the particular property, and that the unnecessary hardship is due to such conditions, and not the circumstances or conditions ge rally created by the provisions of the zoning regulations in Oe neighborhood or district in which the property is located; (2) That because of such physical 'circumstances or conditions, there is no possibility that the property can be developed in strict conformity with the provisions of the zoning regulations and that the authorization of a variance is therefoo necessary to enable the reasonable use of the property; , (3) That such unneces ry hardsship has no-t been created by the appellant; E4--"' (4) That the variance, if authorized, will not alter the essential' character of the neighborhood or district in which the property is located, nor substantially or permanently impair the appropriate use or development of adjacent p perty, nor be detrimental to the public welfare; and (5) That the variance, if authorized, will represent the minimum variance that will afford relief and will represent the least modification possible of the zoning regulations and of the plan. Appeal Date d Appellant , Vote: Yes No Slf,P- - - ---- Li ir,cil-n; below: 1. 4 3. 'WIF H HUN LINGTON ZONING BOAl:U U`.'' Findings, In accordance with Section 446P of the Planrilnr &Dove loomont. Act (1) That there are unique physical circumstances or condition::, including irregularity, narrowness, or shallowness of lot size or shape, or exceptional topographical or other physical conditions peculiar to the particular property, and that the unnecessary hardship is due to such conditions, and not the circumstances or conditions generally created by the provisions of the zoning regulations in t e neighborhood or district in which the property Is located; (2) That because of such physical 'circumstances or conditions, there is no possibility that the property can be developed in strict conformity with the provisions of the zoning regulations and that the authorization of a variance is therefore necessary to enable the reasonable use of the property; i0 U (3) That such unnecessary hardship has no-t!been created by the appellant; �� (4) That the variance, if authorized, will not alter the essential' character of the neighborhood or district in which the property Is located, nor substantially or permanently impair the appropriate use. or development of adjacent property, nor be detrimental to the public welfare; and., 2 (5) That the variance, if authorized, will represent the minimum variance that will afford relief and will represent the least modification possible. of the zoning regulations and of the plan. Appeal # 7 Date__ Appellant ,O. 4A),ts vAl Vote: Yes ,(X No 1 . «sue, .�J � �.r,✓. � ✓ —------_ _ _ -- — --- 3. "01)"'1: HUH L 1 NGTON /ON 1 NG ifU,;r. 1) u.- Findings In acr.ordance withh Section 1046f of the i".;+nninr 1),veloomorit. Act (1) That there are unique physical circumstance:; or condition::, Including irregularity, narrowness, or shallowness of lot size or shape, or exceptional topographical or other physical conditions peculiar to the particular property, and that the unnecessary hardship is due to such conditions, and not the circumstances or conditions generally created by the provisions of the zoning regulations in the neighborhood or district in which the property Is located" e (2) That because of such physical 'circumstances or conditions, there is no possibility that the property can be developed in strict conformity with the provisions of the zoning regulations and that the authorization of a variance is therefore necessary to enable the reasonable use of the property; [AIA ( (3) That such unnecessary hardship has no-t;. been created by the appellants (l+) That the variance, if authorized, will not alter the essential' character of the neighborhood or district in which the property is located, nor substantially or permanently impair the appropriate use or development of adjacent property, nor be detrimental to the public welfare; an&1U, (5) That the variance, if authorized, will represent the minimum variance that will afford relief and will represent the least modification possible.of the zoning regulations and of the plan. Date Appellant Vote: Yes � T\o 1.1 �c;. :'ir;�1!.nr•; i;ctlow: i U -1 Q-•�22�eec.c Appeal # D >Ul)';1'. IiUI'.(,1NG'1UN �UiJIhG BOAC.0 U!" Findings In acc ordnnee with Section 1+1+6f of the i'I.fnt11111 Act (1) That there are unique physical circumstance:: or condition::, including irregularity, narrowness, or shallowness of lot size or shape, or exceptional topographical or other physical conditions Peculiar to the particular property, and that the unnecessary hardship is due to such conditions, and not the circumstances or conditions generally created by the provisions of the zoning regulations in the neighborhood or district in which the property Is located; L� (2) That because of such physical 'circumstances or conditions, there is no possibility that the property can be developed in strict conformity with the provisions of the zoning regulations and that the authorization of a variance is therefore necessary to enable the reasonable use of the property; (3) That such unnecessary hardship has no•t;,been created by the appellant; f (4) That the variance, if authorized, will not alter the essential' character of the neighborhood or district in which the property is located, nor substantially or permanently impair the appropriate use or development of adjacent property, nor be detrimental to the public welfare; and. (5) That the variance, if authorized, will represent the minimum variance that will afford relief and will represent the least modification possible.of the zoning regulations and of the plan. Appeal Date P110 f 7 Appellant 1 .:_��2,C� � tidy �.•., Li•4�.r.r. �� -- ----- _ _ - - - No O , lie 4� % G� l�er"'u✓ W '4 `" h-� l•ti, —� p arc... �v � c cl