HomeMy WebLinkAboutVR-87-0000 - Supplemental - 0028 Proctor Avenue (2)SOUTH IjURLINGTON "ZONING BOAitU O'. AUJUSTX.-.NT
Findings in accordance with Section 14146f of the Planninr •', f)ev(-?lopment
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 not 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 E
(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 # 5
Date
Appellant 12. y (� s�S/a, MVPiT -?,
Vote: Yes No Sign
List findings below:
1. _ NJ PT � L :
h c vv 6:: l ✓rr .tiu/ Ab
SOUTH BURLINGTON Z014ING BOAi:D 0'.� AWUST?^._,NT
Findings in accordance with Section 1+46P of the !)Innnini, w, Dovelopment
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 th 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;
1=J
(3) That such unnecessary hardship has not 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 91-1
(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. f�'J
Date t f ;
Appellant'N
Vote: Yes No
List findings below:
2.
3.
Appeal # 4- 4 -,/
s�f
Sign Q..�
SOUTII BUI?LINGTON ZONING BOP.rtU OF ADJUS'I._:f�'C
^indi_ngs in accordance with Section t,46P of the PlanninE, �� Dovelopment
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; --r-j
(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 not 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:---.E
(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
t
Vote: Yes No
Sil;n
List findinjzs below:
1,
2.
3.
SOUTH I3UHLINGTON ZONING BOAi:I) O'' AW STX�--NC
Findings in accordance with Section 1+46F of the Planning & Developmont
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 he 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 unnece sary hardship has not 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 F—Iol"
(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 (�
List findings below:
2.
3.
Appeal #
No Sign