HomeMy WebLinkAboutVR-99-0000 - Decision - 0069 0006 Pinnacle Drive6. The authorization of the variance would alter the essential character of the neighborhood or
district in which the property is located. It would impair the view of the public from the Dorset
Park Scenic View Protection Zone Baseline.
7. The authorization of the variance would not represent the minimum variance that would afford
relief, it would represent the most modification possible of the zoning regulations and of the plan.
ORDER
The variance to allow a single family dwelling to project 1.645 feet above the maximum elevation
of 417.565 feet above mean sea level permitted under the view protection zone at 6 Pinnacle
Drive is hereby DENIED.
Dated at City Hall South Burlington, Vermont this ' " day of 1999.
-
Fred Blais, Chairman
South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment
2
SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
STATE OF VERMONT
COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
Re: John Larkin Request for a variance
6 Pinnacle Drive
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law & Order
This matter came before the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment on July 26, 1999 by
application of John Larkin seeking a variance from Section 22.401, Dorset Park View Protection
Zone of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations. Request is for permission to allow a single
family dwelling to project 1.645 feet above the maximum elevation of 417.565 feet above mean
sea level permitted under the view protection zone, 6 Pinnacle Drive. The Board of Adjustment
finds as follows:
1. This application is to allow a single family dwelling at 6 Pinnacle Drive to project 1.645 feet
above the maximum elevation of 417.565 feet above mean sea level. The Dorset Park View
Protection Zone A limits the height of a house on this lot to 417.565 feet. The applicant
constructed this house and due to an error constructed it 1.645 feet higher than is permitted.
2. The Administrative Officer Richard Ward on 4/14/97 issued the applicant a zoning permit
(#97-54) to construct a single family dwelling which would be 28 feet in height and not exceed a
height limit of 417.5 feet above mean sea level. The applicant constructed this dwelling 1.645 feet
higher than that which was permitted.
3. There are no unique physical circumstances or conditions, including irregularity narrowness
or shallowness of lot size or shape, or exceptional topography or other physical condition peculiar
to the particular property. The unnecessary hardship is due to an error by the builder by building
the structure too high. The lot is .39 acres (16,988 square feet) which is 4,988 square feet larger
than the minimum lot size. The lot is regular in shape with no topographical features.
4. Because there are no physical circumstances or conditions present there is a 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 not necessary to enable the reasonable use of the
property. The need for the variance is due to an error by the builder. The house could have been
built to comply with the zoning regulations.
5. The unnecessary hardship has been created by the appellant by constructing the structure too
high.