Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVR-84-0000 - Supplemental - 1041 Shelburne RoadWesco, Inc. 25 North Prospect Street Burlington, Vern -ant 05401 Re: 1041 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Sirwndinger: Be advised that the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment has granted your request for a variance. The Board will issue formal findings at a later date. This office will issue a permit upon your request. If you have any questions please don't hesitate to call me. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/,Tr-c], SOUTH is �T:LINGTON CONING BOA', -A) OF AliJUST,y .:NT ^indings in accordance with Section 446E of the Planning & Development 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; 0- (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; El (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 1—;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. El Appeal # �LY L Date Appellant �J �- - t� ?�-,^-r \;J C1�? L-vy\-ft Vote: Yes � No Sign q,/C i/ List findings below: 10 2. /✓ C�� (ram" f l i - �r i* ) _ �j _ r SOUTH I)II-ILINGTON ZONING BOA-;D OF AllJUSTMc;NT ?findings in accordance with Section 446P of the Planning K Development 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; (a Lam- (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 jam- (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. IT r Appeal # Date Appellant Vote: Yes No F-I Sign , List finds s be' 1. sil/- 2. 3 i SOUTH t-URLINGTON ZONING BOA�;D OF AJUSTM:;NT ^indings in accordance with Section 446E of the Planning & Development 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; 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; Z (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 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 # Date 5- /v- IfY Appellant /-r/ec.Ca Vote: Yes No List findings below: 1. /L/�ti��y�r 1�-�r�sr�� ✓'T.r'-.�! �..d.✓�a��e�Tr� 3. 6w =, 77 sJ %i aJ-c i on Z} . - <f-1 fi d�a SOUTH r-L'I'LINGTON CONING BOA;I:D OF AiJUST'�LnNT Findings in accordance with Section 446E of the Planning ck- Development 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; JJ (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; n/ L� (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 (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 sll y�e q Appellant WESG n '�- Vote: Yes Fl--- No List findings below: 2. Na Appeal # S Sign