Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVR-77-0000 - Supplemental - 1085 Shelburne RoadApril 20, 197- Attorney :caul Lee 101 ilain Street Burlin-rton, VT 05401 Re: Zonin,: Appeal - Fournier & ,-'ilkins Dear Attorney A -el: Be advised that the:, zoning?, variance requested by 1•9r. Charles Wilkins for the Fournier property located at 1085 Shelburne Road has been :granted by the :South 3urlin� ton Zor.in ?oard of Adjustment. The Board approved only the dual uses which were proposed (legal offices and "Charlie's Den" tennis accessories, sales and service) the residential use will require another hearin-, before the F,oard. In order to schedule this hearin�; for the ',',ay 16th meetin„ a revised floor plan should be submitted to this office no later than April 27, 1977. Prior to co n.iiencin;; remodelin; of the buildin,;, you are re- quired to obtain a permit from this office. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 863-2F91. Vory truly, Richard 41ard Zoning Administrative Officer PA ,d SOUTH ( ,LINGTON ZONING BOARD OF LJUSTI�ENT Findings 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; (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; Q (3) That such unnecessary hardship has not been created by the appellant; In (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. Q Date �J- /?-7 Appellant Vote: Yes 0 No List findings below: 2. Appeal # Sign 7 3. SOUTH ( :LINGTON ZONING BOARD OF LJUMENT Findings in accordance with Section 446P 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; (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 (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 p erty, 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. El Appeal # -� Date y Ap we Li 1. 2. 3 SOUTH r LLINGTON ZONING BOARD OF t JUSTNENT Findings in accordance with Section 446P 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 t 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; j-t� (3) That such unnecery 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 pr erty, 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. 1 Date Appellant Vote: Yes No List findin s below: 1._ 2 2. 7> Appeal # Sign