HomeMy WebLinkAboutVR-99-01 - Decision - 0002 Sherry Roadve-l`-0!
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
RE: APPLICATION OF DERRICK & KATHY PEPIN - DECK -VARIANCE
This matter came before the South Burlington Development Review Board pursuant to
the previsions of 24 VSA 4468 on application of Derrick & Kathy Pepin, hereinafter
"Applicants" for approval of a variance to allow a 10'x12' deck to project ten (10) feet
into the front yard setback, 2 Sherry Road. The Applicants were present at the public
hearing held relative to this application. Based on evidence submitted at the hearing and
as part of the application, the Development Review Board hereby renders the following
decision on this application:
FINDINGS OF FACT
The owners of record of this particular property are Derrick & Kathy Pepin.
2. This property located at 2 Sherry Road lies within the R4 District.
3. The lot has 70 ft. of frontage along Sherry Road and 120 ft. of frontage along
Brookwood Dr.
4. This property is developed with a single family dwelling.
5. The deck for which a variance is being sought is existing and was constructed
without a zoning permit.
6. All the lots along the east side of Sherry Road have dimensions of 70' x 120'.
7. There are no exceptional topographical features on the property.
8. The Administrative Officer on 7/14/98 issued the applicants a zoning permit (#98-
203) to construct a roof and enclose the deck for which a variance is being
requested. This work was never started and the permit has expired.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1) There are no unique physical circumstances or conditions peculiar to this
particular property. The lot is not irregular in shape as can be seen on the drawing
provided. The lot is not narrow or shallow. It has 70 feet of frontage on Sherry
Road and 120 feet of frontage on Brookwood Drive. All the lots along the east
side of Sherry Road have these same dimensions. The lot is not smaller than
many of the lots in the neighborhood. The unnecessary hardship is due to the
provisions of the zoning regulations and not to any unique physical circumstances
or condition. The fact that the house location results in the need for the variance is
not a physical condition unique to this particular property.
2) Since there are no physical circumstances or conditions, there is a possibility that
the property can be developed in strict conformity with the provisions of the
zoning regulations. The property is currently developed with a single family
dwelling which is a reasonable use of the property. The authorization of a
variance is therefore not necessary to enable to reasonable use of the property.
3) The applicant is creating the hardship by proposing to construct a deck that does
not meet the zoning regulations.
4) The authorization of a variance would not alter the essential character of the
neighborhood nor would it impair the appropriate use or development of adjacent
property, nor be detrimental to the public welfare.
5) The authorization of a variance would not represent the minimum variance that
would afford relief and would not represent the least modification possible of the
zoning regulations and of the plan.
DECISION
Based on the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the South Burlington
Development Review Board hereby denies the Applicants' request for a variance to allow
a 10' x 12' deck to project (10) feet into the front yard setback, 2 Sherry Road for the
following reasons:
The five (5) criteria necessary for the granting of a variance pursuant to 24 VSA
4468 have not been met.
Dated this 7 day of September 1999 at South Burlington, VT.
or