Meeting report · Board of Appeals
Creating this report cost real money.
Help fund coverage →
Board of Appeals — April 21, 2026
The meeting was characterized by rigorous questioning and skepticism from board members regarding whether applicants were seeking variances for genuine hardship or mere economic convenience.
Public impact
Issues from this meeting with documented community impact.
01
Zoning and Setback Precedents
Potential long-term shift in neighborhood density and character if variances are routinely granted for economic convenience. Affected: Neighborhood residents near Phyllis Avenue and future developers in Burlington
zoning change
Decisions logged
Every recorded vote, with timestamps and dissents.
Motion to continue the hearing for 26-8 (2 Wall Street) to the May 5, 2026 meeting.
The board voted unanimously to postpone the decision to allow the applicant to provide more specific information regarding building size and prototype options.
4-0-0 (Passed)
Motion to continue the hearing for 26-9 (5 Phyllis Avenue) to the May 19, 2026 meeting.
The board voted unanimously to postpone the hearing to allow the applicant to finalize plans (attached vs. detached) and provide a more precise site plan.
4-0-0 (Passed)
Approval of an illuminated wall sign for 0 Burlington Mall Road (Game Show Battle Rooms).
The sign is approved at 2 ft in height by 32 ft 7 5/8 in in width, with an updated depth of 3 inches. Conditions include: not to exceed 90 lumens per square foot and no other signs allowed, even by right, conforming to plans dated February 23, 2026.
4-0-0
Topics discussed
Click a topic to expand quotes and full context.
▶ 02:48 Variance Application 26-8: 2 Wall Street (Chick-fil-A)
The applicants requested a variance from side yard setback requirements to construct a canopy for a new Chick-fil-A restaurant. The discussion centered on topography, the necessity of the variance due to retaining wall costs, and whether the building size or location could be adjusted to avoid the variance.
Speakers: Speaker A (Chair), Carrie McCormick, Connor Bailey, Mike, John
▶ 35:09 Variance Application 26-9: 5 Phyllis Avenue (Garage Construction)
The applicant requested a variance for a side yard setback to build a garage. Discussion addressed the steep slope of the driveway as a hardship, the potential for the garage to be detached rather than attached, and the impact on local tree density. A letter of no objection from the abutting property owner at 7 Phyllis Ave was read into the record.
Speakers: Speaker A (Chair), Dan Carberry, Mark, John, Mike
▶ 59:09 Case 16: 0 Burlington Mall Road Signage
A hearing regarding a request for an exterior illuminated wall sign for a tenant (Game Show Battle Rooms) at the Burlington Mall, which requires a special permit for exterior signage.
Speakers: Unidentified speaker, Grant Michael
Controversy & dissent
Where the board, the community, or the agenda diverged.
Potentially controversial issues
01
Variance Application 26-8 (Chick-fil-A)
The applicant is seeking a variance for a large commercial entity. There is a conflict between economic convenience (avoiding the cost of retaining walls) and strict adherence to setback requirements. Board members expressed skepticism that the project cannot be redesigned to meet code without a variance.
Board position: Skeptical; the board signaled that the variance might be unnecessary if the building size or layout were adjusted to avoid the cost of topography mitigation.
medium concern
02
Variance Application 26-9 (5 Phyllis Avenue Garage)
This involves a residential hardship (safety concerns regarding a steep driveway) versus the potential for setting a precedent that alters neighborhood density and tree cover.
Board position: Cautious; the board expressed concern regarding the precedent a granted variance might set for the density of the neighborhood.
low concern
Community vs. board tension
Ready to share? AI-written accountability posts about this meeting's controversies.
View posts →
Action items
Who owes what, by when.
Provide more information regarding the smallest possible Chick-fil-A prototype and explore alternatives (like building width or different layouts) that might avoid the variance.
Assigned: Chick-fil-A Project Team (Crosspoint Associates/Bowler Engineering) · Due: May 5, 2026
Provide a more concise and finalized site plan showing exactly whether the garage will be attached or detached and the exact setback points.
Assigned: Dan Carberry · Due: May 19, 2026
Reach out/coordinate regarding the continuance if more time is needed before the May 19th meeting.
Assigned: a speaker · Due: 2026-05-19
Notable statements
The proposed project includes demolishing the existing building... and the construction of a new Chick-fil-A restaurant. — Connor Bailey · Introduction of the project scope for 2 Wall Street. ▶ 04:41
Rather than incur those costs, we'll just go to the town and get a variance with this little bit of variance when the whole thing could have come to the right a little bit more. — Board Member (unnamed) · Questioning whether the variance request was driven by economic convenience to avoid retaining wall/topography costs. ▶ 18:20
I think it's just a small jog to the right for this project, and you wouldn't even need a variance. — Board Member (unnamed) · Expressing skepticism that the project cannot be shifted slightly to meet setback requirements. ▶ 23:55
I'm overly concerned not with what Dan and his family are doing, but the message that if you grant an easement/variance... it's about the density for the neighborhood. — Board Member (unnamed) · Discussing the importance of maintaining density standards and not setting precedents for the community. ▶ 55:31
We don't set precedence... that's how I vote. — Unidentified speaker · Discussing whether approving the garage at 5 Phyllis Ave would set a problematic precedent for the neighborhood. ▶ 57:03
The mall falls under special permit that there's no exterior signs allowed without coming before the board. — Grant Michael · Explaining why the applicant requires a special permit for the storefront sign despite being within normal regulations. ▶ 60:09
Public comment
What residents said — verbatim, with timestamps.
2
Total speakers
1
Addressed
1
Partial
0
Not addressed
Dan Carberry
Partial
Dan is requesting a variance for a minimum side yard setback to construct a garage. He explains that the existing driveway is steeply sloped, creating safety hazards for his family and neighbors during winter months.
Key concern
Requesting a variance to build a garage to mitigate safety risks caused by driveway topography.
Board responseThe board engaged in an extensive discussion regarding the garage's attachment to the house, the impact on nearby trees, and potential density issues. They suggested he refine his plans and offered a continuance to allow him to prepare a more precise proposal.
The board did not make a decision on the variance itself; instead, they provided guidance on how to improve the application and granted a continuance to May 19th to allow for better planning.
Grant Michael
Addressed
Grant is representing a client at the Burlington Mall who needs an exterior storefront sign. Because the mall has a special permit prohibiting exterior signs without board approval, he is seeking a permit for a face-lit LED channel letter sign.
Key concern
Seeking approval for an exterior storefront sign for a subdivided mall space.
Board responseThe board reviewed the sign dimensions, location, and illumination levels. After confirming it met the necessary lumens per square foot standards, they voted to approve the sign with specific conditions.
The board addressed the request by approving the sign with conditions regarding illumination and the prohibition of additional signs.
Support coverage
Creating this report cost real money.
MeetingWatch attended, transcribed, and analyzed this meeting on its own dime. If this work is valuable to you, chip in to keep covering Burlington.
Follow Burlington
One email when a new report is published from the Board of Appeals — or one weekly digest.
Report composed by
gemma-4-26b, claude-opus-4-7 · analyzed 2026-05-25.