Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission recommends rezoning of 104 Shannon Drive to office/institutional limited use

Burlington Planning & Zoning Commission · April 27, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Burlington Planning & Zoning Commission voted April 27 to recommend that the city council consider rezoning 104 Shannon Drive (27 acres) from Medium Density Residential to Office & Institutional–Limited Use to allow La Funeral Home & Crematory to use an existing house for selection rooms and offices; staff said the change better aligns the site with the comprehensive plan.

The Burlington Planning & Zoning Commission on April 27 recommended that the city council consider rezoning a 27‑acre property at 104 Shannon Drive from Medium Density Residential to Office & Institutional–Limited Use, a move that would allow the adjoining funeral home to formally use the house for selection rooms and arrangement offices.

Planning staff described the property as adjacent to the existing La Funeral Home & Crematory operations and said the future land use map designates the area for neighborhood commercial uses. "Bringing this site into office and institutional brings it closer in compliance to the future land use designation," planning staff told the commission and recommended the limited reclassification. Staff listed the four limited uses the applicant requested: live/work dwelling, single‑family detached dwelling, funeral‑related services and office/professional use.

Applicant David Beal, who identified himself as representing La Funeral Home & Crematory, said the company recently acquired the house at 104 Shannon Drive and intends to use it for additional selection rooms and arrangement offices. "We're not planning to add any new commercial structures," Beal said, adding the firm expects no increase in traffic and plans only minor ADA modifications such as an accessible ramp in the rear.

Commissioners asked no substantive questions of the applicant or staff. One commissioner moved to recommend approval, citing consistency with the comprehensive plan’s land‑use objectives and noting that the proposed OI‑LU district serves as a buffer between residential and general business zones. The motion’s findings referenced the comprehensive plan and required context‑sensitive development to protect adjacent residential areas.

By roll call the commission approved the recommendation (majority present), and staff notified the applicants that the item will move to a city council work session and then to a council public hearing for final action. The commission’s recommendation is advisory; final approval rests with the city council.

The planning staff report and the motion noted compliance requirements: future development must meet building, fire, noise and nuisance codes and any new development will be reviewed through the city’s permit and technical review processes. The applicant and staff were told they will receive written notification and next‑step dates from planning staff.

The commission adjourned after completing the item.