Laserfiche WebLink
power lines. Stan Miller advised that the power company would <br />have to advised of the location of the sign and approve it before <br />they would put power to it, and in addition, that other signs in <br />the area were closer than their sign to the power lines. The <br />Board then proceeded to findings of fact from the development <br />standards: <br /> <br /> 1. That the approval would not be injurious to the public <br />health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community due <br />to other signs in the area with similar set-backs and proximities <br />less than 1,000 feet. <br /> <br /> 2. The use and value of the area adjacent to the property <br />included in the variance would not be affected in substantially <br />adverse manner since similar signs were located in that area and <br />that these particular signs should not interfere with each other. <br /> <br /> 3. That the strict application of the terms of the zoning <br />ordinance would result in practical difficulties in the use of the <br />property due to the proximity of the strip of ground to the <br />parking lot and right of way. <br /> <br /> A motion was then made by Robert Tucker to grant the variance <br />with the additional restrictions that no signs would be placed <br />lower than the sign shown on the drawing which was 17 feet from <br />the ground and that no additional signs would be added and that <br />the sign would comply to the drawing entered as an exhibit. This <br />was seconded by Vernon Kimmel and unanimously carried. <br /> <br /> The next item to come before the Board was the variance <br /> request by George and Opal Fox. The Board's Attorney, having <br /> reviewed the file, advised the Board that the notices were <br /> <br />-2- <br /> <br /> <br />