Laserfiche WebLink
-3- <br /> <br /> grant a variance where a special exception was requested. He advised, however, <br /> <br /> that he could not recall the specific circumstances of that petition. <br /> <br /> The Board agreed with Chairman Oschman and the Board indicated that <br /> <br /> they would consider the petition as a variance even though the ordinance on <br /> its face appears to require the consideration under the special exception <br /> requirement. <br /> <br /> Ti]ford Bailey inquired as to whether there was any plan to restructure <br /> <br /> the building and Mr. Lawson advised that there was no future plan to do any <br /> constructioo to the existing structure. Tilford Bailey further inquired as <br /> to whether ~ day care center was regulated by the State. Francis Fiscus <br /> indicated that for a day care center as small as hers that licensing was not <br /> required but felt that it ~as to one's advantage to be licensed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lawson indicated that Mrs. Fiscus was a registered nurse and <br /> <br /> that they intended to be properly licensed and monitored by the State of <br /> Indiana. Mrs. Fiscus further advised that the State had restrictions as to <br /> the number of children that could be cared for on the premises. The Board <br /> indicated that their ordinance under Section 4.2 would allow a maximum of <br /> 60 children given the lot size im question. <br /> <br /> fChairman Oschman also advised that under Section 4~5 that a 4 foot <br /> <br /> cha~nlJnk Cence was required. Also, after being advised by Mrs. Fiscus that <br /> <br /> there would be 2 employees with a maximum of 20 children Steve Oschman advised there woul~ <br />be a requirement under Section 4(b) of the ordinance for 6 off street parking <br /> <br /> places. The Board then looked at the ordinance requirements for a variance <br /> under Section 10.2 and found as follows: (1) that the grant would not be <br /> injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the <br /> community; (2) that the use and value of the area adjacent to the property <br /> included in the variance would not be adversely affected for the reasons <br /> that the structure was to remain a house and that other businesses were already <br /> located in the area; and (3) the need for the variance arises from some condition <br /> <br /> <br />