Laserfiche WebLink
-3- <br /> <br />1) That the approval of this variance could be injurious to th£ pub~lic health, <br />safety, mcrals and general welfmre of the community with the existing water problems <br />in the area. 2) The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in <br />the variance could be affected in a substantially adverse manner due to having more <br />than one mobile home on the let along with a house, the same affecting the adjoining <br />property owners land values due to having two mobile homes on the property, variances <br />from set-back and other standards which diminish the values of the adjoining <br />properties. 3) That there was no showing of this variance arising from any condition <br />peculimr to the property involved. 4) That there was no showing that the strict <br />application of the terms of the zoning ordinance would constitute an unnecessary <br />hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. 5) That the <br />approval does interfere substantially with the comprehensive plan adopted under <br />the 500 Series of the Indiana Code in that the multiple houses on one lot is not <br />compatible with the use as set out in the Master Plan. Tilford Bailey then made <br />a motion that based upon the findings of fact this variance should be denied. This <br />was seconded by Warren Franklin and the vote was 5 votes against the variance and <br />0 for it. Based upon this the petition was denied. <br /> <br /> The next variance to come before the Board was the petition of Hart M. <br />Hasten and Mark Hasten, an Indiana partnerhip, and Taco Bell Corporation regarding <br />a variance from the development standards requiring approval of a sub-division of <br />land by the Plan Commission, pursuant to the sub-division control ordinance. <br />Notices were found to be in order and attorney Dave Lawson, representing the <br />petitioners, proceeded with a discussion of the request. Attorney Lawson advised <br />where the land was located, that being just south of the VFW and that 8/10ths of a <br />acre was being sold to Taco Bell~ to place a restaurant which ~s within the zoning <br />currently existing for said land. Attorney Lawson gave a history of this ground <br />and the potential problems which were existing regarding street cuts and the Town <br />Board. He showed a plat of the ground and advised that the only request was whether <br /> <br /> <br />