Laserfiche WebLink
-5- <br /> <br />Taco Bell's expense~. Mr. Dawson also explained bow the drainage would be taken <br /> <br />care of with curbs placed te meter the water run-off ~rom the Taco Bell property. <br /> <br /> The Board having heard from all the remonstrators then proceeded to a <br />discussion of the variance from development standards. The Board made the following <br />findings of fact: 1) That the approval of the variance would not be injurious to <br />the public health, safety, morals, and genera] welfare of the community in that <br />the site-plan as presented was up tm the ordinance standmrds and the forcing of <br />this matter to the Plan Commission would not result in any major changes which would <br />mffect the general well-being of the community. 2) That the use and value of the <br />area adjacent to the property incl, ded in the variance would not be affected in a <br />sobstantia]ly mdverse manner by the granting of this variance, in that the site-plan <br />was set out in conformity with ordinance standards and ordinance standards would have <br />to be complied w~th prior to any building permit being obtained. 3) That the strict <br />application of the terms o~ the zoning ordinmnce would result in practical difficulties <br />in the use of the property in that additional meetings would have to be held and <br />unnecessary delays incurred all ~nterfering with the development of said property. <br /> <br /> The Board then proceeded to entertain a motion on this variance request. <br />Wendell Th~ler made a motion to grant the variance based upon the findings of facts <br />for a varimnce from the development standards. This was seconded by Dom Barry. <br />The vote was 4 Jn fsvor of ~nd ] opposed. The Board advised the petitioners that <br />the variance was granted and proceeded to the next item on the agenda. Patr~cia <br />Duncan was present to present her request for a variance from development standards, <br />including the sub-d~vision control ordinance, set-backs on the front and rear side~ <br />mobile home special exception, Notices were found to be Jn order and the petitioners <br />proceeded to show the Board where the location of the proposed modular home, 24' X 40' <br />would be placed where an original home had been on said lot, the same representing <br />a sedond home on said lot. The Board reviewed the drawings and went over the <br />respective set-backs, size of home, the drive, lncation of the past home, and type <br /> <br /> <br />