Laserfiche WebLink
that time he stated that there were no businesses in the area. He stated that <br />Mr. Sterrett should have been aware that he could not just open a business in <br />a residential area. He likewise brought up the issue of the restrictive covenants. <br /> <br /> Mr. Sterrettin response brought out the fact that there was a beauty shop <br />in the area. There next was some discussion regarding the traffic problems and <br />number of times people have seen people have seen people backing out of the <br />petitioner's drive. Mr. Hamm stated that he could recall none; however, he <br />stated the potential for a problem was there. <br /> <br /> Chairman Oschman then proceeded to have the Board discuss this matter. <br />Tilford Bailey requested information as to advertising. Mr. Sterrett said that <br />he is currently not advertising for the reason that it is not worth the money he <br />spends and the sign is not up anymore. Chairman Oschman had a question as to the <br />number of customers that might stop by on an average day. Harlan Sterrett said <br />three to four customers a day. Paul Walters questioned the sign and what would <br />be reasonable. Wendell Thaler asked Mr. Sterrett if he actually needed the sign <br />since the business was more or less a hobby. Harlan Sterrett replied, "Not really." <br />Wendell Thaler asked if he advertised in the phone book to which Mr. Sterrett <br />responded no. Tilford Bailey then requested from the Board's Attorney the number <br />of parking spaces required pursuant to the ordinance and the Attorney pointed out <br />the proper section. The Board then proceeded to entertain a motion on the petition. <br />Wendell Thaler then questioned the remonstrators if they would object to the <br />granting of the variance if there was to be no sign. Mr. Enlow said he would <br />leave this up to Mr. Hamm since he was not currently residing in the home on the <br />property which adjoins the petitioner's. Mr. Hamm stated that the sign offends <br />him more than anything and would not want to be opening up the whole area to <br />business. The Board advised that this variance would be granted to the petitioner <br />only if it passed and any new rezonings would have to be brought before this <br />Board or the Plan Commission. <br /> <br />-5- <br /> <br /> <br />