Laserfiche WebLink
Chairman Walters then entertained a motion from board <br /> <br />member Ray House. Mz. House expressed his opinion that business <br />operation should not be within residential areas, however, since <br />there were no objections he would make a motion that the Board <br />make the following findings, and restrictions, and grant the <br />variance as requested: <br /> <br /> A. FINDINGS: <br /> <br /> 1. That there are exceptional and extraoridinary <br /> circumstances or conditions applicable to the <br /> property of the petitioners and to the intended <br /> use that does not apply generally to the other <br /> property or class of use in the same vicinity <br /> and in the district in which it is located. <br /> <br /> 2. That the variance is necessary for the preservation <br /> and enjoyment of a substantial property right <br /> possessed by other property in the same vicinity <br /> and district which would be denied to the property <br /> in question if such variance was not granted. <br /> <br /> 3. That the granting of such variance will not be materially <br /> detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the <br /> property or improvements in the vicinity and district <br /> in which the subject property is located. <br /> <br /> 4. The granting of such variance will not alter the land <br /> use characteristics of the vicinity and the district <br /> in which such property is located or diminish the <br /> marketable value of adjacent land and the improvements <br /> or cause or add to additional traffic congestion to the <br /> public streets in the area where the improvements are <br /> <br /> <br />