Laserfiche WebLink
The Board took the matter of the requested variance <br />under consideration, and subsequent to discussion, the motion was <br />made by Mr. Steve Edwards, seconded by Mrs. Nan Kollmeyer, and <br />unanimously passed, that said variance as requested be granted <br />finding that: <br /> <br />1. There are exceptional and extraordinary circum- <br />stances or conditions applicable to the property of <br />the petitioners and to the intended use that does not <br />apply generally to the other property or class of <br />use in the same vacinity and in the district in <br />which it is located. <br /> <br />2. That the variance is necessary for the pre- <br />servation and enjoyment of a substantial property <br />right possessed by other property in the same <br />vacinity and district which would be denied to <br />the property in question if such variance was <br />not granted. <br /> <br />3. That the granting of such variance will not be <br />materially detrimental to the public welfare or <br />injurious to the property or improvements in the <br />vacinity and district in which the subject pro- <br />perty is located. <br /> <br />4. The granting of such variance will not alter <br />the land use characteristics of the vacinity and <br />the district in which such property is located <br />or diminish the marketable value of adjacent <br />land and the improvements or cause or add to <br />additional traffic congestion to the public <br />streets in the area where the improvements are <br />to be made in accordance with the granting of the <br />variance. <br /> <br /> The Board then proceeded to hear evidence on Petition <br />07, 1979. The petitioner, Benjamin R. Mendenhall appeared in per- <br />son with his counsel. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mills indicated to the Board that the property was <br />being sold on contract to Jim and Geraldine Henry. That the lot <br />was an unimproved lot, and due to the dimensions of the lot, being <br />132' x 54' 4", it was impossible to fully comply with the present <br />zoning regulations for any development of the unimproved lot. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mills indicated that the intent of the contract pur- <br />chasers was to place a double on the lot facing Indianapolis Road. <br />A diagram of the layout of the proposed structure and plans were <br />viewed by the Board. <br /> <br />-2- <br /> <br /> <br />