Laserfiche WebLink
<br />16.That the variance requested is not the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship in <br />regard to the side yard setback requirement. <br /> <br /> <br />17.That if granted, the variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent <br />property. <br /> <br /> <br />18.That if granted, the variance will not have the effect of allowing a use that is prohibited in the <br />applicable zoning district. <br /> <br /> <br />19.That if granted, the variance will not impair established property values within the <br />neighborhood. <br /> <br /> <br />20.That the increased height will not be compatible with the principal building on the same <br />parcel. <br /> <br /> <br />21.That the increased height will not be compatible with existing development in the immediate <br />neighborhood. <br /> <br /> <br />22.That if granted, the variance will not unreasonably increase the congestion in the public street. <br /> <br /> <br />23.That if granted, the variance will not increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety. <br /> <br /> <br />24.That if granted, the variance will not violate the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br /> <br />25.That, if granted, the variance will not grant the Applicant any special privileges that are denied <br />to other owners of land in the same district. <br /> <br />The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Board Member <br />Brauer, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: <br /> <br /> Chairperson Nixt <br /> Board Member Johnson <br /> Board Member Brauer <br /> Board Member Shepherd <br /> Board Member Van Scoy <br /> Board Member Watson <br /> <br />and the following voted against the same: <br /> <br /> None <br /> <br />and the following abstained: <br /> <br /> None <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />and the following were absent: <br />RESOLUTION #03-09-228 <br />Page 3 of 4 <br /> <br />