Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Page 4 of 7 <br />Zoning Board of Adjustment <br />Minutes of 9/'13/93 <br /> <br />· The applicant has not proven that the Building Official's assessment is <br />incorrect. <br /> <br />· There is not a reasonable difference of ordinance interpretation <br />involved. <br /> <br />· Zoning Ordinance regulations are not unreasonable in regards to this <br />matter. <br /> <br />· Granting the appeal would afford a special privilege to this property. <br /> <br />· Granting the appeal would not be in the best interest of the Zoning <br />Ordinance or the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br />Based on these facts and considerations, staff recommends denial of Appeal <br />of the Enforcement Officer's Determination #A93-001. <br /> <br />Mr. Grant asked Mr. Lewis how he determined the period in time the mobile <br />home was removed from the lot. Mr. Lewis said he had asked Mrs. Hicks if <br />she could provide a date but she could not. Utility records for water service <br />and H.L.& P. 's electrical records were reviewed. The address had been <br />removed from H.L.& Po's service log and there is no longer a record. Water <br />service was discontinued in February. <br /> <br />A. PROPONENTS <br /> <br />Mr. Grant swore in all of the proponents simultaneously. <br /> <br />George A Boyer of 3225 Hillsdale stated he had no objection <br />to having a mobile home on the lot. He noted that, if allowed, <br />the resident should be responsible for keeping the area looking <br />nice and suggested that all mobile home properties be required <br />to have a storage building to keep mower, bicycles, toys, etc. <br />out of view. <br />