Laserfiche WebLink
Council Proceedings <br />City of Now Brighton <br />Sept 11, 1974 <br />5. The question central to the alleged hardship is <br />the required closing of the southwest driveway. <br />A condition recommended by the professional planner. <br />6. This condition for less than four driveways is <br />not presently unique to this property. Zoning <br />ordinance amendments made subsequent to consideration <br />of VN-126 require no more than two driveways on the <br />subject property. <br />7. The major hardship pertaining to this request is, <br />in view of the evidence presented, the possible <br />default in lease agreement of the major tenant <br />of the property. <br />In view of these facts, I have reached the following <br />conclusions: <br />1. The recent zoning revisions regarding the number, <br />of allowable driveways constitutes a policy state- <br />ment by this council that four driveways on the <br />subject property would constitute a public hazard <br />under the best of conditions with proper setback, etc. <br />2. Lacking contrary data, the original variance <br />conditions are necessary for the protection of the public <br />health, safety and welfare, and warrants for <br />reconsideration of these conditions have not been <br />demonstrated. <br />3. It is my best judgment that the granting of a variance, or <br />the granting of reconsideration of variance conditions <br />previously imposed, for reasons that pertain solely to <br />the lease agreements, with other conditions of physical <br />hardship not demonstrated, would violate the constitutional <br />provision of equi-protection of the law, <br />For these reasons I will vote to deny the request. <br />Roll call vote on original motion: <br />Anderson - Aye Fisher - Naye <br />Bagon - Aye Bromander - Aye <br />Rebelein - Aye <br />Motion carried <br />5