Laserfiche WebLink
Director Boling informed the Board that Mr. Hitchcox had three alternatives: (1) remove the two <br />illegal mobile homes from the property, (2) apply for a plat approval so he can develop the <br />property more intensely, or (3) seek the variance (from the Board). He acknowledged that staff <br />had found the variance unwarranted. <br />Mr. Hitchcox again referred to his mortgage and explained the requirements of the bank. <br />He showed the receipt where he paid $4,720.69 for his impact fees, and insisted that he did not <br />receive the money back. He felt that he had accomplished all the improvements that were required <br />by Code, except paving the street. <br />Director Boling reiterated that the impact fees were paid in May of 2006, but were later <br />reversed. He agreed to meet with Mr. Hitchcox after the meeting to show him the cancelled check. <br />Attorney Collins confirmed the options that Director Boling had mentioned, and listed the <br />four requirement conditions that must apply for variance: (1) physical conditions shape <br />topography of the specific property that causes undue hardship, (2) it will not cause injury to <br />adjacent property, (3) the conditions are unique and not generally applicable to other property in <br />the adjacent area, and (4) the variance is consistent with the land development regulations. He <br />acknowledged that staff did not find that any of the conditions applied; therefore, there was no <br />basis to grant the variance. <br />Rhonda Anderson, 4275 48th Avenue, lives directly across the street from Mr. Hitchcox <br />and did not feel the variance should be allowed. She believed that granting him variance would <br />decrease her property value. <br />Wess Coleman, 4885 42nd Street, did not care if Mr. Hitchcox was granted the variance, he <br />wanted everyone to be treated fairly. <br />15 <br />February 12, 2008 <br />