Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />or location, or recognizing that the granting of ten variances threatens the integrity of the Zoning <br />Ordinance). <br />C. That the Variances are deemed consistent with the General Plan <br />(without conducting an environmental analysis of aesthetic or other impacts of the Variances). <br />d. That the Variances are compatible with their environment. <br />2. The Variance did not contain conditions necessary to insure that they <br />would not amount to a special grant of privilege. <br />3. The findings supporting the Variances do not adequately address the fact that <br />the properties for which the Variances were granted are not under common ownership; <br />4. The Variances are improper because the applicant did not have a property <br />interest in the properties for which the Variances were granted. <br />D. Because the Planning Commission's actions of April 9, 1991 did not adequately <br />consider the special circumstances or special privileges applicable to the Variances and address <br />the other issues set forth herein, the Variances are illegal and are being exercised in violation of <br />local and State law. <br />E. The exercise of the Variances would not be in conformance with State law and <br />local law and amounts to a nuisance. <br />Section 2. Revocation of Variance. Based on the facts set forth herein and such <br />other facts otherwise known to the City Council, the City Council hereby revokes the Variances <br />granted on April 9, 1991 to Adams Advertising. <br />�c� <br />