2902 HEWITT AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import

:i aoplying to Pir. Fuller's property that do not agpl}� oenerally to � other properties in the same vicinity or zone. � There is also no evidence in the record to support the Board' s second finding as required by Section 19 . 70. 060 : "Tl�at such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the appellant possessed by the owners of other properties in the same vicinity or zone. " The only discussion in the record that might rel�te to this findincs is that discussed immediately above--i.e, that vari.ances have been granted on an unlawful basis to other restaurants in the �rea befoze. � Again, such prior abuses of the Board of Adjdstments discretion ca:.n�t provide a basis for saying that Mr. Fuller is entitled to a variance for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property right o_` the appeZlant thaY. other owners in the same vicinity or zone posses�- There is no discussion in the record that relates to, or tends to support;the Board's third finding, required by Section 19. 70. 060 : "That the authorization• of the variance �aill not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injuz'ious , to property in tkie vicinity or zone in which the prbperty : is located. " The obvious public purpose of the off-street parking requir�ments, '_s to reduce congestion caused by parkinu on the streets. The only discussion in the record about the deqzee of congestion caused by parking on the streets in the vicinity of Dir. Fuller' s property is the comment made by Board member Russell: "Mr. Fuller, when we went dow�n there for the vi=itation on Friday morning, the parking lot was full then and there wasn' t much off-street parking available. I 'm just concerned about what ' s going to happen �'nen you through another however many square feet you are going to put on there. I think that we are being asked at this stage of the game with all that other cevelopment down there, and -38- , •, �