Text · page 9 of 9
ZBA Mtg. #06 Regular Mtg. #06 July 21, 2026 Page 9 The Chair then asked if the Secretary had received any additional communication either for, or against, granting the Variance. The Secretary stated that no additional communication had been received. Ms. Bowers stated that before it was rezoned, it was zoned Industrial. A construction, manufacturing or concrete facility could have been located there, traffic could be even worse. Mr. Mateer stated that this was not an easy decision, and many factors must be weighed. It if was two (2) years ago, a Use Variance would not have been necessary. Any use of the property would be disturbing to the neighbors. At the same time, the owner has the legal right to develop the property. The Chair closed the Board discussion. Ms. Nawrocki added that the site had been zoned Industrial for at least 15-20 years prior to being rezoned. Ms. Bowers made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Mateer, to APPROVE THE USE VARIANCE, based on the following: 1. Per Section 144-63 (E) (1) All public notices have been filed. 2. Strict application of the regulations will deprive the applicant of a reasonable return on the property, and the lack of return is substantial as demonstrated by competent financial evidence. 3. The hardship is unique and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood. 4. The variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. 5. The alleged hardship was not self-created. THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING: METZ AYE BOWERS AYE MATEER AYE SZALKOWSKI AYE The MOTION was UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. The meeting was adjourned at 8:33 P.M. DATED: 08/04/2026 Respectfully submitted, APPROVED: 08/18/2026 Kristin B. Mahoney, Recording Secretary Mr. Robert Metz, Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals