My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
JAN. 20, 1988
Town-of-Mooresville
>
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS ON LINE
>
MINUTES
>
Board Of Zoning Appeals
>
1980-1989
>
1988
>
JAN. 20, 1988
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/13/2005 10:11:17 AM
Creation date
4/15/2003 9:39:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BZA
BZA - Type
Minutes
DATE
1988-01-20
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
FINDINGS OF FACT <br /> <br /> RE: David and Judith Chandler <br /> 45 East High Street <br /> <br /> This matter came before the Mooresville Board of Zoning Appeals <br />on January 20, 1988, at the regularly scheduled meeting date and <br />time. The petition requested a variance from the use standards <br />to place a beauty shop. <br /> <br /> The Mooresville Board of Zoning Appeals having heard evidence <br /> <br />on the above captioned petition now makes the following findings <br /> <br />of fact pursuant to I.C. 36-7-4-9-18.5: <br /> <br /> (1) The approval would not be injurious to the public health, <br />safety, morals and general welfare of the community in that it <br />was compatible with other uses in the area. <br /> <br /> (2) That the use and value of the area adjacent to the property <br />included in the variance would not be affected in a substantially <br />adverse manner due to the existing history of this type of use in <br />the past fifteen (15) years and other business uses in the area. <br /> <br /> (3) That the need from the variance arises from some condition <br />peculiar to the property involved in that High Street is a <br />combination of residential and business uses. <br /> <br /> (4) That the strict application of the terms of the zoning <br />ordinance would constitute an unnecessary hardship if applied to the <br />property for which the variance is sought due to the fact that the <br />property has historically been used for this type of business and <br />is adjoining another business use which has a lot of traffic. <br /> <br /> (5) That the approval does not interfere substantially with <br />the comprehensive plan in that High Street has several business <br />uses already. <br /> <br /> The variance of use was granted with the following restrictions: <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.