My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
MARCH 16, 1988
Town-of-Mooresville
>
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS ON LINE
>
MINUTES
>
Board Of Zoning Appeals
>
1980-1989
>
1988
>
MARCH 16, 1988
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/13/2005 10:11:13 AM
Creation date
4/15/2003 9:39:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BZA
BZA - Type
Minutes
DATE
1988-03-16
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
vision nor be incompatible with the surrounding area. He also <br />showed that the twenty-five (25) foot set-back would leave them <br />sixty (60) feet from the center of Carlisle Street at the closest <br />angle. Lastly, he pointed out to place a four thousand (4,000) <br />square foot structure on this property they would still be able to <br />meet the parking requirements of the zoning ordinance. <br /> <br /> The Board then opened up questions to the floor and M. C. <br /> <br />Sparr, a property owner in the area, <br />usage of the property and whether or <br />Board. The Board's attorney advised <br /> <br />had a question as to the <br />not this was before the <br />that the only issue was the <br /> <br />set-back issue on both sides and that the property was already <br />zoned for business usage. <br /> <br /> Frances L. Edson of 1590 Henderson Ford Road then spoke and <br />advised that she owned property in the area and had concerns about <br />traffic. Beatrice M. Fisher of 360 West Carlisle Street also had <br />some questions regarding traffic and problems she had had with <br />getting out onto this street and, in particular, the increased <br />traffic from the post office facility. She also stated that she <br />would like the property to be in line with the post office set- <br />back. There being no further questions from the floor, the Board <br />proceeded to a discussion of the proposed variance and looked at <br />the set-back alignment with the post office noting the angle of <br />the street and where the actual set-backs would be. <br /> <br /> The Board then proceeded to findings of fact and, in <br />particular found the following: <br /> <br />~. That the approval would not be injurious to the public <br />health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community since <br /> <br />-3- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.