My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
OCT. 19, 1988
Town-of-Mooresville
>
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS ON LINE
>
MINUTES
>
Board Of Zoning Appeals
>
1980-1989
>
1988
>
OCT. 19, 1988
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/13/2005 10:11:11 AM
Creation date
4/15/2003 9:39:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BZA
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
and that this would not have a sufficient impact on any of those <br />to prohibit the proposed use. <br /> <br /> 5. That adequate measures have been taken to provide ingress <br />and egress so designated as to minimize traffic congestion on the <br />public roads and that the proposed parking lot expansion and dis- <br />tribution of traffic was sufficient. <br /> <br /> 6. That the Special Exception would be located in a district <br />where such use is permitted and all other requirements in this <br />Ordinance which are applicable to such Special Exception would be <br />met. <br /> <br /> A motion was made by Tilford Bailey to approve the proposed <br /> <br />expansion of the Special Exception and the findings of fact. This <br /> <br />was seconded by Warren Franklin and unanimously carried. <br /> The Board then proceeded to findings of fact under the <br /> <br />development standards for a variance from the setback on the side <br />setbacks from 12 feet to 3.6 feet and 12 feet to 6.6 feet on the <br />east property line, along with a front setback of 60 feet to 31.5 <br />feet. The Board found that: <br /> <br /> 1. The setbacks, as proposed, would not be injurious to the <br />public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the <br />community, due to the adjoining uses and the proximity of other <br />homes in the area. <br /> <br /> 2. That the use and value of area adjacent to the property <br /> included in the variance would not be affected in a substantially <br /> adverse manner, due to the proximity of those homes and the uses <br /> of those homes. <br /> <br />-7- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.