Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE MOORESVILLE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS <br /> <br /> The Mooresville Board of Zoning Appeals met at the Mooresville Town <br />Hall on March 18, 1987 at 7:00 p.m. Present were Board Members Steve Oschman, <br />Wendell Thaler, Tilford Bailey, Don Barry and Warren Franklin. The Board's <br />Attorney Timothy C. Currens was also present. The meeting was called to order <br /> <br />by Chairman Steve Oschman who determined that there was a quorum present. The <br /> <br />minutes and findings of fact of the prior meeting were approved. <br /> The first item to come upon the agenda under old business was the <br /> <br />application of Helen Manning which had been continued from the previous meeting. <br />This variance was regarding the real property at 102 Sweetwood Drive for the <br />purpose of manufacturing wood picture frames and selling the same. Mr. Stovall <br />stated that Jerry Mayfield, one of the remonstrators, was not present and would <br />not be present due to illness but had requested a continuance. He also stated <br />that the other remonstrators present were Keith Hill and Mitzie Forbes with the <br />balance of the parties present regarding this issue being in favor of the same. <br />Mr. Stovall then tendered an agreement and read the same to the property owners. <br />The Board's Attorney advised them that this agreement was between the property <br />owners and certainly only between those owners. The Board would have to make <br />its decision based upon the requirements of Indiana Code for a variance from the <br />use of the ordinance. Mr. Stovall then stated why he felt the variance should <br />be granted, in particular, stating the other similiar uses in the area and the <br />hardship being related to the nature of business uses on Indianapolis Road which <br />this property borders. He also stated that due to this and the nature of the <br />business being off of Indianapolis Road that it would not change the use of <br />the surrounding area. <br /> <br /> Keith Hill then spoke and stated that he had no real objection to the <br />granting of the variance as stated with the restrictions agreed to by the <br />surrounding property owners. The Board then held a discussion and proceeded to <br />look at the findings of fact. In particular, the Board found that the business <br /> <br /> <br />