Laserfiche WebLink
-3- <br /> <br /> 8. That no business sign shall be permitted and there shall be no <br />retail sales. <br /> <br /> A motion was then made by Wendell Thaler to approve the variance <br /> <br />based upon the findings of fact presented and the restrictions set out above. <br />This was seconded by Tilford Bailey and the vote was 4 in favor and i opposed. <br /> <br /> The next item to come before the Board was the special exception <br />request of Hugh G. Allen. The Board's Attorney advised that the notices were <br />in order and the Mooresville Plan Commission had made a recommendation to <br /> <br /> the Board of Zoning Appeals showing a unanimous finding at their meeting that <br />the special exception as requested would not adversely affect the Master Land <br />Use Plan. Mr. Allen was present in person and by counsel, David Lawson, from <br />the law firm of Howard & Lawson in Danville, Indiana. Mr. Lawson explained <br />that the request was two-fold, one for the special exception request and <br />secondly, for a variance to allow two buildings on one parcel of ground. Mr. <br />Lawson further explained the other compatible uses in the area including <br />the Wilcher Ford Sales area, Bob Taylor Chevrolet, Wake-Up, Automotive Armature <br />and the NAPA operation. He introduced two exhibits, one a plat showing a house <br />which was partially on the lot #5 and #6 and also a second drawing showing <br />where the additional building would be placed. He went on to explain that this <br />use was a use allowed in the local business classification by special exception. <br />There were no remonstrators present so the Board proceeded to findings under the <br />special exception procedure of its ordinance. After a discussion of the criteria <br />numbered 1 through 6 in the ordinance the Board made the following findings: <br /> <br /> 1. That the establishment, maintenance, or operation of the <br /> <br />special exception would not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, <br />safety, morals or general welfare in any manner and found that it was consistent <br />with other uses in the area. <br /> <br /> 2. That the special exception would not be injurious to the use and <br /> enjoyment of other properties in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already <br /> <br /> <br />