My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
OCTOBER 15, 1986
Town-of-Mooresville
>
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS ON LINE
>
MINUTES
>
Board Of Zoning Appeals
>
1980-1989
>
1986
>
OCTOBER 15, 1986
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
BZA - Type
Minutes
DATE
1986-10-15
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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
RE: <br /> <br /> FINDINGS OF FACT <br /> <br />Variance Request of Robert & Shirley Armstrong <br />16 E. Washington Street, Mooresville, Indiana <br /> <br /> This matter came before the Mooresville Board of Zoning Appeals on <br />Wednesday, October 15, 1986, at the regularly schedoled meeting date and ~me. <br />The petition requested a variance to allow petitioners to open a used furniture <br />and antique business in their basement. <br /> <br /> The Mooresvil] e Board of Zoning Appeals, having he~rd evidence on the <br />above captioned petition now makes the following findings of fact pursuant to <br />Indiana Code 3-7-4-918.5: <br /> <br /> 1 That the approval would not be ~njurious to the public health, <br />safety, morals and general welfare of the cormnunity since this use would create <br />a high volume of tr~ffJce. 2. That the use and value of the area adjacent to <br />the property included in the variaoce would not be affected in a substamtially <br />adverse manner doe to this being located near other business uses and in somewbat <br />of a transition location f~om business to residential. 3. That the need for the <br />variance arises from a condition peculiar to the property due to its location <br />being in a transition neigbborhood from business to residential. 4. That the <br />strict applieation of the terms of the zoning ordinance would constitute an <br />unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought <br />ip that due to its location next to the bus~ness-type of use and with the open <br />field behind it this would place some unreasonable restrictions on the use of <br />the property. 5. That the approval doe£ not interfere substantially with the <br />comprehensive plan due to its location i~ the transition area betweep business <br />and residential uses. <br /> <br />Warren Franklin, Secretary <br />Dated: <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.