Laserfiche WebLink
her husband had brought home, not the business. <br /> <br /> Della Gunnell, also of 211 Bishop Avenue was the next remonstrator to <br />speak. She stated that the Hardys were nice neighbors but she did not want the <br />business use next door. She went on to state that in the 1/2 block area there <br />were 4 driveways and many of the people in the area parked on the street. She <br />felt that additional traffic would be a problem. She also pointed out that when <br />the Mooresville Block Company was granted a variance one of the restrictions <br />was to shut the back side of their property off from traffic running through to <br />Bishop Street from the block company. <br /> <br /> The next party to speak was Mr. Noel, of 205 Bridge Street. Mr. Noel <br /> stated that his house was less than 24 feet from the fence and that the odor <br /> from the business bothered them in their house. He stated that their air <br /> conditioner pulled the smell in during warm weather and also complained of noise. <br /> The next party to speak was Margaret Kenworthy of 182 Taylor Street. Mrs. <br /> Kenworthy stated that the business doesn't bother her as long as it is kept in <br /> the house. There is another building behind the petitioner's house which could <br /> be used for the business and she would object to this. At this point Chairman <br /> Oschman requested from the petitioner the number of dogs which might be present <br /> at one time. The response to this was a maximum of three and that she does only <br /> small breeds. In addition the petitioner advised that she had one dog of her own. <br /> She also explained that she advertised seven days a week and evening appointments. <br /> However, she had only had two evening appointments since January. The Board then <br /> proceeded to a discussion of the standards for a use variance. Tilford Bailey <br /> stated that he felt the use and value of the areas adjacent to the property <br /> included in the variance might be affected in an adverse manner along with no <br /> showing of a unnecessary hardship and lastly, that this does not fit into the <br /> comprehensive plan. Steve Oschman stated that parking seemed to be a problem <br /> with the dead end street and Wendell Thaler stated that item one, that approval <br /> <br />-2- <br /> <br /> <br />