My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SEPT. 19, 1984
Town-of-Mooresville
>
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS ON LINE
>
MINUTES
>
Board Of Zoning Appeals
>
1980-1989
>
1984
>
SEPT. 19, 1984
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/13/2005 10:11:19 AM
Creation date
4/15/2003 9:39:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BZA
BZA - Type
Minutes
DATE
1984-09-19
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
Daryl Ewing of 15 Carol Lane, then had a question regarding the water <br />which would take the place of the gravel and water removed from the mining <br />operation. Dr. Powell then explained that this water would come from under- <br />water streams, which flow through the area. With that the petitioners rested. <br /> <br /> The remonstrators then called Dr. Vij ay Satoskar with Sam Korn, one of <br />the attorneys for the remonstrators, questioning Dr. Satoskar. Attorney Korn <br />first qualified Dr. Satoskaras an expert in the area of geology and as a <br />hydrologist. Dr. Satoskar then stated that this was an issue of preservation <br />of the environment and pointed out that mnymining operation within hearing <br />distance of the residential area could not be a good neighbor pointing out that <br />there is a certain nuisance value to this. He further stated that the burden <br />of proof here was upon the mining operation to show it would not be a nuisance, <br />not the neighborhood. Attorney Lawson then objected to the line of questioning, <br />saying that it was remote from the purposes originally designated for the <br />additional hearing, that being property values and the water problem. Chairman <br />Oschman then cautioned the remonstrators to proceed but within the foundation <br />laid at the start of the meeting as to property values and the effect on the <br />water problem of the residents of Wellwood Subdivision and adjacent areas. Dr. <br />Satoskar then examined petitioners' Exhibit "B", and stated that the model was a <br />generalization. In particular, h~e pointed out that not all wells were plotted <br />on the same and that two well records from 1972, which were contained near the <br />proposed mining area on the Gaddis property, showed that the static level of the <br />water varied within this area and for that reason the model was an oversimplifi- <br />cation. He then pointed out that the top soil covering the gravel acts as a <br />protective blanke~ from polutants. That as certain polutants drain down through <br />the sevem to eight feet of topsoil, some contaminants are neutralized, making the <br /> <br />-8- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.