Laserfiche WebLink
MOORESVILLE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS <br />MINUTES <br /> THURSDAY, APRIL 12, 2001 <br /> <br />The Mooresville Board of Zoning Appeals met on Thursday, Apdl 12, 2001, <br />at 7:00 P.M. at the Mooresville Town Hall. <br /> <br />Members present were: Don Barry, President, Jeff Justice, and Jonathan <br />Swisher. Alan Kramer and Mike Young were absent. Tim Currens, Town <br />Attorney, was present. <br /> <br />Commissioner Jeff Justice, second by Commissioner Jonathan Swisher, <br />made a motion to approve the minutes of March 8, 2001. Motion carded 3- <br />0. <br /> <br />Next was a Variance at 10984 Rooker Road by Debbie Sweet to have a <br />one-operator beauty shop in her home. She stated there would need to be <br />sign erected because her home is approximately 800 feet off the road. The <br />board restricted the size of the sign to be only 2 feet by 4 feet and meet the <br />ordinance setback requirements. <br /> <br />Motion to approve a variance at 10984 Rooker Road for a one operator <br />beauty shop with a sign restriction that the sign will be no larger than 2 feet <br />by 4 feet and meet the ordinance setback requirement, was made by <br />Commissioner Jeff Justice, second by Commissioner Jonathan Swisher. <br />Motion carded 3-0. <br /> <br />Next Ross Hotloway of Holloway and Associates, representing the Amedcan <br />Legion, present a petition for a variance for the property located at the <br />northwest corner of East Main Street and Indianapolis Road. They were <br />requesting a variance for two purposes. The first purpose is to construct a <br />building across lot lines. The building proposed is 88 feet in length with a <br />patio, which could cross over one of the lot lines. Crossing over the <br />sidelines of lot 5 and/or the far east sideline of lot 6 will cause a setback <br />problem for the side yard. Second purpose for a variance is for the front <br />setback. With the depth of the property and being zoned B-3, the setback <br />requirement of 40 feet would not make for the best use of the property. <br />They are requesting a zero setback so when they start to design the <br />building they can use the property to the best advantage for parking and <br />landscaping. They pointed out the most of the surrounding businesses <br />have a zero front setback. <br /> <br /> <br />