My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
DECEMBER 12, 2002
Town-of-Mooresville
>
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS ON LINE
>
MINUTES
>
Plan Commission
>
2000-2009
>
2002
>
DECEMBER 12, 2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/13/2005 10:13:44 AM
Creation date
5/20/2005 11:50:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Plan Commission
NAME
DECEMBER 12, 2002
Plan Commission - Type
Minutes
DATE
2002-12-12
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
<br />Next on the agenda was a letter addressing an illegal business in a residential area on the <br />sound end of Interurban Lane off Crosby Road. Mr. Currens said he would normally <br />send a letter, but since there was no address he would turn it over to Mr. Beikman to <br />investigate. Mr. McGuire said that he and Mr. Pygman went out to see what was going <br />on and there is a slaughtering business going on, with a sign on Crosby Road advertising <br />the business. Mr. Williarnson said it was not a slaughtering business, there is no animals <br />killed on sight, but they do process deer there. The area is zoned agriculture. Mr. <br />McGuire asked if processing deer if illegal in agriculture area. Mr. Currens said that was <br />why he was asking Mr. Beikman to check on what was happening and how it would fall <br />within our ordinance as an agriculture use. <br /> <br />Mr. Darin Carr, 10830 Interurban Lane, is the person who does the deer processing gave <br />a letter to the Board and Mr. Beikman stating his position. Mr. Currens said this not <br />about who agrees with it or not, but if the zoning is proper. <br /> <br />Next on the agenda was Herbert and Linda Asher, 103 W. High Street, requesting a <br />rezone from R-I to R-3 to convert garage into two apartments. Mr. Archer stated that <br />there was an apartment over the garage when they bought the property. Their daughter <br />lives in that apartment that has been there about eight or nine years and they would like to <br />convert the bottom of the garage into an apartment. Mr. Williarnson said that the <br />apartment as been there at least fifteen years. Mr. Currens asked if what they were asking <br />was for two units in the garage and the existing house and they said that was correct. <br />Each unit would have two bedrooms and their house has four bedrooms. Mr. Currens <br />asked if they had a building permit on the current construction that was being done and <br />Mrs. Archer said they only had an electrical permit. Mr. Williamson said there was a <br />problem with the parking and Mrs. Archer said they park in the driveway. She said there <br />was parking on the street also. Mr. Young asked what was the size of the lot and Mrs. <br />Archer said she did not know the lot size. They asked if there was room for off street <br />parking, because there could be as many as four vehicles in the area and Mr. Archer said <br />there was room behind the garage of parking. Mr. Erhhart said the zoning does not <br />provide for parking on the street and Mrs. Archer said there was room the parking behind <br />the garage, all they would need was to have the area graveled. Mr. Crouch said he felt it <br />would help the Board members if they had a drawing showing lot size, garage size, house <br />size, parking area and what his proposals are. Mr. Archer was asked if the driveway was <br />large enough to get their car and the cars for the apartment. Mr. Archer said it was as <br />long no one was parked in the driveway. Mr. Williamson stated he did not feel there was <br />ample space for parking of other vehicles back there. Mr. Williamson said back where <br />the shed was would have to be filled in to allow for parking. Mr. Currens said he was <br />looking at the definition for R-3 and he is not sure this in an R-3. R-3 is generally one <br />structure with three or more units in it. This is one structure with two unites in the back <br />and a single family dwelling on the front of the property. He said a zoning ordinance <br />arnendments means that property no matter what's on it is now going to be R-3 from this <br />point on and anyone could later could tear down the existing structures and build an <br />apartment of three or more units if they wanted to. Mr. Currens said that maybe a request <br />for a Variance instead of a rezone might be a better choice for the Archer's to make. Mr. <br />Williarnson stated he did not feel this was the best use for this property and that Mr. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.