TC 2003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

iivw cuc vii uU~111G~J. 111G Uays Ul LIIG l:Ut'[LGI l:ilurl;ii are gone lney require a lot or Tana and if a Town doesn't provide areas for churches to grow then pretty soon your Y`' 6~'~ coxtununity is stifled and. I believe there is a spiritual side to every community that needs to be addressed. Where else in Mooresville is it allowed for a church to grow and expand. I think this is an appropriate use for this land. There is industrial, commercial, and residential blend in that area and I think the church is making provisions for access thru their property to the property to the west. He said he knew there was more to this than just rezoning, there was the value to the conununity above and beyond the taxes. Town attorney Tim Currens asked Mr. Holloway what amount and where this access was that Mr. Holloway had mentioned- Rev. Wright said he had talked to Councilman Mathis and in the northwest corner the church would allow, off the cul-de-sac, a b0 by 60 entrance. Councilman Mathis said there was a hundred acres of farmland behind the property to be rezoned and if this were to become available for industrial use, this would allow access to that property. Councilman Mathis said before the council could vote they needed to know if this was an agreed to thing. Ross Holloway asked Rev. Wright if this was a conunitment by the church. Rev. Wright answered `yes' _ Councilman Mathis asked. if this was square paved block and Rev. Wright said yes, 3600 square feet paved area. Ross Holloway said this would allow access off of the cul-de-sac. Rev. Wright said he realized there was a hundred acres behind this property and that it was important to Mooresville to have that tax property and they go along with this. Councilman Warthen said spiritually this is the highest investment, but if we were looking at a heavy industrial use that wants to locate on a property adjoining an existing church, I would be the first one to vote to deny that rezone and also be disappointed in the company that asked for it. This rezone could adversely affect the adjoining properties mainly because the same reason I would turn the other down that if in a month, year, or ten years from now a company comes in and says we are looking at this hundred acres and we are industrial and will operate 24 hours seven days a week and we are going to have large trucks running in and out of there and we want to operate next to an existing church and make noise, that kind of taints any decision a future council or this council (depending on the time frame) would make on this. You are moving into an industrial park, the industrial park would not be moving in around you. Rev. Wright said he understood what Councilman Warthen was saying and he had two answers for him. One answer was in the Town of Mooresville Comprehensive Plan there was no provision made for where churches could go to build, so anyplace we go we arc going to have this issue. Number two, as I drive up Highway b7, Ameriplex is across the street from Southwest Church of God, it is mixed to the north, industrial, church, residence, commercial, so apparently this is the way the world is going. Councilman Warthen said in the past councils, in an ideal world, you would want industrial to be buffered by B-3, then B-2, B-1, then residential and obviously there isn't going to be anymore land and we will not have the ability to pick and choose where we want to go to. The point is, five years, ten years, from. now if this room is filled with remonstrators, to an industrial. use going in right next door to you, it's going to be disheartening for councils or boards that have to look at that and I would hope you would look at this with compassion. REV. Wright said he would hope they would not build on the fence line, like we are not going to do. I would hope there would be grass and pavement between. We have looked and looked and this was the best property he could find. Councilman Mathis said his perspective on this is if the church locates there they know they are going to deal with industrial issues. He said he and Rev. Wright had talked about this and opposite of Councilman Warthen, if pan industry wants to buy that hundred acres, I anl going to vote for that rezone because I'm going to know that you realize where you are at. You have to understand that, you are going to take those risks, kind of like moving in next to a pig farmer, you're going to get the smell, likewise you are going to get the same thing here. If you look at this as a business decision, is it a good one, probably not. But churches in our community are an aid not a deficit. Councilman Mathis asked Tim Currens if the property sold, could there be a stipultion the property would go back to industrial use. Attorney Currens said you could put covenants that go with the rezone and that was why he asked about the easement as this was new to him. Should phrase to allowable uses by a church in a B-1 DistricC. As far as having the property revert back rezone this goes to the owners and subsequent owners and I don't think you can limit it where there is revert back to another zoning where there is a transfer of owner, so any restrictions you put on should be that entity and any subsequent owner, so if anyone other than a church purchased, it would be purchased subject to the restriction of church or church related uses, so that would certainly limit who could buy it. Councilman Warthen asked. if it could be limited to the name of the church and Attorney Currens said he did not believe so. The zoning clearly goes with the property. Rev. Wright said he would also state the church would not come to the Town and. Cxght them if someone did move in on the property behind them. Ross Holloway said Lo put in the record the church will not remonstrate against rezoning of the property to the west. A motion was made by Councilman Mathis, second by Councilman Clerk to approve the rezone from B-3 to B-l for a church and church related uses for this property and no remonstrance to the rezoning of the property to the west. Motion passed 3-2. Councilman Warthen and Councilman Bryant opposed.