My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
MOORESVILLE ZONING ORDINAN
Town-of-Mooresville
>
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS ON LINE
>
MINUTES
>
Plan Commission
>
2023
>
MOORESVILLE ZONING ORDINANCE
>
MOORESVILLE ZONING ORDINAN
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/13/2005 10:13:02 AM
Creation date
6/23/2023 8:37:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Plan Commission
NAME
MOORESVILLE ZONING ORDINANCE
Plan Commission - Type
Minutes
DATE
2001-02-27
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
114
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
III. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS <br /> <br />In applying the requirements of the chart, attention should be focused on the actual use in <br />a proposed zone if the use involves a special exception. Appropriate buffering should be <br />determined by the requirements of the zone in which the special exception use would <br />normally be located. As shown in the chart on Page 54. <br /> <br />IV. EFFECTIVENESS OF BUFFERS <br /> <br />The goal of these buffering requirements is to describe the minimum buffering required <br />to protect one use from the potentially negative effects of an intruding use. Attention <br />should be given to: <br /> <br />1. distance between incompatible uses. <br />2. Width of buffer, <br />3. Height of buffer and <br />4. Substance of material used to buffer. <br /> <br />Consideration must be given to the specific use within a particular intruding zone, as not <br />all uses in a given zone will have the same negative effects on surrounding land uses. <br />Different kinds of buffers will be required by different intruding uses to effectively buffer <br />protected uses. <br /> <br />The performance standard of the buffer should be that the protected use should be no <br />more affected by the intruding use's presence as it would be by the presence of any use <br />that would not require a buffer. <br /> <br />V. EXAMPLES OF BUFFERS <br /> <br />In general, natural buffers are preferred over man-made buffers. <br />Natural buffers include: <br /> <br />1. Topographical variations, including hills and ravines. <br />2. Vegetation, inciuding evergreen trees and dense growths of deciduous trees and <br /> hedges. <br />3. Bodies of water, including creeks, ponds and lakes. <br />4. Combinations of the above, including landscaped berms. <br />5. Judicious site planning with regard to prevailing wind directions. <br /> <br />Man-made buffers include: <br /> <br />1. Intervening non-intruding land uses. <br />2. Fences. <br />3. Pools. <br /> <br />The appropriateness and adequacy of a proposed buffer should be evaluated in terms of <br />its effectiveness at mitigating anticipated negative effects of an intruding use. If <br />equivalent effectiveness can be obtained with alternative buffering methods not listed <br />above, they should be looked upon with favor by the governing body. <br /> <br />55. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.