HomeMy WebLinkAboutC.054.93010_0150 (2)u. Indoor theater.
v. Tire recapping.
w. Radio, cellular or TV towers.
r. Outdoor animal boarding kennels.
Y. Fire stations, rescue squad headquarters, and police stations.
4. Thefollowing uses would he allowed but conditioned in that portion oftheproperty which
is located within a 400 foot strip west of the common boundary line of the subject properly and the
Oakbrook Subdivision and of the subject property and the lots located on Silverlining Lane:
a. Mini -warehouses would not be permitted but all other forms of warehouses would he
permitted.
b. Welding shops would be permitted but conditioned that there is no outside welding.
c. Restaurants would be permitted but conditioned not to be open past 8:00 p.m.
d. Contractors 'offices would be permitted conditioned that there be no storage or dispatch
of heavy equipment such as grading, utility or paving equipment.
e. Machinery repair would be permitted conditioned that there be no outside machinery
repair.
f Tin and sheet metal shops would be permitted conditioned that there be no outside work
dome on tin or sheet metal.
5. Race teams would be allowed in the 400 foot buffer. However, no engine shops with
dvnamonteterswould beallowed inthe 400-footbuffer. No outdoor engine testing would be allowed
in the 400 foot buffer.
6. Also in the 400 foot buffer, all lighting behind facilities would be diffused lighting which
would be directed towards the back of the facilities and away from the existing residential uses.
7. There will be a fifty foot wide natural buffer along the common boundary line of the
subject property and the Oakbrook Subdivision and of the subject property and the lots located on
Silverlining Lane.
8. These buffers would be qualified in all the property described as 4658-04-2275 and for
a distance of 100 feet to the south of this tract. The qualification is that regardless of any buffer
language, the construction of a roadway to serve the remainder of the property would be permitted
in this space regardless and in spite of arty buffer language.
9. Theproperty would, ofcourse, be subject to the screening requirements of Section 12.1
of the ordinance as it may apply. This screening would be clone with leyland cypress or similar
vegetation.
10. The property, prior to development, would contain private restrictions which would
reflect the above -stated conditions.
Greg Bryan (opponent of the rezoning) said he owned 7.35 acres adjacent to the property.
He said the property had a log home that was built in 1795. Bryan said he used his property as a
hone -breeding facility. He complained that his family's quiet home life would be disrupted by the
"unregulated industrialization" that would soon occur.
Cliff I Iomeslev, attorney representing the property owners and applicants said the land use
plan needed to be followed. He shared aerial photographs and noted how the property "lays next
to the Talbert Business Park and other intensely developed properties near Hwy. 150." Homesley
said there was no residential development between the property and the interstate on the Cornelius
Road side. He said there was a subdivision (Oakbrook) near the Talbert Business Park, but the
property owners acquired title to their lots in 1997 or later.
Homesley mentioned the Iredell County Land Development Plan approved in 1997, and said
it designated the property node for industrial use. He said the plan also designated a composite
thoroughfare plan indicating that, ultimately, an interchange and a road extending from Cornelius
Road to Mazeppa Road/Mazeppa Road industrial Park and to the interstate would occur. He said
the applicant had reviewed the plan, prior to constructing the industrial park, to determine areas
eligible for development. Homesley said the residential growth in the southern area had increased
in the last few years. He said it was evident that land for industrial development would be harder
to find in the future due to opposition from property owners in nearby subdivisions.