My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BC 1983 09 01
CabarrusCountyDocuments
>
Public Meetings
>
Meeting Minutes
>
BOC
>
1983
>
BC 1983 09 01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/30/2002 3:12:10 PM
Creation date
11/27/2017 12:33:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting Minutes
Doc Type
Minutes
Meeting Minutes - Date
9/1/1983
Board
Board of Commissioners
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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
370 <br /> <br /> UPON MOTION of. Commissioner Lentz, seconded by Chairman Nash and <br />unanimously carried, the Board denied Petition 83-18 to rezone Map/PIN <br />5536-56-8217, 56-1019, 57-4410 from ARR to C-4 and agreed to refund the <br />rezoning fee submitted by Mr. Gaillard Mervin. <br /> <br />MOBILE HOME PARK ORDINANCE <br /> <br />(1) Amend P-5 <br /> <br />add number (21) to read: <br /> <br />When a mobile home is removed from a park that was <br />in existence prior to adoption of the "Mobile Home <br />Park Ordinance" , the replacement mobile home moved <br />in that existing space shall meet all requirements <br />of the "Mobile Home Park Ordinance". Planning Board <br />approved text amendment. <br /> <br /> Mr. David Fudge, owner of Westgate Mobile Home Estates, objected to <br />the requirement that mobile homes be underpinned for the following reasons. <br /> <br />(1) Lack of approved underpinning for mobile homes. <br />(2) Difficulty in finding persons who perform the work. <br />(3) Too expensive for many persons. <br />(4) Existence of houses in the county with no underpinning. <br />(5) No safety reasons that would require underpinning. <br /> <br /> Mr. Dick Green questioned the dislike of mobile homes by persons in the <br />county and the existence of an enforcement official for the underpinning <br />of mobile homes. <br /> Mr. Bill Powlas questioned the need for trailers moved into an existing <br />mobile home park to be required to have underpinning when the mobile home <br />park was grandfathered in under the "Mobile Home Park Ordinance." <br /> The motion by Commissioner Barnhardt to deny the proposed amendment <br />failed for lack of second. <br /> UPON MOTION of Commissioner Lentz, seconded by Commissioner Payne and <br />unanimously carried, the Board referred the proposed amendment back to the <br />Planning Board and staff for further study regarding requirements for mobile <br />homes. The Board requested clarification regarding requirements for <br />permanent residents of mobile home parks and persons in transit residing <br />in the parks. <br /> <br />(2) P-9 Section 1. Mobile Home Addition <br /> <br />No living compartment other than a "Florida Room" or other <br />such prefabricated structure specifically designed by the <br />manufacturer for mobile home extension shall be added to <br />any mobile home parked in a mobile home park which is located <br />within the jurisdiction of this ordinance. The Board of <br />Adjustment may grant a variance to allow the addition of a <br />living compartment other than that designed by a mobile home <br />manufacturer provided that plans for the addition are submitted <br />to the Board for approval and provided that such plans meet the <br />requirements of the applicable Building Code of North <br />Carolina. <br /> <br />Amend to read: No living compartment other than a "Florida Room" or other <br /> such prefabricated structure specifically designed by the <br /> manufacturer for mobile home extension shall be added to <br /> any mobile home parked in a mobile home park which is <br /> located within the jurisdiction of this ordinance. The <br /> Planning Board may grant a variance to allow the addition <br /> of a living compartment other than that designed by a <br /> mobile home manufacturer provided that plans for the <br /> addition are submitted to the Board for approval and pro- <br /> vided that such plans meet the requirements of the applicable <br /> Building Code of North Carolina. Planning Board approved <br /> text amendment, <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.