10-12-09 Common Council Meeting Agenda & Packet

Home Browse Search

6. 'l,h¢ p¢tit®n of Laru-g~ ~o¢ and ]Rosalie A 1D'IicCay and l~onafld ~ Cynthia L. McCay. The Staff recommends approval of all variances. This configuration seems to preserve the largest amount of agricultural land. Due to the location of the existing houses, the Staff has no objection to the frontage variance. 9. Th¢ petition off l~loah Varnaflc, Town of ~Iew Carlisl¢. The purpose of setbacks is to insure that structures do not negatively impact the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties. In this case, the adjacent property is a public right-of--way, with the maintenance of that right-of--way the responsibility of the Town. Having a structure on the property line will require extra diligence, and exposed liability, on the part. of the Town at the time that the alley is re-graded or perhaps eventually paved, to insure that no damage occurs to the structure. 10. The p¢tntion of into done. The Staff recommends denial of the variance. This property in within INDOT's construction area for the State Road 23 road project. Since the entire site is being redesigned, no hardship exists. It is possible to design the site and maintain the 15' front yard setback. Only 26 parking spaces are required (3.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of retail space), yet 46 are provided; more than double. If the 10 spaces within the front setback were eliminated, a variance would not be needed and the number of parking spaces required would have been met and exceeded. The maneuvering aisle width required is 24'; yet is being shown as 30'. An additional 6' would allow fora 11'6" front yard. The building could be moved the additional 3'6" to the north and a variance would not be needed. 12. The petition of Portage Manor. The Staff recommends denial of the variance. The placement of the new sign is clearly visible and the recently completed new intersection will help to identify the entrance. While visiting the site there were no perceived obstructions to viewing an appropriately sized sign. The proposed sign will be 225% taller and 335% larger then allowed. When the new sign ordinance was passed in 2004, the intent was to: "eliminate excessive and confusing sign displays,- maintain and improve the appearance of the City of South Bend as an attractive place in which to live and conduct business; and safeguard and enhance property values by minimizing the possible adverse effects of signs on nearby public and private property ". Special (Exception) Use: A special use may only be granted upon making a written determination and adopting appropriate Findings of Fact, based upon the evidence presented at a public hearing. (1) The proposed use will not be injurious to the public health, safety, comfort, community moral standards, convenience or general welfare; (2) The proposed use will not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or property values therein; (3) The proposed use will be consistent with the character of the district in which it is located and the land uses authorized therein; (4) The proposed use is compatible with the recommendations of the (St. Joseph County and City of South Bend) Comprehensive Plan. 15. The petition of Pedro, Veronica and Lashon Gurrola. The Staff recommends that the Special Exception Use be sent to the Common Council with a favorable recommendation subject to the use as defined in this petition with regards to the number of residents, the type of residents, and the type of services provided. The description of the proposed use appears to meet the standards for granting a Special Exception.