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