Laserfiche WebLink
6, Thee petitoa of Lair°y J ©e aind R rsal €e A McCay and Doualld & Cynthia L. McCaya <br />The Staff rccommends 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 abjection <br />to the frontage variance. <br />9. The petition of Noah VarBnak, Town of New C3eWe. <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 Auto Zone. <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 for a 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. h petition of portage Manor. <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. izre 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 dfxce tionn 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 vise 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 use will be consistent with the chorocter of the district in which it is located <br />and the land uses authorized therein; <br />(4) The proposed use is compatible witb the recommendations of the (St. Joseph County and <br />City of South Bend) Comprehensive Plan. <br />15, The petition of Pedro, Veroun ca mind Lashon GurR7019L. <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 />