12-17 Rezoning 17330 SR 23 (Old National Annexation)

Home Browse Search

Staff Report 10/6/2017 Center,Rainbow Child), commit to using the LB sign standards. Like those properties, the sign should coordinate (base/trim elements)with the design of the building and canopy (the signage as shown in the architectural concepts appear consistent with these points). The parking count exceeds minimum standards and would appear to exceed what would be utilized. Consider reducing the size of the parking lot along the northern portion of the site to lessen the amount of paved surfaces and development costs. Please note that the site should be designed to accommodate a connecting driveway to the property to the east. Commitments: The petitioner is not proposing any written commitments. Criteria to be considered in reviewing rezoning requests, per IC 36-7-4-603: 1. Comprehensive Plan: Policy Plan: The Petition is not consistent with the following: City Plan, South Bend Comprehensive Plan(November, 2006) Objective LU 2.4 Provide buffer spaces between non-compatible land uses. Objective UD 1.4: Encourage attractive and architecturally appealing designs for buildings to create distinctive,visual reference points in the community. Objective UD 1.7: Promote urban design elements in new developments that are appropriately scaled and conducive to pedestrians, including pedestrian safety considerations. Objective UD 4: Improve the character of the community's entryways and corridors. Land Use Plan: The Future Land Use Map identifies this area as a regional commercial node. Plan Implementation/Other Plans: The site is not consistent with the Cleveland Road/State Route 23 Corridor Analysis. The Corridor Analysis states that additional commercial development along both Cleveland and SR 23 should be discouraged. Further, it also recommends that office-type uses be allowed to locate on some of the developable parcels of land along Cleveland Road and SR 23. 2. Current Conditions and Character: The SR 23 corridor at the Douglas Road intersection has developed primarily around office and educational uses, which blend with and/or buffer their neighboring residential uses. The sites in this area are also extensively landscaped with minimal curb cuts. 3. Most Desirable Use: The most desirable use is office and/or small institutional uses that have low traffic volumes. 4. Conservation of Property Values: Property values in the surrounding district may be negatively affected if the property is zoned for retail automotive use. 5. Responsible Development And Growth: It is not responsible development or sustainable growth practice to allow an auto oriented development in a location where pedestrian and automobile access is inadequate and/or hazardous to neighboring child care and educational facilities. APC# 2818-17 Page 3 of 5