Laserfiche WebLink
on the surrounding neighborhood, which satisfies the requirements for granting the special <br /> exception. When you, as a Council, are here making the decision, you act as a Zoning Board. <br /> You have to make sure the special exceptions satisfy the three (3)main criteria. Primarily that <br /> there be no adverse impact on surrounding properties,that it is consistent with the other uses and <br /> is consistent with the comprehensive plan. We think this is a way of resolving and addressing all <br /> of the issues. <br /> Committeemember Ferlic asked, The language for the written commitment `no music shall be <br /> played outside,' does that include within the garage or within the bar playing out onto the deck? <br /> Mr. Masters replied,No music will play on the outside or anywhere outside of the building <br /> premise.No music outside,period. We were asked that question at the ABZA meeting too. They <br /> won't be propping open the doors or windows, either. They may have music inside but they <br /> won't have the door propped open. <br /> Committee Chair Davis asked, Is there a standard decibel meter that everyone is using? <br /> Mr. Masters replied, My client calibrated his with the South Bend Police so they both read the <br /> same. <br /> Mr. Masters also notified the Council of his willingness to amend the written commitments if <br /> need be. <br /> Committee Chair Davis asked if there was anyone to represent the City Legal Department. <br /> Elliot Anderson, City Legal Department with offices on the 12th floor of the County-City <br /> Building, stated, As far as it relates to the lawsuit,I don't have much more information. With <br /> regard to the request for the special exception use, I view that as a separate issue from the <br /> lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed to enjoin the owner of the property from using the outdoor area of <br /> the bar solely for that purpose. It was alleged to be an unlawful expansion of a legal non- <br /> conforming use. So there is currently a preliminary injunction in place but that is really the <br /> extent of the lawsuit. <br /> Committee Chair Davis asked, What is the normal practice of the City? Is that a typical action <br /> the City would normally take? <br /> Mr. Anderson replied, Ordinarily there are a few things that happen before we get there and in <br /> this case there were a number of citations that were issued relating to the unlawful expansion of <br /> the non-conforming use. The owner was generally unresponsive,there was the remediation <br /> agreement that was entered into but it was flawed in a way. It read as if it was authorizing the use <br /> of the outdoor area when there was no concession on the City's behalf that it could be used. The <br /> chronic remediation agreement has language in it that could be interpreted to suggest the City <br /> was condoning outdoor use of that property, which it was not. As Mr. Masters pointed out, <br /> subsequently there was injunction filed not long after the remediation agreement was entered but <br /> that was because the City remained steadfast in its resolve that the outdoor area could not be <br /> used, which is why the lawsuit was then filed. <br /> 4 <br />