Laserfiche WebLink
(1) The proposed use will not be injurious to the public health, safety, comfort, community moral <br />standards, convenience or general welfare; <br />(2) The proposed use will not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or property <br />values therein, <br />(3) The proposed use will be consistent with the character of the district in which it is located and <br />the land uses authorized therein; <br />(4) The proposed use is compatible with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. <br />6. The petition of School City of Mishawaka. <br />Tice staff recommends the Special Use be sent to the County Council with a favorable recommendation <br />for the temporary use for the stated period of time. <br />(1) The proposed use will not be injurious to the public health; safety, comfort, community moral <br />standards, convenience or general we f re; <br />A similar request was approved in August 2009 on Jackson Road for a period of 18 months. The staff is <br />not aware of any issues from that prior location. <br />(2) The proposed use will not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or properly <br />values therein; <br />The temporary use will disturb only one acre of a 58+ acre parcel. The size of the parcel buffers <br />neighboring properties. <br />(3 ) The proposed use will be consistent with the character of the district in which it is located <br />and the land uses authorized therein, <br />Within the 300 foot buffer, there are only 3 structures. Again, the size of the parcel maintains the <br />agricultural character and use of the balance of the property. <br />(4) The proposed use is compatible with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. <br />The St. Joseph County --• South Bend Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map makes no specific <br />recommendation for this property. <br />7. The petition of Charles S Hayes, Inc. <br />The staff recommends the Special Use be sent to the Common Council with a favorable recommendation. <br />The staff recommends denial of the variances for the lattice type tower and landscaping. <br />(1) Ae proposed use will not be injurious to the public health, safety, comfort, community moral <br />standards, convenience or general welfare, <br />The site contains an existing tower. The staff is not aware of any issues with the existing tower and the <br />presence of a second tower wwould not compromise the standards. <br />(2) The proposed use will not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or property <br />values therein, <br />Since a tower already exists, the addition of a second, shorter tower will not have an adverse affect on <br />neighboring properties. <br />(3) The proposed use will be consistent with the character of the district in which it is located <br />and the land uses authorized therein; <br />Ile property is zoned G1 General ]industrial District. However, the property to the west across Franklin <br />Street was recently rezoned to PUD for Ignition Park, an office /research and industrial complex with high <br />development standards. A lattice type tower with or without landscaping would not be consistent with <br />future development in the area. <br />(4) The proposed use is compatible with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. <br />The future land use map identifies this area as industrial. City Plan Objective UD 1.4 Encourage <br />attractive and architecturally appealing designs for buildings to create distinctive, visual reference points <br />in the community. A monopole tower and landscaping would create a more attractive site. <br />E.-Waiar& of Z=1nZ,lppMhWrsa Boffd 0f ZonbgAppecfsV011V21 February doe <br />