Laserfiche WebLink
3. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.) <br />A. Public Hearings <br />(1) continued... <br />No. 2120; (3) Affidavits from the Tri- County <br />News and South Bend Tribune that the <br />Notice of Public Hearing was published in <br />those newspapers on January 7, 2005; (4) A <br />statement from Mr. Schalliol that on <br />January 7, 2005, copies of the Notice of <br />Public Hearing were sent to the affected <br />property owners and registered neighborhood <br />associations; and (5) As of 10:00 a.m. this <br />morning, no written remonstrances were <br />received. <br />Ms. Greene noted that an amendment to a <br />development plan is governed by IC 36 -7 -14- <br />17.5. Under this section of the Code, the <br />Commission is not required to have evidence <br />or make findings that were required for the <br />establishment of the original development <br />area. However, the Commission is required <br />to make the following findings before <br />approving the amendment: (1) The <br />amendment is reasonable and appropriate <br />when considered in relation to the original <br />resolution, plan and purposes of I.C. 36 -7 -14, <br />and (2) The resolution or plan, with the <br />proposed amendment, conforms to the <br />comprehensive plan for the City. Resolution <br />No. 2120 includes this language and <br />accordingly, adoption by the Commission <br />would satisfy the requirements of the statute. <br />In addition, the Commission is required to <br />consider any written remonstrances that are <br />filed during the filing period specified in the <br />notice. <br />c <br />