Laserfiche WebLink
MIMI In I '., ,- VTFIC@ <br />JUL 152014 <br />- pJCi'i-ia4 <br />CITY CLERK, SOUTH SEND, IN <br />STAFF RECOMMENDATION <br />A- 3� �� V3 '3 /3 ' i ,Jo . <br />33 -('y <br />LARRY MAGLIOZZI: I would like to clarify the Staff s position and probably clarify the chain of <br />events that have happened. On May 5, the developer came in and talked to the Staff about two to three <br />hours before they filed their petition. It was a rather hurried meeting, so they could prepare their <br />paperwork. Both Christa and 1 have a clear memory that we indicated to the developers that we were <br />concerned about the range of uses, specifically along Ireland Road. The more commercial uses should be <br />relegated to Area A on the map, where generally west of where their entrance is going to be. Then Area <br />B should be reserved and used for non - commercial non -auto orientated uses. We recognize some of those <br />uses may have drive- in's hence the commitment that they have already made to limit drive -in windows at <br />that location. We had intensive discussions then about Area E. I remember them indicating that Area E <br />was probably very suitable for some kind of a group facility, apartments, residential high density, or <br />maybe offices, and Areas C and D were, at least at the meeting on the 5`h, not discussed much because we <br />really didn't know what the status of the Creek was. On the 19", they came in again. Again we had a <br />conversation with them. We reiterated our position, specifically about Area A and B. The same position <br />that I just mentioned. Again, that Area E would be suitable for offices, high density residential nursing <br />home, whatever, and that Areas C and D would probably be offices. We really didn't talk about retail in <br />Area C and D, so we never got to that point. Our comments to them via e-mail and these two meetings <br />indicated our clear position of what we wanted. We thought they were working towards that. When we <br />got this site plan, we noticed that they essentially opened up all the areas to all the uses, which was totally <br />contrary to what our recommendation would be to them. Again, we thought they were going to progress <br />to another stage where they would start identifying those areas. Hence our comment in the Staff Report, <br />which we had to send out as you know a number of days before this meeting. I just wanted the <br />Commission to be aware that is the reason why we changed our recommendation from favorable to <br />unfavorable. One of the key points is the sensitivity of the Ireland Road land uses and the residential <br />areas to the east of this. <br />GERRY PHIPPS: The reason for our unfavorable recommendation is due to lack of approval from the <br />staff on the uses in the different areas. If they can resolve that before the council meeting, then the <br />council could take that into consideration on their recommendation. <br />OLIVER DAVIS: Is it possible to consider this with a no recommendation? <br />GERRY PHIPPS: The Council could approve it with our no recommendation. <br />After due consideration, the following action was taken: <br />Upon a motion by Gerry Phipps, being seconded by Phil Sutton and unanimously carried, <br />the proposed ordinance of Deldom LLC to zone from R Single Family District, (County), <br />to PUD Planned Unit Development District, (City of South Bend), property located at <br />17716, 17802 and 17830 Ireland Road, City of South Bend, is sent to the Common <br />Council with an unfavorable recommendation. The petitioner has not resolved all the issues <br />raised by the staff in the Staff Report, specifically limiting the range of uses that will be <br />permitted in each of the five areas labeled "A" through "E" on the site plan. <br />Area Plan Commission, June 17, 2014 Minute Excerpts <br />