HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning - 2813-2705 S MichiganORDINANCE NO. 5493 -73
Passed by the Common Council of the City of South Bend,
IRENE K. GAMMON
Presented by me to the Mayor of the City of South Bend,
MARCH 27 rg 73
Clerk
Of Common Council
Clerk
IRENE K. GAMMON
Approved and signed by me .2D:!� a "'— 'Q � . r9 2,3
I
ORDINANCE N0. 5 �L/ 9 3- -7 3
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4990 -68, AS AMENDED, COMMONLY
KNOWN AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA
(Chapter 40, Municipal Code).
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND,
INDIANA:
Section 1;
Ordinance No. 4990 -68, as amended, which ordinance is commonly
known as the Zoning Ordinance of the City of South Bend, Indiana, be and
the same hereby is amended in order that the zoning classification of the
following described real estate in the City of South Bend, St. Joseph
County, State of Indiana:
Lots 53, 54, 55, 56, and 57, Oakside 3rd Plat, in the North-
west Quarter of Section 24, Township 37 North, Range 2 East,
Portage Township, South Bend, Indiana.
be and the same hereby is established as "C" Commercial District and an
"A" Height and Area District.
Section 2:
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after
its passage by the Common Council, approval by the Mayor, and legal
publication.
Memb r of Common Council of the
City of South Bend, Indiana
COMM1U,M,:Dk THE WHDLE
PUBLI(I )tEARde _ '3_ a _ 3
A'"''iWREADIj6Q 3 -
NOT APPROYM /�
REFERRED OjIR IQ 1 ( 9i'yvnuaacaw
PASSED 3 _ a e,. -7 3
FILED M CLERK'S OFFICE
Irerc ^ammcn
CITY CLERK, SOUTH BEND. IND.
.iuC a [1sai
(dnmmtUrt lepurf
010 toe Tommu Mounra of Nhr Tihj of Jftufii Vend:
Your Committee of the Whole
to whom was referred
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.
4990 -68, AS AMENDED, COMMONLY KNOWN
AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA (CHAPTER 40,
MUNICIPAL CODE) — 2813, 2817, 2821,
2901 AND 2905 SOUTH MICHIGAN STREET.
Respectfully report that they have examined the matter and that in their opinion the Ordinance should go
to the Council as favorable.
Odell Newburn
Chairman
IR RL IR EDS IVOLIl NIN4 CO.
PETITION TO AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE
F01:FOFFIC1 OALY) Application NO.
Date Filed with City Clerk or County Auditor
Date Received by the Area Plan Commission
NOTION. THIS PETITION MUST BE TYPEWRITTEN OR PRINTED IN INK.
.READ THE. INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE COMPLETING
REMAINDER OF FORM.
e
I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make app -
lication and ;petition the Ci of South Bend Indiana
to amend the Zoning Ordinance or
as hereinafter requested, and in suppor o a s p ca on,
the following facts are shows
1. The property sought to be rezoned is located at
South Michigan Street
2813,2817,2821,29011 8 2905
2. The property 1a Owned by Albert J. & Betty K. Hans b Bonita, Inc.
3. A legal description of the property is as follows
Lots 53,54,55,56,, and 57, Ookside 3rd Plat, in the Northwest
Quarter of Section 24, Township 37 North, Range 2 East, Portage
Township , South Bend, Indiana.
FILED IN CLERK'S OFFICE
Irene Gammon
CITY CLERK, SOUTH BEND, IND.
JUL, 6 F 72
(CONTINUE ON TILE REVERSE SIDE IF NECESSARY)
$/3/70
44 It is desired and requested that the foregoing property
be rezoned
From B Residential Use and A Height and Area
District
Po C Commer,cial Use and A Height and Area
District.
5. It is proposed that the property will be put to the
following use and the following building (s) will be constructed
(include number of dwelling units if,-residential)
Expanded Parking Lot for existing commercial properties located at
2801 and 2805 South Michigan Street.
:f
6. Number of off'street parking spaces to be, provided.
83
7. Attached is a. copy of a.) an existing
my property and other surrounding properties;
of all the individuals, firms or corporations
within 300 feet of 'the property sought to be
development plan.
plot plan showing
b,) names and addresses
owning property
re ned; c.) site
gna ur. o e over
60280 Miami Road S ut Bend Indiana
Engineering Planning Services, Inc.
A.ddress
1520 North Main Street
Mishawaka, Indiana
anita c.
retitibn Prepared by
2801 South Michigan Street, South Bend, Ind,
Address
AREA PLAN COMMISSION
OF ST. JOSEPH COUNTY, IND.
The Honorable Common Council
City of South Bend
County -City Building
South Bend, IN 46601
HOWARD BELLINGER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
ROOM 1219 COUNTY -CITY BUILDING
227 W JEFFERSON BLVD., BOOTH BEND, INDIANA 49003
(219) 2& -9571
March 1, 1973
In Re; A proposed ordinance and site development plan of
Ranita, Inc. Hans Haus to zone from "B" Residential
to "C" Commercial, property located at 2813, 2817,
2821, 2901 and 2905 South Michigan Street.
Gentlemen:
The attached rezoning petition of Ranita, Inc. Hans
Haus was legally advertised August 5 and August 12,
1972. The Area Plan Commission gave it a public
hearing on August 15, 1972, at which time the
following action was taken:
"A motion made by Ted Sharp that the matter
of the petition of Albert and Betty Hans
to zone 2813, 17, 21, 2901 and 2905 South
Michigan Street be given a favorable re-
commendation subject to: Adherance to the
25' setback from U. S. 31; Screening of
parking spaces to adjacent residential
property; Drainage proposal approved by the
City Engineer; and Parking lot entrances
approved by the City Engineer."
The deliberations of the Area Plan Commission and
points considered in arriving at the above decisions
are shown in the attached minutes. This matter was
not forwarded for your consideration earlier since
the petitioner had not complied.with the site design
requirements. The petitioner has recently made these
adjustments, thus consideration by the Council is in order.
HB /ch
attach.
cc: Albert and Betty Hans
Very yours,
Howard Bellinger
Executive Director
FILED IN CLERK'S OFFICE
MAR 1 1973
Irene Gammon
CITY CLERK. SOUTH BEND. IND.
K'
Health Department and approval of the drainage system
by the County Engineer.
E. A proposed ordinance and site development plan of Hoffman
Brothers Sales and Service, Inc. to zone from "A" Resi-
dential, "A" Height and Area to "C" Commercial, "A" Height
and Area, property located at 413 N. Sommers Street, in the
City of South Bend.
The petitioner was represented by Guy McMichael, attorney with offices
in the First Bank Building who explained he was filling in for Attorney
Herendeen who could not be at the hearing. He said all four corners of
Madison and Eddy where this property is located are zoned Commercial.
He noted there is only one lot in the 400 block of Sommers Street zoned
residential. The rest of the buildings on Sommers Street are warehouse
buildings. The petitioner's business has expanded and they desire to
erect a building to conform with the others. He explained Mr. Bellinger
had suggested they amend their petition to seek "C" Commercial with "F"
Height and Area which would conform with surrounding property. He ex-
plained the proposed use which included ample parking on the southeast
corner of the property owned by Ho£fmans.
Mr. Miles asked if this land was presently parking and Mr. McMichael said
it was not.
Upon a motion made by Roger Parent, seconded by William
Richardson and unanimously carried, the petition of Hoff-
man Brothers Sales and Service, Inc. to zone from "A" Resi-
dential to "C" Commercial is returned to the Common Council
with a favorable recommendation by the Area Plan Commission
subject to "F" Height and Area.
F. A proposed ordinance and site development plan of Albert and
Betty Hans to zone from "B" Residential, "A" Height and Area
to "C" Commercial, "A" Height and Area, property located at
2813, 2817, 2821, 2901 and 2905 South Michigan Street in the
City of South Bend.
Jerry Halloran of Engineering Planning Services at 1520 North Main Street,
Mishawaka, appeared on behalf of the petitioners and. explained the pro-
perty was located in the 2800 and 2900 block of South Michigan Street.
He noted the petitioners own the house immediately adjacent. The peti-
tion is to provide additional parking for the services at 2801 and 2805
South Michigan. He said the new parking area will relieve any congestion
occurring on Woodside or Oakside at peek business hours. He noted as
many as 150 cars might be seeking parking and the site plan indicates
120 to 130 parking spaces. He said there would be ample turn - around space
and there would be no conflict with the surrounding area. Mr. Halloran
noted there are two bituminous and one concrete approach to this property
from Michigan Street and these entrances would handle all traffic from
Michigan Street and there would be no new curb cuts or additional drive-
ways requested.
Mr. Miles asked Mr. Halloran if the petitioner was advised that they can
not place a building on this property if the petition is granted and Mr.
Halloran said they would not build on the property and the use would be
restricted to off- street parking.
8 -
REMONSTRANCE
Then appeared George Athens of 2828 S. Michigan and explained he had
lived in this area for sixteen years and the neighbors are much against
any type of rezoning of the area. He said he thinks there is a traffic
hazard existing and it would be increased by cars exiting onto Michigan
Street. He noted he has waited five to ten minutes trying to get out of
his driveway and he didn't think the area could accommodate an increase
in traffic at this time. Mr. Athens then presented a list of those people
remonstrating, and that he was speaking for. This list was filed by
the secretary and contains seventeen signatures.
Then appeared Ted L. Tate of 2818 S. Main Street who identified himself
as being the owner of the factory directly west from the petitioned area.
Mr. Tate said he had no objection to the rezoning of this property but
he did want some help on storm water problems. He noted he had to sweep
water out of his factory when it rains as the water rushes down from
this area and floods his factory with mud and water. He said he had
lowered the alley somewhat; in the past, the water has entered his build-
ing and rendered much damage. He noted he had the City Engineers out and
they graded the area down. He said this is the only part of the area
not paved and there appeared to be no solution to the problem. He said
if this rezoning is allowed,and he is for it providing they have proper
drainage, the problem of drainage should be remedied first.
Then appeared Carrie Roach of 306 E. Woodside who noted she owns some
property near the petitioned property and she tried to get a rezoning
but the Commission had not wanted to spot zone. She said she could see
no reason that the whole block could not be commercial. She said she is
just one lot away from this property.
Mr. Halloran then replied to Mr. Tate by saying he could see no reason
why the use of drywells properly designed could not be worked out to pro-
vide a satisfactory solution to the water problem. He said the City
Building Department notes there is spot zoning reflecting residential to
commercial in this area.
Mr. Richardson asked if there were additional rezoning requests and if there:
were a site development plan submitted for other property in this area.
He also asked Mr. Halloran if his client realized the restrictions in
the construction of the parking lot are being strictly enforced.
Mr. Halloran said his client was aware of this and to his knowledge there
were no other rezoning petitions pending in this area.
A motion made by Ted Sharp that the matter of the petition
of Albert and Betty Hans to zone 2813, 17, 21, and 2901 and
2905 South Michigan be given a favorable recommendation sub-
ject to:
1.- Adherance to the 25' setback from U. S. 31
- 9 -
2. Screening of parking spaces to adjacent resi-
dential property
3. Drainage proposal approved by the City Engineer
4. Parking lot entrances approved by the City
Engineer
was seconded by Roger Parent and unanimously carried, and
the petition is favorably recommended to the Common Council
subject to these amendments to the site plan being approved
by the Area Plan Commission Staff.
G. A proposed ordinance and site development plan of Louis and
Betty Krueper to zone from "B" Residential to "C" Commercial,
property located at the northeast corner of Cleveland Road
and Helmen Road, St. Joseph County.
Kenneth Fedder, attorney with offices at 300 First Bank Building in South
Bend represented petitioners, Mr. and Mrs. Krueper, owners of the property
and Robert Berger, who has an option to purchase. Mr. Fedder introduced
these people and proceeded with his presentation by explaining Mr. Berger's
existing store is being taken for a school and he has correspondence with
the school board who indicate a desire that the Area Plan Commission
recommend favorably this new location for the Berger Dairy Store. He said
they have an alternative plan he wished to have made a part of the record.
He also presented a photograph of the store they plan to construct. He
noted that in the event the rezoning is not approved there is a good pos-
sibility they will lose four employees and if it is approved, gain four
employees. Mr. Fedder then presented a petition of 84 signatures of
people in favor of the rezoning. He noted there are many advantages to
be gained by the rezoning. He said the plan indicated ingress and egress
on Cleveland Road but that his client was willing to change the ingress
and egress by closing it on Cleveland and having the entrance and exit
on Helmen Road only.
REMONSTRANCE
Mr. Michael Phillips of 53021 Willow Run noted the existing store was
there before the zoning ordinance was written but that Mr. Berger knew
the store would go when the school was built. He said in light of the
land use plan this would not be zoned commercial. He noted the store is
a nuisance in an area that is residential and should remain residential.
He also said he did not think anyone in the area was in favor of the re-
zoning and felt certain the signatures on the petition offered were
residents who did not live as close to the store as he did.
Then appeared F. J. Nimtz, attorney with offices at 511 W. Colfax who
represented Russell Turrell of 52826 Hollyhock Road and the gentlemen
who lives at 52632 Hollyhock Road. Mr. Nimtz explained that Mr. Turrell
had attempted to rezone a piece of property in this area and was told it
would be spot zoning and they request the petition be denied on this
basis. Mr. Nimtz noted the store is a nonconforming use and both his
clients feel it would be spot zoning and request the petition be ruled
unfavorable on this basis.
- 10 -