My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-10-10 Council Agenda & Packet
sbend
>
Public
>
Common Council
>
Common Council Agenda Packets
>
2010
>
05-10-10 Council Agenda & Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/1/2010 3:47:16 PM
Creation date
5/6/2010 10:35:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council - City Clerk
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
77
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Area Board of Zoning Appeals -April 7, 2010 <br />these are market rates. Dne of our main objections is presently the duplex is grandfathered which is <br />somewhat controlled if it ever ceases to be occupied for one year, two years, we all know the grandfather <br />goes away. But looking far a Special Use exemption which in effect if that exemption is granted, then it's <br />allowed far every, I mean I don't know if rt will ever be taken away. So we also feel that it also is not an <br />appropriate use for that land. That duplex is actually in the alley. It took zne three years to a find it. I drove <br />down St. Louis and T'd see, I'd go down Hill Street and I'd see it, but I can never f nd it. Well if you ever go <br />down the street, it's really in the alley. It's really an inappropriate use of that space. I don't what it started <br />out probably in the early days it was some type of out building for the farmers or whatever before that <br />became a city dwelling. As was stated, and we do have design guidelines that are being constructed or are <br />being developed that will be processed through the Common Council that will control the kinds of types of <br />constructions that will take place but we haven't had that done yet. That will probably give us some support <br />here but what our mission has been is to create a neighborhood choice for mixed income for residents, <br />owners, owner occupants, not resident renters. We don't have anything against renters but we want more <br />owner occupants. All of the homes that we remodeled that I mentioned previously that however many, 15 or <br />2a, they were all rental units and they are now all owned by homeowners. I know Notre Dame is here so I <br />won't speak for them, but I'm sure that all of the homes that have been built in their program are all <br />homeowners. I think the operable word is homeowner, not renter. We think that the neighborhood has <br />made great strides. We do not want to take a step back. We think providing, I don't know how many square <br />feet of land is here, but we think providing living accommodations for up to ten people in that small of space <br />and the parking and just the general activities that will take place is probably not an appropriate use. So for <br />those reasons the NNRO and the South Bend Heritage Foundation opposes this Special Use Exemption <br />request. <br />MR. URBANSKI: Anyone else wishing to speak? <br />ANN PUZZELLD; South Bend City Council. l live at 1247 E. LaSalle and I have here a letter written by <br />Stephen and Elizabeth Kollar and I would like to give a copy to the Board if I could. <br />MRS. PUZZELLD GAVE A COPY OF THE LETTER TO THE BOARD AT THIS TIME <br />MRS. PUZZELLD: And I would like to read part of it but partieularIy since things are going so late I'll <br />make it a short part. But I want you to understand what's going on in this neighborhood. What's been going <br />on with this property. You've already been made to understand the character of the neighborhood which <br />tends to be largely single fataaiIy. The character of the neighborhood. We live in a single family <br />neighborhood. These parcels have been an eyesore and an issue for a very long period oftime. The <br />structure on parcel 3 should never have been permitted to be built in the f rst place. It sits at the back <br />intersection of two alleys, each half of the building sits on a separate lot, and it is completely out of character <br />for a single family two neighborhood. It looms over our backyards and dominates the landscape. Safety. <br />Considering the current tenants of the building that straddles parcel 2 and 3 use tl~e public alley as a <br />driveway, there are numerous safety concerns with the upswing in traffic since the new tenants have moved <br />in. And I understand they are students that came in the fall. That's what I understand, There are currently <br />six cars parked in the backyard, front yard of the structure, not to rrzention the 4 cars parked along the street. <br />And there's not hard surface as I understand on the property either. These_ cars race down the alley without <br />stopping to check far any pedestrians or children. This is a tragedy waiting to happen. Then there's zoning <br />73 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.