Laserfiche WebLink
REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 30, 1986 <br />Ms. Barnard inquired of Mr. Don Jankowski, Portage Realty <br />Corporation, 129 Dixie Way South, South Bend, Indiana, what the <br />timetable was for the completion of Georgian Drive. Mr. <br />Jankowski said the timetable was based on market conditions on <br />how many lots sell and how many remain unsold and at the present <br />time there are approximately fifteen (15) lots that have to be <br />sold first. Mr. Jankowski advised that Portage Realty does not <br />have a specific timetable for the completion of Georgian Drive. <br />Ms. Barnard replied that she must have misunderstood Mr. <br />Peddycord's comments regarding the completion of this street. <br />Mr. Peddycord advised that Mr. Jankowski indicated to him that <br />the lots were selling well. <br />In response to Mr. Vance's question regarding what would result <br />if the Board decided not to recommend favorably that Chalet Court <br />be vacated, Mr. Peddycord stated that construction of the church <br />would not stop as there are no statutory prohibitions. He <br />further advised that the church is not going to be built on Lot <br />Nos. 84 and 91, the project will be completed and the way the <br />eighty (80) foot street would be used remains to be seen. He <br />further advised that the church will have to resolve setback and <br />parking lot requirements. He reiterated that this is not a <br />zoning case but a vacation case and there are no statutory <br />grounds for denial. He also stated that the church does not want <br />parking to take place on the adjacent street. <br />Ms. Barnard agreed that zoning is not an issue. She stated, <br />however, that her concerns are safety, traffic use and access to <br />the area. In regards to the potential problem with juveniles <br />utilizing the parking lot at night, Ms. Barnard stated that the <br />Police could be advised of the potential problem and it would be <br />the church's responsibility for making sure a nuisance does not <br />exist. She further reiterated her concern about the increased <br />traffic going through the residential neighborhood by means of <br />only one (1) access. <br />Mr. Peddycord stated that there will be increased traffic in the <br />area but there would also be increased traffic if eight (8) to <br />ten (10) lots were sold to individuals. He stated that case law <br />does not permit additional traffic to be a basis for denial of <br />use of the property. <br />Mr. Vance advised that he is concerned about Georgian Drive not <br />being completed and the increased traffic. He stated that he <br />hopes the church can work with the residents of the area as it <br />appears that the church is going to become a permanent resident. <br />He indicated that perhaps a gate could be utilized to deter <br />unauthorized use of the parking lot and that a timetable for <br />completion of the additional access could be developed. <br />Therefore, Mr. Vance made a motion that a favorable <br />recommendation be forwarded to the Common Council regarding this <br />vacation subject to any and all utility easements. Ms. Barnard <br />seconded the motion and it carried. Mr. Leszczynski advised that <br />favorable comments have been received from the Engineering <br />Department, Area Plan Commission and the Community Development <br />Department concerning this proposed vacation. <br />In seconding the motion, Ms. Barnard stated that it is up to the <br />church to meet with the residents of the area to resolve any <br />concerns and complaints. Mr. Peddycord stated that he will <br />arrange a meeting with representatives from the church and <br />Portage Realty to resolve concerns and develop an estimated <br />timetable for the completion of Georgian Drive. <br />