11-14-16 Zoning and Annexation - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

way that doesn't eviscerate our ability to plan. It's a difficult issue, and I think we can do better and I think we can be bigger. I'd like to see everybody come to the table on this in a better, more open way. This is a great opportunity —it's just the wrong horse to ride, and it is dangerous. Committeemember Davis asked Mr. Magliozzi if he had any comments on behalf of Area Plan, to which Mr. Magliozzi replied that he did not. Committeemember Davis then explained that the format they were currently engaged in was unusual, but that, after all the updates and changes to this proposed project, it was only fair to the public to hear what the members of the Committee and Council thought of the project. They continued around the table. Committeemember John Voorde stated, I think this is the toughest issue we've faced, in my brief tenure on the Council, and it is certainly one that is transformative for that area, whichever way it goes. I believe in planning —the importance of it as a guide. He stated that though he was not responsible for the passing of the East Bank Plan, as he was not yet a part of the Council, he did it up for display at the front desk of the Clerk's Office. He stated, A lot of other plans up there, too. Some of them aren't relevant anymore, because plans, once made, may no longer be relevant to the reality of what's going on in the marketplace. There was a plan to make South Bend a pedestrian mall, at one time, and that one ought to stay on the shelf, probably never should have been adopted. The hindsight is clear. He stated that it was obvious that there is a desire for things to happen in that area, that there is a desire to be developer - friendly, to bring in the market and drugstore. He stated, This particular proposal in this place is complicated by the fact that what we do here will affect everything around it in a positive or negative point of view. He stated that he wanted to make an informed decision, and noted that this was an important case, as it affects a public asset. He stated, When I was first on the Council in 1980, it wasn't long after we started that we voted for the park bond, which was the last park bond up until the most recent one that opened up the East Race, because the people had the vision that things could happen here. He explained that there had been a plan for a village concept on the East Bank back then, but that there was no one at the time who would step up to make it a reality. He stated, Now I think we're coming back full- circle to what the original East Bank vision was. I think I agree with Councilmember Broden. We're going to need more time. I think we can take more time, get a continuance here for not too long, as long as it's not just time to put off a decision. As long as all the principal parties —Area Plan, Matthews, other essential developers, Community Investment —come together, sit down, and say is this the best plan? I personally want to understand this to a greater degree. I don't want to lose development. I've been around too long and seen too much of that in downtown South Bend. I know of specific examples where things could have happened but didn't because somebody along the way said that it was not part of the plan. That's too bad, because we lost things to neighboring communities that we quite frankly shouldn't have. I just want to make sure that we do this one right, and we have a window of opportunity to do that in the next thirty (30) days while allowing Mr. Matthews to adhere to his timeline. Councilmember Regina Williams- Preston explained that this was a very interesting process, and that she was learning a great deal. She stated that it was important that this case would set a precedent. She stated, What I'm hearing is that if there is another way that doesn't impact our 10