Laserfiche WebLink
REGULAR MEETING MARCH 12, 2007 <br />require that the owner injected a higher pressure than the main. The average cost to a <br />homeowner is three to eight times than a gravity system. With this high pressure main, <br />there will inevitably be leakage and runoff thus contaminating wells and ponds. This will <br />also reduce property values. Development needs to be smart and beneficial to the entire <br />neighborhood and the City. Not just because one or two individuals perceive a need. Is <br />South Bend becoming the Benton Harbor of Indiana, so we can have more windows <br />boarded up? This project does not fit City Plan, it is not needed, and it is not a good idea. <br />It will lead to a reduction of property value. Mr. Pink urged the Council to defeat this <br />bill. <br />In rebuttal, <br />Mr. Feeney stated the City Plan that was developed by the Community and Economic <br />Development after many public hearings, indicates that this area is suitable and targets <br />this area for low density residential. At the current time there is absolutely no zoning <br />classification that will guarantee low density residential for this particular area. <br />However, the developers and the current property owners are willing to enter into a <br />guarantee with the City that this property will remain low density residential. That is part <br />of the commitment that they are stating that they are willing to enter into. So, <br />consequently it does fit the City Plan. Surface run off is guaranteed to pollute adjacent <br />water supply that is not the case in fact when retention areas are used as a viable and <br />preferable tool by the IDEM in storm water management. In the subdivision Hidden <br />Creek, west end of Jackson Road, South of the By-Pass, they dealt intensely with IDEM <br />in preparation in plans for the protection of wetlands on that property. Those plans <br />involved retention areas immediately adjacent to the wetlands, where water was allowed <br />to sit and solids were allowed to settle out of the water before it entered into the wetlands <br />area. In other words, a control basin, where any solids and pollutants would be trapped <br />before then enter into the wetlands. This is the type of development that the IDEM and <br />the Department of Natural Resources recommend. Negative impact on single family, <br />throughout this City's development they have been involved with developers and well as <br />the Council who have spent their own dollars to extend sewer and water to the far reaches <br />of areas that this City has annexed within its borders. Again, we are dealing with a <br />developer that is stating and willing to put into writing their willingness to extend sewer <br />and water to portions of this City, which currently do not have sewer and water. This is <br />something that is a bad thing for single family residential; Mr. Feeney stated that he <br />honestly didn't think so. He stated that this project will benefit the single family <br />residential homes in the neighborhood. Mr. Feeney stated that Mr. Pink advised that this <br />project will pollute, if fact this is not the case. Mr. Feeney stated that he believes that this <br />project will not pollute. He won't guarantee it like Mr. Pink does. Crime should not be <br />concern; it has not been seen in other areas of the City, where multi-family has been <br />introduced. Mr. Feeney urged the Committee of the Whole to send this onto the Full <br />Council with a favorable recommendation. <br />Councilmember Dieter asked if IDEM recommended this project <br />Mr. Feeney stated that IDEM recommended this particular technique. Plans have not <br />been tendered to the IDEM. Mr. Feeney stated that his soil scientist has been certified to <br />locate and delineate wetlands by the Army Corp. of Engineers. His soil scientist is the <br />individual who has looked at this property and told him that there are no wetlands present <br />on the property. Mr. Feeney reiterated that there are no wetlands on the property. <br />Councilmember Rouse asked Mr. Pink if he mentioned that he was an engineer <br />Mr. Pink stated that he is an Engineer. <br />Councilmember Rouse then asked Mr. Pink if he is a civil engineer. <br />Mr. Pink stated no he is not. Mr. Pink stated that he is a mechanical engineer, industrial <br />engineer and a couple years towards another engineering degree. He also stated that he <br />has had the responsibilities for about six major businesses and was responsible for the <br />sewage of the facilities. Mr. Pink advised that he has some knowledge. <br />13 <br />