HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-10-16 Zoning and AnnexationOFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
KAREEMAH FOWLER, CITY CLERK
ZONING & ANNEXATION OCTOBER 10, 2016 3:30 P.M.
Committee Members Present: Oliver J. Davis, John Voorde, Jo M. Broden,
Gavin Ferlic (late)
Other Council Present: Tim Scott, Karen L. White, Dr. David Varner,
Randy Kelly, Regina Williams- Preston
Committee Members Absent: None
Other Council Absent: None
Others Present: Kareemah Fowler, Alkeyna Aldridge, Joseph Molnar,
Kathleen Cekanski- Farrand, Adriana Rodriguez
Agenda: Bill No. 16 -67: Airport Authority Annexation Fiscal Plan
Substitute Bill No. 35 -16: Airport Authority Annexation
Bill No. 41 -16: Commerce Center PUD Rezoning at 401 E.
Colfax
Committee Chair Oliver Davis called the meeting of the Zoning and Annexation Committee to
order with three (3) items of business on the agenda. Committeemember Gavin Ferlic was
absent, but a quorum was still reached.
Bill No. 16 -67: Airport Authority Annexation Fiscal Plan
Substitute Bill No. 35 -16: Airport Authority Annexation
Michael Divita, Planner with the Department of Community Investment with offices on the 14th
floor the County City Building. This is a fiscal plan for the annexation requested by the Airport
Authority, the property owner of seven (7) properties southwest of the bypass and Lincolnway
West. The proposed annexation area is approximately seventy -one point three (71.3) acres,
which meets the state law requirement. No people reside in the annexation area. The area
contains two (2) vacant residential structures and agricultural and wooded land. The airport
authority will transfer the property to the City to provide industrial uses. No capital
improvements are planned by the City at the time of annexation. Water is available at the site,
and sewer will have to be extended to the site.
455 County -City Building • 227 W. Jefferson Boulevard • South Bend, Indiana 46601
Phone 574- 235 -9221 • Fax 574- 235 -9173 • TDD 574- 235 -5567 • www.SouthBendIN.gov
JENNIFER M. COFFMAN ALKEYNA M. ALDRIDGE JOSEPH MOLNAR
CHIEF DEPUTY/ CHIEF OF STAFF DEPUTY/ DIRECTOR OF POLICY ORDINANCE VIOLATION CLERK
A portion of Pine Road will be added to the City, and it may have to be updated by the
developer. A section of Lincolnway West will be annexed, but as US 20, it will continue to be
maintained by the Indiana Department of Transportation. No additional street equipment will be
necessary. The annexation area will be in the Council's First District, and it will be served by
Police Beat twenty -four (24), Fire Station six (6) located on Western Avenue, Emergency
Medics four (4) and five (5), and Code Enforcement area eight (8). No additional personnel or
expenditures will be needed for the annexation area. Mr. Divita asked for this committee's
favorable recommendation.
Committeemember Gavin Ferlic arrived at 3:34 P.M.
Committee Chair Oliver Davis mentioned that there was a family that was nearby on Pine, and
there were supposed to be some discussions to clarify information. He asked Mr. Danch to
clarify that in his comments.
Committeemember Jo M. Broden asked when the traffic analysis will take place on Pine Road.
Mr. Danch suggested that they hear from the Area Plan Commission.
Angela Smith, Area Plan Commission with offices on the 11th floor of the County City Building,
the petitioner is seeking to annex and rezone a portion that is sixty -eight (68) acres at the corner
of the bypass, Lincolnway and Crane Road. She presented a map of transportation routes that is
on file in the City Clerk's Office. The property is mostly zoned Manufacturing in the County
right now. A small portion is A- Agricultural, it is bordered by M- Manufacturing to the north,
and R- Single Family to the north. Across Pine there is R- Single Family residential and M-
Manufacturing in the County to the south. It is a vacant site, and there is not a site plan because
this is an undeveloped area and there is no identified leaser. This comes to you with a favorable
recommendation subject to written commitment. The written commitment states that if this land
were to be developed with access to Pine Road, there would have to be a traffic study. The main
concern is that Pine Road is not adequately sized for more traffic than a residential area usually
receives.
Councilmember Dr. David Varner clarified that this is being annexed by the City and is currently
owned by the Airport Authority.
Ms. Smith clarified that is correct, but once it is annexed it will be transferred to the City.
Mike Danch, Danch Harper and Associates, 1643 Commerce Drive, South Bend, we're asking to
transfer the property between the Airport Authority and the City of South Bend for some
improvements that the City would make to the airport. They would pick up the seventy (70)
acres for future development for industrial use. We're asking to take it over from M-
Manufacturing and A- Agriculture and Residential in the County to Light Industrial in the City of
South Bend, which will limit the uses that will be allowed in the City of South Bend. I talked to
the residents that came to the Area Plan meeting. I shared with them what we are doing and
hopefully addressed their concerns that going to the Light Industrial classification adds more
2
protection for their neighborhood than what they had previously. They were under the
impression that an additional road would cut through their properties, and that is not going to
happen with this project. We've also agreed that those restrictive covenants would apply to the
property so that if anybody did come in and they wanted to access Pine Road for whatever they
do, then those written commitments will kick in, and the traffic studies would have to be
approved by the City of South Bend and the County, and by the Indiana Department of
Transportation.
Council Attorney Cekanski- Farrand stated that the recommendations for each will be different,
so it would be good to separate the recommendations.
Committeemember Voorde moved for a favorable recommendation of Bill No. 16 -67, it was
seconded by Committeemember Broden and carried by voice vote of four (4) ayes.
Committeemember Ferlic motioned to accept the Substitute Bill No. 35 -16, it was seconded by
Committeemember Voorde and carried by voice vote of four (4) ayes.
Committeemember Ferlic motioned to recommend Substitute Bill No. 35 -16 favorably to the full
Council subject to the written commitments addressed in the August 17, 2016 letter from the
Area Plan Commission to the Common Council. Committeemember Voorde seconded, and it
carried by voice vote of four (4) ayes.
Bill No. 41 -16: Commerce Center PUD Rezoning at 401 E. Colfax
Committee Chair Davis asked the Council Attorney to explain Bill No. 41 -16.
Council Attorney Cekanski- Farrand explained that the Colfax address is listed on the original
bill, and at the last Council meeting there was not an opportunity to accept the substitute bill,
which is now on file with the Office of the City Clerk. That bill now contains addresses on
Sycamore Street as well as on LaSalle. Proper notice was given prior to the Area Plan
Commission meeting that gave no recommendation. At some point, we have to give direction
via proper motions to the Office of the City Clerk so we are giving proper notice to the public.
Committeemember Broden asked what the actual address is that is encompassed, and why that is
not in the title.
Ms. Smith stated that they used the title provided by the petitioner. The other addresses were
identified by the parcel layer of the geographic information system. We felt that it was prudent
to include all of them as a better representation of the land, so we captured the other parcels that
were captured. There was also someone that was left out of the legal description, so we changed
that as well.
Committeemember Broden asked if 401 E. Colfax is part of the substitute, and 228 and 230
Sycamore Street is correct within the title, and then 312 LaSalle Avenue.
Committeemember Ferlic motioned to accept Substitute Bill No. 41 -16
3
Ms. Smith confirmed that that was the bill that was heard. She assured everyone that the three -
hundred (300) foot list was generated from all of the property addresses as was our
advertisement. We don't advertise the legal description but that was what was represented and
heard at the Commission meeting.
Committeemember Broden asked about the yard signages and mail notices that are put out on
these properties typically.
Ms. Smith stated that those are put out based on whatever recommendation Larry Magliozzi
gives. Our legal obligation is the publication in the newspaper, but we followed the other
procedures that we typically do.
Committee Chair Davis asked if that goes to the owner of the property.
Ms. Smith stated it goes to everybody within three - hundred (300) feet of the extreme edges of
the development.
Committeemember Ferlic motioned to accept the Substitute Bill No. 41 -16, Committeemember
Voorde seconded and it carried by a voice vote of four (4) ayes.
Committee Chair Davis stated that a schedule would need to be set up, and recommended that
reports be distributed in a formal way so we can have more of a discussion on October 24, 2016.
He then asked Ms. Smith for a brief summary of the explanation of the PUD versus the mixed
use and all of that to give the public a better understanding.
Ms. Smith stated that there probably would not be time to complete a full traffic study, but she
has forwarded all of their information over to help them do a further analysis, and they were
going to try to identify any missing information. They need to know approximately how much
traffic they think the grocery store would generate. They also want more information on the
number of bedrooms and units associated with the residential, and the final, more specific
information on how much office space might be included as well to figure out how many
additional cars will need to be accommodated.
Committee Chair Davis asked if the second meeting of November, which would give them a
month, would be enough time.
Ms. Smith stated that she doesn't think that is enough time to do a full traffic study, but it would
be enough time to provide more information on the proposal.
Councilmember Tim Scott asked the Clerk's Office to add the documents to Dropbox as they are
made available.
Committee Chair Davis would like to see include the Building Report, Traffic Study documents,
Area Plan, Engineering, and a score card on housing that is either in the works or coming online,
etc.
Ll
Committee Chair Davis stated that he would like to formally announce this tonight at the 7:00
P.M. meeting.
Committeemember Broden asked for the minutes from the informational meeting from the
Clerk's Office, and stated that the presentation by the developer would be great to incorporate.
Committee Chair Davis stated on December of 2013, there was something that if you could
research and email the Area Plan Commission documents to the full Council, that would be
helpful. The December of 2013 meeting of the Area Board of Zoning Appeals was referred to
during the public portion. If the whole Council could get a word - for -word copy of that meeting,
they would understand what the public was talking about.
Committeemember Broden pointed out an error in the packet, and Ms. Smith responded that she
would speak to the Clerk's Office to make sure that everything is correct.
Committeemember Ferlic motioned to recommend that the Council continues Bill No. 41 -14 to
October 24, 2016 and set for second and third hearing during full Council on November 14,
2016.
Committeemember Davis clarified that they would still be ok if they pushed it to November 281h,
and Council Attorney Cekanski - Farrand answered yes.
Committeemember Broden seconded the motion on the floor, and it carried by voice vote of four
(4) ayes.
Committee Chair Davis adjourned the meeting at 3:54 p.m.
y SVbmitted,
vis, Committee Chair