Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-27-17 Zoning and Annexation 04 spU T$8�� 4 � � x U C W PEACE a 1865 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK KAREEMAH FOWLER,CITY CLERK ZONING&ANNEXATION FEBRUARY 27, 2017 4:55 P.M. Committee Members Present: Oliver Davis, John Voorde, Gavin Ferlic, Jo M. Broden, Jerry Phipps (citizen member) Committee Member Absent: None Other Council Present: Regina Williams-Preston, Karen White, Dr. David Varner, Randy Kelly Other Council Absent: Tim Scott Others Present: Adriana Rodriguez, Aladean DeRose, Kareemah Fowler, Graham Sparks, Brian Pawlowski Presenters: Angela Smith, Doug Kirby Agenda: Bill No. 02-17- Rezoning& Special Exception for Eddy St. Commons Phase II Bill No. 03-17- Rezoning for Crate Escape at Douglas Road Substitute Bill No. 08-17-Zoning Text Amendment for the CBD Committee Chair Oliver Davis called the Zoning and Annexation Committee meeting to order at 4:55 p.m. He introduced the members of the committee then gave the floor to the Area Plan Commission to discuss Bill No. 02-17. Bill No. 02-17- Rezoning & Special Exception for Eddy St. Commons Phase II Angela Smith, Area Plan Commission with offices on the 11th floor of the County-City Building, stated, The petitioner is seeking to rezone the ten(10) acre tract on the map. It's practically the vast majority of property between Napoleon and Howard. There are currently three (3) zoning districts on the site and they are proposing to rezone the entire development to MU (Mixed-Use). All the current zoning districts already allow what is in the guidelines for a Mixed-Use District. The majority of the site is vacant. There will be five (5) distinct blocks within the site. Block A will have a mix of retail and flex office space on the ground floor with Multi-Family residential above it. Block B will have a similar kind of use. The petitioner is seeking a special exception, right now they don't know if the units will be attached or detached structures. If they are detached they would need that special exception to allow for Single-Family. Block C is proposed 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/DIRECTOR OF DEPUTY/DIRECTOR OF POLICY ORDINANCE VIOLATION CLERK OPERATIONS to be Multi-Family with some surface parking. Block D will be similar to the Single-Family town homes along Georgiana. Block E has more Multi-Family parking and the proposed redevelopment of the Robinson Learning Center on the south portion of the site. Blocks A and B are proposed to have a four(4) story height limit. Blocks C, D and E will all fall below the forty (40) feet or three (3) stories allowed within the MU (Mixed-Use) district. They are not asking for any height variances. Originally the petitioner made a written commitment to restrict the uses along Georgiana to residential. If the Council so chooses, tonight they can accept this legislation with that written commitment to be upheld. Committeemember Jerry Phipps asked, Was the original plan a high-rise for this area? Ms. Smith answered, The petitioner did receive from the Area Plan Commission a height variance for the northern two (2) blocks to go to the four stories. They are trying to be sensitive to the residential areas around the development. Doug Kirby, Kite Reality Group, stated, I don't have much more to add beyond what Angela just presented. I'm definitely available to answer any questions you may have. We met with the neighbors several times, worked with Notre Dame and really tried to work on a collaborative plan to address all the stakeholders. There will be a fifteen(15) foot buffer on the east side of the alley between the development and the residential neighborhood. Ultimately the old Robinson Center may become retail development, but right now they are in need of a much larger facility and that is what we are providing for them. There will be green scape and playground space for the Robinson Center. Councilmember Randy Kelly stated, I know that some of the issues brought by neighbors for Phase I have come to fruition.Namely,the issue of parking has been at the forefront. I'm wondering what we can do to alleviate some of these issues? Mr. Kirby replied, I think a permit program with the City could work. Committee Chair Davis stated, I encourage Notre Dame to continue working with the City toward that outcome. Brian Pawlowski, Community Investment with offices on the 14th floor of the County-City Building, stated, Our engineers are working with Notre Dame and the developers to conduct a traffic study on this portion of development. The permit option we may pursue is something very similar to the one (1)by Four Winds Field. Committeemember Jo M. Broden asked, When would be the timeframe for that data of the study?And is there a study on the already existing parking structure? Mr. Pawlowski replied, It is underway so probably within less than a month. Mr. Kirby replied, We have taken a look at the structure and why it is under-utilized. Maybe it is signage and we could improve that to get more of an understanding of the parking. 2 Committee Chair Davis opened the floor to those from the public who wish to speak in favor of or in opposition to the legislation. There was no one wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to the legislation. Committeemember Gavin Ferlic moved to send Bill No. 02-17 to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. This motion was seconded by Jerry Phipps and passed unanimously by a voice vote of five (5) ayes. Bill No. 03-17- Rezoninjz for Crate Escape at Dou,-las Road Committeemember Ferlic moved to continue Bill No. 03-17 indefinitely. This motion was seconded by Committeemember Broden and passed unanimously by a voice vote of five (5) ayes. Committee Chair Davis then introduced Substitute Bill No. 08-17 to the committee and asked the Council Attorney to give context to the substitute bill. Substitute Bill No. 08-17- Zoning Text Amendment for the ('131) Aladean DeRose, Council Attorney, stated, The substitute was done by the Area Plan Commission and it was just to simplify and make the language better reflect the language in the rest of the ordinance. Ms. Smith stated, It was also a formatting issue. There were some things that were included in the ordinance that didn't need to be in order for the change to happen. It was just to make it formatted the same way the rest of the language is in the existing ordinance. The text amendment proposed is to address the property located between the St. Joseph River and the East Race Waterway. The height to the west of the river is and will remain one hundred fifty(150) feet and the height to the east of the East Race Waterway will remain sixty(60) feet. The only thing being changed is the height. There is no reference to the stories. This comes to you from the Area Plan Commission with a favorable recommendation. Committee Chair Davis asked, When it comes to text amendments, what is the process of notification for the neighbors? And would you explain the process of introducing and passing a text amendment. Ms. Smith replied, In terms of notification,there isn't anything in our bylaws that requires us to notify surrounding property owners. We have in some instances in the past, but generally we don't notify property owners because usually it's a city-wide thing anyway so we can't notify everyone in the City. There are, by state law, only two (2)bodies that can initiate text amendments. Either the Common Council or the Area Plan Commission can initiate a text amendment and in this case, it was initiated by the Common Council. The Area Plan Commission has to hear it regardless of who starts it. 3 Mr. Ferlic, 1109 Duey Ave., stated, First,thank you to the Council for considering this text amendment. This ordinance is in response to community demand and the neighbors' demand. This fits within the vast majority of the comprehensive plan with regard to Mixed-Use development, increase in density, and amenities such as restaurants, grocery stores and pharmacies. It is important to note that to this point, no Mixed-Use development has occurred or been proposed on this island since the comprehensive plan was adopted 2008. 1 would encourage the Council to move forward to allow the plan to be achieved. Committee Chair Davis stated, I was there in 2008 with the planning for the neighborhood. A lot has changed since then and this small change will help us build back up. We have to make changes within the spirit of the law to make things like this happen. Tim Corcoran, Community Investment with offices on the 14th floor of the County-City Building, stated, This text amendment was written in conjunction with the Office of Community Investment. We wanted to do this in order to facilitate the agreement that was put together early this year. On the west side of the river, it's currently zoned at one hundred fifty(15 0) feet but the Chase Tower is currently approximately three hundred (300) feet. So this proposed number is almost half of what is the highest of the CBD, and think one hundred fifty (15 0) feet helps the gradient effect of what the plan is looking for. Committeemember Broden stated, So what is the rationale behind the one hundred fifty (15 0) feet? Mr. Ferlic answered, In working with Community Investment, we are looking to scale height into the surrounding neighborhoods. For all intents and purposes,the one hundred fifty (150) feet from the three hundred (300) feet in the downtown offers a transition that successfully scales into the neighborhoods while also encouraging Mixed-Use development. We thought one hundred fifty (150) feet would achieve that proper scaling affect into the residential neighborhoods from our downtown. Committeemember Broden stated, In terms of planning principles, we are kind of forgetting about the river. That's a pretty significant geographical factor in terms of your dome of your city. How about the rationale for the one hundred fifty (150) feet as far as petitions of past. We are saying we are trying to open things up to facilitate Mixed-Use development. What's the track record or the data that says the height is what is stopping people from developing things in that area? Mr. Ferlic answered, Since 2008 there has been no actual development of Mixed-Use that we are looking for in the comprehensive plan. The only proposed developments to this point have all exceeded the sixty (60) foot cap. In order to make the comprehensive plan possible,this is a way to achieve it. Councilmember Regina Williams-Preston asked, Have we heard from The Pointe and what they have to say about the proposal? 4 Mr. Ferlic answered, The Pointe did write a letter in favor of a development that was under development agreement currently. So the development that is proposed at nine (9) stories at the Commerce Center location is supported by The Pointe. Committeemember Broden stated, I wouldn't want to make assumptions on how The Pointe feels about this right now. There are some finer points to that letter that I would encourage everyone to read. Also,they purchased that property in 2015 and made $3 million of investments. Obviously there wasn't an opportunity to go up and they chose not to. Why is the reference to stories silent in this text amendment? I think we should include a story count. Also, could someone address the transition from one hundred fifty(150)to the sixty(60) feet and why it is that way? In terms of mechanicals, is that extra height silent too? Is there a specific area the mechanical equipment atop the building needs to be? Ms. Smith replied, Referencing stories in text often brings about concern because sometimes stories don't match up with the feet requirement and visa versa. I would expect in the future the reference might come out. The separation on the west side of the river is basically an alley. The mechanicals can be up to twenty five (25) feet above the one hundred fifty (150) feet. It does not have to be in any specific place. It is only just to house the equipment. If it had windows or was being used for more than just housing the equipment,that would not be allowed. Committeemember Phipps stated, I think there is a lot to like about this and it settles a lot of the East Race conversation. My concern is there being enough demand for apartments. We don't want to put all our eggs into one basket with this large development. Is there any information on the housing study in regard to demand? Mr. Pawlowski replied, In a housing study from 2013 that was projecting out five (5)to ten(10) years, the number of units that have been brought on are within the threshold of that study. In the ten(10) year outlook the number of units that could be brought on were roughly one thousand (1000). Developers would not be committing the investment they are if they didn't have an understanding of the demand. Committee Chair Davis stated, There was someone at the Area Plan Commission meeting who said they were retiring and were wanting to move downtown. I think that is interesting. It's easier to get around when everything is close to each other. Committeemember John Voorde stated, I've paid close attention to this issue starting with the East Bank Village plan and the want to make this part of land distinctly different from the west side of the river. The recession is to fault for the lack of development opportunities since the plan was created, not the height restriction. Even with the sixty(60) feet limit, there were variances allowing seventy eight(78) feet within the district. I like ninety six(96)feet and think that height is a de facto height for the island. I don't like one hundred fifty (15 0) feet. A lot of properties in this area are changing hands and the question is what it's going to be. To say there hasn't been any development is unfair and untrue because there has been. This seems like a rush to judgment. I think this text amendment spoils the vision. 5 Committee Chair Davis then opened the floor to the members of the public wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to the legislation. There were none present to speak in favor. Steve Francis, 2025 S. Edison St., stated, I'm dizzy because this project has taken a lot of turns. It has been hard for us in the public to keep up with it. Those who have serious questions are lost in the process. This is a major change to the zoning ordinance. The plan making process in 2008 was a full blown, inclusive and reaffirming process for the community to really envision what they wanted to have happen east of the river. We wanted the village concept. What you're doing now is pushing a reset button on that concept. The process is compromised and along the way I think you have all gotten lost in your various camps of what you want personally. The content in opening it up to one hundred fifty (15 0) feet is two (2) and a half times the current height maximum. That blows it out of the water. If Dave Mathews wants twelve (12) stories two (2) years from now, he would be able to do that. Please take a step back, take a breath, and go through the process. We need to go back through the process we went through in 2008. Rolanda Hughes, 1029 Riverside Dr., stated, I agree with everything Mr. Francis just said and I think Mr. Voorde hit the nail on the head. The only argument to go so high has been the parking spaces. I have done some research on this. The specific number given for the project was two hundred and forty (240). I've counted and they are only using ninety nine (99) at the Commerce Center right now. They said they needed one hundred and twenty (120) spaces for the Martins Supermarket and Pharmacy. I did a survey at the Martins on Portage Ave. and the most cars they had were eighty three (83), not the one hundred and twenty (120)they said they needed. Further, they are envisioning one hundred and thirty two (132)places for offices and one hundred and forty four(144) for the apartments. I think they are double counting the number of spaces that are going to be used. In terms of due diligence on the part of the Council, you need to let them know they do not need that many parking places. Next week, Matthews can decide to go higher if he wants to. Once this is lifted,there is no going back. The agreement hasn't been signed. There is $5 million of TIF on the table. I think the City at this point shouldn't allow this money to be available. Committeemember Ferlic moved to send Substitute Bill No. 08=17 to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. This motion was seconded by Committee Chair Davis and failed by a voice vote of two (2) ayes (Committee Chair Davis and Committeemember Ferlic) and three (3) nays (Committeemembers Voorde, Broden, and Phipps). Committeemember Ferlic then moved to send Substitute Bill No. 08-17 to the full Council with no recommendation. This motion was seconded by Committee Chair Davis and passed by a voice vote of three (3) ayes (Committee Chair Davis and Committeemembers Voorde and Ferlic) and two (2) nays (Committeemembers Phipps and Broden). With no other business on the agenda, Committee Chair Davis adjourned the Zoning and Annexation Committee meeting at 6:05 p.m. 6 Respect ub i , Olive vis, Committee Chair 7