Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-27-10 Common Council Meeting Minutes REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 Be it remembered that the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana met in the Council Chambers of the County-City Building on Monday, September 27, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was called to order by Council President Dieter and the Invocation and Pledge to the Flag were given. ROLL CALL COUNCILMEMBERS: Present: Derek D. Dieter 1st District, President Henry Davis, Jr. 2nd District Thomas LaFountain 3rd District Ann Puzzello 4th District, Chairperson Committee of the Whole David Varner 5th District Oliver Davis 6th District, Vice-President Al “Buddy” Kirsits At-Large Timothy Rouse At-Large Karen L. White At-Large OTHERS PRESENT: Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand Council Attorney Janice I. Talboom Deputy City Clerk Mary Beth Wisniewski Chief Deputy Absent: John Voorde City Clerk REPORT FROM THE SUB-COMMITTEE ON MINUTES To the Common Council of the City of South Bend: The sub-committee has inspected the minutes of the September 13, 2010 meeting of the Council and found them to be correct. Therefore, we recommend the same be approved. s/Derek D. Dieter s/David Varner Councilmember White made a motion that the minutes of the September 13, 2010 meeting of the Council be accepted and placed on file. Councilmember Rouse seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. SPECIAL BUSINESS Gary Gilot, Director, Public Works, gave an update on the intersection of Western Avenue and Olive Street. th Mr. Gilot thanked former 6 District Councilmember Erv Kuspa for his continued th follow-up and to current 6 District Councilmember Oliver J. Davis, for keeping the ball rolling on this project. Mr. Gilot then introduced Carl Littrell, City Engineer, to give the project status on the Western Avenue and Olive Street Intersection Improvements. Mr. Littrell advised that the project goal is to reduce accident frequency and severity and improve mobility at the intersection. He stated that the means chosen were to replace mechanical time of day controller with eight phase solid state controller. Provide presence detection to make intersection traffic-responsive. Provide new signal supports. Replace existing underground wiring. Provide permissive left turns (five section head.) Resurface and re-mark pavement. Provide clean land assignments signs and markings. 1 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 Capital needed is $400,000 from Local Road and Street Account and was approved in Spring 2010 with an appropriations ordinance. He noted that there is up to $75,000 available from federal funding for signal equipment. The Troyer Group is the engineering consultant and their fee is $22,000. Mr. Littrell stated that there are three small parcels of land needed on three corners of the intersection to provide space for curb ramps, signal poles, and signal controller. Real estate appraisals were made in June and July 2010. Offers were made to owners at the end of July. Each of the three offers were accepted during the 30 day consideration period. The cost of the parcels was $27,441 including reimbursement for sign relocations. Appraisal costs for the real estate was $7,525 and the Legal Department and Engineering Division were the buyers and reviewers saving approximately $350 per parcel for the fees of an “outside” Professional. Signal poles and other equipment were obtained by quotations during August 2010 using federal funding through the HES program. The cost is $31,551. This signal equipment will be installed by the Bureau of Traffic and Lighting when the contractor completes foundations. Bids for the improvements were opened on September 13 The Board of Public Works made a contract award to Rieth-Riley Construction on September 23. The amount was $237,900. Total cost $326,417 and subject to changed conditions encountered during construction. Work on the intersection will begin the first of October th and be completed by November 15. Traffic restrictions will occur during the work but the intersection will always be open to traffic in both directions. Separate projects are underway to provide signal interconnection on the Western corridor. A safety and mobility improvement is underway at Walnut Street to be completed in 2011. A pedestrian safety and mobility and traffic calming project is being planned for Chapin Street for completion in 2011. New curbs, walks and approaches are necessary along the south side of the project, one driveway will be closed. Mr. Littrell stated that the cooperation and understanding of three property owners at the intersection is appreciated. They are Jacqueline Wheeler at Midwest Muffler and Brake, John Akram of Baracheh Land Company operating the Marathon Convenience Center and Healther Jacobs, Manager of the Polish National Alliance Chapter. Mr. Littrell stated that a copy of the map and report are on file in the Office of the City Clerk. Councilmember Oliver Davis thanked Gary Gilot and Carl Littrell for the update. He also extended a thanks to Father Christopher Cox from St. Adalbert’s Parish and to TAPP for their continued effort and support in keeping this project on the forefront. SPECIAL MEETING OF THE SOUTH BEND COMMON COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Council President Dieter advised that the Council will hold a Special Meeting on th September 30, 2010 in the Council Chambers, 4 Floor County-City Building, 227 W. Jefferson Boulevard, South Bend, Indiana, at 6:00 p.m. to have Public Hearing and Third Reading on Bill No’s. 52-10; 56-10; 57-10; 58-10 and 59-10. Additionally, President Dieter advised that there will be a Personnel and Finance Committee to discuss Bill Nos. 52-10; 58-10 and 59-10, and a Joint Meeting of the Personnel and Finance Committee and Health and Public Safety Committee to discuss Bill Nos. 56-10 and 57-10 at 4:30 th p.m. on September 30, 2010, in the Council Informal Meeting Room, 4 Floor County- City Building, 227 W. Jefferson Boulevard, South Bend, Indiana. RESOLVE INTO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE At 7:08 p.m. Councilmember Rouse made a motion to resolve into the Committee of the Whole. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. Councilmember Puzzello, Chairperson, presiding. Councilmember Puzzello explained the procedures to be followed for tonight’s meeting in accordance with Article 1, Section 2-11 of the South Bend Municipal Code. Councilmember Puzzello stated that a brochure may be found on the railing in the Council Chambers explaining those procedures. 2 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 PUBLIC HEARINGS BILL NO. 55-10 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, APPROPRIATING $276,780 WITHIN FUND 212 FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT SHELTER PLUS CARE GRANT PROGRAM Councilmember Henry Davis, Jr. made a motion to continue this bill indefinitely at the request of the petitioner. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. BILL NO. 52-10 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL LEVYING TAXES AND FIXING THE RATE OF TAXATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF RAISING REVENUE TO MEET THE NECESSARY EXPENSES OF THE CIVIL CITY OF SOUTH BEND FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2011 BILL NO. 53-10 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL APPROPRIATING MONIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE EXPENSES OF SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS OF THE CIVIL CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2011, AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2011, INCLUDING ALL OUTSTANDING CLAIMS AND OBLIGATIONS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL TAKE EFFECT BILL NO. 54-10 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND APPROPRIATING MONIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE EXPENSES OF THE DESIGNATED ENTERPRISE FUNDS OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2011 AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2011, INCLUDING ALL OUTSTANDING CLAIMS AND OBLIGATIONS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL TAKE EFFECT Councilmember Varner made a motion to combine Bill Nos. 52-10; 53-10 and 54-10 for the purpose of Public Hearing. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. Councilmember LaFountain, Chairperson, Personnel & Finance Committee reported that this committee met this afternoon on these three (3) bills and Sends Bill No. 52-10 to the Full Council with a favorable recommendation; Bill No. 53-10 to the Full Council with no recommendation and Bill No. 54-10 to the Full Council with no recommendation. th Mayor Stephen Luecke, 14 Floor County-City Building, 227 W. Jefferson Blvd., South Bend, Indiana, made the presentation for Bill Nos. 52-10; 53-10 and 54-10. 3 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 Mayor Luecke advised that the City is required by State Law to set the tax rate for the to fund operations of the Civil City of South Bend and that is what Bill No. 52-10 does. Unfortunately, the timing of the calendar doesn’t work well; if we had certified assessed values at this time and if we had a passed budget at this date we could set the precise tax rate as it needs to be. However that is not the case at this time, he stated that they have a rough estimate of what the budget is going to be, subject to additional comments from the City Council, however we do not have that certified assessed value. Mayor Luecke stated that every year as they do this they advertise higher than expected at the recommendation of the Department of Local Government Finance. He stated that when the assessed values are certified and have an approved budget they do the calculation and actually set the rate at the amount that it needs to be to provide the funds required for the budget. He asked the Council favorable recommendation on Bill No. 52-10. He stated that Bill Nos. 53-10 and 54-10 are the budgets for the Civil City and Enterprise Funds. He stated that he is proud to bring this budget before the Council, it is a conservative budget that meets the requirements of the community and sets a new base line as we move forward after we have seen the challenges with the implementation of the property tax caps and adjusting to the nation wide recession and its impact on the local economy. Mayor Luecke stated that this budget is balanced for the general fund and shows a modest increase in both the general fund and Park Department Budget of less than 1% each in those two funds. It reflects that we continue to see a decrease in property tax due to the property tax caps and part due to the loss of assessed value due to the recession and foreclosures and other activity, not only in South Bend but across the country. It also reflects a decrease in local income taxes from last year again because of the recession. He stated that this budget does what they promised to residents and to the businesses. Mayor Luecke stated that when he asked this Council and the St. Joseph County Council to adopt a local option income taxes to help off set the loss of property taxes, he said that they said it was critical in order for the City to be able to sustain public safety and quality of life issues in the community. This budget because of the Public Safety Loit as well as some federal dollars through the stimulus grant allows them to bring back the sworn strength of those two departments because they believe that is important to the citizens, residents, the businesses as they move forward. In addition, they are able to fund Parks programs so that they don’t have to cut the summer programs that they thought they might have to prior to the implementation of the tax as well as some additional dollars for operations in facilities moving forward. Mayor Luecke stated that this is a very positive budget however are showing a loss of 15 million dollars in property taxes from 2008, but nevertheless because of the cuts that we have made over the past couple of years and with the replacement dollars from the Local Option Income taxes are able to sustain and fund what they believe are important services for our citizens and our residents. th Mr. Gregg Zientara, City Controller, 12 Floor County-City Building, 227 W. Jefferson Blvd., South Bend, Indiana, made the presentation for the City of South Bend 2011 Proposed Budget. Mr. Zientara presented a power point presentation for the City of South Bend’s 2011 Proposed Budget. Mr. Zientara stated that a copy is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. He stated that South Bend is a City with a vision and is a vibrant, caring city. Residents and government celebrate the diversity and vitality, and together, we nurture our educational, social, cultural, natural, human, and economic resources. He stated that our City Government dedicates itself to civic engagement with open, effective dialogue among citizens and governing bodies. We enjoy a high quality of life enriched through our achievements of ethnic and racial harmony, volunteerism, philanthropy, and just equal access to economic and social opportunities, and are a center for learning. He noted out excellent schools and world-class institutions of higher education, engaged with st the community, prepare our youth to compete in the 21 century. South Bend is a community that fosters entrepreneurship, and attracts and retains completive businesses by continually investing in its work force and technology. South Bend is a city of safe and unique neighborhoods with diverse housing choices. We have built an environment that embraces our historic heritage while facilitating progressive design and land use, utilizing modern infrastructure. Downtown is a dynamic hub for housing, commerce and government, and a regional destination for culture, arts, and entertainment. South Bend has an excellent transportation system that offers alternative modes of transport, provides 4 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 accessibility throughout the community, values, pedestrians, and is integrated locally and regionally. He noted that we are proud stewards of the natural environment, preserving the St. Joseph River as a valuable resource and cherishing out parks and plentiful green spaces. Mr. Zientara noted that the City has eight (8) goals that focus on the economy, safety, quality of life, trust, responsiveness, infrastructure, finance and workforce. He noted the 2010 accomplishments that the City has withstood negative effects of circuit breaker property tax reform through reduced spending, conservative fiscal policy, local option income tax increases, and fiscally responsible behavior. All city services, all parks & recreation programs, all parks facilities, all code enforcement activities, police staffing at full force, fire staffing at full force were achieved without disruption. Economic development progress highlighted by Eddy Commons development and progress at Innovation and Ignition Parks. He noted that the stage is set for efficiency improvements in city infrastructure back office operations. Mr. Zientara stated that a new payroll system that is “state of the art” will be implemented in the next few weeks. He advised that they are getting rid of the manual processes that have been in place for a number of years. Mr. Zientara stated that in concert with City Goals & Objectives, City 2011 Budget priorities are: 1. Fund projects intended to lead to economic improvement; 2. Provide excellent public safety services (police & fire protection) to all city stakeholders (i.e. citizens, businesses, taxpayers, visitors); 3. Provide excellent quality of life services via Parks & Recreation, Arts & Culture opportunities, Human Rights protection to all city stakeholders; 4. Provide transparent disclosure to all city stakeholders; 5. Continue to improve City responsiveness, efficiency, effectiveness benefiting all city stakeholders; 6. Continue to strive for improvement in City infrastructure (i.e. roads & streets, solid waste collection service, quick response to storm damage clean-up, customer service, citizen friendly environment, “state of the art” back office city operations, ecologically friendly wastewater operations); 7. Maintain strong & financially stable city financial condition; 8. Continue to value the human resource “asset” of all city employees (bargaining & non-bargaining) who are the day to day leaders that drive delivery of all required, necessary, desired and offered services to all city stakeholders. Mr. Zientara advised that the City budget is a diverse and dynamic document (subject to change) and is divided into six (6) segregated “sections” 1. General Fund; 2. Special Revenue Funds; 3. Debt Service & Capital Funds; 4. Enterprise Funds; 5. Internal Service Funds; 6. Trust & Agency Funds and that the Common Council is the approval body required for each fund within the city budget. The General Fund is constructed of general government, public safety, code enforcement, public works, engineering, energy conservation, maintenance, traffic & lighting, human rights, arts & culture. The General Fund expenditures provide funding for the aforementioned city operations. General fund revenues are derived from the following sources: property tax, other taxes (auto excise, commercial vehicle, liquor, cigarette, gaming, and financial institutions), license fees & fines (business, court & public records, fines & violations), fees for services, internal city transfers for services. He noted that there are thirty-three (33) Special Revenue Funds, including parks & recreation, rainy day, excess levy, motor vehicle highway, grant funds, CED funds, various police & law enforcement funds, public safety LOIT, local roads & streets, various fire protection funds. Fund expenditures provide funding for projects & expenditures of these fund operations. Revenues are derived from a variety of sources including Grants, other taxes, fees for services, fines & violations, property tax revenue for Parks & Recreation. Mr. Zientara advised that Debt Service & Capital Fund (16 funds) including Hall of Fame debt service, EMS Fire capital, professional sports development, Coveleski Stadium capital, Zoo Endowment, COIT, Cumulative Capital Development (CCD), improvement, EDIT, Major Moves, Morris Capital, Palais Preservation, Hall of Fame Capital, CREED, fund expenditures and provide funding for projects & expenditures of these fund operations. Revenues are derived from a variety of sources including fees for services/income tax & other tax revenues, property tax revenue for CCD & Hall of Fame debt. Mr. Zientara stated that there are twenty-five (25) Enterprise Funds representing the “business” operations including Building Department, Parking Garages, Solid Waste, Water Works, Wastewater & Sewage Works, and Century Center. Funds are self sustaining with no city fund taxpayer support. Revenues are derived from fees for services (i.e. building & construction, fees, parking fees, utility fees for garbage collection, water usage and waste/sewer fees, user fees at the Century Center.) Expenditures are those business type expenditures required to “run” the business operations. There are four (4) Internal Service Funds including Central 5 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 Services, City business & liability insurance, employee benefits, unemployment compensation. The funds are internal city funds and are self sustaining with no city specific fund taxpayer support. Revenues are derived from fees for services to internal city operations. There are three (3) Trust & Agency Funds including Firefighters Pension, Police Pension and City Cemetery Trust. The funds are trust funds and self sustaining with no city specific fund taxpayer support. Revenues (fire & police pension) are derived from State supported money and City Cemetery revenues from private donations. Mr. Zientara stated that they had discussions early in 2010 with the St. Joseph County Assessor to get estimated assessed values for 2011. Mr. Zientara reviewed key revenue highlights noting that assessed property value 2010 pay 2011 projected down 5% (on heels of 2008 -2%, 2009 -10%, 2010 -9%) The collection rate of 2010 pay 2011 taxes set at 95% (2008 96%; 2009 90% and 2010 94% projection.) Total Property Tax Revenue ’10 pay ’11 down $.2 million. COIT Revenue down $2.2 million (18% from base, 2009 level. EDIT Revenue down $2.2 million (18% from base) and Public Safety LOIT Revenue down $1.1 million (18% from base.) General revenue down 0.7% or $.5 million; Parks & Recreation business revenue down 3%; Sewer Revenue up 19% due to rate increase for CSO capital funding and water utility business revenue down 4% due to pumping volume declines. Mr. Zientara discussed assessed value, property tax revenue status & projections on a spreadsheet on pages seventeen (17) and eighteen (18) of the power point presentation. Mr. Zientara advised that the City Administration has proposed a continued fiscal responsible budget despite continued property tax & other tax revenue declines and business revenue stagnation. He reiterated a balanced Genera Fund budget with water & sewer bonds spent down $10.7 million of prior year bond proceeds, police grant spent down $1.0 million of prior year grant proceeds, police and fire pension spent down $1.2 million of prior period proceeds and water utility business loss $.6 million, $600,000 due to loss of revenue. Mr. Zientara noted on page 20 of the power point presentation is a 2011 Proposed Budget Expenditures with comparison. Mr. Zientara closed stating that the City Administration’s proposed budget has been available to the public in documents filed in the Office of the City Clerk and on the City’s Website since the August 16, 2010 meeting with the Council. He noted that the City Administration has been engaged with the Common Council in Committee Meetings (7 sessions, approximately 14 hours) with respect to the proposed budget since the initial th meeting on August 16. He stated that the City Administration looks forward to finalization and adoption of the budget by the Common Council. Mayor Luecke thanked the Council for all the time that they have put into the Budget Hearings. He stated that the city’s budget is a complicated document that requires a lot of study and the time that the Council has spent with department heads has been very fruitful and appreciates the suggestions and is aware of additional adjustments that have been requested and would certainly like to look at. Mayor Luecke made one clarification of Mr. Zientara in that the Public Safety LOIT funds both the Police and Fire Departments. Mayor Luecke stated that he believes that this is a responsible budget, lives within the City’s means even with the further decreases in revenue sources and builds a stronger foundation from the previous cuts that were made last year from efficiencies that were developed. It allows the City to maintain the quality of life that the residents of South Bend expect and deserve and we continue to find better ways to do our work and grow our economy. He stated that they look forward to final passage of the budget in the next couple of weeks and would happy to answer any questions that the Council may have. This being the time heretofore set for the Public Hearing on the above bill, proponents and opponents were given an opportunity to be heard. Councilmember Henry Davis, Jr., thanked City Controller Gregg Zientara for giving a very detailed account of the budget. He stated that he would like to make some comments on some of the projects regarding economic development that were noted in the budget presentations that were made at the hearings before the Personnel & Finance Committee. He noted Portage Prairie, Eddy Street Commons, Hall of Fame, Coveleski, Century Center, but did not hear LaSalle Square mentioned at all. He stated that he had an opportunity to talk with a gentleman obviously a developer who is working with the City and with the Chamber of Commerce for over a year and half and is nowhere near 6 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 close to sealing the deal. He has had many employers wanting to move into his building, but because he can’t seem to get the City’s cooperation to close the deal, he is missing the opportunity, not because of financing or anything on his part, it’s the City not getting the job done. Councilmember Henry Davis, Jr., noted a customer service center mentioned at one of the budget meetings and agreed that is something that is sorely needed. But questioned how would that work, cross-training and that sounds like someone is going to lose their job. Not sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing but efficiency is a great thing. He advised that Councilmember Rouse and he went to Ft. Wayne to look at the High Performance Government Network and the Lean Six Sigma. At that workshop they learned that other cities have bought into that network. Councilmember Rouse held a committee meeting with a presentation from the Lean Six Sigma High Performance Government Network. After the presentation it was discussed with the City Administration and decided that this was not something the City was interested at that time and felt that they could do a better job of streamlining government on our own. Councilmember Henry Davis stated how ironic it is that here we are two years later asking the same question of streamlining government and doing more with less. He also heard bike lanes mentioned in one of the presentations, and stated that the people that he represents in his district don’t care about bike lanes, it’s not a concern that they are interested in. He stated that there was an increase in the Local Option Income Tax (LOIT) that he proudly voted against, along with a major sewer rate increase, but did not hear about the 6 million dollars that was put in by the City to fund a new sewer system for Notre Dame (he wasn’t absolutely sure on the dollar amount.) However, he stated that in his district the CSO project on Bonds Avenue has been quite an ordeal for the residents of that neighborhood and they are still dealing with it. Councilmember Henry Davis noted that it has been said time and time again that a large percentage of the general fund budget goes towards public safety. He noted that was a significant number considering that the remaining 19% must go to fund other departments. He also stated that when a problem arises in his district his constituents have to call him because they can’t seem to get any satisfaction. Councilmember Henry Davis feels that he should not have to call various departments to follow up to get things done that employees of the city should be able to handle and rectify. He stated that he doesn’t mind doing it, but should not have to. Mr. Zientara clarified what has to happen next. He stated that first the assessed value has to be certified. Secondly, the Council and the City Administration have to adopt the budget. Third, after passage and approval he will submit the budget to the Department of Local Government Finance and they will make the determination on the tax rate based on the approved budget. There being no one present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in opposition to these bills. Councilmember Dieter made a motion to recommend Bill No. 52-10 to the full Council favorably. Councilmember Rouse seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes and one (1) nay (Councilmember Henry Davis.) Additionally, Councilmember Dieter made a motion set this bill for Third Reading on September 30, 2010. Councilmember Rouse seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes and one (1) nay (Councilmember Henry Davis.) Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to continue Bill No. 53-10 in the Council Portion Only, until the October 11, 2010 meeting of the Council. Councilmember White seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. Councilmember Dieter made a motion to continue Bill No. 54-10 in the Council Portion Only, until the October 11, 2010 meeting of the Council. Councilmember White seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. BILL NO. 56-10 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, FIXING THE ANNUAL PAY AND MONETARY FRINGE BENEFITS OF POLICE OFFICERS OF THE SOUTH BEND POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR CALENDAR YEARS 2011, 2012 AND 2013 7 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 BILL NO. 57-10 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, FIXING THE ANNUAL PAY AND MONETARY FRINGE BENEFITS OF FIREFIGHTERS OF THE SOUTH BEND FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR CALENDAR YEARS 2011, 2012, 2013 AND 2014 Councilmember Varner made a motion to continue Bill Nos. 56-10 and 57-10 to the Special Meeting of the Council on September 30, 2010 and refer them to the Personnel & Finance and Health and Public Safety Committees. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. BILL NO. 58-10 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, FIXING MAXIMUM WAGES OF TEAMSTER EMPLOYEES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2011 BILL NO. 59-10 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL FIXING MAXIMUM SALARIES AND WAGES OF APPOINTED OFFICERS AND NON- BARGAINING EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2011 Councilmember Dieter made a motion to continue Bill Nos. 58-10 and 59-10 to the Special Meeting of the Council on September 30, 2010 and refer them to the Personnel & Finance Committee. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. RISE AND REPORT Councilmember Varner made a motion to rise and report to the full Council. Councilmember Henry Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. ATTEST: ATTEST: _________________________ _________________________ John Voorde, City Clerk Ann Puzzello, Chairperson Committee of the Whole REGULAR MEETING RECONVENED Be it remembered that the Common Council of the City of South Bend reconvened in the Council Chambers on the fourth floor of the County-City Building at 7:27 p.m. President Derek D. Dieter presided with nine (9) members present. BILLS-THIRD READING There were no bills for Third Reading at this time. RESOLUTIONS 8 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 RESOLUTION NO. 4048-10 A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE ADOPTION OF A DECLARATORY RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, COMMONLY KNOWN AS 901 (LOT 2) AND 909 (LOT 1) NORTH ST. PETER STREET AS RESIDENTIALLY DISTRESSED AREAS FOR PURPOSES OF A (5) FIVE-YEAR RESIDENTIAL REAL PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR SNYDER CUSTOM HOMES, INCORPORATED WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, has adopted a Declaratory Resolution designating certain areas within the City as Residentially Distressed Areas for the purpose of tax abatement consideration; and WHEREAS, a Declaratory Resolution designated the area commonly known as 901 (Lot 2) and 909 (Lot 1) North St. Peter Street (old consolidated address is 727 East Corby Street), South Bend, Indiana, and which is more particularly described as follows: Lot 1 and Lot 2 as shown the same and designated on the Plat of Snyder’s Corby Street Minor Subdivision as in the Office of the Recorder of St. Joseph County, Indiana; , and this property which has the old consolidated Tax Key Number of 018-5107-3766be designated as a Residentially Distressed Area under the provisions of Indiana Code 6-1.1- 12.1 et seq., and South Bend Municipal Code Sections 2-76 et seq., and; WHEREAS, notice of the adoption of a Declaratory Resolution and the public hearing before the Council has been published pursuant to Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1-2.5; and WHEREAS, the Council held a public hearing for the purposes of hearing all remonstrance’s and objections from interested persons; and WHEREAS, the Council has determined that the qualifications for a residentially distressed area have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, as follows: SECTION I. The Common Council hereby determines and finds that the petition for real property tax abatement and the Statement of Benefits form meet the requirements of Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1 et seq., for tax abatement. SECTION II. The Common Council hereby determines and finds that the area meets one of the following conditions as formally established in Ordinance No. 9394-03, which was passed on February 10, 2003: A. The area is comprised of parcels that are either unimproved or contain only one (1) or two (2) family dwellings designed for up to four (4) families, including accessory buildings for those dwellings; or B. Any dwellings in the area are not permanently occupied and are: i. the subject of an order issued under IC 36-7-9; or ii. evidencing significant building deficiencies; or C. Parcels of property in the area: i. have been sold and not redeemed under IC 6-1.1-24 and IC 6-1.1-25; or ii. are owned by a unit of local government; or D. A significant number of dwelling units within the area are not permanently 9 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 occupied or a significant number of parcels in the area are vacant land; or E. A significant number of dwelling units within the area are: i. the subject of an order issued under IC 36-7-9; or ii. evidencing significant building deficiencies; or F. The area has experienced a net loss in the number of dwelling units, as documented by census information, local building and demolition permits, or certificates of occupancy, or the areas are owned by Indiana or the United States; or G. The area (plus any areas previously designated under this subsection) will not exceed ten percent (10%) of the total area within the Council’s jurisdiction. SECTION III. The Common Council also hereby determines and finds the following: A. That the description of the proposed redevelopment meets the applicable standards for such development. B. That the estimate of the value of the redevelopment is reasonable for projects of this nature; C. That the other benefits about which information was requested are benefits that can be reasonably expected to result from the proposed described redevelopment; and D. That the totality of benefits is sufficient to justify the requested deduction, all of which satisfy the requirements of Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1-3. E. The deduction will not be allowed unless the dwelling is rehabilitated to meet local code standards for habitability. F. The deduction will not be allowed unless the dwelling rehabilitation is completed within five (5) calendar years from the date of the adoption of this Resolution by the Common Council. SECTION IV. The Common Council hereby confirms its Declaratory Resolution designating the area described herein as a Residentially Distressed Area for the purposes of tax abatement. Such designation is for Real property tax abatement only and is limited to five (5) calendar years from the date of adoption of the Declaratory Resolution by the Common Council. SECTION V. The Common Council hereby determines that the property owner is qualified for and is granted Real property tax deduction for a period of five (5) years, and further determines that the petition complies with Chapter 2, Article 6, of the Municipal Code of the City of South Bend and Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1 et seq. SECTION VI. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption by the Common Council and approval by the Mayor. s/Derek D. Dieter Member of the Common Council Mr. J. Bernard Feeney, Land, Feeney & Associates, Inc., 715 South Michigan Street, South Bend, Indiana, made the presentation for this bill on behalf of the property owner Snyder Custom Builders, Inc. Mr. Feeney advised that Snyder Custom Homes intends to construct two new single family homes. Each home will be two stories. One of the homes will contain approximately 2,850 square feet with three bedrooms and an attached two stall garage. The other home will contain approximately 3,000 square feet with four bedrooms, a finished lower level and an attached two car garage. The cost of the two homes will be approximately $525,000 each. Mr. Feeney noted that total taxes to be abated for the two homes is estimated to be $3,786.68 and total taxes to be paid for the two homes are estimated at $55,204.60. A Public Hearing was held on the Resolution at this time. 10 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 There being no one present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in opposition to this Resolution, Councilmember Varner made a motion to adopt this Resolution. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried and the Resolution was adopted by a roll call vote of eight (8) ayes and one (1) nay (Councilmember Henry Davis.) RESOLUTION NO. 4049-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1400 WEST RIVERSIDE DRIVE AN ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA FOR PURPOSES OF A (5) FIVE-YEAR PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR STEEL WAREHOUSE COMPANY, LLC AND AFFILIATES AND EQUIPMENT LESSORS WHEREAS, a petition for personal property tax abatement consideration has been filed with the City Clerk for consideration by the Common Council of the City of South , Bend, Indiana, requesting that the area commonly known as 1400 West Riverside Drive South Bend, Indiana, and which is more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of the Southwest ¼ of said, section 35; thence South 89 49’ 52” West (bearing assumed) along the South line of said section, 308.97 feet; thence North 89 55’ 00” West, 116.24 feet; thence North 00 00’ 27” West, 12.00 feet to the North line of a 12 foot alley; thence North 89 55’ 00” West along said North line of alley; the East line of Kessler Boulevard, 128.00 feet South 89 55’ 18” East of the Northeast addition to the City of South Bend recorded April 6, 1906 in the Plat Book 0, pages 30 and 31; thence South 89 55’ 18” East along the South line of King Street, 352.84 feet; thence North 00 00’ 27” West, 194.85 feet to a point the centerline of the East and West 14 foot alley between King Street and McCartney Street produced East; thence North 00 06’ 09” East, 128.81 feet; thence North 89 46’ 49” East 287.05 feet to the Westerly line of Riverside Drive; thence South 16 37’15” West along a chord subtending said Westerly line of Riverside Drive, 455.43 feet to the South line said section 35; thence North 90 00’ 00” West along said South line, 156.71 feet to the point of the beginning. Commencing at the Southeast corner of the ¼ of said section 35; thence North 00 00’ 30” West (bearing assumed) along the East line of said Southwest ¼ a distance of 463.14 feet to the Point of Beginning for the following described tract; thence continuing North 00 00’ 30” West along said East line 336.00 feet to the South line of Queen Street; thence South 89 56’ 09” West along said South line of Queen Street 176.60 feet, thence North 00 02’ 36” Est. 195.00 feet to the centerline of the East and West 14 foot alley between Kinyon Street and Queen Street; thence South 89 56’ 09” West along said centerline of alley, 131.27 feet; thence South 00 06’ 09” West along the East line of Lot 145 in the Third Plot of Northwest Addition recorded March 7, 1907 in Plat Book 9, page 60 in the Office of the St. Joseph County Recorder and its Northerly and Southerly extensions, 195.00 feet to the South line of Queen Street; thence South 89 56’ 09” West along Allen Street; thence South 00 05’ 51” West along said East line of Allen Street, 329.87 feet to the South line of McCartney Street; thence South 89 58’ 27” East along said South line of McCartney Street, 12.91 feet; thence South 00 06’ 09” West 6.11 feet; thence North 89 56’ 09” East 308.71 feet to the Point of Beginning. 11 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 and which has Tax Key Numbers 018-2110-4065 and 18-2110-4067 be designated as an Economic Revitalization Area under the provisions of Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1 et seq., and South Bend Municipal Code Sections 2-76 et seq., and; WHEREAS, the Department of Community and Economic Development has concluded an investigation and prepared a report with information sufficient for the Common Council to determine that the area qualifies as an Economic Revitalization Area under Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1, et seq., and South Bend Municipal Code Sections 2-76, et seq., and has further prepared maps and plats showing the boundaries and such other information regarding the area in question as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Community and Economic Development Committee of the Common Council has reviewed said report and recommended to the Common Council that the area qualifies as an Economic Revitalization Area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, as follows: SECTION I. The Common Council hereby determines and finds pursuant to Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1-4.5 et seq., that: a. The estimate of the cost of the new manufacturing equipment is reasonable for equipment of that type; b. That the estimate of the number of individuals that will be employed or whose employment will be retained by the Petitioner can reasonably be expected to result from the proposed installation of new manufacturing equipment; c. That the estimate of the annual salaries of those individuals that will be employed or whose employment will be retained by the Petitioner can be reasonably expected to result from the proposed installation of new manufacturing equipment; d. Any other benefits about which information was requested are benefits that can be reasonably expected to result from the proposed new manufacturing equipment; and e. The totality of benefits is sufficient to justify the deduction requested. SECTION II. The Common Council hereby determines and finds that the proposed new manufacturing equipment can be reasonably expected to yield the benefits identified in the Statement of Benefits as set forth in Sections 1 through 3 of the Petition for Personal Property Tax Abatement Consideration and that Statement of Benefits form completed by the petitioner, said form being prescribed by the State Board of Accounts, are sufficient to justify the deduction granted under Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1-4.5. SECTION III. The Common Council hereby accepts the report and recommendation of the Department of Community and Economic Development, and the Community and Economic Development Committee's favorable recommendation, that the area herein described be designated as an Economic Revitalization Area for purposes of personal property tax abatement and hereby makes such a designation. SECTION IV. The Common Council determines that such designation is for personal property tax abatement only and shall be limited to two (2) calendar years from the date of the adoption of this Resolution by the Common Council. SECTION V. The Common Council hereby determines that the property owner is qualified for and is granted property tax deduction for a period of (5) five years. 12 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 SECTION VI. The Common Council directs the City Clerk to cause notice of the adoption of this Declaratory Resolution for Personal Property Tax Abatement to be published pursuant to Indiana Code 5-3-1, said publication providing notice of the public hearing before the Common Council on the proposed confirming of said declaration. SECTION VII. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption by the Common Council and approval by the Mayor. s/Derek D. Dieter Member of the Common Council Councilmember Timothy Rouse, Chairperson, Community & Economic Development Committee, reported that this committee met this afternoon and voted to send this bill to the Common Council with a favorable recommendation. Mr. Jim Tuesley, Attorney for Steel Warehouse, advised that Steel Warehouse is a steel service center focusing on flat rolled, low carbon steel, with operations involving slitting, leveling, pickling, temper rolling, shearing and cold reducing. The company also supplies profiling parts using its plasma and laser cutting operations. In connection with its operations the company takes substantial positions in steel products for future sale and marketing of same to its customers. He stated that under the proposed project Steel Warehouse will add laser cutting and material handling capacity for its existing and expanding customer base. He noted that the total estimated cost of the equipment is $2,400,000 to $3,000,000. He noted that depending on the final value of the equipment to be procured total taxes to be abated during the five (5) year abatement period are estimated to be between $55,746 and $77,809. Total additional taxes to be paid as a result of the project during the five (5) year abatement period are estimated to be between $163,197 and $203,997. Mr. Tuesley stated that per the petition, it is estimated that the project will create seven (7) to nineteen (19) new, permanent full-time positions with an annual payroll of $212,700 to $582,864. The project will also maintain four (4) existing permanent full-time positions with a total annual payroll of $133,120. A Public Hearing was held on the Resolution at this time. There being no one present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in opposition to this Resolution, Councilmember Rouse made a motion to adopt this Resolution. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried and the Resolution was adopted by a roll call vote of nine (9) ayes. RESOLUTION NO. 4050-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, COMMONLY KNOWN AS 2722 W. TUCKER DRIVE AN ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA FOR PURPOSES OF A (5) FIVE-YEAR PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR STEEL WAREHOUSE COMPANY, LLC AND AFFILIATES AND EQUIPMENT LESSORS WHEREAS, a petition for personal property tax abatement consideration has been filed with the City Clerk for consideration by the Common Council of the City of South , Bend, Indiana, requesting that the area commonly known as 2722 W Tucker Drive South Bend, Indiana, and which is described: as: The following parcels of Real Estate all located in St. Joseph County, Indiana: A part of the South ½ of the Northwest ¼ of Section 15, Township 37 North, Range 2 East in the City of South Bend, St. Joseph County, Indiana, described as follows: 13 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 Beginning at a point on the East line of the Southwest ¼ of the Northwest ¼ of said Section 15, 580.64 feet South of the Northeast corner of said Southwest ¼ of the Northwest ¼, said point being 172.0 feet North of the North right of way line of the Indiana Northern Railway Company; thence Westerly parallel with said North right-of- way line 565 feet to the Southwest corner of a tract of land conveyed to Stanley Enterprise, Inc. By a deed recorded October 16, 1993 in Deed Record 777, page 226; thence North along the West line of said Stanley Enterprises, inc. tract, said line being parallel with the East line of said Southwest ¼ of the Northwest ¼, 323.0 feet to the South line of Tucker Drive; thence West along the South line of Tucker Drive 215.93 feet; thence South parallel with said East line of the Southwest ¼ of the Northwest ¼, 495.90 feet to the North right-of-way line of the Indiana Northern Railway Company; thence Easterly along said North right-of-way line, 860.23 feet to the West edge of Steel Warehouse Co. Inc. building; thence North along said West edge of building, 172.0 feet; thence Westerly parallel with the North right-of-way line of the Indiana Northern Railway Company, 79.3 feet to the point of beginning, containing 5.0 acres, more or less.. A part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 37 North, Range 2 East in the City of South Bend, Indiana, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point 260 feet South and 25 feet West of the Northeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence West 540 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, 324.25 feet to a point 172 feet North of the North line of the right-of-way of the Indiana Northern Railway Company; thence East parallel with said North line of said right-of-way, 540 feet; thence North parallel with the East line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, 320.75 feet to the place of beginning. A tract of land in the West Half (1/2) of the Northwest Quarter (1/4) of Section Fifteen (15), Township Thirty-seven (37) North, Range Two (2) East, now within and a part of the City of South Bend, St. Joseph County, Indiana, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the center of the Northwest Quarter (1/4) of said Section Fifteen(15); thence South along the North and South center line of said Quarter Section Two Hundred Twenty (220) feet to the North line of Tucker Drive; thence West along said North line to the West line of said Section Fifteen (15); thence North along said West line One Hundred Twenty-eight and One Tenth (128.1) feet, more or less, to a line Two Hundred Fifty (250) feet by rectangular measurement Southeasterly from said original centerline of the New York Central Railroad right-of-way; thence Northeasterly parallel to the Two Hundred Fifty (250) feet by rectangular measurement Southeasterly from said original centerline of the New York Central Railroad right-of-way, Seven Hundred Twenty-seven and One One-Hundredth (727.01) feet, more or less, to a point on the East line of the Southwest Quarter (1/4) of the Northwest quarter (1/4) of the Northwest Quarter (1/4) of Section Fifteen (15); thence Southerly along said East line One Hundred Ninety-nine and Eighty-six Hundredths (199.86) feet, more or less, to the South line of the Northwest Quarter (1/4) of the Northwest Quarter (1/4) of Section Fifteen (15); thence East along said South line Six Hundred Sixty-three and fifty-two hundredths (663.52) feet, more or less, to the place of beginning, excepting Thirty (30) feet off the East side thereof for purposes of a public highway. A lot or parcel of land situated in the Northwest quarter of Section 15, Township 37 North, Range 2 East, now within and a part of the City of south Bend, bounded by a line running as follows, to –wit: Beginning at a point on the North line of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 15,600 feet West of the Northeast corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 15; thence running West along said North line a distance 725.8 feet to the Northwest corner of said Southeast Quarter of said Northwest Quarter; thence South a distance 220 feet, more or less, to the North line of a 40 foot road known as Tucker Drive; thence East along the 14 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 North line of said roadway to a point due South of the place of beginning; thence North to the place of beginning. Together with and subject to an easement over the 40 foot roadway lying immediately South of the above described real estate known as Tucker Drive, and extending Eastward to Olive Street. Part of the Southeast Quarter (1/4) of the Northwest Quarter (1/4) of Section Fifteen (15), Township Thirty-seven (37) North, Range Two (2) East, now within and a part of the City of South Bend, described as beginning at a point 260 feet South of the Northwest corner of the Southeast Quarter (1/4) of the Northwest Quarter (1/4) of said Section fifteen (15); thence South 492.9 feet to the North line of the right-of-way of the Indiana Northern Railroad; thence East along the said North line of the right-of-way of the Indiana Northern Railroad 305 feet; thence North 492.9 feet; thence West 305 feet to the place of beginning. Together with a right-of-way over a 40 foot roadway North of and adjoining the aforedescribed tract, and continuing Easterly to Olive Street, which said 40 foot roadway is now commonly known as Tucker Drive in said City of South Bend. The East Half of the South East Quarter of the North East Quarter of Section No. 16, Township No. 37 North, Range No. 2 East, containing 20 acres, more or less, and being Lot No. 16 in the Sub-division of said Section No. 16, and now within a part of the City of South Bend, excepting there from the following: The original right-of-way across, the North West corner heretofore conveyed by Joseph B. Arnold, to the Indiana Illinois, and Iowa Railway Company by Warranty Deed dated August 21, 1894 and recorded in Deed Record 95, page 553, of the records of St. Joseph County, Indiana; and excepting second the following: Beginning at a point on the West line of said Lot Numbered 16, where the same is intersected by the South Easterly line of said original right-of-way, thence running South on the west line of Lot Numbered 16, 219 feet, more or less, to a point distance 250 feet by rectangular measurement from the original center line of said right-of-way; thence North Easterly parallel with and 205 feet distant by rectangular measurement from the original center line of said right-of-way a distance of 733.3 feet, more or less, to a point on the East line of said Section No. 16, thence North on said East line, a distance of 105.5 feet, more or less, to the North East corner of said Lot No. 16; thence West along the North line of said Lot No. 16, thence North on said East line, a distance of 105.5 feet, more or less, to the North East corner of said Lot No 16; thence West along the North line of said Lot No. 16, a distance 254.5 feet, more or less, to the intersection with the said Easterly line of said original right-of- way; thence South Westerly with said Easterly line a distance 454.5 feet, more or less, to the place of beginning, containing 3.04 acres, more or less; excepting third, all that part of said lot no. 16 which lies South of the North line of the right-of-way of the St. Joseph, South Bend and Southern Railroad Company, excepting fourth, a strip of land 70 feet wide North and South lying next north of and adjoining the right-of-way of the St. Joseph, South Bend and Southern Railroad Company; excepting further that a strip of 40 feet in width, North and South, and being a extension of Tucker Drive, shall be established through the Northerly part of said tract and dedicated to the public as a highway, which said extension shall extend to the right-of-way of the New York Central Railroad Company. All that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 37 North, Range 2 East, described as follows: Beginning at a point 260 feet South and 330 feet West of the Northeast corner of the said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence West 996.08 feet to the West line of said section; thence South 498.35 feet to the North line of the right-of-way of the Indiana Northern Railway Company; thence Easterly along the said Northerly line of said Indiana Northern Railway Company a distance of 996.08 feet, more or less, to a point on the Northerly line of the said Indiana Northern Railway Company South of the place of beginning; thence North to the place of beginning. Beginning in the center line of Olive Street in said City at a point Seven Hundred Eighteen and twenty-five hundredths (718.25) feet South of the North line of said Section 15 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 No. 15, said point of beginning being on the Southerly line of a strip of land fifty(50) feet wide reserved for the right of way of the Indiana Northern Railroad Company thence running South on the center line of Olive Street, a distance of Six Hundred Eight and fifteen-hundredths (608.15) feet to the South east corner of said North East quarter of the North West quarter of Section No. 15; thence running West on said South line, a distance of Thirteen Hundred twenty-seven (1327) feet to the West line of said quarter Section, thence North on said West line, a distance of Four Hundred Ninety-three and four hundredths (493.04) feet to the Southerly line of said parcel deeded by said Grantors to the New York Central Railway Company; thence North Easterly along the Southerly line of said last named parcel to a point on the South line or the right of way of the Indiana Northern Railroad Company due West of the place of beginning: thence East ten hundred Fifty-seven and Thirteen-hundredths (1057.13) feet, more or less, to the place of beginning and containing Seventeen and seven hundred Sixty-one thousandths (17.761) acres, exclusive of Olive Street. All that part of the East Half of the North West Quarter of the North West Quarter of Section No. 15, Township No. 37 North, Range No. 2 East, that lies South of the right-of- way of the Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa Railroad Company (now New York Central Railroad), now within and a part of the City of South Bend; excepting there from a lot or parcel of land bounded as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the South Easterly line of said right-of-way and the East line of the East Half of the Northwest Quarter of the North West Quarter of said Section No. 15, thence running South Westerly along the South Easterly line of said right-of-way to the West line of the East Half of the North West Quarter of the North West Quarter of said Section; thence running South 219 feet, more or less, to a point; thence North Easterly parallel with and 219 feet South of the Southerly line of said right-of-way to the East line of the East Half of the North West Quarter of the North West Quarter of said Section No. 15; thence North 219 feet, more or less, to the place of beginning. and which have Key Numbers 18-8075-2838, 18-8075-2839, 18-8075-2843, 18-8075- 2844.03, 18-8075-2844.04, 18-8075-2844.06, 18-8075-2845.01, 18-8075-2845.02, 18- 8075-2845.03, be designated as an Economic Revitalization Area under the provisions of Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1 et seq., and South Bend Municipal Code Sections 2-76 et seq., and; WHEREAS, the Department of Community and Economic Development has concluded an investigation and prepared a report with information sufficient for the Common Council to determine that the area qualifies as an Economic Revitalization Area under Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1, et seq., and South Bend Municipal Code Sections 2-76, et seq., and has further prepared maps and plats showing the boundaries and such other information regarding the area in question as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Community and Economic Development Committee of the Common Council has reviewed said report and recommended to the Common Council that the area qualifies as an Economic Revitalization Area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, as follows: SECTION I. The Common Council hereby determines and finds pursuant to Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1-4.5 et seq., that: a. The estimate of the cost of the new manufacturing equipment is reasonable for equipment of that type; b. That the estimate of the number of individuals that will be employed or whose employment will be retained by the Petitioner can reasonably be expected to result from the proposed installation of new manufacturing equipment; 16 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 c. That the estimate of the annual salaries of those individuals that will be employed or whose employment will be retained by the Petitioner can be reasonably expected to result from the proposed installation of new manufacturing equipment; d. Any other benefits about which information was requested are benefits that can be reasonably expected to result from the proposed new manufacturing equipment; and e. The totality of benefits is sufficient to justify the deduction requested. SECTION II. The Common Council hereby determines and finds that the proposed new manufacturing equipment can be reasonably expected to yield the benefits identified in the Statement of Benefits as set forth in Sections 1 through 3 of the Petition for Personal Property Tax Abatement Consideration and that Statement of Benefits form completed by the petitioner, said form being prescribed by the State Board of Accounts, are sufficient to justify the deduction granted under Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1-4.5. SECTION III. The Common Council hereby accepts the report and recommendation of the Department of Community and Economic Development, and the Community and Economic Development Committee's favorable recommendation, that the area herein described be designated as an Economic Revitalization Area for purposes of personal property tax abatement and hereby makes such a designation. SECTION IV. The Common Council determines that such designation is for personal property tax abatement only and shall be limited to two (2) calendar years from the date of the adoption of this Resolution by the Common Council. SECTION V. The Common Council hereby determines that the property owner is qualified for and is granted property tax deduction for a period of (5) five years. SECTION VI. The Common Council directs the City Clerk to cause notice of the adoption of this Declaratory Resolution for Personal Property Tax Abatement to be published pursuant to Indiana Code 5-3-1, said publication providing notice of the public hearing before the Common Council on the proposed confirming of said declaration. SECTION VII. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption by the Common Council and approval by the Mayor. s/Derek D. Dieter Member of the Common Council Mr. Jim Tuesley, Attorney for Steel Warehouse, advised that this abatement request for personal property at 2722 W. Tucker Drive involves the acquisition of equipment for manufacturing, servicing, processing and material handling of steel and steel products, having a total cost expected to be from $1,000,000 to $2,500,000. The acquisition will enable the company to add capacity and modernize its existing manufacturing equipment and facilities at this location. Mr. Tuesley noted that depending on the final value of the equipment to be procured total taxes to be abated during the five (5) year abatement period are estimated to be between $6,445 and $16,113. Total additional taxes to be paid as a result of the project during the five (5) year abatement period are estimated to be between $67,999 and $169,997. He stated that per the petition, it is estimated that the project will create four (4) to seven (7) new permanent full time jobs at the Tucker location representing new annual payroll of $134,500 to $232,600. The project is also expected to retain a total of four (4) full time jobs, representing an annual payroll of $133,120 at the facility. A Public Hearing was held on the Resolution at this time. 17 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 There being no one present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in opposition to this Resolution, Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to adopt this Resolution. Councilmember White seconded the motion which carried and the Resolution was adopted by a roll call vote of nine (9) ayes. RESOLUTION NO. 4051-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, APPROVING A PETITION OF THE AREA BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1401 SOUTH LAFAYETTE BLVD., SOUTH BEND, INDIANA WHEREAS, Indiana Code Section 36-7-4-918.6, requires the Common Council to give notice pursuant to Indiana Code Section 5-14-1.5-5, of its intention to consider Petitions from the Board of Zoning Appeals for approval or disapproval; and WHEREAS, the Common Council must take action within sixty (60) days after the Board of Zoning Appeals makes its recommendation to the Council pursuant to I.C. 36-7-4-918.6; and WHEREAS, the Common Council is required to make a determination in writing on such requests pursuant to Indiana Code Section 36-7-4-918.4, and WHEREAS, the South Bend Board of Zoning Appeals has made a recommendation, pursuant to applicable state law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA as follows: SECTION I. The Common Council has provided notice of the hearing on the Petition from the Board of Zoning Appeals pursuant to Indiana Code Section 5-14-1.5-5, requesting that a Special Exception be granted for the property located at: 1401 South Lafayette Blvd, South Bend, Indiana: In order to permit the construction of a 180 foot telecommunications tower in a “GI” General Industrial District SECTION II. Following a presentation by the Petitioner, and after proper public hearing, the Common Council hereby approves the petition of the South Bend Board of Zoning Appeals, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. SECTION III. The Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, hereby finds that: 1. The proposed use will not be injurious to the public health, safety, comfort, community moral standards, convenience or general welfare; 2. The proposed use will not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or property values therein; 3. The proposed use will be consistent with the character of the district in which it is located and the land uses authorized therein; 4. The proposed use is compatible with the recommendation of the City of South Bend Comprehensive plan; all of which is requested by the South Bend Municipal Code §21-09.03 SECTION IV. Approval is subject to the Petitioner complying with the reasonable conditions established by the Board of Zoning Appeals which are on file in the office of the City Clerk. 18 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 SECTION V. The Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption by the Common Council and approval by the Mayor. s/Derek D. Dieter Member of the Common Council Councilmember Al “Buddy” Kirsits, Chairperson, Zoning and Annexation Committee, reported that this committee met this afternoon and voted to send this bill to the Common Council with a favorable recommendation. Councilmember Oliver Davis disclosed that he is a member of the South Bend Public Transportation Corporation (TRANSPO) Board. He stated that he has filed his Conflict of Interest paperwork with the State of Indiana and a copy is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. After discussion with Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand it was determined that no conflict exists. Mr. Mark Lyons, Assistant Zoning Administrator, 125 S. Lafayette Blvd., South Bend, Indiana, presented the report from the Area Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Lyons advised that the petitioner is seeking a Special Exception to allow a 180’ tall telecommunications tower in a “DI” General Industrial District. He stated that the Area Board of Zoning Appeals gave it a public hearing on September 1, 2010 and sends this bill to the Common Council with a favorable recommendation. Mr. Michael Hardy, Attorney, Barnes & Thornburg, 100 N. Michigan Street, South Bend, made the presentation for the bill on behalf of the petitioner South Bend Public Transportation Corporation, (TRANSPO) as it is better known as. Mr. Hardy advised that TRANSPO has built a new building within Ignition Park. At their current facility they have a large communications tower of the lattice style and this communication tower is utilized only for transportation vehicles which are a part of the TRANSPO system. They would like to re-locate that existing lattice style tower from their current facility on Northside to their new facility in Ignition Park. Mr. Hardy noted that this communication tower is not being utilized for any purpose other than TRANSPO’s communication with their bus drivers. He stated that it is an appropriate size, appropriate height, and appropriate style. It was designed for that, and this would allow TRANSPO not to incur any additional expense. He asked the Council for their favorable consideration. A Public Hearing was held on the Resolution at this time. There being no one present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in opposition to this Resolution, Councilmember Puzello made a motion to adopt this Resolution. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried and the Resolution was adopted by a roll call vote of nine (9) ayes. RESOLUTION NO. 4052-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, APPROVING A PETITION OF THE AREA BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2602 WESTERN AVENUE, SOUTH BEND, INDIANA WHEREAS, Indiana Code Section 36-7-4-918.6, requires the Common Council to give notice pursuant to Indiana Code Section 5-14-1.5-5, of its intention to consider Petitions from the Board of Zoning Appeals for approval or disapproval; and 19 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 WHEREAS, the Common Council must take action within sixty (60) days after the Board of Zoning Appeals makes its recommendation to the Council pursuant to I.C. 36-7-4-918.6; and WHEREAS, the Common Council is required to make a determination in writing on such requests pursuant to Indiana Code Section 36-7-4-918.4, and WHEREAS, the South Bend Board of Zoning Appeals has made a recommendation, pursuant to applicable state law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA as follows: SECTION I. The Common Council has provided notice of the hearing on the Petition from the Board of Zoning Appeals pursuant to Indiana Code Section 5-14-1.5-5, requesting that a Special Exception be granted for the property located at: 2602 Western Avenue, South Bend, Indiana In order to permit: The Approval of a Special Exception to allow for the operation of a Private Club for property located at 2602 Western Avenue, South Bend, Indiana per Section 21-03.02 (a) (2) (E) of the City of South Bend, Zoning Ordinance. SECTION II. Following a presentation by the Petitioner, and after proper public hearing, the Common Council hereby approves the petition of the South Bend Board of Zoning Appeals, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. SECTION III. The Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, hereby finds that: 1. The proposed use will not be injurious to the public health, safety, comfort, community moral standards, convenience or general welfare; 2. The proposed use will not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or property values therein; 3. The proposed use will be consistent with the character of the district in which it is located and the land uses authorized therein; 4. The proposed use is compatible with the recommendation of the City of South Bend Comprehensive plan; all of which is requested by the South Bend Municipal Code §21-09.03 SECTION IV. Approval is subject to the Petitioner complying with the reasonable conditions established by the Board of Zoning Appeals which are on file in the office of the City Clerk. SECTION V. The Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption by the Common Council and approval by the Mayor. s/Derek D. Dieter Member of the Common Council Councilmember Al “Buddy” Kirsits, Chairperson, Zoning and Annexation Committee, reported that this committee met this afternoon and voted to send this bill to the Common Council with a favorable recommendation. 20 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 Mr. Mark Lyons, Assistant Zoning Administrator, 125 S. Lafayette Blvd., South Bend, Indiana, presented the report from the Area Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Lyons advised that the petitioner is seeking a Special Exception to allow a private Club in a “MU” Mixed Use District on property located at 2602 Western Avenue. Mr. Lyons stated that the Board of Zoning Appeals gave it a Public Hearing on September 1, 210 and sends this bill to the Common Council with a favorable recommendation and with a recommendation that they provide a 20’ x 40’ paved parking area. Mr. Mike Danch, President, Danch, Harner & Associates, 1643 Commerce Drive, South Bend, representing the petitioner and also representing the City of South Bend and the contingent purchaser for the property. This project is a relocation of the Hells Angels Private Club from the corner of Catalpa Street and Indiana Avenue to 2602 Western Avenue. Mr. Danch stated that the clubs current location is part of the Ignition Park project and the City has acquired that property. He noted that the Hells Angels Club has been at their current location for over 30 years. He advised that the City of South Bend’s Redevelopment Department has been working with the Hells Angels Club to find a suitable location. This existing building on Western Avenue fits the criteria that they were looking for. It was noted that the recommendation from the Area Board of Zoning Appeals that a paved 20’ x 40’ parking area be provided and that was agreed to. Mr. Danch asked the Council for their favorable consideration. A Public Hearing was held on the Resolution at this time. Pastor Ralph Miles spoke in favor of this bill. He stated that he looks forward to seeing the club relocate and believes that they will help keep crime down in the neighborhood. There being no one else present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in opposition to this Resolution, Councilmember Puzello made a motion to adopt this Resolution. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried and the Resolution was adopted by a roll call vote of eight (8) ayes (Councilmember Rouse left the Council Chambers before the vote was taken.) RESOLUTION NO. 4053-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, APPROVING A PETITION OF THE AREA BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3700 S. GERTRUDE WHEREAS, Indiana Code Section 36-7-4-918.6, requires the Common Council to give notice pursuant to Indiana Code Section 5-14-1.5-5, of its intention to consider Petitions from the Board of Zoning Appeals for approval or disapproval; and WHEREAS, the Common Council must take action within sixty (60) days after the Board of Zoning Appeals makes its recommendation to the Council pursuant to I.C. 36-7-4-918.6; and WHEREAS, the Common Council is required to make a determination in writing on such requests pursuant to Indiana Code Section 36-7-4-918.4, and WHEREAS, the South Bend Board of Zoning Appeals has made a recommendation, pursuant to applicable state law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA as follows: SECTION I. The Common Council has provided notice of the hearing on the Petition from the Board of Zoning Appeals pursuant to Indiana Code Section 5-14-1.5-5, 21 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 requesting that a Special Exception be granted for the property located at: 3700 S. Gertrude St. in order to permit the installation and operation of a resource recover facility. SECTION II. Following a presentation by the Petitioner, and after proper public hearing, the Common Council hereby approves the petition of the South Bend Board of Zoning Appeals, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. SECTION III. The Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, hereby finds that: 1. The proposed use will not be injurious to the public health, safety, comfort, community moral standards, convenience or general welfare; 2. The proposed use will not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or property values therein; 3. The proposed use will be consistent with the character of the district in which it is located and the land uses authorized therein; 4. The proposed use is compatible with the recommendation of the City of South Bend Comprehensive plan; all of which is requested by the South Bend Municipal Code §21-09.03 SECTION IV. Approval is subject to the Petitioner complying with the reasonable conditions established by the Board of Zoning Appeals which are on file in the office of the City Clerk. SECTION V. The Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption by the Common Council and approval by the Mayor. s/Derek D. Dieter Member of the Common Council th Councilmember White made a motion to accept the 4 Substitute Bill as on file in the Office of the City Clerk. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. Councilmember Kirsits, Chairperson, Zoning & Annexation Committee, reported that this committee met three times on this bill and sends it to the full Council with no recommendation. st Mr. Richard Deahl, Attorney at Law, Barnes & Thornburg, 600 1 Source Bank Center, 100 North Michigan, South Bend, Indiana, made the presentation on behalf of Randy Schlipp, owner NRJ Real Estate, LLC. Mr. Deahl thanked the Council for their devotion and attention that they have given to this bill. Mr. Deahl stated that this project has not changed from the original hearing at the Area Board of Zoning Appeals nor has it changed from the last Council meeting and that is because the petitioners have put a lot of thought and preparation into this project which is no small endeavor. Considerable thought has gone into this project to address concerns that the Council and neighbors might have. The Schlipps are putting in a piece of equipment that costs $6 million dollars to enhance their site on Gertrude Street and to enhance their business and thrive at this location. This investment of over $6 million dollars is a catalyst for new employment, 18 new jobs on day one and 30 within two years and a platform to help Gertrude St. Metal Recycling for years to come. One thing that they do appreciate is the Council taking a look at is what is happening today at Gertrude St. Metal Recycling, it is not merely an auto salvage yard, or a junk yard, it is primarily and industrial business that take place out their today. A number of trucks come and go with crushed trucks, cars that are not drivable that are crushed today, 22 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 separated and sorted for future use. This piece of equipment allows this process to go th one step further and be able to sell the shredded material in bulk. This is the 4 substitute bill before the Council tonight. Mr. Deahl noted that the written commitments have been updated to include information gathered by Ms. Ann Kolata, Redevelopment Department, th 12 Floor County-City Building. She stated that the information from the Indiana Brownfield’s regarding environmental matters with the subject site before the new equipment would be installed. She stated at a public meeting at the Gertrude Street site, that as part of any “comfort letter” that may be issued by the office handling Indiana Brownfield sites would be the condition that the subject site has certain capping completed. Based on these conversations and Petitioner’s conversations with Indiana Brownfield’s, the petitioner is willing to agree to address environmental concerns, as they pertain to the subject site, in the form of commitments with the resolution. Mr. Deahl noted that protecting public health, safety, comfort, community moral standards and general welfare is the petitioner’s main goal and have developed a site plan that protects and enhances the public health, safety, comfort, moral standards and welfare. Exhibit 2 of the letter dated September 27, 2010 addressed to the South Bend Common Council is an aerial view of the subject site where to equipment will be located and distances to certain neighboring properties. The Petitioner’s site selection is unique in that it is located in a remote area of the site and is no closer than one-third of a mile to the closest improvement. In addition, the petitioner has developed a site plan which includes a 10 foot high acoustical fencing on the west and north sides of the property; construction of earth berms of ten feet high and planting of trees to the south and installation of a ten-foot high decorative brick fence along the entire east side of the property. This fencing will provide a barrier for sound and increase the overall aesthetics of the site. Mr. Deahl noted that an independent acoustical study was conducted by “Acoustics by Design.” This sound study revealed that decibel levels related to operations of the machinery on site would be between 60 and 68 decibels at 300 feet form the property line. Three hundred (300) feet from the Petitioner’s property line which is located within industrial zoned property to the west and north (which Petitioner is purchasing by virtue of the St. Joseph County Commissioner’s Tax Sale) is located in industrial zoned area to the east and to undeveloped property to the south (where the noise level is the least.) Exhibit 3 is a general example of typical noise levels, as compared with decibel ranges. The decibel range of approximately 60 in the “quiet” range and is similar to a business office with a window air conditioner at 3 feet. These levels are far less than existing noise levels on the site, which include decibel levels in excess of 100 (regarding back-up beepers), trucks and noise generated from the movement of scrap metal by crane operations. The equipment proposed to be installed does not increase any of the noise levels currently generated by machinery and equipment on site. Similarly, the operation of the proposed equipment on-site will not create any vibration which due to normal operations. Specifically, as noted in the Petition and in the Commitments, Petitioner will assure that the machinery and equipment is installed on 27 spring pads which isolates vibration. Exhibit 4 shows a portion of an isolation study provided to the Petitioner by the equipment manufacturer. The manufacturer’s study notes that 99% of any vibration is captured and eliminated by virtue of the design and spring pad isolators. The equipment will not produce noise or vibration pollution from operations. The petitioner also engaged in an air study conducted on a similar item of equipment for installation in Michigan. This study revealed that the operation of a similar scrap shredder would not cause any violation of ambient air quality standards. Mr. Deahl noted that as previously discussed the petitioner is currently committed and will continue to be committed to conducting its operation in full compliance with all federal, state and local laws, as well as going above and beyond to assure the safety of its workforce, as well as the safety of the community at large. Both the site plan and commitments set forth a strong plan to assure enhancement of public safety, health, comfort and welfare. These items are installation of two separate fire hydrants on site; construction of a designated fire lane for immediate access to the site, if needed, to be serviced by fire or other emergency personnel; construction of two separate water detention ponds, the first of which will have an impenetrable PVC liner coupled with a state of the art carbon filtration system to collect any floatables and/or other residue from water run-off; built in fire suppression systems with the machinery and equipment; compliance with recommendation from the St. Joseph County Health Department (all noted in the Commitments) regarding the complete removal of hazardous fluids and disposal of the same from vehicles prior to 23 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 processing, as well as other Commitments regarding environmental matters; installation of machinery with electrode magnetic systems, to separate metals in conjunction with a dampening system to eliminate any “dust” from processing operations; and limitation of the hours of operation from 8:00 a.. – 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday only. Proposed use will promote use of adjacent areas and values. As noted in the petition, the site plan and Petitioner’s plans will do much to promote the use of adjacent areas and property values. As noted in Exhibit 1, the current location of Petitioner’s property on Gertrude Street is an ideal location for the proposed recycling operations. Specifically, the Petitioner’s site is located in a general industrial zoning district, which is the highest industrial zoning classification used by the City of South Bend. At this site, the Petitioner currently purchase metal for recycling, crushes cars, separates, and sorts and make substantial progress in the overall recycling of metals processed. The addition to the machinery will vertically integrate the Petitioner’s business and allow it to increase the value of the processed metals. The Petitioner is making substantial investments to enhance the site aesthetics and to create barriers for any visual and sound impact (which would be less than current decibels on-site.) In addition, the Petitioner has agreed to contribute to the expense to extend city water service north along Linden toward the site. The petitioner has agreed to waive reimbursement form other property owners for any expenses in the event they decide to “tie in” to the extended water service. The petitioner has agreed to contribute toward the improvements for certain roadways extending from the site to Ireland Road. These roadway improvements will be enhancing the base and width of the roadways, which can benefit vehicular and other traffic and use of the public infrastructure. These investments can only serve to enhance the value of the industrial zoned area, as well as any development potential for any other vacant area south of the subject site. Mr. Deahl noted that the operation will be consistent with the character of the zoning district. He reiterated that the current zoning district of the subject site if general industrial. This site as well as approximately 40 acres to the west and north and additional property to the east has been zoned general industrial for many, many years. The site immediately to the north of the subject property has been identified by the City of South Bend (and Indiana Brownfield’s) as an environmentally contaminate site which has very limited uses, other than industrial. The petitioner has purchased a tax sale certificate and can take title to this property. In the vent the Petitioner acquires the same; the petitioner is committed to increasing the aesthetics of the northern property and gradually covering the same if required by Indiana Brownfield. In addition, the proposed use is, simply the addition of an item of machinery to further process recycled metals. The proposed use is not a significant change from the current use of the property which is conducted and will continue to be conducted on site. Mr. Deahl noted that this project is compatible with the City Comprehensive Plan. The City’s comprehensive plan identifies the subject site, property to the north and east as a designated general industrial site. Exhibit 5 is a portion of the City’s Plan regarding the future land uses contemplated for the next (twenty years) from the period of adoption of the Plan in 2006. The subject site and surrounding property, as noted is and continues to be identified as an area for general industrial use. This plan was developed with input from the public, the Area Plan Commission, the Council and other to ensure that site selection and future growth of properties and areas of the City have been taken into account. The following are the fifteen written commitments that the NRJ Real Estate LLC and Gertrude Street Metal Recycling, owner Randy Schlipp and Nick Schlipp agree to are as follows: 1. Owner shall not, at any time, store more than 200 vehicles on the Property that have not had all hazardous or regulated substances removed. 2. All regulated substances shall be removed from all feed stock prior to crushing or shredding in any resource recovery/shredding operation conducted on-site. 3. For purposes of these commitments “regulated substances” shall be as defined in St. Joseph County Code 52.100 which is “Any extremely hazardous substance, hazardous substance, petroleum or petroleum byproduct, human waste, radioactive substance, biological substance, or other objectionable substance.” This includes fuel, oil, transmission fluid, differential fluid, hydraulic fluid, antifreeze, brake fluid, batteries, mercury switches, air conditioning coolant and other substances as may be deemed necessary by the St. Joseph County Health Department to prevent damage to the surface or groundwater. 4. All feed stock/inventory of vehicles for the process in the resource recovery facility/shredder with liquids present shall be stored on a concrete or asphalt pad with a system to control and collect spills of regulated substances. At no time shall more than 2,000 vehicles be 24 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 located on site for processing. 5. Owner shall not operate the resource recovery/shredding facility at any time outside of the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. 6. All vehicles and other feed stock shall be stacked no higher than 10 feet above a concrete storage pad. 7. The removal of all fluids from feed stock shall be performed on a concrete or asphalt pad with a system to control and collect spills of regulated substances. 8. The crushing and shredding of material shall be performed on a concrete or asphalt pad with a system to control and collect regulated substances. 9. All regulated substances shall be removed from all feed stock prior to crushing or shredding. 10. All liquid wastes removed from feed stock shall be stored in structurally sound water tight containers specifically designed for the storage of the respective waste and shall be stored either (a) inside of a structure with a concrete or asphalt floor and no floor drain, or (b) outside of a structure in structurally sound secondary containment capable of containing the full volume of all liquids stored. 11. A carbon filtration system shall be installed and appropriately maintained between the first and second retention basins identified on Owner’s site plan submitted with its Petition to prevent any contamination of surface or groundwater. 12. The resource recovery facility/shredder shall be installed on spring pads, to eliminate vibration emanating off-site, as described in Owner’s Petition. 13. The Owner shall be required to invest in, construct and maintain the following site improvements on the Property before commencing any operation of a resource recovery facility/metal shredder: (a) a 10’ foot high earth berm, topped with evergreen trees and other plantings on Owner’s south property line; (b) a 10 foot high acoustical fence along the entire west and north lines of the Property; and (c) a 10 foot high solid, decorative fence along the east line of Owner’s Property, all as set forth on the site plans submitted as part of the Petition. 14. Owner shall (a) direct, as a condition to operations of any resource recovery facility/metal shredding operation, that all truck traffic leaving the Property exit such Property solely to the South, and (b) cooperate, at the request of the City of South Bend, with directing trucks that may enter or exit the Property to do so using only designated truck routes and not use any route extending north along Gertrude from the Property. 15. Prior to commencing any operations utilizing the resource recovery facility, Owner will spread or otherwise install throughout the subject site, pavement, asphalt, crushed asphalt and/or other crushed aggregate (or a combination) to provide a general cap on the entire site. Mr. Deahl noted that these commitments shall be binding on the Owner, subsequent owners and other persons acquiring an interest in the property. He asked the Council for their favorable consideration. Mr. Randy Schlipp, President and CEO Gertrude Street Metal Recycling, 3700 Gertrude Street, South Bend, Indiana, gave some history on the shredder. He stated that the shredder was invented 31 years ago, and there have been significant improvements to the machine. He stated that springs have been put on the machine to reduce vibration, any emissions have been taken care of by computerized water and just enough water so that it is not running of the fluff and having to reclaim that and enough water to keep dust down. They will follow federal guidelines in removing all mercury switches. Mr. Schlipp stated that they are going to clean up the property next to them that has been used as dumping grounds for a number of years. He noted that this is a family business and that he would not think of putting any member of his family in danger nor would he put anyone from the public in danger. He stated that they currently meet and will continue to meet all EPA and IDEM regulations at the time of installation. He stated that if the rules change as they go along they will comply with those changes. A Public Hearing was held on the Resolution at this time. The following individuals spoke in favor of the bill. Mr. Sal Gerschoffer, 2101 Prairie Avenue, South Bend, Indiana stated that he has lived at that located for over 70 years. He stated that he know the Rum Village Neighborhood like the back of his hand. Mr. Gerschoffer stated that the junk yards and dumps were located on Gertrude Street long before there were any houses built. He stated that the people that built those homes along Gertrude knew full and well that the junk yard and dump were there long before the decided to move in. He stated know Mr. Schlipp wants to put in a metal shredder and create new jobs and generate tax dollars for the City of 25 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 South Bend and he could not be happier. He believes that Mr. Schlipp is a good business man and looks forward to him expanding his business in the Rum Village Neighborhood. He pointed out that Mr. Schlipp is not going to ask for tax abatement, unlike Steel Warehouse who asked for abatement earlier this evening. He asked the Council for their favorable consideration. Mr. Todd Stull, 54674 Drummer Ct., Granger, Indiana stated that he is the owner, Best Way Towing, and is in favor of this bill. He stated that the Wal-Mart on Ireland Road was built on a landfill, Fed Ex near the airport was built on a landfill, and Ignition Park was built on contaminated land and cleaned up by the City of South Bend to promote new growth and jobs in the area. He stated that he is in favor of creating new jobs, and adding to the tax base and possible create more work his business Best Way Towing. Mr. Stull urged the Council to vote favorably on this bill Mr. Steven Stockberger, 717 W. Calvert, South Bend, Indiana, spoke in favor of this bill. He stated that he has lived there over 29 years. Mr. Stockberger stated that if we do nothing out there it is just another Brownfield that the City will have to clean up. He stated that the owner is willing to commit to improving the property and even help with the widening of street. He stated that Mr. Schlipp has agreed to put up a fence and make the property much safer, especially for the Church who is located directly behind this property, they want to put up hiking trails and a fence would keep them from wondered onto Mr. Schlipps’ property. Mr. Stockberger stated that after the Council ways the pros and cons of this project they will see the pros out weigh the cons. He urged the Council for their favorable consideration. David Niezgodski, 4942 Scenic Drive, South Bend, Indiana, and also serves as State Representative District 7, in which this property is located. He stated that he heard Councilmember Henry Davis talk about stats that ranked Indiana pretty high on a scale in creating new jobs. Mr. Niezgodski advised that what those statics don’t tell is that those jobs are temporary part-time and what they should really be telling is that Indiana is th ranked 48 for residents that are living at or below the poverty line. He stated that he is also Chairman of the House Labor and Employment Committee and what he sees everyday is that this great recession has not ended and hope that there is some rebound in the future. Mr. Niezgodski stated that with 320,000 Hoosiers out of work we cannot sit back and wait for jobs to come back. He stated that we have to work and compete to get those jobs to come back to Indiana. He stated that he sees the Schlipp’s as good people who want to make their business flourish and who are offering to bring jobs to the area he strongly encouraged the Council’s favorable consideration on this bill. The following individuals spoke in opposition to this bill. Mr. John Abernathy, 59449 Keria Trail, South Bend, Indiana, stated that his property is th located 4.10 of 1 mile of the proposed site. He stated that he and his wife love South th Bend. He is a 7 generation of his to continue to live in this neighborhood. He stated rd that his wife is a 3 generation of her family and her father and his brother formed a little company called South Bend Lathe. They developed that company into a workforce of approximately 900 people at one time. He stated that he had so many unanswered questions that make voting in favor of this project impossible. He questioned the truck traffic increase and what impact that would have on the roads. A total of eighty (80) trucks coming down the small county (country) roads, Linden, Chippewa, Gertrude, Ireland Rd. Mr. Abernathy likened the truck route to a duck arcade at the county fair. Trying to get as many ducks, in other words if this truck route doesn’t work, try another one, planning this on the fly, and not really knowing what the plan is going do to the surrounding neighbors. The developers say he is going to pay for half the cost of developing the roads. He stated that there is a lot of work that is needed to be done to correctly widen the roads out there. You are going over Bowman Creek and would need to level the hilly roads out there and if you think that this can be done for $500,000 he would be very surprised. He doubt’s that the petitioner is going to write a blank check when the figures are in to widen the roads to support a project like this. Mr. Abernathy commended Mayor Luecke and the City of South Bend who have been recognized as only one of 158 communities in the United States as being a Bicycle Friendly 26 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 Community by the League of American Bicyclists. Mr. Abernathy placed on file with the Office of the City Clerk the press release along with a map of the bike paths. He noted that the route of the bike trail goes along Linden and Chippewa Avenues along Rum Village Park which is right along where this project is going in. Mr. Abernathy commented on the article that was in the South Bend Tribune last Saturday on the emissions and pollution that will be generated by the shredder. It stated that no matter what kinds of pollution control put in there will still be emissions and pollution coming from the shredder. He stated that if this project goes through the City might want to rename Ignition Park to Emission Park. He urged the Council not to support this bill. Ms. Deanna Waggy, 59310 W. Linden Road, Indiana, stated that she is the first house directly south of this proposed project. She stated that she was very concerned at this afternoon’s committee meeting on hearing that the truck route had been changed to Linden Road. Anyone who drives a stick shift knows that this intersection of Linden and Ireland Road knows that it is very difficult to drive even for those that have experience driving. The roads are hilly and very narrow making driving very difficult during the icy winter months. This is a very dangerous intersection especially with the daycare center right on the corner. She stated that she would not appreciate the additional truck traffic going passed her house; it makes the house rattle and shake. She stated that there are many reasons why she doesn’t want this project to be approved mainly because of all the unanswered questions and concerns of the residents in the neighborhood. Ms. Waggy stated that she would like to work with the Schlipp’s to resolve those unanswered questions. She stated that she has concerns with the decisions that the City is making and impacting on County residents. She stated that there is a lot of green space out there and one of the reasons that people want to live out there is because of that. This is a quality of life issue and urged the Council to put safety measures in to keep and preserve the wildlife and nature. She also was concerned on the impact this project will have for the Rum Village Park and Nature Center just down the street from this project, she stated that she would like to see this area added to the Rum Village Park to expand and make it an even bigger green space for the City of South Bend. She urged the Council to vote against this bill. Mr. Joe Schultz, 20550 W. Chippewa, South Bend, Indiana, stated that he and his wife Faith have lived their since 1972. He stated that one concern that they have is the traffic. They have seen the truck traffic slowly increase. He stated that he doesn’t know if many of the Council have driven up Chippewa lately, it’s not a great street. It really has deteriorated and it’s and embarrassment to the City of South Bend if you drive by the movie theatre or bowling alley. It’s a very narrow street when you get down to the end of it by Keria Trail. This does not hold up to truck traffic like they said it does. Mr. Schultz stated that they say there are maybe 10 trucks going in and out of there a day right now. They’re probably right. He says they stop work at 5 in the evening, but when he and his wife take off for their evening walk about 7:00 p.m. there were trucks driving up and down the street. He mentioned one in particular rolling up and down the street full of metal and rumbling and shaking the house. He stated that now with the addition of a car shredder and 30 to 40 more trucks double that by coming and going, the street is not going to be able to handle it. He stated that over the years he has seen a lot more traffic both cars and trucks with the various developments that have gone in. He stated that this area is a very nice area. However he questioned whether or not the infrastructure could handle this kind of project. Mr. Schultz stated that the infrastructure should be developed before the project goes in. He stated that trying to turn west or east off of Linden Avenue or Keria Trail onto Ireland Road is a very difficult task already with the new Wal-Mart and Lowe’s on Ireland Road and now with this project creating 40 trucks in and 40 trucks out for a total of eighty (80) trucks a day will make it even more difficult. He stated that a traffic light would have to be installed and the road widened at Linden and Ireland Road. He stated that he already sees trucks having a difficult time getting up the hill at the Wal-Mart on Ireland Road during the icy winter months. He stated that he and his wife went walking one evening and counted several trucks going up and down Chippewa at 8:00 p.m. He questioned who is going to control the truck traffic? Mr. Schultz stated that this project would be very detrimental to the neighborhood and asked the Council to vote against this bill. 27 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 Mr. Bob Wiseman, 3402 S. Locust Road, South Bend, Indiana, Christ Chapel Church, reiterated what he said at the Area Board of Zoning Appeals and at the last Council Meeting regarding if there are any hiccups in the plans of this shredder in regards to disrupting the plans that the church has for the 40 plus acres of pristine property. He stated that there are walking trails back on the south and east side which again the northwest side of the proposed project property. Mr. Wiseman stated that the Church is looking to expand those trails, light them and possibly have a retreat area out there with campsites. But questioned how can they do that if the potential of a car shredder is just over this 10’ wall right next to our property? He stated that he tried to invite the Council to the church property to see what they have out there but ran out of daylight to do so. Mr. Wiseman stated that as the church grows they would like to put a new sanctuary on the property and build a warehouse to store product for feeding the nations humanitarian efforts. He stated that over the past five years they have shipped more that $60 million dollars of product around the world. They are just a tiny spec that helps with that organization but would like to continue doing so. He mentioned the article in the South Bend Tribune this past Saturday regarding air pollution from this project. If there is any chance whatsoever that this occurs, how can we put any of our residents in that kind of danger of exposing them to toxic gases. He stated that he is not sure, but this is the kind of glitch or hiccup that he has been concerned with. Mr. Wiseman stated that he has a meeting to attend to this week to discuss the future plans of the church. He stated that they have a beautiful property on Locust Road more than half of the 40 + acres are wooded; they have deer and wild turkey on the property along with just about every kind of bird and wildflowers possible. He stated that they are so proud of their property and would like to continue to improve their property. He stated what price could be put on the health and quality of life of the residents of the area. This project could have a significant negative impact on residents of this area. He stated that he would like the Council to vote against this bill. Mr. Paul Duda, 2133 S. Taylor Street, South Bend, Indiana, stated that he is representing the Rum Village Neighborhood Association and at their last meeting voted against this project 3-1. He stated that the reason is mostly because of the environmental impact that this project is going to have on the Rum Village Neighborhood. He also questioned why Mr. Schlipp could not get approval at his Eau Claire, Michigan site, if he is so well liked for his business practice, why didn’t they want the car shredder up there? He asked the Council to check into what happened in Eau Claire and get the facts before voting on this project tonight. He urged the Council to vote in opposition. Ms. Rita Kopala, 66559 Ivy Road, Lakeville, Indiana, stated that she heard tonight that former dump sites are now where Wal-Mart and Lowe’s sit on Ireland Road and Fed Ex located out at the airport. She asked why would it be any different to get something like that for this area and move this project to a site that would be better suited. She stated that this kind of business has the potential for explosions and this project is too close to Rum Village Park. She stated that she is disappointed in Mr. Niezgodski; she thought that someone who came from the west side of South Bend would have stuck up for those people out there. Mr. Clifford Hamilton, 20909 W. Ireland Road, South Bend, Indiana, recalled the number of trucks that was proposed originally was 10 to 20 now it is up to 40 trucks a day. He questioned why those numbers are changing. He guessed for dollars reasons to make the project work. Mr. Hamilton asked the Council if they have asked Mr. Schlipp for a business plan, to see what exactly his intentions are. He also questioned the truck route and the ever changing truck route plan. He stated that there are many accidents that occur on Ireland Road especially where it intersects with Linden Avenue. He urged the Council to vote against this bill. Mr. Bruce Huntington, Attorney At Law, Botkin & Hall, 105 E. Jefferson Blvd. South Bend, Indiana stated that he is representing Mr. & Mrs. Parker, 1717 W. Ireland Road, South Bend, Indiana. Mr. Huntington stated that this project brings a much more intense use that it ever was intended to be used for. He stated that it has been mentioned about the emissions, pollution, and potential for explosions, noise and the biggest issue being the traffic. Mr. Huntington stated that one issue he would like to further detail is the 28 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 environmental impact on the adjoining Rum Village Park. He stated that the City of South Bend Park Department has done a wonderful job in keeping this park a beautiful place and a very popular place for the residents of the city to enjoy. He questioned the environmental impact that this project is going to have on that park. He stated that Mr. Deahl has mentioned time and time again the criteria that must be met when considering this petition. Whether there is injury to the public health, safety, comfort, community moral standard, convenience or general welfare. He stated that this project is going to greatly impact those issues and the desirability of that area. In regard to the proposed use be consistent with the character of the district in which it is located and the land uses authorized therein, this is a more intense use and changes the nature of this use because it brings in more volume than it can handle and be a detriment to the neighborhood. As far as the City Comprehensive Plan, it states that this area is industrial, but we don’t know what is going to happen with this intense of a use and urged the Council to vote against this bill. Mr. Mark Harbaugh, 1710 S. Carlisle Street, South Bend, Indiana, stated that he lives near the Ethanol Plant and smells the emissions from that plant daily. He stated that some days it makes him sick to his stomach. He stated that he has grandchildren and doesn’t like for them to play outside because of the stench from the Ethanol Plant and he worries what those emissions are doing to his family’s health. He stated that this project needs to be relocated to another site that can handle the traffic and not located near a residential area. He urged the Council to vote against this bill. In Rebuttal, Mr. Deahl, stated that he would like to highlight three points that were brought up tonight by the remonstrators. First, that this piece of machinery is going to transform the use from industrial to heavy industrial by bringing additional intensity to the use. Mr. Deahl stated that industrial use is the heaviest zoning classification that the City has; there is no heavier district other than industrial. The GI district is established by code to provide for development of manufacturing and processing facilities that require additional outdoor storage or outdoor operations. Permitted uses in this district tend to generate heavy traffic and require extensive community facilities. There is already a general industrial use at Gertrude Street Metal Recycling and this additional equipment does not change the fact that this district perhaps other than in a Special Exception process contemplates a heavier industrial use or that has more significant traffic than Gertrude Street has currently or contemplates having. Regarding the traffic issue to clarify it is not the petitioner changing the number of trucks leaving the facility, it has been the remonstrators throwing out and contemplating the different numbers of trucks in and out of the facility. From day one the petitioner has stated that it currently has 10 trucks a day. With the addition of the equipment the trucks needed would be an additional 30 trucks per day for a total of 40 trucks per day. Mr. Deahl stated that this is an extremely small increase in the percentage of vehicular traffic along either Chippewa or Linden Avenues. The second item has been traffic considerations. He stated that the Schlipps are very aware of the neighbors concerns regarding the truck routes that are going to be taken. Mr. Deahl stated that the Schlipps are willing to work with the City and County officials to make whatever truck route that is given to them work. They are willing to commit the resources to use and develop the safest route to handle an additional 30 trucks per day as part of this project. The transfer of the designated route since we have met out at the site from Chippewa to Linden was a suggestion after further consideration of the overall cost to extend water and to improve the roadways and there is some synergies that can be maintained by doing both of those infrastructure improvements at the same time. The third and final point, is the environmental issues that have been brought up tonight. As indicated on the final site plan that this project has some sophisticated environmental measures in place to make sure operations on site and which are currently followed by the petitioner but any additional processing operations which are currently on site would not produce any water run off that would not be treated and cleaned before being disbursed if at all. In addition there were a number of references to the South Bend Tribune’s paper this past Saturday into a study that was done. Mr. Dahl stated that he investigated the study and has looked at the two what are called scrappers that were 29 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 sampled in these fence line studies in the San Francisco Bay area and would ask the Council to take into consideration that both of these facilities were foundry facilities where they melted scrap steel into ingots and other products and had significant air issues in those facilities and that they are extremely different operations than what is being contemplated on the site. Mr. Deahl thanked the Council for their time and attention to this project and urged them to vote in favor of this bill. Councilmember Puzzello stated that the one issue that bothers her most is the odor that will be emitted from the equipment. Mr. Nick Schlipp advised that there may be a faint odor. He stated that of all of the shredder facilities that they have interviewed and read about there haven’t been any complaints of odor. He stated that in California the air emission controls are more stringent there are actually chemicals that can be added in and fragrances to make it smell better. He stated that the smell comes when the auto shredder residue is wet and has time to sit there. He stated that if you look at the site plan they did not leave a large enough bay to be able to stockpile. He stated that is what keeps fires under control by not having a fluff pile of auto shredder residue and that also keep the odor down as well. Councilmember Henry Davis asked if there was a timetable set for the water and sewer hook-up. Mr. Deahl stated that to his knowledge a firm timetable was not set. However, this project is contingent upon there being water extended to the site. So without water to the site the installation and operation of this machinery cannot take place. So the timetable is at much of the City’s discretion. While the petitioner is fully cooperative and wants to assist in moving this project forward will work with the timeline established. Councilmember Henry Davis stated that it doesn’t sound like they have one. Councilmember Henry Davis asked how long it takes to get and build the machinery on site. Mr. Nick Schlipp stated that from the date it is order it is four (4) months to build the machine and while that is being done they would be doing site preparation work. He stated that an additional two (2) months would be need once the machinery is delivered to be operational. So approximately 6 months or a little longer because they will have to have some civil engineering done, soil borings done to see what type of structural base they will need and to work with the City of South Bend Street and Water Departments to get the timing synched to have both projects done at the same time. Councilmember Henry Davis stated that he would like to see a timetable set. He noted that he has gone back and forth on this issue. He stated that he doesn’t live near this thnd project, however, the 6 District in which this proposed project is located and the 2 District in which he represents are very similar, the demographics are almost identical. Both districts need so much attention and get neglected so when a project like this comes along it is really hard to say yes or no. Businesses have fled South Bend and relocated to other areas. He stated that he knows people who would give their right arm to have any kind of job whether it be temporary, part-time or whatever, just to have income coming in for their families. He stated that he is really having a difficult time making a decision on this issue. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated that he was most bothered that Mr. Schlipp failed to take his advice to discuss his plans with neighbors early on. Councilmember Oliver Davis played the theme from Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood and recited some of the lyrics. “To have a beautiful day in the neighborhood, you have to have communication with your neighbors,” He stated that a big indication to me on how you’re going to be is how you interact with your neighbors. Councilmember Oliver Davis read from a WNDU website: Despite the argument that Randy’s recycling would invest 5.5 million dollars and create 30 new jobs over the next two years the planning commission voted against 30 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 granting a recommendation. Mr. Schlipp then was quoted saying “If the community doesn’t want me there, then I don’t really want to be there. I would like to be in a community that welcomes me and maybe there is somebody in the Michiana area farther away from the residents and thought that this was a heavy industrial property and that this would be a good location.” Now Mr. Schlipp is looking for any community that might want his recycling business and his shredder.” Councilmember Davis asked if this project could be moved to another Brownfield site that would be better suited to handle a project like this. But ultimately the key to making a project like this work is communication. He stated that he would like to see this bill voted down tonight and then have it come back and work together to find a location that is better suited for a project like this. Councilmember Rouse stated that there are only 6 days left until the 60 day window is up on this bill. Councilmember Puzzello stated that she made a pro and con list and that the pros out weighed the cons. She stated that she would like to see a yearly update report sent on the written commitments that the petitioner is agreeing to make. Councilmember Puzzello said she typically votes with a council member who feels strongly about a project in their district, and she started out opposed to the shredder. But as the debate grew, she realized that the issue affects the entire community, in light of the road and water improvements and the new jobs. “I have questions about the pollution,” she noted. “We won’t know until it shows up.” Councilmember Varner stated that he isa little leery of the prospect of waiting until it’s up and running before we find out what the problems are. He stated that the dynamics of the project have grown out of proportion and it has now become a win lose situation instead of a win/ win situation. He stated that he has seen the City work together with a petitioner to help them relocate their business to a site more suitable and would like to see that happen with this project. Councilmember LaFountain stated that the area has been zoned industrial for decades and the shredder won’t change that. They are already crushing cars out there and with the written commitments in place he stated that he would be voting in favor of this bill. Councilmember Rouse stated that he would really like to vote for this. The city needs the economic development. He believes that Randy Schlipp will make a good proprietor. However, he believes that this property is zone improperly; the road cannot handle the load. If the city does not hook up water to the property and widen the road the project won’t work and that tell him that there is a problem with the zoning? He stated that he would like to see this project work and maybe working together with the Public Works Department, Mr. Gilot’s office who has worked very diligently the past couple of weeks to try to get the questions and concerns of the residents in the area answered. However, until that is done he believes that not all the parameters have been met and they need to girt up the project. Until that is done, he will be voting against this bill. Councilmember White and Councilmember Dieter questioned how much the city would be contributing to the road work that will have to be done. Gary Gilot, Director, Public Works stated that the road work will cost about $500,000, and the water main will cost of $250,000. He stated that Mr. Schlipp has agreed to split those costs with the city, meaning each will pay $375,000. Councilmember White thanked Councilmember Oliver Davis, The Schlipp Family, The Residents of the Neighborhood, and Public Works Director Gary Gilot for their hard work and trying to maintain a win/win situation for the parties involved. She asked what the time line would be for the water and road improvements. Gary Gilot, Director, Public Works advised that as the road as it exits today has enough structural strength to take the forty (40) trucks and probably last another five (5) years. 31 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 But if you are looking for a long-term sustainable 20 year service life you will have to build up the structural strength of the road and widen it a little bit so that there is more comfort and safety for the large trucks passing a vehicle. It’s a narrow road currently and would like to get it to two 12 foot standard lanes. The water is necessary to bring up to adequate pressure for fire protection and for other uses from Ireland Road north to the site. It would then enhance the development potential of the acreage that it goes past. Both of those projects, the water main is $250,000 dollars; the road is not to exceed $500,000 dollars; which is a base widening with a 3 to 4 inch overlay polymer modified asphalt and would be using the existing 8 inch asphalt depth on Gertrude and Linden as a good base foundation. Mr. Gilot stated that there aren’t too may arterial streets in South Bend that have much more than 11 or 12 inches of thickness for structural strength for a lot of heavy trucks. So why we think that the 8 inch could take some truck traffic building it up to 11 or 12 inches would make it a very durable pavement for the long term. He stated that the petitioner stated that it would take four months to order equipment and two and half months to install it. Mr. Gilot stated that they can do the road and the water main in much less time. 2600 foot of water main could be done in 26 days or less and the paving, the widening is going to take a few days and the overlay can be done in a day, it’s a matter of getting Spring temperatures that are adequate. We will need to appropriate the 50% that comes from the water utility and the road funding source and well as getting the petitioner’s money as matched to do the project in the Spring. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated that this would not help with improvements on Chippewa Avenue. Mr. Gilot responded that if there is an improved widened Linden Avenue, he did not know why anyone would want to use Chippewa. Councilmember Oliver Davis then questioned where the money is coming from to improve Linden Avenue and during the budget hearings it was mentioned that funds are needed to repair streets in the city, so how can the city put up half of the funds for this project and what happens to the other streets that need repair? Mr. Gilot stated that he understands that this is a $6 million dollar investment into the city which would produce $90,000 a year in new property tax revenue. He stated that is about a 4 year payback and a very good return on the investment. Councilmember Kirsits advised that he takes comfort in the 15 commitments Schlipp has pledge to keep. Should he violate any of them, neighbors will have grounds to sue him, and city code enforcement or the county health department can shut it down. Councilmember Kirsits stated that there is probably no way we can bring everyone together. The best we can do is put the commitments in place and have a hammer and if this turns out to be a problem, then we have the tool to correct it. He stated that he did not think it would be necessary and thinks that this will be a state-of-the-art operation.” Council President Dieter thanked everyone involved and to look at the total package. He thanked them for the on-site tour and thanked Public Works Director, Gary Gilot for his assistance. There being no one else present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in opposition to this Resolution, Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to defeat this Resolution. Councilmember David Varner seconded the motion. The Resolution was defeated by a roll call vote of three (3) ayes (Councilmember’s Varner, Oliver Davis, Rouse) and six (6) nays. Additionally, Councilmember Kirsits made a motion to adopt th the 4 Substitute Bill 10-40. Councilmember LaFountain seconded the motion. The Resolution was adopted by a roll call vote of six (6) ayes and three (3) nays (Councilmember’s Varner, Oliver Davis, Rouse.) 32 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 BILLS – FIRST READING BILL NO. 61-10 FIRST READING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA REPEALING CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 6 OF THE SOUTH BEND MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO TAX ABATEMENTS AND ESTABLISHING NEW TAX ABATEMENT PROVISIONS AND PROCEDURES This bill had first reading. Councilmember Varner made a motion to set this bill for Public Hearing and Third Reading on October 11, 2010 and refer to the Community and Economic Development Committee. Councilmember LaFountain seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. UNFINISHED BUSINESS REPORTS FROM AREA PLAN COMMISSION BILL NO. 46-10 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, ANNEXING TO AND BRINGING WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AND AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN CLAY TOWNSHIP, CONTIGUOUS THEREWITH; COUNCILMANIC DISTRICT: 4 BILL NO. 47-10 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, ANNEXING TO AND BRINGING WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AND AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN CLAY TOWNSHIP CONTIGUOUS THEREWITH: COUNCILMANIC DISTRICT #4, STADIUM PLACE DEVELOPERS, LLC, JEAN C. JOHNSON-TRUSTEE FOR THE JEAN C. JOHNSON REVOCABLE TRUST, AND GLENN & KAYE BLOSSOM (PETITIONERS) 54700 BLOCK OF BURDETTE STREET, SOUTH BEND, INDIANA Councilmember Varner made a motion to accept Substitute Bill Nos. 46-10 and 47-10. Councilmember Puzzello seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. (Councilmember Oliver Davis was not present in the Chamber’s at this time.) Additionally, Councilmember Varner made a motion to set Bill Nos. 46-10 and 47-10 for Public Hearing on October 25, 2010 and Third Reading on November 8, 2010 and refer to the Zoning and Annexation Committee. Councilmember LaFountain seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. (Councilmember Oliver Davis was not present in the Chamber’s at this time.) NEW BUSINESS There was no New Business to come before the Council at this time. 33 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR COMMENTS REGARDING BILL NO. 30-10 Mr. Raul Jara, 317 Napoleon, South Bend, Indiana, thanked the Council for their consideration of Bill No. 30-10 and urged them to set and vote on Bill No. 30-10, amending various sections of Chapter 2, Article 9, of the South Bend Municipal Code Addressing the Human Rights Ordinance by the inclusion of new provisions for employment fairness. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, President Derek D. Dieter adjourned the meeting at 8:26 p.m. ATTEST: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ John Voorde, City Clerk Derek D. Dieter, President 34