HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-25-10 Zoning & Annexation Committee~/'1
~ ` ~'~,~ ~
y ° j. ~ ~ ,
,,.
'`-~-' - ZONING & ANNEXATION COMMITTEE
October 25. 2010
The October 25, 2010 meeting of the Zoning and Annexation Committee of the South Bend
Common Council was called to order by its Chairperson Council Member AI "Buddy" Kirsits at
4:10 p.m., in the Informal Meeting Room, 4th Floor County-City Building, 227 W. Jefferson Blvd.,
South Bend, Indiana
Committee Members Present: AI Kirsits, Tom LaFountain, Oliver Davis, David Varner
Other Council Present: Derek Dieter, Ann Puzzello, Karen White, Tim Rouse, Henry
Davis
Others Present: Mike Danch, John Lloyd, Mark Lyons, Dave & Wanda Shock,
Dennis Andres, Michael Divita, Leroy Yoder, Ronda Chris
Agenda: Bill No. 10-59 -Fiscal Plan S.R. 23 & Maple Lane
Bill No. 46-10 -annexation 17904 S. R. 23
Bill No. 10-57 -Special Exception Maple Lane & S. R. 23
Bill No. 10-60 -Fiscal Plan Stadium Place Annexation
Bill No. 10-55 -Special Exception 1032 Campeau
Bill No. 10-56 -Special Exception 925 S. Webster
Bill No. 47-10 -Annexation Stadium Place
Chairperson Kirsits opened his committee hearing with all members and every other
Councilmember present.
The first item on the agenda was bill No. 10-59 representing the fiscal plan of the city for the
extension of services to an area to be annexed in Clay Twp. Michael Divita from Community
Development gave a detailed summary of the fiscal plan which is attached here for review.
Questions about the plan began after the presentation Derek Dieter went on record in opposition
to the plan and the annexation maintaining police "beats" are already overstretched and
undermanned. Also speaking against the annexation was Ronda Chris who focused opposition
on sewer availability to the area not wanting to be forced to "hook-up" if sewer was extended in
the future. Linda Freel echoed her opposition. Wanda Shock, a retired police officer, opposed
the annexation petition, ultimately for a massage parlor, citing the difficulty in policing and
distinguishing between lawful and unlawful massage parlors. Chairperson Kirsits asked for
Director of Public Works, Gary Gilot, about the sewer extension and "hookup" requirements.
Gary said cost estimates for the sewer extension had not been done; but were a determining
factor in whether the city would support an annexation or consider a sewer extension. Gary said,
generally a short payback period was inherent to a "go ahead" decision. He also added that
ultimately other potential customers would be required to "hook-up" once the extension was in
place. He told the Committee cost estimates could be provided for the 7:00 meeting. (his
subsequent report showed a cost of $140,000 or $73,400 more to build than could be recovered)
(Attached) Councilmember Varner said the fiscal plan needs to reflect sewer extension costs.
Councilmember Rouse said emphatically the sewer costs had to be included in any plan or
decision.
At this impasse Chairperson Kirsits suggested a continuance of Bill No. 10-59 until the next
meeting on November 8, 2010 pending a revised fiscal plan. All agreed. In that two other bills
Substitute Bill No. 46-10 and Bill No. 10-57 both contingent on the passage of Bill No. 10-59
could not move forward were continued to November 8, as well.
Bill No. 10-60 -Chairperson Kirsits asked Michael Divita to walk the Council through the fiscal
plan for the Stadium Place Annexation Area. In the brief discussion that followed two significant
points were made. Councilmember Dieter again stated police beat coverage was too thin
basically becoming dangerously inadequate. Councilmember Rouse said the City should have
an overall strategic plan for annexations. Such a plan should include a shared vision and a
realistic timeline. The present apparently piecemeal approach would not do. Ultimately,
Councilmember Varner finding no objection to this particular objection to this fiscal plan moved
the bill go to Council favorably. Councilmember LaFountain seconded the motion and all
affirmed.
Bill No. 47-10 Chairperson Kirsits accepted a motion from Oliver Davis seconded by
Councilmember Varner to accept the substitute Bill No. 47-10. All approved. Derek Spier from
the Area Plan Commission staff recounted their process noting while the Commission had some
concerns about adequate parking it nonetheless gave it a favorable recommendation. Mike
Danch representing the petitioners said the approval to annex would result in consistent zoning
for the project. Councilmember Puzzello wanted assurance that the number of students allowed
to live in the units would be controlled by the Planned Unit Development criteria (PUD) Danch
rallied that concern.
On a motion by Councilmember LaFountain seconded by Councilmember Varner and supported
by all the bill was sent to Council favorably for final action on November 8, 2010.
Bill No. 10-55 This Bill would allow the construction of a garage with separate living quarters.
Mark Lyons from the BZA reported a favorable referral to Council so long as the SF-1 restrictions
continued to apply. The petitioner Joe Crimmins agreed to the condition Oliver Davis moved the
exception be granted subject o the BZA restriction. Councilmember Varner seconded and all
agreed to the favorable recommendation.
Bill No. 10-56 This bill would allow an exception to the 50% restriction on outdoor storage raising
it to 75%. Mark Lyons reported that the BZA had forwarded the bill with no recommendation.
Attorney John Lloyd representing the petitioner recounted how the petitioners had met with
concerned owners of adjacent property and had been able to agree on a "go ahead" for the
project. Rich Deahl, an attorney for the adjacent property owner confirmed the agreement as did
the owner Ann Lacay. Based upon that, Oliver Davis motioned for a favorable recommendation
with commitments. Varner followed and all supported.
There being no further business to come before the Council at this time, Chairperson Kirsits
adjourned the meeting at 5:50 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
,~
AI "Buddy" Kirsits, Chairperson
Zoning and Annexation Committee