Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-22-04 Zoning & Annexation South Bend Common Council Zoning and Annexation Committee Minutes form Meeting of March 22, 2004 The March 22,2004 meeting of the Common Council's Zoning and Annexation Committee was called to order by its Chairperson, Council Member Ery Kuspa, at 4:12,p.m. in the Council Informal Meeting Room. Persons in attendance included Council Members Dieter, Pfeifer, Kelly,Puzzello, Varner, Kuspa, Coleman,Kirsits and White. Among those also present were Attorney Thomas Walz,City Clerk John Voorde,Jim Frick(South Gateway Association),Terry Bland(South Bend Tribune),and Aladean M. DeRose substituting for Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand, Council Attorney. A full quorum of the Committee existed in that all members were present namely,Council Members Kuspa,Puzzello, Kelly,.and Coleman. A. Bill No.10-04-Annexation of the 20000-21000 Block of Kern Road/Property of Duane and Virginia Zeiger. Chairperson Kuspa reported his receipt of a letter from Larry Magliozzi,South Bend Division of Community Development, requesting permission to continue hearing on this Bill to April 12, 2004 in that the Board of Public Safety was unable to approve the Fiscal Plan at its meeting on March 17,2004. Council Member Coleman made a motion to continue public hearing on Bill No. 10-04 to the Council's next meeting of April 12,2004. Council Member Kelly seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. B. Bill No. 04-29 Resolution Approving Petition for Special Zoning Exception for Property Located at 1020/1022 South Webster, South Bend,Indiana. Attorney Thomas Walz made the presentation to the Committee, stating that the Board of Zoning Appeals made no recommendation as to approval of this special exception. Council Member White asked Mr.Walz why the BZA made no recommendation. The answer was that the BZA could not determine whether this was an appropriate special exception. The initial problem arose because of the original terminology used by the petitioner, i.e. a request to operate a"Transfer Station." Mr.Walz explained that this terminology was the inaccurate and unfortunate result of a lay person filling out legal forms(Junoll originally prepared the petition itself). Mr. Walz informed the Council that the Building Commissioner can impose and enforce conditions upon the special use. Mr. Walz"further explained that what Junoll Industries actually wants is the limited right to store occupied containers overnight without transferring contents. He added that there is a true and necessary justification for this request because landfills have restricted hours and it is nearly impossible to meet the 3:00 p.m. closing deadline of most landfills. It is Mr. Walz's further belief that Michigan is moving toward closing landfills from other states. This company will be more profitable and productive if it is permitted the special exception that it is seeking. According to Mr. Walz this is blighted property which is being substantially improved. The lot is fenced; it will be secured with a rolling gate; and will be paved with black top. The containers will be stored on part of the premises farthest removed from third party property. Mr. Walz stated that one of the prior remonstrators was Imagineering,but he has met with the owner of that company and Mr.Walz believes that the Imagineering owner will be agreeable to this restricted and fully defined use. The other objector is Mr. Morris who is a competitor. Attorney Walz also pointed out that the material being stored is construction waste and there is no risk of vermin or pests.. Council Member Coleman asked for clarification as to whether there will clearly be removal of containers within 24 hours.. Mr. Walz responded affirmatively except for Fridays where the removal would occur on the next business morning. Council Member Dieter asked about the maximum number of dumpster containers to be placed on site, and the owners informed him that it would be about six. The owners further stated that they would make sure the contents would be construction and demolition debris only,and they would remove any non-construction or demolition debris and exclude it from the containers. Council Member Puzzello suggested that the Council make very specific conditions upon any approval of this special use. Another co-owner, June Sheaks also spoke and added that she had prepared the BZA petition and did not know appropriate terminology. Originally, she was envisioning a situation where there might be two partially filled dumpsters and there might be a need to consolidate the contents of two incomplete containers to make one complete bin. However,the owners now agree not to do this and therefore there is no possibility of moving materials from one container to another. She further explained that the containers are on wheels and they will be wheeled to the ground from the truck; stay there all night; and then would be wheeled back on the truck for delivery next morning to a landfill. The Committee Chair then opened the meeting to the public. Larry Bass ofRemar Land Corporation spoke and questioned how the owners would prevent trash from blowing around the neighborhood. The owner responded that the boxes would be,placed in the southeast corner near Sturgis Iron. The owners could not guarantee that debris would not blow away but the storage would be in a confined area. Remonstrator Mike Morris stated that there had been recent development in this area and that $1,000,000 of improvements were recently made. Therefore, it is not a blighted area. He further stated that he had spoken with a Michigan landfill operator who informed him that the contemplated restrictions on out-of-state trash are limited to Canadian trash,not Indiana trash. Mr.Morris added that according to the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) any business operation whereby trash that remains on a property for more than 24 hours constitutes a transfer station and requires tarpaulin or other coverage. He stated that he welcomes the new owners and accepts competition,but that he objects to this special exception. Page 2 Attorney John Lloyd representing Richard Brothers of 401 West Sample Street located behind the subject property stated that the petition should be appropriately changed to reflect that this should be designated as a Junoll petition and not a BZA petition. He also added that whether the entity is a transfer station is best addressed by IDEM: Whenever debris is moved from one container to another it constitutes a transfer station,however,the arrangement as described here is "murky." IDEM also has preemptive rights,and where its authority exists,local government has no jurisdiction. Council Member Varner stated that this is an industrial site surrounded by industrial uses and in the interest of keeping this industry viable,the owners.should do whatever is necessary to assure that the business activity will not constitute a "transfer station" subject to IDEM or other City regulation. He noted that if this petition is approved the area becomes productive,but if not,it could remain vacant for years. He urged the Council to "work proactively" to solve the problem. Council Member Coleman stated that he was uncomfortable with many of the problems described, particularly the blowing of trash overnight. Council Member.Coleman also thought it might be appropriate to have IDEM weigh in on the issue of whether this did or did not constitute a transfer station. The Council discussed the necessity of including as a condition to any approval of the Bill that the containers be covered overnight as well as other conditions. A discussion ensued as to the appropriate method of securing an opinion or review by IDEM. Attorney Walz stated that he spoke with Steve Schaffer at IDEM who verbally advised Mr. Walz that if this business is not transferring material from one container to another, it would not fall within IDEM's jurisdiction. It was moved and seconded that Bill No.04-29 be approved if amended to contain the following conditions: 1. That the containers be covered in accordance with appropriate regulations to prevent blowing and scattering of contents; 2. That the containers be removed from the premises within 24 hours except for weekends when the containers would be removed within forty eight(48)hours; 3. That there shall be no transfer of materials between containers; and 4. That there be written review by IDEM confirming that the business activity as described does not fall within regulatory jurisdiction of IDEM. The Motion was unanimously approved by the Committee. C. Miscellaneous Matters Mr. Jim Frick,President of the South Gateway Association,requested Council support for a remonstrance against the renewal of the Glo-Worm Liquor.Permit. Mr.Frick stated that the Local Alcoholic Beverage Board would meet Wednesday,March 24,2004 to determine whether the Glo- Page 3 • Worm permit should be renewed. Support from the Council is needed in order to deny renewal of liquor permit. With recent prostitution investigation focusing on Glo-Worm,it is more critical than ever that this business be stopped. Council Members questioned whether a joint letter from the entire Council would be appropriate. Aladean DeRose stated that it would be better for Council Members to address this issue personally on behalf of their respective constituents. Council Member Varner raised concern about care of the Studebaker Golf Course. He said he had received several complaints from constituents that the golf course is poorly maintained with only one person in charge. Member Coleman suggested that the appropriate committee schedule a meeting on April 26,2004 with Parks Director Phil St. Clair to review plans of all City maintained golf courses during the 2004 golf season. There being no further business to come before the Committee,the meeting was adjourned at 5:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Council Member Ery Kuspa, Chairperson Personnel and Finance Committee AMD/cw Attachments Page 4