Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-09-84 Human Resources & Economic Development (Controlled use Ordinance) atilminl12PP 3arpr1't (IID hit Cum= Counrll of Iljt 014 Df flotttlj lima: HUMAN RESOURCES AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE The July 9 , 1984 meeting of the Human Resources and Economic Development Committe was called to order by its' chairman, Eugenia Braboy at 4 :00 p.m. in the Council chambers. Persons in attendance included: Councilman Serge, Braboy, Beck, Puzzello, Taylor, Zakrzewski, Crone, Paszek, and Voorde, Rich Hill, Carolyn Pfotenhauer, Carol Sheetz, Tim Decker, members of the news media and Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand and various other members of the community which are identified below. Councilman Braboy opened the meeting by thanking everyone in attendance. She noted that the purpose of the meeting was to continue the discussion of the controlled use ordinance. She then read various ground rules which would govern the meeting. She noted that her committee met on March 6 , 198, to discuss the controlled use ordinance. Today's meeting is to react to the .City Attorney's suggestions found in a letter dated. May 7, 1984. It is hoped that a new bill if found to be necessary, would be filed on July 18, with first reading July 23rd, and public hearing on August 13th. She hoped that members of the audience would abide by a five minute limitation on each Presentation._ Councilman Braboy then called upon the City Attorney to make a presentation. Mr. Hill noted that the present ordinance was passed in 1976 following extensive input by realtor0, neighborhood groups and other concerned citizens . Its' primary goal was the elimination of blight. In recent months problems of enforcement led to the March 6th meeting. Mr. Hill noted that there are ten areas of controlled uses, however a problem has arisen regarding the interpretation of a building which. is "structurally altered or enlarged" . He noted that in his opinion the present ordinance would prohibit remodeling of restrooms"or- kitchen facilities. Additionally two uses and a family restaurant could not locate in a area even though they may have a positive impact. He then reviewed possible amendments which would not dilute the protection to the neighborhoods. He suggested that the Board of Zoning Appeals be allowed to provide exemptions for two uses: Class .A Cabarets and establishments which serve beer and wine. The petitioner would have to meet the criteria addressed in. the May 7th letter (copy attached) .. There would be a formal application process with notice to any existing neighborhood groups. He stressed that it would be a "case specific exemption. " Councilman Crone inquired whether another individual could purchase such a structure and maintain its' same use. Mr. Hill noted that the procedure would be separate and that amendatory language would have to be prepared for this Councilman Puzzello suggested that the new owner should be required to provide certain information but shouldcnot have to go back to "Square one. " The Council also inquired as to what procedure would be used if there was no established neighborhood group in the area. This would have :to be looked into further. Counci.lia.n Beck. voiced opposition to using the MA, since it is a Board appointed totally by the Mayor and could be subject to pressure from that office-. Mr. Hill contended that thefBoard has acted independently. rase r.,.. � IVal1.MIMS CO. Page 2. • Councilman -Serge -inquired-into the exact role: of the BZA. Their role would not be advisory but rather conclusive according to Mr. Hill. Councilman Voorde inquired whether a .f.ee was contemplated of the petitioner who would-seek BZA intervention. 'Both ch- the City Attorney and Council Attorney agreed that reasonable costs could be .addressed in a fee through proper amendatory language. Councilman Crone voiced concern regarding the 'notice provision especially if there is not an organized neigborhood group. She recommended that a definition be prepared for "structurally altered" . The Council Attorney then was called upon to give a summary of her involvement. in this area. She noted that she assisted Councilman Beck in drafting. a letter to Mayor Parent dated September 23, 1983 regarding possible changes to the controlled use ordinance. She suggested that the ten controlled uses be carefully studied to see if in fact the list was current. She also suggested redefining such classifications as Class A and Class B cabarets,, amusement devices, amusement arcades, and suggested the elimination of family type resturuants. Massage parlors have not been included and perhaps should be. She also requested that notice to the entire Council of a public hearing before the BZA might be an alternative in the notice area. Mr. Roger Baele of the Rum Village Neighborhood Association •contended that the rule change is for a hotel on the East side of town. He questioned why .a good law should be changed. He noted that exceptions often become the rule and he did not want the ordinance weakened since it was very soundly based on law. Councilman Puzzello noted that reviewing the controlled use ordinance was in no way related to any hotel project. • Arlene. Quigley representing her husband, Arthur. Quigley,: who is the president of the Northeast Neighborhood Association then read a letter voicing opposition to changing the :controlled use ordinance. (copy attached) She noted that there were four basic reasons why it should not be amended and that the present ordinance is a "pillar of strength" that- is serving - the entire City. Charles Gnoth. one of the owners of the Loading Zone stated that the ordinance ,is to restricted and he would like to make various improvements at his tavern. Margery Kinsey noted that remodeling an area into a kitchen could later have the same area made into a tavern, - She believed that structural changes and modernization could be made underrthe current ordinance and that only exterior enlargements were prohibited.;, Steve Morty of 730 Notre Dame Avenue noted that many establishments -start out, good then face economic problems and then become a "'real dive"'. He believes that the ordinance has served the community well. He also believed that through the BZA process there would be an undue burden placed on working people who would have to take off from their jobs. Hildegard Zymlak of 19,03 Franklin and a member of the Rum Village Neighborhood Association spoke -in favor of retaining the 1, 0.00 foot restriction.. She believed that it has served the community and all the neighborhoods. Changes should only be made for Page 3. changes for restroom and kitchen modifications. Mr. Hill noted that the Building Department has refused to issue permits for enlarging the perimeter of a building for a kitchen. Ranalda Robinson of 737 N. Frances noted that taverns in the past were a benefit to the residents of the neighborhood, now however they just serve Notre Dame students. She took issue with Councilman Beck ' s statement in the newspaper that taverns should be enlarged so. that "we can get the kids off the street" . Mrs. Robinson stated that she is not against taverns but is against enlarging them. People should act as responsible adults and cited the Goose Neck as an example of an establishment hurting the neighborhood. She noted that residents are moved out of the inter-city by the government and are relocated to neighborhoods which should have protections from blight caused by such. taverns. Mr. Harold A. Rowley, Jr. of 2609 York Road and the owner of Corby Tavern located at 1026 Corby Blvd. noted that he has had a covenant with the Northeast Neighborhood Council for the past several years. He questioned by the City was pre-occupied with just the taverns rather than all of the uses addressed in the ordinance. He questioned items 2 and .3 on page 2 of the May 7th letter and believed they were .to subjected. He noted that with the review by the ABB and the ABC that there were adequate controls,.and specifically questioned why complaints rather than convictions were referred to. He felt this was double jeopardy. Another tavern owner of the property located in South Bend for over 30 years just wants to enlarge his kitchen and believes that this should be allowed. • Phillip .Slate of 54909 Hollywood who is associated with the laundromat thought that "something was rotten in Denmark" . He _believed that since the City had been working on this for;:over ten months that a one day notice of a meeting was inappropriate. He noted that the BZA is an appointed board and that perhaps instead the -"hardship rule" could be invoked if an owner wanted to. modernize his establishment so long as existing seating capacity was not increased. He questioned why he was notified while others weren't and made reference to "Bauer-Gate" . Councilman Beck then explained why he was notified. . Bernard Diedrich a local realtor then displayed a map depicting all of the establishments which sell liquor. lie noted that he -tried to contact attorney Lux regarding the history behind -this ordinance. He also noted that enforcement of DUI laws are having a significant effect on establishments. The ABC controls the number of licenses, the health department controls health_ and safety requirements and the Area Plan Commission controls parking requirements, He believes the proposed changes were "ridiculous" and are subject to interpretations and the City would be asking for "a whole lot of problems". He believed that the ordinance prohibits good development and cited the Village Inn on Hickory and Shakeys as examples. Pasquale Anastasio the owner of the "Commons" stated that he would like to replace his entire building so that it could be more attractive and energy efficient. • Richard Heyde believed that the ordinance needed "more teeth" . He hoped that personal conflicts would be put aside so that the best solution Page 4. could be reached. He questioned the notice aspect of the ordinance proposed and hoped that the City would be receptive to constructive suggestions. Mr. Bill McGlynn of 121 North Shore noted that he was associated with MADD and hoped that only' the modification language be addressed so that the 1,000 ft. restriction would remain to regulate bars. - Mr. Wallace Jessup of 522 E. Altgeld requested that a moratorium be placed on all new dealer permits. He noted that a retailer permit are what r.estaur.::ants, have and dealer permits allow you to take the package home. He proposed a resolution to this effect. (copy attached) Maria Catanzarite noted that -her family owns and operates the rest:a_ur:ant. known as Francisco' s Family resa'aaran't located at 1636 N, Ironwood. They have been there for two years and the whole family works there. It is a nice family restaurant and they would like to. move to the GoodWill Plaza to help the neighborhood. She stated that "you can' t drink coke or milk with pizza and spaghetti" . Councilman Serge noted that he operated a tavern for over 36 years and that it was an important business. He noted that he remodeled his establishment on Portage Avenue so that his customers would be more ' comfortable. He thought the problem was on the East side of town. Councilman Puzzello noted that if changes are made there mus:t _be better policing. Councilman Beck stated that changes are needed. She is most concerned about using the BZA and cited several appointed Boards which have had their problems; :redevelopment with the Odd Fellows Building, public works with the Violin Woman, the' School Board with education. She said that we must review this ordinance carefully and hope that another instrument_ rather than the BZA could be used. She felt it was the Council ' s responsibility. Councilman Crone noted that certain subjective criteria may be needed if th:e 'BZA is used. She did not question their ability however noted that changes to the ordinance will effect the entire City not just the five points area. She stressed that we must look at all uses such as controlling adult book stores, etc. Councilman Zakrzewski voiced concern about using the BZA. He felt that the Council should have the final say. He voiced this position .in March and has not changed his mind. He questioned the definition of structural alterations. Councilman Puzzello requested Mr. Diedrich, to send any suggestions' he might have in writing. Mrs. Robinson also noted that parking requirements should be carefully studied. Councilman Braboy requested all persons to put their ideas in writing and send them to the City Council. She also stressed that any changes Page 5. would effect the entire City. She hoped that since several persons were unable to be present today that they would give their i:x:.put at a later time. Following further discussion Councilman Taylor made a motion seconded by Councilman Beck that the meeting be adjourned. The meeting was adjourned at 5 : 55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Eugenia Braboy, Chairman