Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-11-96 Special Sub-Committee of the Community & Economic Development Commfttts Uport: Special Sub-Committee of the Community and Economic Development Committee to tbs Common Counsfl of tbs (Mg of South NC*: The April 11, 1996 meeting of the special sub-committee of the Community and Economic Development Committee was called to order by the Council Member Sean Coleman at 4:05 P.M.in the Council informal meeting room. Persons in attendance included Council Members: Luecke, Broden, Hosinski, Coleman and Varner, Mike Beitzinger, Mike Graf, Mike Urbanski, Ray Brach, Mary Booth, Bob Luan, Laura Smith, Chris Matteo, Larry Magliozzi, Susan Hodgson, Jim Rans,Paul Gjemre,Kent Ullrey and Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand. Council Member Coleman began the meeting by an introduction of all persons present. He then reviewed the overall objectives of the special sub-committee,namely to 1. Designate New Areas for RDA consideration -add to the current city map by legal description and map 2. Fine-Tune the RDA Policy -Grdfathering -Open vs. Closed designations -Single lot descriptions -Lot Size 60 ` -Owner-occupied 3. Meeting Schedule Larry Magliozzi then reviewed a one-page handout dated 4-11-96 entitled "Residential Tax Abatement Areas". (copy attached)He indicated that 1298.3 acres would be involved and highlighted those areas that had improvements, approximate % of vacancy,approximate%of vacant lots,etc. Mike Beitzinger noted that he had spoken with John Lentz from the St. Joseph County Auditor's Office. He stated that a Form 322 must be completed within thirty (30) days from the notice date of an assessment. He noted that there is a possibility for already built homes to qualify for tax abatement consideration. Discussion then focused on the issue of grandfathering. It was suggested that improvements be considered going back to five(5)years from the date of assessment. The Council Attorney then reviewed the draft of Bill No. 18-96 (copy attached). She noted that in § 2-76.1 (a) (20)which defines"Residentially Distressed Areas(RDA)" that Exhibit Nos.A-13 Rum Village and A-14 Far Northwest are already on the books. All Exhibits thereafter would be new. A-18 was inadvertently left off the draft, A-17 had the incorrect acreage listed and A-32 was in discussion stages and was not added to the draft ordinance. She also noted paragraphs (a) through (b) of § 2-77.1 addressing "Single- Family Construction"are already in existence. The new language begins at sub-paragraph (c)through(e). In response to a question,she stated that if the sub-committee recommends grandfathering, that the grandfathering provisions should be included as a subparagraph within§2-77.1 so that the regulations would be set forth and consistently applied to all Special Sub-Committee of the Community and Economic Development Committee April 11, 1996 Page 2 RDA areas. Council Member Hosinski agreed with the Council Attorney that there is a fairness issue involved and that the policy if developed should be set out. Mike Urbanski voiced concern with regard to the minimum frontage requirement of sixty feet (60'). He recommended that as long as it is a "buildable lot" that it should qualify. He stated that the need to develop in the older parts of the inner City would benefit by a"buildable lot"criteria.Mr.Urbanski also voiced concern that closed subdivisions are now becoming the primary focus where the program initially began as in enticement to built in the older areas of the inner city. Chris Matteo and others disagreed, and stated that closed subdivisions were a proper focus for the new legislation. Council Member Luecke voiced appreciation of Mr. Urbanski's comments, however believes that other individuals like the Building Commissioner, etc. need to be involved in such decisions. Council Member Luecke noted that the five-year period for completion for developments should also be deleted in§2-77.1 (c) (2)of the draft. Concerns were also raised with regard to the "A" Height and Areas District Regulations. Mary Booth and others noted that "villa-type" construction would not qualify. Chris Matteo questioned whether"horizontal properties" would qualify, and it was suggested that they would not. Following discussion, Mike Urbanski made a motion, seconded by Sue Hodgson that§ 2-77.1 (b) (1) addressing the minimum lot size be deleted. The motion passed with three abstentions. It was further recommended and discussed to remove § 2-77.1 (b) (2) addressing "A"Height and Area restrictions be deleted with the focus being on"single-family owner- occupied dwellings" built in residential areas. Special consideration of spec homes and model homes was suggested. Following further discussion, Sue Hodgson made a motion, seconded by Chris Matteo that Bill No. 18-96 with all of the recommended changes and amendments be recommended favorably to the Community and Economic Development Committee and the Council. The motion passed. Council Member Coleman suggested that a meeting of the subcommittee be held on Tuesday,April 23, 1996 at 4 p.m. There being no further business to come before the sub-Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 5:55 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Council Member Sean Coleman Chairperson Attachments