Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-12-00 Zoning & Annexation toinitttttr lot: Zoning anb animation tomtttittc The June 12, 2000 meeting of the Zoning and Annexation Committee was called to order by its Chairperson, y Council Member Karen L. White at 3:35 P min the Council Informal Meetin g room. Persons in attendance included Council Members Aranowski, Pfeifer,Kelly, King, Ujdak, Varner, and White; John Byorni, Area Plan Assistant Director, Kenneth Fedder, Dea Andrews, Robert Hunt, Don Fozo, Noreen D. Moran, Carl Littrell, Gary Gilot, Director of Public Works; Brent Badek, Travis Parker, Anastacia Gring, Travis R. Saunier of GPD Associates of Akron, Ohio; Mr. Bill R. Owen, Maureen Bolton, Robert Corn, Timothy Lykowski, Todd Zeiger,Edward Talley, Terry Bland of the *MU) VIZ'Of UU , and Kathleen Cekanski- Farrand, Council Attorney. Council Member White noted that the first item on the agenda was to continue the review of substitute Bill No. 35-00 which is a zoning request for the property located at 1515 Kemble. John Byorni introduced Brent Bader to the Council who will be replacing Travis Parker. Mr. Byorni noted that both the Area Plan staff and the Commission sends the request to the Council with a favorable recommendation. Anastacia Gring, the petitioner and owner of the subject property, made the presentation. She noted that she is in the process of selling her home since it is now too small for her family,and found out during her attempt to see it that it was not zoned residential. The rezoning would permit her to sell to another individual for residential purposes. Following discussion, Council Member Varner made a motion, seconded by Council Member Ujdak that Bill No. 35-00 be recommended favorably to Council. The motion passed. The Committee then reviewed Substitute Bill No. 36-00 which is a rezoning request for the property located at 231 East Ireland Road. Mr. Byorni noted that the request is for the rear portion of the property. It comes to the Council with favorable recommendations from both the Area Plan staff and the Commission. Mr. Travis R. Saunier of GPD Associates of Akron, Ohio, represented the petitioner. He noted that the site is that of the Taco Bell restaurant. In response to questions made from 5th District Council Member Varner who represents this area of the city, Mr. Saunier stated that the current building would be demolished and moved back onto the property. In light of safety concerns the grade will be decreased from 10 to 11 % to 5 to 6 %. Dr. Varner inquired into whether the larger SUV's will be able to access the drive-thru area. Mr. Saunier stated that the new configuration will properly address the congestion problems currently occurring on Ireland and that SUV's will be able to safety access the area. Following discussion, Council Member Varner made a motion, seconded by Council Member Ujdak that Substitute Bill No. 36-00 be recommended favorably to Council. The motion passed. • The Committee then reviewed Substitute Bill No. 27-00 which would establish as an 7oang and Annexation Committee June 12, 2000 Page 2 historic landmark the structure located at 501 West Colfax commonly known as the Remedy Building. Mr. J. Edward Talley, Director of the Historic Preservation Commission stated that the HPC believes that a plan is now in place for saving the structure which they recommend favorably to Council. Mr. Todd r President Zeiger, of the Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana then n o reviewed an undated handout (copy attached) which outlined a "project timeframe" for the building. He noted that the project would take between nine (9) to twelve (12) months to complete. The Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana would then move their Northern Regional Office from the Probst House to the Remedy Building. Noreen D. Moran stated that she lives two (2) blocks from the structure. She believes that the building would be a meaningful addition to the West Washington Street area. Dea Andrews noted that she too lives approximately two (2) blocks from the area. She recalled that the Remedy Building was addressed by Jack McGann when the $;'OUt1j VtU J ILrtburct made its major expansion in the downtown area. She stated that its current location is awkward at best. Architecturally the Remedy Building would be significant for South Bend since there are very few of this king remaining. She then presented a letter of support from Mr. Jeff Gibney. Maureen Bolton spoke in favor of the landmark designation. She noted that the proposed site of relocation would be good for the city and stated that the city should welcome it to the South Bend landscape. Mr. Ted Lykowski expressed concern about the designation in light of the pending issues regarding ownership and its relocation. He noted that he is a moving contractor and property owner of where the Remedy Building is currently located. Mr. Lykowski stated that it should not take nine(9) months to move the structure. He voiced concern about the continuing liability he has and the on-going expenses which he is incurring to protect the structure and maintain the land. He noted that the insurance costs alone are $ 400 per month since the structure is vacant. He would like the issue of who should pay for liability insurance addressed before there is any landmarking of the building. He noted that the Sextons nor their attorney, Kevin Butler are present, and that they have been present at all prior committee meetings where this issue was discussed. Mr. Zeiger stated that the state plan release triggers the date of moving with March of 2001 being the target date. He noted that ideally he would like to move the Remedy Building this fall and further noted that he had left three (3) messages for the Sextons and called their attorney. He stated that he would be willing to work something out with regard to insurance costs. In response to a series of questions from Dr. Varner, Mr. Talley indicated that the Council could go forward today on the landmark designation and make it contingent on specific conditions. He noted that the building received interim protection in light of the threat to demolish the structure. Dr. Varner voiced continuing concern with regard to the fact that no assurances were • iciong and Annexation Committee 11 3300 Jrce 3 being provided that in fact a legal transaction would be forthcoming. The Council Attorney noted that the Historic Preservation Commission could seek an extension of the interim protection without the Council being obligated to move forward on the ', ordinance this evening. In request to a question from Council Member King, it was noted that the lot is to be purchased but that the Remedy Building itself was to be donated. Council Member King inquired that if the "carrying costs"could be addressed whether an agreement between the parties could be reached. Mr. Lykowski stated that items could be discussed and agreed to however he continued to voice concern about the term of the proposal being outlined by Mr. Zeiger. In response to a question from Council Member Ujdak, Mr. Lykowski stated that the mowing of the property and the trash on the property are the biggest problems in addition to the continuing costs of liability insurance. Council Member Ujdak noted that Mr. Zeiger indicated that the finance meeting is scheduled to take place on June 13th and the executive meeting on June 20th. In light of these dates and the lack of firm agreements in place, he suggested that the proposed ordinance be continued until the June 26th Council meeting. Following discussion, Council Member Varner made a motion, seconded by Council Member Ujdak that Substitute Bill No. 27-00 be continued until the June 26th committee and Council meeting,and that Mr. Zeiger file with the Office of the City Clerk a written update no later than Friday,June 23, 2000. The motion passed. The Committee then reviewed Bill No. 45-00 which is a request to establish as an historic landmark the property located at 3020 Buckingham. Mr. Talley circulated pictures of the subject property. Dr. Varner noted that there has been no response from the property owners and this raises I concerns since the property is located in the 5th District which he represents. He quoted from the HPC letter of March 21,2000 sent to the property owners which did not elicit a response. Mr. Talley stated that the Historic Preservation Commission is reviewing five (5) possible landmark designations each moth and that often nothing is heard from the property owners. f Council Member Kelly voiced concern about this procedure and stated that he was not comfortable of voting on this bill tonight. The Council Attorney noted that the Common Council has voiced concern about the notice procedures in this area for well over a year. She suggested that proposed historic landmarks not be filed for Council consideration until after formal notification to the proposed affected property owners could be validated. Following discussion, Council Member Ujdak made a motion, seconded by Council Member Varner that Bill No. 45-00 be continued until July 24,2000. The motion passed. The next item on the agenda was Bill No. 6-00 which addresses the Royal Oaks Estates annexation. Council Member White noted that the Council had received a memorandum form Mr. Littrell dated June 8, 2000 (copy attached) which addressed the water, sanitary sewer lines, street L r L.rte and Annexation Committee Nor 1:. 2000 and drainage systems and security concerns raised at the last Committee meeting. Council Member Ujdak inquired about the maintenance bond. Mr. Littrell stated that it would be the standard bond for a three (3) year period which would begin at the time of acceptance by the city. It was n oted that no public hearing n would tak e place on the bill this evening since it was continued at the third reading stage. Mr. Don Fozo, Building Commissioner, then reviewed Bill No. 00-54 addressing the Board of Zoning Appeals special exception for the property located at 1803 South Bend Avenue. He noted that it received a favorably recommendation at the May 18th BZA meeting. Mr. Fodder noted that this matter involves the Osceola restaurant "Between the Buns" which plans to open a new restaurant near the vicinity of the former"Cactus Jacks". Council Member Ujdak noted that he has a potential conflict of interest on the matter and therefore would not be voting on the measure. As a result, the Committee did not have a quorum to take formal action. Council Member King voiced concern about the placement of this item on the agenda and that it should not have received preference in its location. There being no further business to come before the Committee, Council Member White adjourned the meeting at 4:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Council Member Karen L. White, Chairperson Zoning and Annexation Committee KCF:kmf Attachments •