Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-18-04 Council Special Meeting Minutes SPECIAL MEETING FEBRUARY 18, 2004 Be it remembered that the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, met in the Council Chambers of the County-City Building on Wednesday, February 18, 2004 at 6:00 p.m. The meeting was called to order by Council President Karen L. White and the Invocation and Pledge to the Flag were given. ROLL CALL Present: Derek Dieter 1st District Charlotte Pfeifer 2nd District Roland Kelly 3rd District Vice-President Ann Puzzello 4th District David Varner 5th District Ervin Kuspa 6th District Sean Coleman At-Large Chairperson, Committee of the Whole Al "Buddy"Kirsits At-Large Karen L. White At-Large President Absent: None OTHERS PRESENT: Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand Council Attorney John Voorde City Clerk Mary Beth Wisniewski Chief Deputy City Clerk Janice I. Talboom Deputy City Clerk At 6:03 p.m. Councilmember Coleman made a motion to resolve into the Committee of the Whole. Councilmember Kelly seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. Councilmember Coleman, Chairperson, Committee of the Whole, presiding. BILL NO. 81-03 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA REPEALING AND REPLACING THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS OF THE SOUTH BEND MUNICIPAL CODE, NAMELY CHAPTER 21, ARTICLES 1 THROUGH 11, EXCLUDING ARTICLES 6.5 AND 8, WITH THOSE ARTICLES NOT REPEALED BEING RENUMBERED, AND THE INCLUSION OF NEW ZONING MAPS, ALL OF WHICH SHALL BE ENTITLED "THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND ZONING ORDINANCE" Councilmember Kuspa, Chairperson, Zoning and Annexation Committee advised that state law requires a written statement of the reasons for the rejection or amendment of a legislative body when returning a replacement zoning ordinance to the Area Plan Commission. I am therefore providing those reasons in my capacity as Chairperson of this Committee. Mr. Kuspa further noted that the Zoning and Annexation Committee has met on several -1- 1 SPECIAL MEETING FEBRUARY 18, 2004 occasions to review and discuss the proposed replacement zoning ordinance for the City of South Bend. More specifically, the Zoning and Annexation Committee met on this proposed ordinance this calendar year on January 28, 2004; February 2, 2004; and February 11, 2004. These meetings were in addition to review and discussion which took place by the former Common Council last Fall. As a result of candid discussions and review of the draft ordinance, it was determined that several definitions which are found in the current zoning ordinance were omitted from the proposed new ordinance. This fact was brought to the attention of the Area Plan staff and their consultant. Following a series of discussions, the amendments specifically addressing definitions which have been included today are believed to be necessary and clarify terms or phrases in the new zoning ordinance. Our Committee also discussed at length the need for clarification of the zoning ordinance amendment procedures in the proposed ordinance. As a result of much discussion, the proposed amendments in that area have been included in the interest of setting forth clear information and the requirements expected of the petitioner, as well as the role of the Office of the City Clerk, the staff and Area Plan Commission, and the Common Council. Input was received from the Area Plan staff and their consultant in this area also,with the final version of the amendments in this area reflected a consensus of all parties affected by the regulations. In light of many concerns being raised by many Council Members with regard to the proposed flag regulations and the lack of problems or concerns in this area by the City, the Council has deleted those specific regulations from the ordinance. I believe that all of the recommended amendments have been throughly discussed and the strengthen the zoning ordinance. I respectfully request the Area Plan Commission to approve the amendments as passed by the South Bend Common Council on February 18, 2004. Councilmember Kuspa made a motion to consider the 2nd second Substitute Bill No. 81-03, with the amendments dated February 18, 2004 which are on file in the City Clerk's Office. Councilmember Puzzello seconded the motion, which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. Robert Sante, Executive Director, St. Joseph County Area Plan Commission made the presentation for this bill. Mr. Sante stated that on November 18, 2003 the Area Plan Commission sent forward to the Common Council the"Proposed New South Bend Zoning Ordinance"This bill came with a unanimous favorable recommendation. The purpose of the ordinance is to over the years be able to bring about many positive changes in the City. There will be regulations for architecture, landscaping, lighting, signage that will change the way the City of South Bend looks in the future. Mr. Sante noted that these changes will be a benefit to the City in the years to come. Mr. Sante further noted that the new ordinance will be much more user friendly than the old ordinance. Mr. Sante noted that this new ordinance will eliminate the height and area districts. Mr. Sante noted that under the old ordinance the Area Plan Commission was required to keep two (2) separate sets of maps one for zoning and the other for height and area district on the property. This new ordinance would eliminate all the height and area districts and all of the regulations that are contained in the height and area districts will be within each zoning district. Each zoning district will have its on requirements for set backs and heights. The other item that is being changed is the site plan requirements. There have been many discussions on site plan requirements. There will be a proposed site plan required to be submitted with the rezoning petition. There is a requirement of seventeen(17) copies of the proposed site plan. The site plan should have all the required information that the Area Plan Commission and the Common Council needs in order to make a decision on the proposed plan. At this stage the site plan does not require all the engineering and drainage documentation to be done. Following the approval -2- SPECIAL MEETING FEBRUARY 18, 2004 by the Area Plan Commission and the Common Council then a final site plan would be required. At this time the engineering and drainage calculations would then be required on the final site plan, so the Building Department can determine whether or not it conforms to all the requirements of the ordinance. Mr. Sante further noted that the ordinance also allows for certain protections for the community. The protections are in the form of landscaping, lighting requirements, set backs, with extra set backs called buffer yards if it's a commercial use. For instance, if the project is adjacent to a residential district, they will have to have increased set backs and screening that will be required. Mr. Sante also noted that along with the new ordinance is the new zoning map for the City. In drawing the new zoning maps the Area Plan Commission Staff attempted to match the new zoning to the old classification or the existing uses as closely as possible. Whenever possible the Area Plan Commission avoided zoning existing land uses in to non-conformance. The new ordinance is a huge difference over the existing ordinance. However, it is important to understand that no ordinance of this size and complexity is ever perfect right out of the box. Mr. Sante stated that over the coming years will be working the bugs out with different agencies that administer and enforce the ordinance with the Area Plan Commission and the Common Council. Mr. Sante noted that the detailed plan called City Plan is now in progress and will help establish the zoning needs of the community. Mr. Sante thanked and acknowledged Mr. Gene Valanzano, Baker&Daniels for his excellence in putting together this ordinance. Mr. Sante also acknowledged the steering committee, Councilmember Kuspa, Mr. Karl King, Mr Don Fozo, St. Joseph County Building Commissioner, Mr. Brent Bajdek, Assistant Zoning Administrator, Mr. Gary Gilot, Director of Public Works, Mr. Bill Schalliol, Community and Economic Development. Mr. Sante thanked the entire staff of the Area Plan Commission as well as the Common Council's Zoning and Annexation Committee. A special thank you to Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand for her expertise in the development of this ordinance. Mr. Sante made a special note that the Area Plan Commission Staff will support the amendments dated February 18, 2004, as on file in the City Clerk's Office. Jeff Myers, Staff Planner, Area Plan Commission gave a power point demonstration, highlighting the changes that Mr. Sante made in his presentation. The power point demonstration omitted the new site plan requirements. In a rezoning a site plan is required, in any building situation the site plan is required to go through the Building Department and be approved by that department and its entirety as in terms of all the standards set forth by the Building Department. Councilmember Pfeifer wanted a clarification from the Area Plan Commission that the power point demonstration had not been updated based on the amendments that were approved February 18, 2004. Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand asked Robert Sante, Executive Director, Area Plan Commission to clarify that the power point demonstration had not been updated since the amendments were made on February 18, 2004 as on file in the Office of the City Clerk. Mr. Sante confirmed that the power point demonstration had not been updated with the amendments that were approved on February 18, 2004 and that seventeen(17)proposed site plans would be required. Councilmember White asked why the Historic Preservation language was changed? Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand, Council Attorney noted that the Historic District was inadvertently omitted. That definition has been changed to Historic Preservation District and therefore included it in its entirety and then also added it under Historic Preservation because that term was not included into the definition that we have proposed in our last amendment that was heard by the committee. Councilmember Varner questioned when the Ordinance become effective? Kathleen Cekanski- Farrand, Council Attorney noted that the bill will be sent back to the Area Plan Commission, they will have a maximum of 45 days to act. If they act favorably on the 2nd Substitute Bill with the February 18, 2004 amendments it will become effective upon their filing of a report with the -3- SPECIAL MEETING FEBRUARY 18, 2004 City Clerk. If the Area Plan Commission sends the bill back to the Council with an unfavorable recommendation, the Council has a maximum of 45 days to over rule the commissions recommendation. This being the time heretofore set for the Public Hearing on the above bill,proponents and opponents were given an opportunity to be heard. The following individuals spoke in favor of this bill. Don Fozo, Building Commissioner, St. Joseph County and the City of South Bend, spoke in favor of this bill. Mr. Fozo stated that in his 27 Y2 years of working in County and City government that a new zoning ordinance has been a long time in the"works." Mr. Fozo believes that the new ordinance is a user friendly ordinance, and supports the passage of the bill. Catherine Brucker, Director, Department of Code Enforcement, spoke in favor of this bill. She indicated that the zoning ordinance has been long outdated. Ms. Brucker further noted that the new zoning ordinance will help moved forward with the vision for the future in the City Plan. Ms. Brucker indicated that she is in full support of this ordinance. Ann Carol-Nash, Assistant City Attorney, spoke in favor of this bill. Ms. Nash indicated that on behalf of the entire Legal Department of the City of South Bend, they commend everyone involved in the development of this ordinance. Ms. Nash stated that she is in full support of this bill. Larry Magliozzi, Assistant Director Community and Economic Development spoke in favor of this bill. Mr. Magliozzi noted that it took twenty-six (26)meetings to get to this point on the zoning ordinance. Mr. Magliozzi further noted that South Bend needed a new zoning ordinance, the current ordinance is outdated for the business districts, and they were no provisions to protect the older neighborhoods. Mr. Magliozzi also agrees that the new zoning ordinance blends in well with the community's hopes for the future in"City Plan." Gary Gilot, Director, Public Works Department, spoke in favor of this bill. Mr. Gilot supports this bill whole heartedly. Mr. Gilot noted that the new zoning ordinance provides for historic districts as well as moving South Bend toward becoming a 21st Century. There was no one present wishing to speak in opposition to the bill. Councilmember Kelly made a motion to send second 2nd Substitute Bill No. 81-03 as amended on February 18, 2004, as on file with the City Clerk,to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. Councilmember White seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. RISE AND REPORT Councilmember Kelly made a motion to rise and report to the full Council. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine ayes ATTEST: ATTEST: oorde, City Clerk Sean Coleman, airperson Committee of the Whole -4- SPECIAL MEETING FEBRUARY 18, 2004 REGULAR MEETING RECONVENED Be it remembered that the Common Council of the City of South Bend reconvened in the Council Chambers on the fourth floor of the County-City Building at 6:44 p.m. Council President Karen L. White presided with nine (9) members present. BILLS - THIRD READING BILL NO. 81-03 THIRD READING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA REPEALING AND REPLACING THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS OF THE SOUTH BEND MUNICIPAL CODE, NAMELY CHAPTER 21, ARTICLES 1 THROUGH 11, EXCLUDING ARTICLES 6.5 AND 8, WITH THOSE ARTICLES NOT REPEALED BEING RENUMBERED, AND THE INCLUSION OF NEW ZONING MAPS, ALL OF WHICH SHALL BE ENTITLED "THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND ZONING ORDINANCE" Councilmember Coleman made a motion to consider the second substitute version of this bill as amended on February 18, 2004 as on file in the Office of the City Clerk. Councilmember Kuspa seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. Additionally, Councilmember Coleman made a motion to pass this bill as substituted and amended, February 18, 2004, as of file in the Office of the City Clerk. Councilmember Kuspa seconded the motion which carried by a roll call vote of nine (9) ayes. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business to come before the Council at this time. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business to come before the Council PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR There was no one present wishing to speak to the Council at this time. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council,President White adjourned the meeting at 7:45 p.m. ATTEST: ATTEST: 0-1 - .041 . -e-e-1^--e"&ti" h hn oorde, City Clerk 4.ren L. White, President -5-