Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-22-13 Common Council Meeting Minutes REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 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 Monday, July 22, 2013 at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was called to order by Council President Derek Dieter and the Invocation and Pledge to the Flag were given. ROLL CALL COUNCILMEMBERS: st Present: Tim Scott 1 District nd Henry Davis, Jr. 2 District rd Valerie Schey 3 District (late 7:02) th Fred Ferlic 4 District th Oliver J. Davis 6 District, Vice-President Derek Dieter At-Large, President Gavin Ferlic At-Large Karen L. White At-Large, Chairperson Committee of the Whole th Absent: David Varner 5 District (excused) OTHERS PRESENT: Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand Council Attorney John Voorde City Clerk Janice I. Talboom Deputy Mary Beth Wisniewski Chief Deputy REPORT FROM THE SUB-COMMITTEE ON MINUTES Councilmember Scott made a motion that the minutes of the July 8, 2013, meeting of the Council be accepted and placed on file. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. SPECIAL BUSINESS REPRESENTING THE CITY ADMINISTRATION WILL BE KATHRYN ROOS – CHIEF OF STAFF. REPORTS OF CITY OFFICES There were no reports from City Offices at this time. RESOLVE INTO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE At 7:02 p.m. Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to resolve into the Committee of the Whole. Councilmember Gavin Ferlic seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. Councilmember White, Chairperson, presiding. Councilmember White, explained the procedures to be followed for tonight’s meeting in accordance with Article 1, Section 2-11 of the South Bend Municipal Code. Councilmember White stated that a brochure may be found on the railing in the Council Chambers explaining those procedures. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 BILL NO. 16-13 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3529 AND 3527 WESTERN AVENUE, SOUTH BEND, INDIANA 46619, COUNCILMANIC DISTRICT NO. 2 IN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA Councilmember Ferlic, Chairperson, Zoning & Annexation Committee reported that this committee held a meeting this afternoon and it was the consensus of the committee to send this bill to the full Council with no recommendation. Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand stated that immediately after the formal presentation any member of the public may speak at the podium and we asked that you give you name and residential address and you are allowed to speak for the maximum of five minutes per person. Comments in favor of the matter before the Council are taken first; they are immediately followed by comments from the public that are in opposition to that. Immediately after the close of the remonstrators the petitioner who has given the formal presentation has the opportunity for a five (5) minutes rebuttal and in this period of time if there were any questions that were asked the presenter will address those during the rebuttal period. At that point, Councilmember White will close the public portion and it will move to the Council. During this period of time the Council has the opportunity to ask questions and make formal motions for the disposition of the bill before them. th Christa Nayder, Staff Member, Area Plan Commission, 11 Floor County-City Building, 227 W. Jefferson Blvd., South Bend, Indiana, presented the report from the Area Plan Commission. Ms. Nayder advised that the petitioner is requesting first a zone change from the MU Mixed Use District to the LB Local Business District and a Special Exception to allow a gasoline service station. Ms. Nayder used a power point presentation to identify the location. She showed the convenience store and home to the right will be where the proposed gas pumps will be located. There is an existing 1700 square foot convenience store. The petitioner is proposing an addition of two gas pumps and nine (9) parking spaces. To the north, across the alley, are single family homes and a church zoned SF2 Single Family and Two Family District. To the east is a vacant house with a business front zoned MU Mixed Use District. To the south, across Western Avenue is a parking lot zoned MU Mixed Use District. To the south, across Western Avenue is a parking lot zoned LB Local Business District. To the southwest is a vacant commercial business zoned MU Mixed Use District. To the west is a convenience store zoned LB Local Business District. This comes to the Council with a favorable recommendation from the Area Plan Commission. Western Avenue is a major east/west traffic corridor, with a wide variety of well-established business and commercial uses. Mike Danch, Danch, Harner & Associates, 1643 Commerce Drive, South Bend, Indiana, representing the petitioners. Mr. Danch advised that mainly what he is doing before Council this evening about two weeks ago we were asked to continue this particular petition to give us time to make some changes. A couple of Councilmembers, Councilmember Dieter, and Councilmember Scott had made a request for some changes in the written commitments. What I gave to Council this afternoon was that revised set of written commitments they total eight (8) commitments now, we had a few less. The main changes in the commitments for Council one were that there would be no single cigarette sales; we actually added that specifically into the written commitments. The second one from Councilmember Dieter was anything concerning drug paraphernalia and what we actually listed on their was the I.C. Code, which was the State requirements for drug paraphernalia that was also put in as part of the commitments. This last week at the request of one of the Councilmembers I attended a neighborhood meeting with the LaSalle Park Association. What I would tell Council is that we met for approximately 45 minutes and I did 2 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 give the neighborhood association a copy of the same set of commitments that the Council sees before them this evening. We did discuss the same issues that the neighborhood association still has some concerns. One of our commitments was revised those to address one of the concerns that was brought up at this last neighborhood meeting there was a concern about possible litter or trash that may be present on the site. We added a commitment as well to this rezoning that would be taken care of on a daily basis. So that was part of everything that we have tried to do with the neighborhood association to at least alleviate their concerns on what we were requesting. I think Christa from the Area Plan Commission pretty well summed up where we are asking Council to do. We are asking for two particular items: one is to rezone the property to the LB District to allow us to have a gas dispensing facility which will be two gas pumps which would be located on the east side of the site and I think we have gone over the site plan we told Council all the improvements that we plan to make to the site. The petitioner is willing to invest 500 to 600 hundred thousand dollars at this particular facility to make improvements and I think based on those improvements and on the commitments that we have come up with and hopefully we have tried to address with the concerns of the neighborhood that the Council would see fit to approve this rezoning. If you have any questions, I would be glad to answer them. Councilmember Dieter: Could you allude to what 500-600 hundred thousand dollars is going to improve? Mr. Danch, actually there is a number of things. There are some improvements on the inside of the facility for the food processing, a new freezer. On the exterior what we are mainly doing is the re-doing the exterior of the site. We are adding new parking areas; we are adding new screening areas for fencing, all new lighting which doesn’t exist right now. There will be a canopy that will be located on the east side of the site along with two gas pumps. There will be additionally landscaping along Kenmore Street and also along the front of the facility. Right now there is a used area; I will just call it a gravel rut area on the west side of the building, which is used for parking. That would be completely removed parking will be at the back end or north side of the site. New curbing, new sidewalks would be put in along Kenmore to match the sidewalks that were done along the front of the side and between those improvements on the outside along with gas pumps and with inside and painting of the building, that adds up to about 500-600 hundred thousand dollars. Councilmember Dieter just a quick follow-up, if this is approved, and those improvements are made, with all the inventory that sits in front of the window, paper and everything else, will that not be visible anymore or would that still be all stuffed up in there. Mr. Danch, what we will end up doing is that will give him more room to remove some of those items as we had talked to Council before he has had trouble previously, he actually had plate glass windows there and now he has plexi-glass windows. But with the improvements we would be able to remove some of those items from in front of those windows to open that space up. 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 the bill: Barbara Dockery, 3527 W. Western Avenue, South Bend, Indiana Sharon Wells, 3409 S. (inaudible) Charles Clark, 437 Albert, South Bend, Indiana Robert Townsend, 214 N. Kenmore, South Bend, Indiana Mary Johnson, 215 N. Falcon, South Bend, Indiana Debra McLoughlin, 214 N. Kenmore, South Bend, Willie Spann, 217 Concord, South Bend, Indiana Henry Alfe, 254 N. Chicago, South Bend, Indiana James Carter, 322 Falcon, South Bend, Indiana Herbert Miller, 442 Falcon, South Bend, Indiana Greg Brown, 1238 Diamond, South Bend, Indiana 3 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 The following individuals spoke in opposition: Constance Green, 3217 Dunham, South Bend, Indiana, President, Far Westside Neighborhood Assoc. Florene Jennings, 110 S. Lake, South Bend, Indiana Charlotte Bridges, 222 S. Dundee, South Bend, Indiana Billie Cannady, 206 N. Illinois, South Bend, Indiana Marvin Crayton, 305 S. Lake, South Bend, Indiana Wendel Johnson, 305 S. Falcon, South Bend, Indiana Dennis Blount, 302 S. Chicago, South Bend, Indiana Pastor Calvin Macon, New Generation Christian Ministries, 51575 Clubhouse Drive, South Bend, Indiana th Michael Divita, Planner, Community Investment Department, 14 Floor County-City Bldg., 227 W. Jefferson Blvd., South Bend, Indiana, as the Council is aware the City is in the process of creating a new Western Avenue Corridor plan to replace the existing one that provides the basis for planning decisions. The new plan would provide more detailed guidance on preferred land uses. The plan would also include market based business development strategies to assist in the revitalization of areas such as this that have seen moderate levels of investment. On the matter before us tonight we appreciate the petitioner’s service to the neighborhood and the willingness to meet with Community Investment, hear the neighborhoods concerns and make alterations to their plans. We would welcome investment here to the extent that it is a benefit to the neighborhood and to the city. We would certainly not object to a well-managed store here. We would support an expanded retail presence that offers a wider range of goods to residents. The city favors plan elements such as the enhancement of the store, landscaping, lighting, fencing, and the creation of a parking lot that moves the vehicle parking off of the Kenmore Street tree lawn and the investment that comes along with these improvements. However, the City hesitates to endorse a Special Exception and create another new auto related use here and because of its characteristics would have a negative effect on the quality of life and property values for neighboring residents and one that may serve to discourage future investment in surrounding properties. In Rebuttal, Mr. Danch: Let me bring up a couple things that the Council sees that there are people that are obviously in favor of this petition and there are also some people that are against the petition. I think what Council heard tonight was a lot of the problems with this particular neighborhood. What we are asking Council to be able to do is bring this property up and add 500-600 hundred thousand dollar’s worth of improvements here. I think what you heard was that there is also congestion at some of the other stations which forces people to go to other areas. I think being allowed to put two gas pumps and that’s all we are talking about at this particular location a new facility, this would be a Marathon facility run type and I think the way we have done it with the commitments with the lighting with the security with what we have presented to Council that we have hopefully addressed a lot of the concerns that were brought up tonight. But I think that the Council can see that there are a lot of neighbors that use this facility they would like to see Ricky expand, they would like to see it brought up and I think that is going to continue to be done but what we would ask Council to do is approve the zoning and the gas pumps. If you have any questions, I would be happy to answer them. Councilmember Scott: You know we started this in November it’s been a long road on it. I think it’s good, there is a lot of due diligence that’s being done here a lot of questions being asked. Councilmembers that asked for the petitioner to meet with residents, meet with the neighborhood associations, I think that’s all well and good. It’s really difficult because we want businesses to expanding; we definitely want businesses expanding on the Westside. However, there have just been too many flags for me. I’ve seen miscommunication where a letter to set up a meeting with the neighborhood association back in November it was given to a person that didn’t make it there and meetings never happened. I’ve been in Rick’s Mart and concerned with not only paraphernalia or anything else that is kind of deemed illegal, sportswear that might not be licensed or might be licensed who knows, single cigarettes. In my business I work in the petroleum, I know what gas stations are and gas pumps are there, they are at a lost or just break even. The whole idea is to drive business into the stores to buy the soda pop, the candy, the whatever. You know I don’t think the petitioner is not savvy in his business, obviously he is, 4 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 and he has gotten the two best people to come before this Council and is willing to invest 500 hundred thousand dollars. I would rather see an investment right now up front that all these flags aren’t coming up with the neighborhood groups. You look around at some of the really good businesses we don’t have those kinds of conversations. We don’t have neighbors saying no, no, no. Henry Davis brought up healthy food options. We are not stopping Rick’s mart from not selling healthy options. Obviously there is some money there, there are ways to make the business better, but there aren’t always all these red flags. With that said, I cannot be supportive. Councilmember Henry Davis: This has to be, first of all I want to thank everyone for coming out, to have the courage to come out and actually speak to the Council. We don’t necessarily see a lot of you on a regular and consistent basis. I implore you to continue to show up because a lot of things that we do down here are pass policy on a day to day basis. So please keep coming out, just not for this one issue that affects you just this one time. My concerns have been said and I have already taken my stance on which side I was going to be on. But I want to add comments to why I feel the way I do. What we are asking Rick to do in my opinion can be deemed obnoxious. He is a business owner his job is to make profit, why would I want to go into business if I don’t make a profit, that doesn’t make any sense. So, what is the real issue behind what we are talking about? Is it the single cigarette sales; the gas pumps, is it the community meetings that he doesn’t want to show up to, is it the name change; is it that kind of business that we are talking about; are those the real issues that we are facing right now? I am going to probably say no that is not the issue; the issue is the lack of investment by the city in an area where investment needs to be at. We have a community that has come out and we call ourselves the Lakeside. Raised on Sheridan Street, this is my area; this is where I am from. My biggest issue as of right now is that these types of situations divide this community, strong community, and my issue at this point is that we have asked the administration for a plan, well before this came up back in November, we are here again to ask Community Investment for a plan. My opinion has turned into a political football game, how does this play out later on, which gets the votes, who doesn’t get the votes etc. We still have people living in those areas who need certain services. For instance, where do we pick up a bag of socks at? Where do we get t-shirts from? Where do we get the things that are called retail from a certain area in that area, we don’t, so that is why Rick is able to do what he does, because there is nothing else over there. So, while we are debating on whether he should spend 500 hundred thousand dollars of his own money on one area or not, I mean that is crazy. He should have the ability to spend 500 hundred thousand dollars of his own money in a given area if that is what he wants to do. If he wants to take it and burn it up, then he should be allowed to do that himself. My issue is that we have not as a City Council nor as a City Administration, Mayor’s Office and Community Investment have actually set down to make sure that this could be a potential win/win for the business owner as well as for the residents that are in that particular area. And, as a result you are going have a divided community over a store that is there to make profit. Makes no sense to me, so my strongest issue about this is that this Council needs to get in line, our Council leadership needs to get in line, the Mayor’s Office needs to get in line to make sure that these residents are served properly. Is there an enforcement issue, you better believe it, there has always been an enforcement issue over in that area. The police have to be called at least two to three different times. Or if they are over there, there is four or five of them and it’s an issue of harassment. So we have to look at these things for what they are, Code Enforcement, how often does Code Enforcement visit these areas, they don’t. I just telling you what goes on over on the Westside and Lakeside. This is the reason that I ran for office, because these things need to go to a higher level and need to be intentionally done and we need to be a priority on the City’s list for investment, period. I don’t have anything else to say, thank you so much, again, I vote with my folks from the LaSalle Park Neighborhood Association, they stated that they didn’t want it, that’s the way I was going to sway back in November and I’m still there, and I’m implore folks that came out here, if you want to be a part of a larger way of getting these things done, please join the neighborhood association, join it and we can get more together than we can apart. My question to Mike Danch is thereany way possible that he can still make this investment without the gas pumps. I see some healthy conversation that supports the expansion of the store but not the gas pumps. Chairperson White stated to Councilmember Davis that after the Council comment portion, we can go back and have the petitioner address that question. 5 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 Councilmember Schey: This is a difficult decision, we have heard from both sides, both those in support of Rick’s expansion as well as those that are opposed to it. I would hope that we could all agree that there are both benefits and issues with the proposal that is before us. It is clear from the presentations tonight that Rick’s Mart provides a valuable service for the residents. From the residents who have spoken both for and against it appears that Rick’s Mart is convenient location for neighbors to walk to, to buy food, clothing or daily necessities. In terms, of the product line, I would imagine if there were requests for things such as fresh produce or expanding your offerings at the store, I would hope that you would agree to expand maybe a healthier selection based on the suggestions we heard tonight. Because I understand and agree we certainly want to raise healthy kids to eat healthy food. In terms of the public safety issues that were raised tonight. I did request, I hope that everyone can hear me, I don’t have a microphone, I did request from the police department a report on calls for service at this address over the past three (3) years because obviously we hear things, but until there is a documented record for us to refer to, it’s sometimes hard to know what is fact and what’s perception. Based on the calls for service over the past three years 2010, 2011 and 2012, there has been a drastic decline in the number of calls for service at Rick’s Mart. The calls for service in 2010 and I gave my document to the Council went from 34 calls for service down to 14 calls for service in 2012. Just basing it on numbers it appears that with the increased surveillance and watchful eye it appears that if calls for service have gone done which is a very positive thing. A bigger concern that I would have would be Rick deciding that this is not a good location for his business if the Council denies his request and it becomes a vacant location. That would be a bigger issue in terms of public safety and a gathering spot. So I have to share with you in terms of my decision making process I want you to know that it is a difficult decision I want take into consideration everyone’s point of view but I do have to make a decision and knowing that a vacant location if a business owner is denied an opportunity to run their businesses as they see fit expand and pursue bigger and better things could lead to a vacant location. I will be voting in support of this proposal. Dr. Fred Ferlic: I agree with what Valerie said. I will vote for this proposal. I think what you have here is a bunch of priorities. Everybody has priorities, but when it comes down a cost benefit ratio and the only way any part of South Bend is going to survive if there is private money put into it. Otherwise, if you expect public money to revitalize your neighborhood, government money, we become a Detroit. As you know Detroit this last weekend filed for bankruptcy, which is a very sad situation. I could give you two examples, on S.R. 23 where I am two blocks from where I live we have between five corners and Ironwood we have three gas stations approximately a block, block and half. We have seven restaurants, a tire store, we have a bakery, we have two barber shops, we have all kinds of apartments behind there and the three gas stations all service food same as Rick’s Mart and yet they produce a commerce, they produce dollars for that area. The more people that use that, the happier I am, because it represents a revitalization of that area. The other example is the Eddy Street Commons and the Five Corners Area. Five years ago if you will recall that area was blighted, the most valuable store was the liquor store. Ok, then we got rid of that because people saw that a liquor store could make money so maybe we could make money with other stores so they revitalized that whole area and you cannot do that without private money. So I think that Rick’s got a good plan it’s a successful business plan and when it comes to paraphernalia we have the same thing all over the city. Well it’s up to the City to enforce those laws, if there is a law against that then the City government; you have the right to have your police department, your code department to enforce those laws. Secondly, let’s say they didn’t enforce it; then it’s up to the citizens and I can tell you in my district, they would boycott the place. We would march in front of it if he were selling illegal things and the city didn’t have the courage to enforce their laws, then we would boycott it. We would run them out of business, and that’s what good neighbors do. But I don’t think that is going to be the case here. I went to medical school in New York City and New York City they don’t have giant Martins, Kroger’s or Wal-Mart’s because the land is to valuable, they have thousands of these Rick’s Marts. That’s how it works there and they love it because it brings business and vitality to the region. So I think if you deny this, I think we are headed on the same path as one of our sister cities with bankruptcy in the future. I know you don’t like to say it, but, thank you. Councilmember Oliver Davis: We have to look at the Special Exception Use may be only granted upon making a written determination adopted appropriate findings of fact based upon 6 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 evidence presented at the public hearing. #1 That a proposed use would not be injurious to the public, health, safety, comfort, community moral standards, convenience or general welfare. I would like to focus on #1, there is no need for me to get to #2, #3 or #4. #1 says may not be injurious to the public health, safety, comfort, community moral standards, convenience or general welfare. I see a lot of discomfort in here tonight and that’s under the convenience issues really and safety issues have been brought up on this kind of thing. I really wish I would have talked and shared this in our conference this afternoon. With all due respect to private money a lot of the issues on the Eastside were not just done with private money, they were done by tax dollars in those areas too. A lot of those areas on the Eastside did not have histories that were issues of safety or comfort and we have a situation here that is dealt with safety and comfort since I have been on the Council. That’s the issue that I really think that I would hope while private owners do have an opportunity to grow their business and given the Special Exception Use when they do that no matter how much money they plan to invest. There is a need to look at what’s comfort and safety. It would be my wish and I think Councilmember Davis alluded to this earlier and we talked about it again that there could be some way that, and some have had discussions and talked about this, that the store could be expanded and because I did see Rev. Brown’s pictures and I have seen others and understand that the store could be expanded which could help convenience and everything else. But the gas station issue adds another level of challenges that in that area which I pass often it is not safe over there, it’s not comfort over there, that would be the best way to have some kind of understanding for both sides to increase the store not have the gas station, deal with how things would go there and move forward in life. That would add some safety and comfort to everybody, a little discomfort to everybody, but overall comfort. I think we can really move forward in that, so in light of the owners taking some time to still invest in that area expand their place and delete the issue of the gas station, I would be all for it. If they cannot do it in this current proposal, I understand that and I would have not for that at this time. So, it’s up to them to see if they can make some adjustments, I’m sure they can, I hope they can, I know they can. So I am pleading to them at this time to just make some adjustments and move forward. Councilmember Gavin Ferlic: I want to say thank you to everyone who came out tonight and took their time to express their opinion. Appreciate it. Councilmember Dieter: Also a thank you for everybody showing up tonight. Again this Council we do a lot of work, we do a lot of homework, we talk to a lot of people, and our goal in the end is to mediate everything that the people want. Not that were doing anything intentionally when there is a divide between people in neighborhoods you know. We do end up taking one way or the other but it’s not taking sides, not to win; to lose we just try to mediate once we get all this information. And Oliver’s point of what comes before us on the zoning laws, I think he stated that pretty well, so, I defer to you Councilmember White. Chairperson White: At this point you have heard from all the Councilmember’s and I have personally talked to a number of neighbors and actually visited the area, I used to live right down the street on 249 N. Kenmore. The house is still standing and the issue in terms that is before us it is unfortunate as Councilmember Henry Davis has stated that the community is divided, hopefully we can move forward. Whether the gas station remains or not, I am not in support of even a gas station when you begin to look at the location which is really infringed upon the neighborhood. I think that at this point there will be plans forthcoming in regards to the Western Avenue Corridor citizens will have the opportunity for input and as we begin to look at the lack of neighborhood support I think that we as a Council we have to listen to our citizens even though there are others who have spoken in support. This has been an ongoing issue for quite some time and I think that it is very important that the Council we would take action and that we would work collectively together to really bring the sides together to see what is best for your neighborhood. It is your neighborhood and I think that we have to listen to our citizens and look at a plan. One of the individuals that spoke in support Rev. Brown brought some excellent points, we need to not only look at Munchie Mart, Ricky’s Mart, but all of these types of stores that are in our community and I think that is where the Council needs to make sure that we have consistency in regards to what we are asking of Rick’s Mart, but also all of these mini-marts are in our community and we are very aware that it brings other types of negative impact within the community as well. And so I am going to pledge that we work as a Council to look at all these mini-marts within our community not only from a zoning perspective but from enforcement and 7 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 to really make sure that we have consistency throughout. So at this time, there was a question that Councilmember Davis, Jr., but have forgotten that questions, but allow that question to be addressed and then we will move toward a motion from the Council regarding this bill. Please restate the question. Councilmember Henry Davis, Jr.: Before I do that, you know what; you brought up something that makes a lot of sense. We already starting working with the Council Attorney preparing a new policy for mini-mart stores or that zoning, so again, I will extend that invitation to any Councilmember that is willing to participate on that. That is obviously a conversation that I have been holding with Council for a while. So again, extending my hand out, an invitation to say hey do you want to participate, you know please. Mr. Danch, I asked you earlier, about the investment being made. I am asking again is there any possible way that this investment could be still made, it probably still won’t be at the level of 500 hundred grand or even higher. But because of the convenience of the items that are being sold in the store, things that folks obviously need as far as accommodations could we go with the plan just to expand the store rather than the store and gas pumps. Can we separate those? Mr. Danch: No, that’s what we were just discussing. Because the issue came before Council as the rezoning with the special exception, it would have to be done together. If we could split those up that would be a different situation where Council could say okay forget the gas pump part of it and will give you the zoning. But because of the way it’s done, you actually have to vote on both things. What would happen, what you are suggesting is that if Ricky wanted to at some point in time to do an expansion for just some things, he would have to come back before this Council with just a rezoning petition and we would have to go back again to the Area Plan Commission because again the zoning that we are asking for this and because of where this location is we would have to go back to Area Plan and ask for approval of the 11 or 12 variances all over again as well. And to bring before Council just a zoning petition, so he would have to go through this process again, to just do the zoning portion to do the improvements. Councilmember Henry Davis: Ok, I understand that and I’m glad that you explained that to us and I’m not happy that it is working that way, however, in the essence of good governing is there any potential way that this conversation could happen again without the gas pumps, obviously for the convenience need to expand the store for the area? Again, look we need the investment, believe me, but what I am getting at is that I don’t want to be in a position that we get into the investment and it hurts us more than it helps us. Mike Danch: The only thing that we can do after whatever Council decides this evening is for Ricky to make a determination which way he actually wants to go with this particular piece of property. We have had conversations with the Building Department on what he can and cannot do, and he is really limited on what we are allowed to do with the existing situation, with the existing zoning classification that he has now. We have tried to look at every possible thing that could happen with the property but that will be something that we will take a look at. Councilmember Henry Davis: Is there anyone from the City Administration, Mike is here, is there any way that the conversation can happen and I am more than willing to participate with you and Rick and Mike and whoever from the administration to secure a better way of investing the money to help out the neighborhood regardless of whether the plan is put in place or not. Mike Danch: Sure, we would be glad to. Councilmember Henry Davis: Thank You. Councilmember Oliver Davis: Roll Call Councilmember Schey made a motion to send this bill to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. Councilmember Dr. Fred Ferlic seconded the motion which carried. The motion was defeated by a roll call vote of two (2) ayes (Councilmember’s Schey, Ferlic) and six (6) nays (Councilmember’s Scott, Henry Davis, Jr., Oliver Davis, White, Gavin Ferlic, Dieter.) Additionally, Councilmember Scott made a motion for unfavorable recommendation to full Council concerning this bill. Councilmember Gavin Ferlic seconded the motion which carried 8 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 by a roll call vote of six (6) ayes (Councilmember’s Scott, Henry Davis, Jr., Oliver Davis, White, Gavin Ferlic, Dieter) and two (2) nays (Councilmember’s Schey, Dr. Fred Ferlic.) BILL NO. 11-13 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3801 WESTERN AVENUE, COUNCILMANIC DISTRICT 2 IN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand read the amendment into the record: Section III. This rezoning and special exception shall be subject to written commitments executed by the petitioner on April 19, 2013 and an amended site plan filed on July 22, 2013 both of which care in the Office of the City Clerk. Section IV. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage by the Common Council, approval by the Mayor, and legal publication. Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to accept the amendment as read into the record by the Council Attorney. Councilmember Scott seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. Councilmember Dr. Fred Ferlic, Chairperson, Zoning & Annexation Committee, reported that this committee held a meeting this afternoon and it was the consensus of the committee to send this amended bill to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. th Christa Nayder, Staff Planner, Area Plan Commission, 11 Floor County-City Building, 227 W. Jefferson Blvd., South Bend, Indiana, advised that this property is located on the Northwest corner of Western and Illinois Street. Just to give you a little history, let me back up, the petitioner is requesting a zone change from MU Mixed CB Community Business District and a Special Exception for Automobile Sales and Service. A little history on the site, the petitioner currently owns the site just to the west on the Corner of Western and Chicago and would like to expand their existing business in 2005 the western half of the petitioner’s property received a Special Exception for the automobile sales and service. Ms. Nayder referenced her power point, this is a wide shot of Western Avenue with the arrows pointing to the property under questions. This is a shot of the existing site again on the west is the petitioner’s existing business and on the right is the vacant lot that they would like to develop. Again, just kind of from another angle, and this is looking along Western to the west on the other side of their existing business and then on the other side of Illinois Street again looking east along Western. The area to be rezoned is 17,000 square feet and the storage will be used primarily for the storage of cars to be repaired and cars to be displayed for sale. The petitioner has revised the site plan as to how landscaping, fencing, etc. and that was the amended portion that you just did. To the north is vacant land zoned SF 2 Single and Two Family District to the east across Illinois Street is a towing business zoned GB General Business District. To the South across Western Avenue is a liquor store, zoned LB Local Business District. To the west is the owner’s existing automobile sales and service business zoned CB Community Business. Across Chicago Street is a carwash zoned CB Community Business District. Both the rezoning and the special exception come to you with a favorable recommendation from the Area Plan Commission. Once again, Western Avenue is a heavily traveled east-west corridor providing business opportunities for new and established business. The appropriate expansion of this business will relieve Chicago Street from being used as a parking area and add much needed buffering between the business and the neighborhood. The special exception use meets the standards for approval for the Special Exception Use and moving parking out of the right-of-way will support public safety; the expansion of an existing business should not affect the adjacent property values; the general character of Western Avenue is a commercial corridor and the City Plan objectives are being met in providing for a range of mixed uses. Councilmember Dieter: They are going to do auto repair? Christa Nayder: Yes 9 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 Councilmember Dieter: They have paperwork to for auto repair currently? Christa Nayder: Yes, service is considered repair. Councilmember Dieter: Ok, well, is there a percentage of for that business, car sales, legal car sales and repair? Is it 50, is it. Christa Nayder: Are you asking what the business currently does or if there are any restrictions. Councilmember Dieter: Restrictions, because as I look at like I said earlier, it looks like, not that they sale bad things, but cars are stuffed in their like sardines, it doesn’t look like you can walk through the lots, you know you have to walk over cars to get to look at a car, it’s not like a car lot where you can walk around. Christa Nayder: The use is the use, it is automobile sales and service, you can sell cars, you fix cars. Councilmember Dieter: What if they stack everything in there again? Christa Nayder: Not based just solely on the use. If you wanted to regulate it through a written commitment or something to say “number of cars” they can have Councilmember Dieter: What is currently there? Christa Nayder: The use doesn’t limit it to being 50% of one or the other. Kimberly Clendenin, 56659 Windsor Avenue, South Bend, Indiana, stated that she is the representative for Azteca Auto Sales. Mr. Dieter to address your question, the zoning itself is for automobile sales and service. There is no distinguishing between one and the other. The main concern that Jose (the owner of Azteca Auto Sales) and I have had with respect to this business is that congestion that happens between his business and the car wash. Just about any time when you go there, his customers are parked on Chicago. Nobody likes that, nobody wants that, and hopefully with the expansion of the lot adjacent to his that problem will no longer exist. The vehicles that Mr. Consuelo purchases from the auto auction on the west side of South Bend are wrecked vehicles. He has another facility called T&T Auto Sales and Services farther along Western Avenue. His current plan and what he has implemented with the last month and since we started this process and heard some of the concerns of the neighbors as well as some Councilmembers is those vehicles that are purchased are taken to the T&T Sales and Service once the repairs are made, then the vehicles are brought back to the auto sales location. To answer Councilmember Dieter, yes you are absolutely correct the cars are packed in their like sardines. He doesn’t have a place to park the vehicles that are for sale other than that lot, hence the reason that he purchased the adjacent lot to expand his business. Once I had turned into you what I call written commitments which are the enhancement beautification plan. This is what I hope the Council is looking for the Western Avenue Corridor. This is just not the expansion of the lot in which we are rezoning is today; it is a continuation of the whole block. It’s going to go from Illinois to Chicago, and what’s going to transpire is that the vehicles that he has for sale at the car dealership can be moved over to the vacant lot once all the repaving for both lots is done, all of the fencing is done, and the landscaping is finished. Then there won’t be the congestion that you have on Chicago for those vehicles which are customers and employees. They will parking inside the fenced in area, and all vehicles for sale will be around the perimeters. Any vehicle that would need to be repaired any more so than a broken window or replacing a window, a light, a fuse, a battery, those repairs would be done down the street at his other business. I am hoping to get a favorable recommendation from all of you so that Mr. Consuelo can expand his business and continue to thrive on the West Side of South Bend. If by chance the Special Exception is not passed, the lot will continue to look as it does, if not worse. But I hope that you could see fit to allow Mr. Consuelo to expand his business, to beautify Western Avenue. I understand that it may not be in the extended plans that the Community Investment Department is beginning to institute but we do have a fellow businessman now who is willing to invest those dollars in Western Avenue in the fashion that it is going to beautify the area, enhance the area and help the community especially the Western Avenue Corridor in this particular area. Because 10 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 not everyone is able to go to a new car dealership and purchase a vehicle. If you have any questions for me I would be happy to answer them. Councilmember Henry Davis, Jr.: What is the timeline on this? Ms. Clendenin: I asked Mr. Consuelo’s and the minute you say yes, Mr. Consuelo will have a call into the contractor. I did ask him when he hopes to be finished and he said before cold hits. That was the most commitment I could get from him. If you would like to put that in as a written commitment I would be more than happy to do that. Councilmember Henry Davis Jr.: Okay, just as a matter of record, currently, approximately you don’t have to know to the dollar amount how much property tax is being paid? Ms. Clendenin: On the lot that he is currently on over eight thousand dollars. Councilmember Henry Davis Jr.: Is that per year? Ms. Clendenin: Yes sir. Councilmember Schey: Just thank you for such thorough communication and taking the time to work with the Council to share the plans. Councilmember Oliver Davis: At our last Council meeting you were asked to go to the neighborhood association. Did you do that and would you share that with us? Ms. Clendenin: I was able to and Ms. Brodie was nice enough to allow us to come and give a presentation to the LaSalle Park Neighborhood Association. Many mixed reviews, when I mentioned cars I was cut off from any other words past that. What I think transpired and the feeling that I got from the neighborhood association was yes they want businesses to be in the Western Avenue Corridor, they would just like different kinds of businesses not auto related. As I tried to explain to them, this isn’t a new business, this is an expansion of an existing business and not only will it beautify one lot but once it is rezoned, we will be beautifying the whole block. Once again I felt it wasn’t in their vision for the Western Avenue Corridor. Councilmember Derek Dieter: He has another business, I was not aware of that. Ms. Clendenin: It’s not another dealer sales lot, what it is, are you aware of where the Taste of Mexico Restaurant is? To the east of that there is what used to be Fred’s Place, he owns that now and that’s where all his vehicles go for repairs. Councilmember Derek Dieter: So all those cars that are for sale have been in an accident? Ms. Clendenin: Unless they are trade-in, yes. Councilmember Derek Dieter: So the majority of the cars that you will be selling had previously been in a crash? Ms. Clendenin: Since 2001, Mr. Consuelos, those are the types of vehicles that he has. Councilmember Derek Dieter: Because I was not aware of that. He only has one other place besides this for autos let say that he buys at an auction that he prepares and shifts to this place? No further questions at this time. Ms. Clendenin: Correct. This being the time heretofore set for the Public Hearing on the above bill, proponents and opponents were given an opportunity to be heard. th Mike Divita, Planner, Community Investment Department, 14 Floor County-City Building, 227 W. Jefferson Blvd., South Bend, Indiana: Just a general comment, happy to work with Kim and 11 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 the neighborhood on trying to work on something good for this particular site. If she has chance for rebuttal, for those in attendance, I would ask that if you could explain a little bit more on the volume and placement of the cars and address Councilmember Dieter’s concerns and describe the landscaping as planned and the type of fencing. Councilmember White: So you are not speaking in support, you are just asking for additional information. Mike Divita: Yes, just more clarification. Councilmember White: We will get to that point after the public hearing portion. There was no one present wishing to speak in favor of the bill. Additionally the following individuals spoke in opposition to the bill: Constance Green, 3217 Dunham, South Bend, Indiana, speaking on behalf of the Far Westside Neighborhood Association. We recognize that we want economic development and revitalization of the area. We respect the Council in the fact that you have a corridor plan which is coming up that would allow everyone to speak and have a voice. Our association surveyed and sent letters out to all these businesses in the last two years and we met with them and they wanted at that time nothing to do with the neighborhood. We went up and down Sample Street, Western Avenue, we passed out letters, and we mailed letters. One of the things that I have and I am under the understanding that there are two other wreck shops on Western Avenue owned by the owner and they are an eyesore. I personally living and driving down Western Avenue and I hardly see any automobiles moved out of there. I am concerned about the environmental protection. If he is going to repair cars and oil damage to the soil, what does it do to the infrastructure, the old sewer lines and the already possible contamination of LaSalle Park, Beck’s Lake? We need to look at some of those things before we make a decision to let the expansion go. Whether or not the plan will raise the value and respect and hope of the citizens that live there. All up and down Western Avenue there are car lots, restaurants, car washes, quick businesses to get in and roll over money, buy a cheap building, rent a piece of property and throw some cheap cars up there. A lot of times if I was being unethical those are just fronts, but I would never say without knowing. Where is all this quick money coming from to do everything and nobody needs investment, they have their own money. Florence Jennings, 110 S. Lake Street, South Bend, Indiana: There a number of car lots up and down Western Avenue. My opinion, I don’t look at them as car lots, the other two lots that Jose has they are lot junk yards, the cars are packed in there like sardines, grass growing everywhere, you can hardly see the cars anymore. The cars are just sitting there piling up, getting tighter and closer together. The sketch that they have up on the screen is beautiful, the flowers, the fence, but all I have seen there is cars just piling up, junk getting tighter and tighter. If you allow them to have a bigger place, they are going to just bring more cars and pack them in tighter and tighter anywhere, and then what are you going to do? We don’t need another car lot on Western Avenue, we don’t need it. We need something for the children, the elderly, especially for our children because that’s our tomorrow are future. Something for our children to do, get them off the streets. I don’t know right now what that would be, but if I would sit down long enough I could think of something. I have sixteen grandchildren, there would be something we could do, but another car lot would not be it. But, I am not for it. Billie Cannady: I am a concerned citizen, a resident of the community and I am in opposition at this time to the business owner because based on my observation after the last meeting that we had at the LaSalle Park Neighborhood Association, I drove up and down Western Avenue from Walnut Street all the way down to Peppermint Road and there are approximately 22 businesses that relate to cars and trucks, repairs etc. So therefore based on that being my main idea and reasoning as to opposing him expanding is because #1 as the business owner we are going to go with the habit of his housekeeping. He’s got everything packed in their now and the chances of him expanding he is going to pack it in again. Unfortunately, this is just my intuitive guess because what he is doing now and it’s all about profit. I don’t think this person when I met him seems to be a decent gentleman, very respectful, his representative, I have sat down and spoken to her, she’s a good representative I think the intention of good is there to some extent, but in the 12 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 end at the end of the day, it is really about profit and I don’t really think based on, I ‘m going to say on his lack of presence because he wasn’t at the last two meetings either and I think that a business owner should be present, just like we are present here tonight, we are all here, business goes on, so you should be present as well to voice your concerns make yourself known as far as your good intent, so as far as I’m concerned I’m going to say absolutely not because what that is going to do is lower the property value more to some extent because I’m sure that the expansion will allow for him more and more business concerning cars and from being that to my understanding that he doesn’t have anything other than rental properties and the other businesses that he owns on Western Avenue all dealing with cars and that is my question to her does he have anything else. I think being a businessman or businesswoman isn’t there a better business plan you know starting a new business other than cars or mini marts? I mean come on you can pay someone to come up with a better business plan? It just doesn’t have to be cars or mini- marts. So with that said, thank you very much. In rebuttal, Ms. Clendenin stated that she is having Christa from Area Plan put her site plan back up on the screen, so that I can better explain what the landscaping and the use of the property will be for. Ms. Clendenin referred to the PowerPoint. This is Western Avenue and what we are going to have here is century fencing, and century fencing is what’s in front of the Center for the Homeless, Memorial Hospital Outreach, so what we have here is the vacant alley, here will be chain link with screening on it, and we will start the century fence all around the perimeter as well as extended to Azteca Auto Sales and back to his building. Here we will have landscaping; we will have six foot evergreen trees as well as hedges and some shade trees in the tree line. As long as none of the landscaping is over 3’ high we intend to put landscaping here, there will be a gate here, and some landscaping that you will see when you drive in, as well as in front of Azteca Auto Sales. When it comes to the number of vehicles that we will have on the lot, I apologize I just can’t separate this lot from the business as well so when I go and count the number of parking spots of vehicles that can fit there on the outer perimeter and well as in here (referring to the screen and Power Point) since we will not be stock piling any vehicles for repair, I count anywhere from 66 to 85 that would include employees as well as customers vehicles. When it comes to the process of getting used vehicle sales permit that is regulated by the Indiana Secretary of State it is a process that has 15 different requirements, you have to be bonded in the State of Indiana in order to be a used car sales dealer. There are five car lots from Mayflower to Olive that are licensed, are there other locations that people put cars out front and put “For Sale” signs in them, the answer is yes. I forgot the name of that, but people do that. To answer why Mr. Consuelo is not here tonight? Mr. Consuelo has poison ivy, in his eyes, I have never seen as bad of a case of poison ivy like he has. When I saw him today, I asked him to stay 20 feet away and to please go home. I agree if it were my business, I would have my thumb on the pulse. It was mentioned that Mr. Consuelo has two other wreck shops. He does not, and I am assuming you are talking about Azteca Auto Sales as a wreck shop because yes a lot of times in the past wrecked vehicles were also there and at T&T location east of “A Taste of Mexico. He does have two vacant lots that are just grass next to the barber shop on Western Avenue and he also has a rental property on the corner of Meade and Western Avenue when it comes to his property. When it comes to environmental protection the city gives you permission, if you are going to do auto sales and service and if you are going to do any painting there is a process that is involved with that and are the ones that regulate that. Because of the type of repairs that Mr. Consuelo is going to be doing on his new property environmental issues would not be any different than what you would have in your own driveway. Councilmember Schey: I want to address the environmental issue. Can you confirm that when it comes to disposal when it comes to things like oil changes that all of the protocols, when it comes to environmental protocols that he is adhering to them. Ms. Clendenin: The answer is yes. There are some vehicles that come in that do need to have the oil taken out of them, gas taken out of them as well as transmission fluid. There is a company in LaPorte that comes and recycles that for him. They recycle the oil and transmission fluid, he uses the gas. I can’t remember their name off the top of my head. Councilmember Schey: He doesn’t put anything into the sewer. Ms. Clendenin: No. 13 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 Councilmember Henry Davis: I am afraid that we are going to set a pattern of saying no to businesses in this area and for the entire South Bend. There has been talk that we are unfriendly to business for a long time and clearly it’s showing today in some regards, I am not blaming anyone for it, it’s just some things are being looked over. So as a suggestion as way of creating a more harmonious environment for Western Avenue and again I am working with a team of folks and I am extending an invitation to my Council colleagues and we are looking over how the licensing and zoning for these particular lots exist and change it so it fits more of an aesthetically business friendly environment. Hopefully we will be able to get to a level where everyone agrees before this particular piece of legislation would be voted upon. However, it’s a step in the right direction in building and cleaning up the Western Avenue corridor. It’s a positive and I wish it could have been done several years ago, but now is just the time to get it done. So with respect to the business and respect to the investment, with respect to the residents in that area I think this is a very good opportunity for us to chime in on what we want it to look like latter on and what type of businesses that we want to accept in our community. We are looking at signage changes, we are looking at the way the asphalt (parking lots) looks, and we are looking at the total nine. We are looking at the aesthetic total nine. When it gets to that point even being able to operate, fix cars on site and also sell them will be something potentially is something of the past. So I want to give my thumbs up to this particular project because of what is going to happen later on to clean up the area and I hope we all can support this as well. Councilmember Dr. Fred Ferlic: I support this bill along with Henry, and if Code does their job enforcing it will work. I understand that he sold 400 cars last year, maybe next year he can sell 800 and it can look like Ireland Road or Grape Road does, they have beautiful car dealerships on both and they bring a lot of people to the area to do business. Oliver J. Davis: One of the reasons that I have appreciated this plan is because of the community development and this is an existing business. If this were a new business I would be voting against it. I don’t have a problem with existing businesses trying to expand it depends on the expansion. This does not have any gas stations and is okay with me. Councilmember White: I had supported a bill a numbers of years back, a car dealership across from the Old Harrison School on Western Avenue, the neighbors had met with the petitioner and the petitioner at that time made a number of promises. If you drive past that business, it is not what they said they were going to do. I believe that this is an enforcement issue and think that there are some things that need to be put in place. When you count the number of car related business along Western Avenue, it is unacceptable to me. I will not be supporting this bill this evening. I believe that there are plans forthcoming with regard to how “we” collectively want to see Western Avenue develop. To continue to support expansions of used car dealerships is unacceptable for me and I will not be supporting this. Councilmember Henry Davis: With this being a zoning matter, what is the difference between a written agreement and the written law? For example, let’s say I made an agreement like the one over by Harrison School and those things never came to fruition, now because it’s an agreement and not law is it enforceable or not enforceable? Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand: Indiana State Law gives limited power for the Council to enter into what is called written commitments. Written Commitments are then enforced through the Building Department and the Legal Department. Written Commitments are only as good if they are enforced. Councilmember Henry Davis: Let’s say there is an ordinance versus an agreement. Which one is stronger the ordinance or the agreement or are they the same? Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand: They should be of equal importance because when it is approved by the City Council and the Area Plan Commission it is then enforceable by the City Administration. They are equally the same. Councilmember Henry Davis: They are equally the same. 14 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand: Yes. Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion for favorable recommendation to full Council concerning this bill. Councilmember Schey seconded the motion. The motion carried by a roll call vote of six (6) ayes and two (2) nays (Councilmember’s White and Dieter.) BILL NO. 26-13 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AMENDING CHAPTER 21 OF THE SOUTH BEND MUNICIPAL CODE, ARTICLE 5 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, SECTION 21-05 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, TO REVISE THE CRITERIA USED IN DETERMINING MAJOR/MINOR CHANGES TO APPROVED SITE PLANS AND REMOVING TIME LIMITS TO OBTAIN SECONDARY APPROVAL Councilmember Dr. Fred Ferlic, Chairperson, Zoning & Annexation Committee, reported that this committee held a meeting this afternoon and it was the consensus of the committee to send this amended bill to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. th Angela Smith, Planner, Area Plan Commission, 11 Floor County-City Building, 227 W. Jefferson Blvd., South Bend, Indiana, made the presentation for this bill. Ms. Smith advised that the purpose of this bill is to make certain amendments to the section of the Zoning Ordinance that regulates Planned Unit Developments. The changes, as presently proposed, would remove the time constraints for the submittal of final plans and clarify that the Executive Director of the Area Plan Commission could allow certain changes if approved at a public hearing by the Area Board of Zoning Appeals. This being the time heretofore set for the Public Hearing on the above bill, proponents and opponents were given an opportunity to be heard. There being no one present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in opposition to this bill, Councilmember Dieter made a motion for favorable recommendation to full Council concerning this bill. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. BILL NO. 28-13 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AMENDING CHAPTER 20 THE SOUTH BEND MUNICIPAL CODE BY THE INCLUSION OF NEW ARTICLE 13 ENTITLED MOPED REGULATIONS, AND AMENDING SECTION 2-123 SCHEDULE OF ORDINANCE AND CODE VIOLATIONS Councilmember Gavin Ferlic left the Chambers at this time. Councilmember Dr. Fred Ferlic made a motion to accept the substitute version of this bill as on File in the Office of the City Clerk. Councilmember Schey seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes. Councilmember White, Chairperson, Health & Public Safety Committee, reported that this committee held a Public Hearing on this substitute bill this afternoon and sends it to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. Councilmember Gavin Ferlic returned to the Chambers at this time. 15 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 Councilmembers Oliver Davis, 1801 S. Nash, South Bend, Indiana and Tim Scott, 711 Forest Avenue, South Bend, Indiana, made the presentation for this bill. They thanked fellow co- sponsors Councilmember’s White and Dieter. Councilmember Oliver Davis stated that there have been a growing public health and safety concerns in light of moped accidents and the number of mopeds being stolen, He noted that regulations in other Indiana cities have been reviewed, Evansville in 2010, Terre Haute, 2011, Richmond, 2010 and Kokomo’s in 2012. Councilmember Davis highlighted some key components of the Ordinance. Tail and brake lights are required on all mopeds and shall remain operable at all time while the moped is in operation, with the headlamp having an intensity to illuminate a distance of not less than one hundred feet. No passengers are permitted on any moped operated with in the City. No moped shall be operated in any bicycle lane or bike lane within the City. No moped shall be operated with the City by any City resident that does not display an affixed valid registration decal on the moped which has been issued by the South Bend Police Department. All owners of a moped who reside in the City and who operate or permit their moped to be operated on streets within the City must have the moped inspected and registered annually with the South Bend Police Department. The annual registration form shall be complete in person at the South Bend Police Department headquarters. Councilmember Scott advised that this bill compliments Indiana State Law which already prohibits anyone under 15 years of age to operate a moped. Prohibits mopeds on interstate highways & sidewalks, prohibits going faster than 25 mph, and requires protective headgear, glass, goggles or transparent face shield if under 18 years of age with state violation being a Class C Infraction. Local city safety regulations would require tail & brake lights 7 headlamp must be on at all times when in operation; no passengers on mopeds; no mopeds in bike lanes and require a valid registration decal affixed to the moped which has been issued by SBPD. Councilmember Scott stated that any business which rents mopeds must have protective headgear & opportunity to purchase insurance. The initial registration fee is $20.00 and $15.00 Annual renewal registration fee. Councilmember Scott clarified that registration shall be for a st term of one (1) year, commencing May 1 and expiring the last day of April of the following year. However, for purpose of initial implementation, any registration decal issued in 2013, shall remain in effect until the last day of April 2015. He stated that the dedication of fines/fees collected fifty (50%) percent of all fines and fees collected for any violation of this Article shall be deposited into the Law Enforcement Continuing Education Fund (Fund#220.) Councilmember Henry Davis, Jr.: What is the cost for those figures? Is there a cost associated with those stickers for the City? Councilmember Scott: There is a cost, we haven’t defined the exact graphic for the stickers, they are a non-removable metallic type of sticker and cost is approximately less than a buck a sticker. Councilmember Henry Davis Jr.: Really, ok would you be interested in amending your fee for the licensing potentially bringing it down to about $10.00 perhaps? Because the cost is just $1.00 and I made the point earlier about people who actually use mopeds because of poverty, low-income, lost their license, $25.00 could potentially be a lot of money to a teenager who uses the moped to go back and forth to work, just asking, because they only cost a $1.00 for the sticker, could we be a little more conscientious about the fee and lower it down to about $10.00 instead. Councilmember Scott: Just to reiterate Councilmember Davis, the initial fee is $20.00, $15.00 st thereafter so the 1 year it is initially is $20.00 for the registration. You have to understand the cost of the officer or someone in administration to collect the data, input the data, and make sure that it is entered into the database. Councilmember Henry Davis Jr.: That is their job. Councilmember Scott: There are other costs associated to that fee. Councilmember Henry Davis Jr.: I just asked you what the costs for doing this and you said that you haven’t been able exact that cost, so now you are telling me there is cost. So, what is the cost? 16 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 Councilmember Scott: You asked the cost of the sticker. Councilmember Henry Davis Jr.: I mean for the whole project. You have this whole certification project, so with that certification there is a cost of doing business, what is the cost of doing that business? And if there is a cost that is about the $20 or $25 dollars or whatever we are asking for then maybe we will lose out somewhere, if it is way below then obviously there is some money that’s going to go somewhere else and get used for some other purpose so my question again is sign up, give them a sticker, somebody input the information, what is the cost? And then when we measure that cost against the amount of mopeds that within the City of South Bend, just so that we are going to make out so that the person who is doing the job is spending their time wisely or the tax dollars are being spent wisely. Councilmember Scott: I believe and I am not speaking for the co-sponsors looking at this, I believe the $20 registration fee handles that administration cost in a reasonable manner. Once that data is inputted, the $15 re-occurring fee for a police officer to look at it, talk to the individual to get their information, and affix the sticker, is reasonable. Councilmember Henry Davis Jr.: Where is your paperwork to suggest that, I mean how do you prove that, where is your proof? Councilmember Scott: I don’t have any documented. Councilmember Henry Davis Jr.: So, again would you be interested in lowering the fees for this particular project because of what I just said and I don’t want to repeat it anymore. I don’t think that it is a bad idea. Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand: If I could just add State Law requires any fees to be reasonably and related to the cost and the service that is provided by the city. Having done the negotiations for the City of South Bend with regard to Sworn Officers that would be involved with regard to the inspections and also checking the applications as a review process this would be far less than they actually cost incurred by the City of South Bend. Councilmember Henry Davis Jr.: We don’t know that because nobody has shown those numbers. Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand: Yes we did. Councilmember Henry Davis Jr.: I am sorry we don’t know that. I would like to know the cost, no one is telling me what the cost is, I’m sorry. Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand: The documentation is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. Councilmember Henry Davis Jr.: I am going to vote for it, but my point is can we lower the cost of doing business that is my whole point. Because obviously there is dollars that are going to go to other places, if I am an employee of the City of South Bend my job is to do x, y and z for whatever it is, the police officer, then my job is to do that. You are still going to pay me my salary to do that, so weighing the cost against my time, you are still going to be doing your job, regardless of that, you are still going to get paid for it. So, again going back to my original question about the $10 being a fee set for the moped certification, again, that’s where I am at with it. Councilmember Scott: I respect your question to that; I again think that these fees are reasonable. Councilmember Oliver Davis: Asked Council Attorney if she had the fees that the other cities charge? Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand: $25 is the base for Cities that we have looked at and the renewal is anywhere from $10-$15. 17 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 Councilmember Oliver Davis: So we are consistent with other cities. Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand: Yes, we are. Councilmember Schey: So if it takes 30 minutes of an officer’s time, perhaps is that the calculation that, if it takes 30 minutes to an hour for the inspection and licensing, is that where this takes the employee’s time that were coming up. Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand: Plus reviewing the bill of sale to make sure that we have proper ownership involved, and to review the information on the application. Councilmember Schey: So, beyond the $1 for the sticker, there is the employee’s time. Council Attorney Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand: That’s correct. Councilmember Scott: You not only do you have to look at it from an officer’s standpoint, but there is probably someone within administration to input the data after it is collected, and it is also shared with the City Legal Department. Councilmember Henry Davis Jr.: That is doing your job. 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: Cecil Eastman, 57412 Peachstone Drive, South Bend, Indiana, stated that he is in favor of the moped bill. I am in favor of charging $20 for the initial fee because there is such a thing for city employees called opportunity costs. Even though it may be part of job to do something, but if we are now doing something that we have never done before that means that something else has to get satisfied and that needs to be taken into account. None of us are being paid as Kings here; we are all getting paid something for what we do. So by all means $20 is a very reasonable fee. Jesse Davis, P. O. Box 10205, South Bend, Indiana, I am in favor of this because basically it will tell if these mopeds are legitimate. If may keep some kids off of them who shouldn’t be on them. Keeps some drug dealers off of them who shouldn’t be on them, which is a good idea. Hopefully the sticker is going to be large enough and colorful enough so that you are going to see it, driving behind them, so you know it is a registered moped. And hopefully we are going to change the color of the sticker every year. The only other question that I have about this would be what people riding their mopeds through let’s say Mishawaka. If this passes, I think we should talk to Mishawaka, St. Joseph County and see if the other local cities to join in with a similar ordinance, because you are going to run into, I have a son who is disabled, he is 22, he rides his moped everywhere, he doesn’t have a driver’s license, but he does come into South Bend occasionally and it would be I guess a sort of harassment if he gets stopped every time he crosses over into South Bend. So this is something that you might want to think about and make county wide. Rev. Greg Brown, 1238 Diamond, South Bend, Indiana, I am in support of this because safety is always first dealing with these youth. This is a tough issue, there has to be enforcement of this bill. A young man ran into my mother’s van, he was riding his brother’s moped; he jumped off and ran because he was scared to tell his grandmother that he had the bike out. His brother is in Iraq. So who is responsible for the damage? So, what I did was put the moped inside my garage and told him to bring a parent back to get it. This will give us some validation to safety in South Bend and I think that is what you need because you have people riding on sidewalks, they use different areas, they don’t stop at the stop signs, turning on no turn on red signs. Those issues need to be enforced. Samuel Brown, P. O. Box 1975, South Bend, Indiana, representing Citizens United for a Better Government, South Bend, Indiana, I am in favor of this bill. Safety is the primary concern. 18 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 Scott Ruszkowski, SBPD, 701 W. Sample Street, South Bend, Indiana, thanked Councilmember’s White, Scott and Oliver Davis for this bill along with Kathy Cekanski-Farrand for this bill. It is much appreciated, I think we started back in January, February of this year, this can’t be anything but a good thing. I don’t think that there is anybody in this room that hasn’t had some type of run in with a moped. Everybody has, everyone in my family has, I have, and I heard it from pretty much everybody here tonight. I was at the LaSalle Park Neighborhood meeting last week and mopeds were mentioned. Mr. Davis asked the question about the cost. You can look at it two ways, you can spend $2,000-$3,000 dollars for a moped, and $20 for one year is not that big a deal. That’s in my opinion, being a father of three boys all living at home and two grandkids on top of that. Secondly, that $20-$25 a year just initially, you can’t even go to the movie theatre for two people and go through and hour and half movie without spending way more than that. So $20 dollars initially going down to $15 dollars, I see absolutely no problem with that price, if it saves one life for $20 dollars, tell me how it couldn’t be worth it. I’m not sure if it is appropriate, but I would be happy to answer any questions if you have them. Councilmember White: You are just speaking in favor at this time. There being no one else present wishing to speak either in favor or in opposition to this bill. Councilmember Dieter made a motion for favorable recommendation to Council concerning this bill as substituted. Councilmember Schey seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. RISE AND REPORT Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to rise and report to full Council. Councilmember Scott seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. ATTEST: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ John Voorde, City Clerk Karen L. White, Chairperson Committee of the Whole 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 9:24 p.m. Council President Derek Dieter, presided with eight (8) members present. BILLS – THIRD READING BILL NO. 16-13 A BILL AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3529 AND 3527 WESTERN AVENUE, SOUTH BEND, INDIANA 46619, COUNCILMANIC DISTRICT NO. 2 IN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA This bill had third reading. Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to defeat this bill. Councilmember White seconded the motion which carried. The bill was defeated by a roll call vote of six (6) ayes and two (2) (Councilmember’s Schey, Fred Ferlic.) 19 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 ORDINANCE NO. 10242-13 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3801 WESTERN AVENUE, COUNCILMANIC DISTRICT 2 IN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA This bill had third reading. Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to amend this bill as in the Committee of the Whole. Councilmember Scott seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. Additionally, Councilmember Gavin Ferlic made a motion to pass this bill as amended. Councilmember Schey seconded the motion which carried. The bill passed by a roll call vote of six (6) ayes and (2) nays (Councilmember’s White, Dieter.) ORDINANCE NO.10243-13 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AMENDING CHAPTER 21 OF THE SOUTH BEND MUNICIPAL CODE, ARTICLE 5 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, SECTION 21-05 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, TO REVISE THE CRITERIA USED IN DETERMINING MAJOR/MINOR CHANGES TO APPROVED SITE PLANS AND REMOVING TIME LIMITS TO OBTAIN SECONDARY APPROVAL This bill had third reading. Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to pass this bill. Councilmember Gavin Ferlic seconded the motion which carried. The bill passed by a roll call vote of eight (8) ayes. ORDINANCE NO. 10244-13 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AMENDING CHAPTER 20 THE SOUTH BEND MUNICIPAL CODE BY THE INCLUSION OF NEW ARTICLE 13 ENTITLED MOPED REGULATIONS, AND AMENDING SECTION 2- 123 SCHEDULE OF ORDINANCE AND CODE VIOLATIONS This bill had third reading. Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to amend this bill as in the Committee of the Whole. Councilmember White seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. Additionally, Councilmember Gavin Ferlic made a motion to pass this bill as amended. Councilmember Scott seconded the motion which carried. The bill passed by a roll call vote of seven (7) ayes and one (1) nay (Councilmember Henry Davis, Jr.,) 20 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 RESOLUTIONS BILL NO.13-45 A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE ADOPTION OF A DECLARATORY RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, COMMONLY KNOWN AS CRESCENT OAKS – SECTION 2, 2322, 2330, 2338, 2402, 2408, 2416, 2424, 2432, 2323, 2331, 2339, 2405, 2413, 2421, 2509, 2517 BASIN STREET, 2440 BASIN STREET OR 5511 RUNNING DEER DRIVE, 2429 BASIN STREET OR 5469 BALBOA PARK AVENUE, AS RESIDENTIALLY DISTRESSED AREAS FOR PURPOSES OF A (5) FIVE-YEAR RESIDENTIAL REAL PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR TAMPICO DEVELOPMENTS, LLC Councilmember White made a motion to continue this bill until the August 12, 2013 meeting of the Council, due to the lack of a presenter. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. RESOLUTION NO. 4267-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS WITH THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, COMMONLY KNOWN AS 773 PULLING STREET AS RESIDENTIALLY DISTRESSED AREA FOR PURPOSES OF A (5) FIVE-YEAR RESIDENTIAL REAL PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR JOEL & KATHERINE DOSMANN WHEREAS, a Statement of Benefits and a petition for residential real property tax abatement have been submitted to and filed with the City Clerk for consideration by the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, requesting that the area commonly known as 773 Pulling Street, South Bend, Indiana, and which is more particularly described as follows: Lot 102, in Royal Oak Estates, Section 2, as per Plat thereof recorded January 22, 2003 as Instrument No. 0303821, in the Office of the Recorder of St. Joseph County, Indiana , and this property has Tax Key Number 023-1018-0381.59be designated as a Residentially Distressed Area under the provisions of Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1 et seq., and South Bend Municipal Code Sections 2-76 et seq., and; WHEREAS, the Department of Community Investment has concluded an investigation and prepared a report with information sufficient for the Common Council to determine that the area qualifies as a Residentially Distressed Area under Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1, et seq., and South Bend Municipal Code Sections 2-76, et seq., and has further prepared maps and plats showing the boundaries and such other information regarding the area in question as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Community Investment Committee of the Common Council has reviewed said report and recommended to the Common Council that the area qualifies as a Residentially Distressed Area. 21 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, as follows: SECTION I . The Common Council hereby determines and finds that the petition for real property tax abatement and the Statement of Benefits form meet the requirements of Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1 et seq., for tax abatement. SECTION II. The Common Council hereby determines and finds that the area meets one of the following conditions as formally established in Ordinance No. 9394-03, which was passed on February 10, 2003: A. The area is comprised of parcels that are either unimproved or contain only one (1) or two (2) family dwellings designed for up to four (4) families, including accessory buildings for those dwellings; or B. Any dwellings in the area are not permanently occupied and are: i. the subject of an order issued under IC 36-7-9; or ii. evidencing significant building deficiencies; or C. Parcels of property in the area: i. have been sold and not redeemed under IC 6-1.1-24 and IC 6-1.1-25; or ii. are owned by a unit of local government; or D. A significant number of dwelling units within the area are not permanently occupied or a significant number of parcels in the area are vacant land; or E. A significant number of dwelling units within the area are: i. the subject of an order issued under IC 36-7-9; or ii. evidencing significant building deficiencies; or F. The area has experienced a net loss in the number of dwelling units, as documented by census information, local building and demolition permits, or certificates of occupancy, or the areas are owned by Indiana or the United States; or, G. The area (plus any areas previously designated under this subsection) will not exceed ten percent (10%) of the total area within the Council’s jurisdiction. SECTION III. The Common Council also hereby determines and finds the following: A. That the description of the proposed redevelopment meets the applicable standards for such development. B. That the estimate of the value of the redevelopment is reasonable for projects of this nature; C. That the other benefits about which information was requested are benefits that can be reasonably expected to result from the proposed described redevelopment; and D. That the totality of benefits is sufficient to justify the requested deduction, all of which satisfy the requirements of Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1-3. E. The deduction will not be allowed unless the dwelling is rehabilitated to meet local code standards for habitability. F. The deduction will not be allowed unless the dwelling rehabilitation is completed within five (5) calendar years from the date of the adoption of this Resolution by the Common Council. SECTION IV. The Common Council hereby determines and finds that the proposed described redevelopment can be reasonably expected to yield benefits identified in the Statement of Benefits and the petition for real property tax abatement consideration and that the Statement of Benefits form prescribed by the State Board of Accounts are sufficient to justify the deduction granted under Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1-3. SECTION V. The Common Council hereby accepts the report and recommendation of the Community Investment Committee that the area herein described be designated as a Residentially Distressed Area and hereby adopts a Resolution designating this area as a Residentially Distressed Area for purposes of real property tax abatement. 22 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 SECTION VI. The designation as a Residentially Distressed Area shall be limited to five (5) calendar years from the date of the adoption of this Resolution by the Common Council. SECTION VII. The Common Council hereby determines that the property owner is qualified for and is granted property tax deduction for a period of five (5) years. SECTION VIII. The Common Council directs the City Clerk to cause notice of the adoption of this Declaratory Resolution for Real Property Tax Abatement to be published pursuant to Indiana Code 5-3-1 and Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1-2.5, said publication providing notice of the public hearing before the Common Council on the proposed confirming of said declaration. SECTION IX. Pursuant to Indiana Code 6-1.1-12.1-2, the rehabilitation must meet all local code standards for habitability as a specific condition of having such property designated as a residentially distressed area. SECTION X. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption by the Common Council and approval by the Mayor. s/Derek Dieter Member of the Common Council Councilmember Gavin Ferlic, Chairperson Community Investment Committee, reported that this committee held a Public Hearing on this bill this afternoon and voted to send it to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. Joel Dosmann, 13733 Hill Street, Mishawaka, Indiana, made the presentation for this Resolution. Mr. Dosmann advised that he and his wife intend to construct an approximate 2,300 square foot, single-family home. He stated that the lot is located in the Royal Oak Estates Subdivision. There are approximately 30 vacant lots and growth has been stagnated. Mr. Dosmann stated that the lot is currently owned by First Federal Savings Bank and will be sold to the builder which is Oakbrook Homes, then sold to he and his wife. He stated that the previous builder holding the lot was Weiss Homes. Total taxes to be abated during the five (5) year abatement period are estimated to be $8,769. Total taxes to be paid during the five (5) year abatement period are estimated to be $3,162. A Public Hearing was held on the Resolution at this time. There being no one present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in opposition to this Resolution. Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to adopt this Resolution. Councilmember Schey seconded the motion which carried and the Resolution was adopted by a roll call vote of eight ayes. BILL NO. 13-47 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS WITH THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1047 LINCOLNWAY EAST AS A RESIDENTIALLY DISTRESSED AREA FOR PURPOSES OF A (5) FIVE-YEAR PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR CROOKED EWE, INC. 23 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 BILL NO. 13-48 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS WITH THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1047 LINCOLNWAY EAST AN ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA FOR PURPOSES OF A THREE (3) YEAR REAL PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR CEOL MOR PROPERTIES Councilmember White made a motion to combine Bill Nos. 13-47 and 13-48 for the purposes of Public Hearing. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. RESOLUTION NO. 4268-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS WITH THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1047 LINCOLNWAY EAST AS A RESIDENTIALLY DISTRESSED AREA FOR PURPOSES OF A (5) FIVE-YEAR PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR CROOKED EWE, INC. WHEREAS, a petition for real property tax abatement has been filed with the City Clerk for consideration by the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana requesting that the area located at 1047 Lincoln Way East which is more particularly described as: Parcel 1 : Lots G Two (G-2), F Two (F-2) and E Two (E-2) as shown on the recorded Plat of Wenger and Krieghbaum’s Vistula Avenue Addition, more fully described as beginning on the West edge of the St. Joseph River on the line between lots “G-2” and “H-2” as shown on the recorded Plat of Wenger and Krieghbaum’s Vistula Avenue Addition: thence Southwest on the line between said “Lots “G-2” and “H-2” to Lincoln Way East; thence Northwest on the Easterly line of Lincoln Way East 136.7 feet; thence Northeast parallel to the line between said Lots “G-2” and “H-2” 30 feet; thence Northwest parallel to Lincoln Way East 50 feet; thence Northeast parallel to the line between said Lots “G-2” and “H-2”, to the St. Joseph River, thence Southeast along said river to the place of beginning. Parcel II: Lots H Two (H-2) and I Two (I-2) as shown on the recorded Plat of Wenger and Krieghbaum’s Vistula Avenue Addition to the City of South Bend recorded November 17, 1908 in Plat Book 9, page 100 in the Office of the Recorder of Saint Joseph County, Indiana. And which has Key Numbers 018-7017-0684, 018-7017-0682; and 018-7017-0680 presently at this point in time, be designated as an Economic Revitalization Area under the provisions of Indiana Code § 6-1.1-12.1 et seq., and South Bend Municipal Code Sections 2-76 et seq., and; WHEREAS, petitioner has agreed to and has accepted responsibility to report any changes in the final legal description and to report the final, appropriate Key Number to the Department of Community Investment and to the Office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, the Department of Community Investment has concluded an investigation and prepared a report with information sufficient for the Common Council to determine that the area qualifies as an Economic Revitalization Area under Indiana Code § 6-1.1-12.1, et seq., and South Bend Municipal Code Sections 2-76, et seq., and has further prepared maps and plats showing the boundaries and such other information regarding the area in question as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Community Investment Committee of the Common Council has 24 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 reviewed said report and recommended to the Common Council that the area qualifies as an Economic Revitalization Area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, as follows: SECTION I. The Common Council hereby determines and finds that the Petition for Real Property Tax Abatement and the Statement of Benefits form completed by the Petitioner meet the requirements of Indiana Code § 6-1.1-12.1 et seq., for tax abatement. SECTION II. The Common Council hereby determines and finds the following: A. That the description of the proposed redevelopment or rehabilitation meets the applicable standards for such development; B. That the estimate of the value of the redevelopment or rehabilitation is reasonable for projects of this nature; C. That the estimate of the number of individuals who will be employed or whose employment will be retained by the Petitioner can reasonably be expected to result from the proposed described redevelopment or rehabilitation; D. That the estimate of the annual salaries of those individuals who will be employed or whose employment will be retained by the Petitioner can be reasonably expected to result from the proposed redevelopment or rehabilitation; E. That the other benefits about which information was requested are benefits that can be reasonably expected to result from the proposed described redevelopment or rehabilitation; and F. That the totality of benefits is sufficient to justify the requested deduction, all of which satisfy the requirements of Indiana Code § 6-1.1-12.1-3. SECTION III. The Common Council hereby determines and finds that the proposed described redevelopment or rehabilitation can be reasonably expected to yield benefits identified in the Statement of Benefits, Sections 1 through 3 of the Petition for Real Property Tax Abatement Consideration and the Memorandum of Agreement between the Petitioner and the City of South Bend, and that the Statement of Benefits form completed by the petitioner, said form being prescribed by the State Board of Accounts, are sufficient to justify the deduction granted under Indiana Code § 6-1.1-12.1-3. SECTION IV. The Common Council hereby accepts the report and recommendation of the Community Investment Committee that the area herein described be designated as an Economic Revitalization Area and hereby adopts a Resolution designating this area as an Economic Revitalization Area for purposes of real property tax abatement. SECTION V. The designation as an Economic Revitalization Area shall be limited to two (2) calendar years from the date of the adoption of this Resolution by the Common Council. SECTION VI. The Common Council hereby determines that the property owner is qualified for and is granted property tax deduction for a period of three (3) years. SECTION VII. The Common Council directs the City Clerk to cause notice of the adoption of this Declaratory Resolution for Real Property Tax Abatement to be published pursuant to Indiana Code § 5-3-1 and Indiana Code § 6-1.1-12.1-2.5, said publication providing notice of the public hearing before the Common Council on the proposed confirming of said declaration. SECTION VIII. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption by the Common Council and approval by the Mayor. 25 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 s/Derek Dieter Member of the Common Council RESOLUTION NO. 4269-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS WITH THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1047 LINCOLNWAY EAST AN ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA FOR PURPOSES OF A THREE (3) YEAR REAL PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR CEOL MOR PROPERTIES WHEREAS, a petition for real property tax abatement has been filed with the City Clerk for consideration by the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana requesting that the area located at 1047 Lincoln Way East which is more particularly described as: Parcel 1 : Lots G Two (G-2), F Two (F-2) and E Two (E-2) as shown on the recorded Plat of Wenger and Krieghbaum’s Vistula Avenue Addition, more fully described as beginning on the West edge of the St. Joseph River on the line between lots “G-2” and “H-2” as shown on the recorded Plat of Wenger and Krieghbaum’s Vistula Avenue Addition: thence Southwest on the line between said “Lots “G-2” and “H-2” to Lincoln Way East; thence Northwest on the Easterly line of Lincoln Way East 136.7 feet; thence Northeast parallel to the line between said Lots “G-2” and “H-2” 30 feet; thence Northwest parallel to Lincoln Way East 50 feet; thence Northeast parallel to the line between said Lots “G-2” and “H-2”, to the St. Joseph River, thence Southeast along said river to the place of beginning. Parcel II: Lots H Two (H-2) and I Two (I-2) as shown on the recorded Plat of Wenger and Krieghbaum’s Vistula Avenue Addition to the City of South Bend recorded November 17, 1908 in Plat Book 9, page 100 in the Office of the Recorder of Saint Joseph County, Indiana. And which has Key Numbers 018-7017-0684, 018-7017-0682; and 018-7017-0680 presently at this point in time, be designated as an Economic Revitalization Area under the provisions of Indiana Code § 6-1.1-12.1 et seq., and South Bend Municipal Code Sections 2-76 et seq., and; WHEREAS, petitioner has agreed to and has accepted responsibility to report any changes in the final legal description and to report the final, appropriate Key Number to the Department of Community Investment and to the Office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, the Department of Community Investment has concluded an investigation and prepared a report with information sufficient for the Common Council to determine that the area qualifies as an Economic Revitalization Area under Indiana Code § 6-1.1-12.1, et seq., and South Bend Municipal Code Sections 2-76, et seq., and has further prepared maps and plats showing the boundaries and such other information regarding the area in question as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Community Investment Committee of the Common Council has reviewed said report and recommended to the Common Council that the area qualifies as an Economic Revitalization Area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, as follows: SECTION I. The Common Council hereby determines and finds that the Petition for Real Property Tax Abatement and the Statement of Benefits form completed by the Petitioner meet the requirements of Indiana Code § 6-1.1-12.1 et seq., for tax abatement. 26 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 SECTION II. The Common Council hereby determines and finds the following: A. That the description of the proposed redevelopment or rehabilitation meets the applicable standards for such development; B. That the estimate of the value of the redevelopment or rehabilitation is reasonable for projects of this nature; C. That the estimate of the number of individuals who will be employed or whose employment will be retained by the Petitioner can reasonably be expected to result from the proposed described redevelopment or rehabilitation; D. That the estimate of the annual salaries of those individuals who will be employed or whose employment will be retained by the Petitioner can be reasonably expected to result from the proposed redevelopment or rehabilitation; E. That the other benefits about which information was requested are benefits that can be reasonably expected to result from the proposed described redevelopment or rehabilitation; and F. That the totality of benefits is sufficient to justify the requested deduction, all of which satisfy the requirements of Indiana Code § 6-1.1-12.1-3. SECTION III. The Common Council hereby determines and finds that the proposed described redevelopment or rehabilitation can be reasonably expected to yield benefits identified in the Statement of Benefits, Sections 1 through 3 of the Petition for Real Property Tax Abatement Consideration and the Memorandum of Agreement between the Petitioner and the City of South Bend, and that the Statement of Benefits form completed by the petitioner, said form being prescribed by the State Board of Accounts, are sufficient to justify the deduction granted under Indiana Code § 6-1.1-12.1-3. SECTION IV. The Common Council hereby accepts the report and recommendation of the Community Investment Committee that the area herein described be designated as an Economic Revitalization Area and hereby adopts a Resolution designating this area as an Economic Revitalization Area for purposes of real property tax abatement. SECTION V. The designation as an Economic Revitalization Area shall be limited to two (2) calendar years from the date of the adoption of this Resolution by the Common Council. SECTION VI. The Common Council hereby determines that the property owner is qualified for and is granted property tax deduction for a period of three (3) years. SECTION VII. The Common Council directs the City Clerk to cause notice of the adoption of this Declaratory Resolution for Real Property Tax Abatement to be published pursuant to Indiana Code § 5-3-1 and Indiana Code § 6-1.1-12.1-2.5, said publication providing notice of the public hearing before the Common Council on the proposed confirming of said declaration. SECTION VIII. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption by the Common Council and approval by the Mayor. s/Derek Dieter Member of the Common Council Councilmember Gavin Ferlic, Chairperson, Community Investment Committee, reported that this committee met this afternoon on these bills and voted to send Bill No. 13-47 and 13-48 to full Council with favorable recommendations. 27 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 Sean Meehan, 2416 River Avenue, Mishawaka, Indiana, made the presentation for these Resolutions. Mr. Meehan advised that he and Andrew Walton propose to rehabilitate a vacant building which was formerly a VFW hall into a brew pub. The brew pub will manufacture beer for area restaurants, retail stores, and their storefront. He noted that the building will be renovated in two different sections with one side being the brewery side (2,400 square feet) and the other side being the storefront (5,000 square feet.) The storefront will serve manufactured beer on premise as well as packaged beer for take-away. The estimated cost of the renovations will be $320,000. The brewing equipment shall consist of 13 vessels; a small computer system will be installed for brewing software which will allow them to closely monitor the product. He stated that twenty (20) solar panels on the roof to aid in water heating. The cost of the equipment is estimated at $114,037. Total taxes to be abated during the five year personal property period are $5,032. Total new taxes to be paid over five years are estimated at $4,899. Total taxes to be abated during the three (3) year real property abatement period are estimated at $14,096. Total new taxes to be paid of the three (3) years are estimated at $14,506. He stated that it is estimated that the total project will create 21 permanent, full-time and 5 permanent, part-time jobs within the first year, representing a new annual payroll of $752,460. A Public Hearing was held on the Resolutions at this time. *Dr. Ferlic left the Chambers at this time. (The vote reflects that there were seven (7) Councilmember’s Present) There being no one present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in opposition to these Resolutions. Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to adopt Bill No. 13-47. Councilmember Scott seconded the motion which carried and the Resolution was adopted by a roll call vote of seven (7) ayes. Additionally, Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to adopt Bill No. 13-48. Councilmember Scott seconded the motion which carried and the Resolution was adopted by a roll call vote of seven (7) ayes. MOTION TO RECONSIDER BILL NO. 13-45 Councilmember Henry Davis, Jr., made a motion to reconsider Bill No. 13-45. No second on the motion. The motion failed. *Dr. Ferlic present BILLS - FIRST READING BILL NO.31-13 FIRST READING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 14, ARTICLE 9, OF THE SOUTH BEND MUNICIPAL CODE ADDRESSING THE COMMUNITY CAMPUS ADVISORY COALITION (CCAC) This bill had first reading. Councilmember Dieter made a motion to refer this bill to the Community Relations & Residential Neighborhood Committees and set it for Public Hearing and Third Reading on August 12, 2013. Councilmember Scott seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. 28 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 BILL NO. 32-13 FIRST READING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AMENDING THE SOUTH BEND MUNICIPAL CODE AT CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 19, SECTION 2-213; CHAPTER 19, ARTICLE 3, SECTION 19-63 (c) (2); AND CHAPTER 20, ARTICLE 9, SECTIONS 20-112 AND 20-113.4 ADDRESSING PENALTIES FOR HANDICAPPED PARKING VIOLATIONS This bill had first reading. Councilmember Dieter made a motion to refer this bill to the Health & Public Safety Committee and set it for Public Hearing and Third Reading on August 12, 2013. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. BILL NO. 33-13 FIRST READING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, FOR BUDGET TRANSFERS FOR VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA FOR THE YEAR 2013 This bill had first reading. Councilmember Gavin Ferlic made a motion to refer this bill to the Personnel & Finance Committee and set it for Public Hearing and Third Reading on August 12, 2013. Councilmember Schey seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes and one (1) nay (Councilmember Henry Davis, Jr.) BILL NO. 34-13 FIRST READING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, APPROPRIATING ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR CERTAIN DEPARTMENTAL AND CITY SERVICES OPERATIONS IN 2013 OF $124,256 FROM GENERAL FUND (#101), $35,000 FROM PARKS & RECREATION FUND (#201), $110,000 FROM MOTOR VEHICLE HIGHWAY FUND (#202), $10,752 FROM GIFT, DONATION, BEQUEST FUND (#217), $1,665,00 FROM EMS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (#288), $500 FROM HAZMAT FUND (#289), $40,460 FROM INDIANA RIVER RESCUE FUND (#291), $184,502 FROM COUNTY OPTION INCOME TAX FUND (#404), AND $60,000 FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCOME TAX FUND (#408) This bill had first reading. Councilmember Henry Davis, Jr., made a motion to continue this bill indefinitely. No second on the motion. The motion failed. Councilmember Scott made a motion to refer this bill to the Personnel & Finance Committee and set it for Public Hearing and Third Reading on August 12, 2013. Councilmember Schey seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) and one (1) nay (Councilmember Henry Davis, Jr.) 29 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 BILL NO. 35-13 FIRST READING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, APPROPRIATING ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR CERTAIN DEPARTMENTAL AND ENTERPRISE OPERATIONS IN 2013 OF $82,000 FROM SOLID WASTE FUND (#610), $180,000 FROM SOLID WASTE DEPRECIATIONS FUND (#611), $739,667 FROM WATER WORKS BOND CAPITAL FUND (#623), $336,502 FROM SEWAGE WORKS GENERAL FUND (#641) $274,502 FROM SEWAGE WORKS CAPITAL FUND (#642), $1,080,895 FROM SEWAGE WORKS SINKING FUND (#649), $2,438,088 FROM SEWAGE WORKS DEBT SERVICE RESERVE FUND (#653), $81,065 FROM 2013 SEWER REFUNDING BOND FUND (#664) AND $611,752 FROM CENTURY CENTER OPERATING FUND (#670) This bill had first reading. Councilmember Scott made a motion to refer this bill to the Personnel & Finance Committee and set if for Public Hearing and Third Reading on August 12, 2013. Councilmember Oliver Davis seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of seven (7) ayes and one (1) nay (Councilmember Henry Davis Jr.,) UNFINISHED BUSINESS REPORTS FROM THE AREA BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS BILL NO. 13-49 SPECIAL EXCEPTION – 1724 S. MAIN ST. Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to refer this this bill to the Zoning & Annexation Committee and set it for Public Hearing and Third Reading on August 12, 2013. Councilmember Scott seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. Councilmember Valerie Schey requested that the Personnel & Finance Committee hold a meeting on Bill Nos. 35-13; 34-13; and 33-13 prior to the August 12, 2013 meeting of the Council, to discuss those bills in further detail. NEW BUSINESS Councilmember Oliver Davis thanked everyone who attending the City Cemetery Restoration Project Kick-Off Meeting. He stated that the next meeting will be held Wednesday, August 21, 2013 at 5:00 p.m. Councilmember Davis advised that Thursday, July 25, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. at the O’Brien Center. Additionally, there will be a neighborhood meeting to discuss the basement/water problems Thursday, July 25, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. The hosts will be Chris and Peggy Tomkiewicz, 2801 W. Calvert Street, South Bend, Indiana PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR Christopher Huff, 1831 College Street, South Bend, Indiana, spoke regarding the vacant & abandoned housing in South Bend. He stated that he was afraid that we are going to spiral downward and we may never recover. Mr. Huff also commented that we have too high of a crime rate. He stated that with the city of Detroit debacle this past week, we should take a hard look before it’s too late. 30 REGULAR MEETING JULY 22, 2013 Jesse Davis, P. O. Box 10205, South Bend, Indiana, spoke regarding the Sewer Insurance Fund. He stated that he has filed several privilege of the floor forms and is still waiting for an answer. He stated that former Director of Public Works Gary Gilot initiated the pilot program to charge for sewer insurance. He asked the Council to re-visit the sewer insurance ordinance. Rev. Greg Brown, 1238 Diamond, South Bend, Indiana, informed the Council that he is going to be interviewed by the Indiana State Police in Valparaiso, Indiana, on Friday July 26, 2013 at 11:00 a.m., on the Chief Teachman incident. He stated they are finally moving forward on this issue. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, President Derek D. Dieter adjourned the meeting at 9:52 p.m. ATTEST: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ John Voorde, City Clerk Derek D. Dieter, President 31