10-10-16 Zoning and Annexation - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

protection for their neighborhood than what they had previously. They were under the impression that an additional road would cut through their properties, and that is not going to happen with this project. We've also agreed that those restrictive covenants would apply to the property so that if anybody did come in and they wanted to access Pine Road for whatever they do, then those written commitments will kick in, and the traffic studies would have to be approved by the City of South Bend and the County, and by the Indiana Department of Transportation. Council Attorney Cekanski- Farrand stated that the recommendations for each will be different, so it would be good to separate the recommendations. Committeemember Voorde moved for a favorable recommendation of Bill No. 16 -67, it was seconded by Committeemember Broden and carried by voice vote of four (4) ayes. Committeemember Ferlic motioned to accept the Substitute Bill No. 35 -16, it was seconded by Committeemember Voorde and carried by voice vote of four (4) ayes. Committeemember Ferlic motioned to recommend Substitute Bill No. 35 -16 favorably to the full Council subject to the written commitments addressed in the August 17, 2016 letter from the Area Plan Commission to the Common Council. Committeemember Voorde seconded, and it carried by voice vote of four (4) ayes. Bill No. 41 -16: Commerce Center PUD Rezoning at 401 E. Colfax Committee Chair Davis asked the Council Attorney to explain Bill No. 41 -16. Council Attorney Cekanski- Farrand explained that the Colfax address is listed on the original bill, and at the last Council meeting there was not an opportunity to accept the substitute bill, which is now on file with the Office of the City Clerk. That bill now contains addresses on Sycamore Street as well as on LaSalle. Proper notice was given prior to the Area Plan Commission meeting that gave no recommendation. At some point, we have to give direction via proper motions to the Office of the City Clerk so we are giving proper notice to the public. Committeemember Broden asked what the actual address is that is encompassed, and why that is not in the title. Ms. Smith stated that they used the title provided by the petitioner. The other addresses were identified by the parcel layer of the geographic information system. We felt that it was prudent to include all of them as a better representation of the land, so we captured the other parcels that were captured. There was also someone that was left out of the legal description, so we changed that as well. Committeemember Broden asked if 401 E. Colfax is part of the substitute, and 228 and 230 Sycamore Street is correct within the title, and then 312 LaSalle Avenue. Committeemember Ferlic motioned to accept Substitute Bill No. 41 -16 3