My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-28-16
sbend
>
Public
>
Common Council
>
Minutes
>
Common Council Meeting Minutes
>
2016
>
11-28-16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/26/2017 10:35:40 AM
Creation date
12/13/2016 1:22:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council - City Clerk
City Council - Document Type
Council Mtg Minutes
City Counci - Date
11/28/2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
REGULAR MEETING <br />NOVEMBER 28, 2016 <br />only has a partial east -west alleyway which allows for egress to rear - loading garages on new <br />construction homes that have been developed there. He explained that he wanted to speak in <br />favor of removing this particular alleyway, because it will lead to the further development of <br />quality new homes and streetscapes facing St. Louis Boulevard on the 1000 block. <br />Those from the public wishing to speak in opposition to the bill: <br />Patrick Sullivan, owner of 1014 & 1022 St. Louis, explained that the 1022 property he owns sits <br />on the north side of the alley. He stated that he uses the alley when he is there to do repairs or <br />maintain his properties. There is a duplex that sits in the alley directly east of the 1022 house. He <br />frequently sees tenants enter and exit through the west side of the block. He feels that in closing <br />the alley, homeowner and resident access would be restricted. <br />James Masters returned to the podium to offer a rebuttal. Councilmember Broden requested that <br />the map of the property be displayed for the Council as reference during Mr. Master's rebuttal, <br />which Mr. Masters agreed would clarify his position further. Mr. Master's stated that he felt <br />there was some confusion as to what precisely was being closed. Referring to the site plan <br />displayed for the Council and public, Mr. Masters stated that on the left —i.e., west —is St. Louis <br />Boulevard, while the top of the page is north. The parcels that his client owns are the southern <br />half of Lot 79 and all of 80. The alley in question is the one between those two (2) parcels. The <br />north -south alley is not being closed. Mr. Masters stated, I think that may address Mr. Sullivan's <br />concern, because that alley is being kept open, as is the alley as it continues eastward. In fact, to <br />address the concern about trash pickup, I believe that's why Public Works asked for the small <br />easement on what would be the ten (10) feet at the very end of the alley as it intersects with the <br />north -south alley. Mr. Masters speculated that that was so that a track truck that is traveling west <br />along the alley has room to make a turn when it reaches the north -south alley. There will be no <br />interference with the trash trucks going either north and south or eastward along the alley. Mr. <br />Masters then asked Mr. Sullivan if that answered his question, to which Mr. Sullivan responded, <br />Only partially. Mr. Masters continued, ensuring again that it would not impede anyone traveling <br />north and south or those traveling farther to the east by the other properties, like Lot 73 and 74. <br />Councilmember Scott asked what street the alley dropped into. Mr. Masters believed it to be St. <br />Peter. Councilmember Scott stated, So, access to Lot 73 and 74 can be from a street or from that <br />alley. Mr. Masters responded that he was not sure if Lot 73 and 74 continue for the entire length. <br />He further reassured the Council that that would not get closed. He stated that only the one- <br />hundred and fifty -five (155) foot stretch depicted in the site plan would be closed, leaving the <br />remaining east ten (10) feet open. <br />Councilmember Karen White made a motion that Bill No. 68 -16 be sent to the full Council with <br />a favorable recommendation. Councilmember Randy Kelly seconded the motion which carried <br />by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. <br />66 -16 PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE OF <br />THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF <br />SOUTH BEND, INDIANA AMENDING <br />VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE SOUTH BEND <br />MUNICIPAL CODE AT CHAPTER 17, <br />ARTICLES 4 AND 6 TO ADDRESS NEW <br />WATER RATES AND CHARGES <br />Councilmember Scott made a motion to continue Bill No. 66 -16 until January 9th, 2017 and send <br />it back to the Utilities Committee. Councilmember Varner seconded the motion which carried by <br />a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. <br />70 -16 PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE OF <br />THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF <br />E3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.