01-23-17 Council Mintues - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 23, 2017 Marguerite Taylor, 714 East Corby Boulevard, South Bend, IN, stated that she was the person on the Economic Development Committee that Mr. Pawlowski referenced earlier in the evening. Ms. Taylor stated that she belongs to the South Bend Heritage Board of Directors, the Northeast Neighborhood Council, the NNRO, and that she works at the Robinson Community Learning Center which, she argued, gives her a good perspective on the neighborhood. She recalled criticism of the development of the Eddy Street Commons that warned that deer populations would be driven out of the woods by Notre Dame. She stated, Really, what was in the Notre Dame woods were skunks. What has come out of that is kids walking, bicycling... I don't think South Bend ever was considered a college town. I have been to Ann Arbor and Pittsburgh —they have large colleges. South Bend never was that. Eddy Street gives us the feel of being in a college town. Ms. Taylor informed the Council that all the boards that she has been on have unanimously voted to approve this bill. There were none from the public who wished to speak in opposition of the bill. Councilmember Oliver Davis thanked Mr. Gavett and Kite Realty for taking the time to talk to their neighbors. Councilmember Davis stated, Over the last few situations, I have been trying to emphasize that more and more when it comes down to zoning issues. I think that really helps clear up a lot of the things before we even get to this Council, and it makes development grow in a stronger and better way. Councilmember Regina Williams- Preston thanked the Department of Community Investment and the developer. Councilmember Williams- Preston stated, I am always talking about affordable housing. It is great to see that you are taking the initiative to begin that process and say, "You know what? We are really going to live up to these values of mixed - income neighborhoods and we are going to build it right into the plan." Councilmember Tim Scott made a motion to send Bill No. 05 -17 to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. Councilmember Gavin Ferlic seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of eight (8) ayes. 06 -17 PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, REAFFIRMING ORDINANCE 10461 -16 FOR CUSTOMERS OUTSIDE THE CITY'S CORPORATE BOUNDARY Councilmember Dr. David Varner, Chairperson of the Utilities Committee, reported that they met this afternoon and send this bill forward with a favorable recommendation. Michael Schmidt, Assistant City Attorney, with offices on the 12th Floor of the County -City Building, South Bend, IN, served as the presenter of this bill. Mr. Schmidt stated, I come before Council today to ask for the Council to reaffirm Ordinance 10461 -16 that was passed in its full in October 2016. That ordinance dealt with what we call "system development charges." It removed compact fees and replaced them with a surcharge of fourteen percent (14 %). The bill we have in front of you uses the exact same language of Ordinance 10461 -16, but relates to waste water fees for users outside of the corporate boundary of the City. With all the best intentions, it was missed that we need to hold a public hearing and give the users outside our corporate boundaries a chance to present their case as it relates to any fee change. The surcharge and system development charge related to waste water would certainly constitute a change in fees. So, at this time, we ask that we hold the public hearing and we also ask that we move forward with the confirming of Ordinance 10461 -16, as it relates just to fees for users outside the corporate boundary. The rest of the ordinance that you passed in October is in effect, so the system development charges and what -not for water users are active, and that has been applied. So, we are moving forward on that end. It is just this one particular piece that remains outstanding at this time. Without the support of Council, we run the risk of having to go back. If you recall the cumbersome nature of compact fees, of having to open that back up and try to figure out how to pursue compact fees against all the customers that are out there —I don't think 8