|
REGULAR MEETING MAY 22, 2017
<br /> not addressed. Councilmember Davis stated that he did not like that there is no on-street parking.
<br /> He stated that at the Area Plan Commission meetings that he attended, many residents showed
<br /> up. He further explained that such a number of people offering complaints was a sign.
<br /> Councilmember John Voorde stated that he was glad that the developers modified their proposal,
<br /> however he felt that the project would have an impact on the character of the neighborhood. He
<br /> stated that he would support continuing consideration of the bill until the June 12th, 2017
<br /> meeting, and that, otherwise, he is inclined to side with the residents and not support the project.
<br /> Councilmember Tim Scott stated that he does not like that there is no on-street parking, and that,
<br /> like John, he would be in favor of a continuation.
<br /> Councilmember Karen White stated that she supports the project but that she would also stand
<br /> behind a continuation of the consideration of this project, so as to come up with a better plan to
<br /> meet citizens' and the developers' needs.
<br /> Councilmember Oliver Davis stated, I would agree with that. The concern that I have—and that's
<br /> why I don't mind a delay—is because, with all due respect, there was nobody from the
<br /> neighborhoods, who live there, who even stood up in favor. When we make these decisions, I
<br /> like to hear somebody from that neighborhood outside of the developers to share some positive
<br /> things.
<br /> Councilmember John Voorde asked, I'd like to ask one (1) question of Councilmembers who
<br /> were on the Council when the Commons was established: did you just say that residential
<br /> abatement wasn't available? I don't recall, I was Clerk as the time.
<br /> Councilmember Dr. David Varner stated, When Eddy Street Commons was developed, the City,
<br /> at their expense, placed all of the infrastructure—the streets, the sewers, the sidewalks, I think it
<br /> even built the alleys as part of the development. At that time, members of the Council thought
<br /> that this was the City's contribution and we shouldn't be contributing more in the form of a tax
<br /> abatement. Subsequently, one (1) or two (2) people had come forward, so we made part of the
<br /> agreement that there would be no abatement.
<br /> Councilmember Oliver Davis made a motion to continue Bill No. 09-17 until June 12th, 2017.
<br /> Councilmember Jo M. Broden seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of six (6) ayes
<br /> and two (2) nays (Councilmembers Gavin Ferlic and Dr. David Varner).
<br /> Councilmember Karen White asked what the expectations would be for the developers during the
<br /> next two (2)weeks.
<br /> Councilmember John Voorde responded that there should be a meeting held where the developers,
<br /> the residents, and any Councilmember that wants to participate may discuss how further
<br /> compromises may be reached.
<br /> 22-17 PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE
<br /> AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR
<br /> PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST
<br /> CORNER OF IRELAND ROAD AND
<br /> LAFAYETTE BLVD., COUNCILMANIC
<br /> DISTRICT NO. 5 IN THE CITY OF SOUTH
<br /> BEND, INDIANA
<br /> Councilmember Oliver Davis, Chair of the Zoning and Annexation Committee, reported that
<br /> they met this afternoon and send this bill forward with a favorable a recommendation.
<br /> David Stanton, Area Plan Commission, with offices on the 11th Floor of the County-City
<br /> Building, South Bend, IN, served as the presenter of this bill. Mr. Stanton stated, The petitioner
<br /> is requesting a zone change from SF2 Single-Family and Two (2) Family District, to CB,
<br /> Community Business District, and seeking two (2) variances from the development standards. To
<br /> the east, south, and west along Main, Ireland, and Lafayette are all zoned CB, Community
<br /> Business District. Mr. Stanton presented to the Council and displayed public images of the
<br /> property. He stated, Both properties are vacant lots. To the left will be a bank building, and the
<br /> right will be left for future development. The 3.2 acre site is proposed to be divided into two (2)
<br /> 5
<br />
|