|
REGULAR MEETING July 24, 2017
<br /> want to put the onus on the people who are responsible, and I believe it's us. Councilmember
<br /> Williams-Preston stated that she hopes that people in the neighborhood come together and move
<br /> forward in a way that is more respectful of each other's needs. She stated, It feels to me that if
<br /> Mr. Burg and the establishment actually adhere to the written commitments,that that will allow
<br /> everybody in the neighborhood to be in peace and quiet.
<br /> Councilmember Randy Kelly stated, I would just like to thank Ms. Preston for those words, and I
<br /> really don't have anything to add to that.
<br /> Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated,Very well articulated, Regina. Thank you for those
<br /> comments. I would concur that this is the process to try to amend—if something went awry with
<br /> the 2004 rezoning—is to allow the public to view this specific use. Is it a right fit? Is it specific
<br /> to that site?I think of the four(4) criteria that we are asked to evaluate,probably the second one
<br /> (1) that was enumerated tonight: "the proposed use will not injure or adversely affect the use of
<br /> adjacent area or property values therein."Whom is being impacted, and is it adverse? I think the
<br /> commitments are going a long way... These are going beyond, legally, what's required. I guess
<br /> I'm feeling that that is accommodating the complaints. It's making a specific effort to eliminate
<br /> the adverse effect. We should be able, in the City of South Bend, in a Mixed Use District,to
<br /> accommodate a place for individuals to go to the bar,to enjoy themselves, and it shouldn't and
<br /> need not disturb the overall peace of the neighborhood. So, I would agree with Councilmember
<br /> Preston that there needs to be work on all ends, here: enforcement, neighborliness, other folks
<br /> coming and going, and also a higher degree of communication and collaboration within the
<br /> neighborhood itself. This is the process. Our parameters are very limited, and I think the business
<br /> is making some pretty large accommodations to get this off on a better foot. I'm going to read
<br /> something very specific from the ABZA minutes: "The question is whether or not the proposed
<br /> land use is consistent with the district it is in and whether or not an impact on the surrounding
<br /> community would be detrimental. The Mixed Use District is established to allow for
<br /> establishments such as this. The fact that this is a tavern makes it a controlled use and therefore a
<br /> special exception." So, the type of establishment being requested is considered and addressed in
<br /> the zoning ordinance and the land use. So, kind of hone in on this. It is about use. The district
<br /> was Commercial. It's Mixed Use. We should be able to accommodate this.
<br /> Councilmember Dr. David Varner stated that selective enforcement comes as a result of selective
<br /> complaints. Regarding the written commitments, Councilmember Dr. Varner stated, I think it's a
<br /> practical solution to a difficult problem. And then we have to allow our decision to be enforced,
<br /> to the extent it can, by the Administration. I am inclined to support this and then ask everyone,
<br /> including Mr. Burg who is making the concessions,to really live up to his statements with
<br /> regards to wanting to be a part of the neighborhood and wanting to run a good business. On the
<br /> other hand,the good people of the neighborhood want to know that they can live and enjoy the
<br /> peace and quiet. It takes a collaborative effort,not a winner or loser. If we walk out of here and
<br /> someone thinks there's a winner and someone thinks we're a loser, then I'm afraid we've failed.
<br /> Councilmember Oliver Davis stated that the Council should have been brought into this case
<br /> earlier than it had been. Councilmember Davis urged that the City must do a better job, stating,
<br /> We cannot punish business owners when we have made mistakes, ourselves. He concluded by
<br /> stating that he would be voting in support of the special exception.
<br /> Councilmember John Voorde thanked Mr. Masters and Mr. Anderson for their informative
<br /> responses to the Council,thanked the people for speaking for or against the bill, which he stated
<br /> helps inform the Council's decision. He pointed out that Council Attorney Bob Palmer and
<br /> Councilmember Gavin Ferlic had arrived at language that was acceptable for.the written
<br /> commitments.
<br /> Councilmember Gavin Ferlic stated, I want to say thank you to everyone for coming,both in
<br /> favor and in opposition. I also want to say thank you to the City for their handling of this matter.
<br /> I think you've done a fine job. You know, a big thing to consider here is that if the lawsuit
<br /> against Friendly Confines prevails,they'll have the ability to use the deck any way they want,
<br /> play music,have people out there until 3 a.m., and that might not be the best compromise for the
<br /> neighborhood. I do think that the language in the written commitments provides compromise and
<br /> protection for the neighbors. I will be supporting this. If this does go through, Mr. Burg, I would
<br /> 23
<br />
|