Laserfiche WebLink
REGULAR MEETING MAY 24, 2004 <br />and agricultural land in the county zoned "A" Agriculture. Access to the site if from <br />Mayflower Road. Water and Sewer are available to the site. The drainage has not been <br />addressed by the petitioner. The total site to be rezoned is 26.17 acres. Of that, the <br />buildings will occupy 3.12 acres, or 11.9 percent of the site. Parking and drives will <br />occupy 6.67 acres, or 25.5 percent of the site. Open space will occupy 16.38 acres, or <br />62.6 percent of the site. A check of the Agency's maps indicates that no public wells, <br />wetlands, flood or environmental hazard areas are present. The site plan is preliminary. <br />The City Engineer made the following comments: A drainage plan is required at the final <br />site plan stage. The City Engineer made the following comments: A drainage plan is <br />required at the final site plan stage. In 2002, this site received a favorable <br />recommendation from the APC and was approved by the Council for a rezoning to "R -2" <br />Residential for multi - family residential development with a club house. Based on <br />information available prior to the public hearing, the staff recommends that this petition <br />be sent to the Common council with a favorable recommendation, subject to a final site <br />plan. This is an existing apartment complex that is being annexed into the City of South <br />Bend. This rezoning is necessary so the apartments are properly zoned in the City. <br />Mr. Mike Danch, Danch Harper & Associates, 2422 Veridian Drive, Suite 201, South <br />Bend, Indiana, made the presentation for this bill on behalf of Ronald and Beverly <br />Matthys, LLC. <br />Mr. Danch advised that the petitioner is seeking a voluntary annexation and rezoning of <br />26.17 acres of land located in Portage Township, St. Joseph County, Indiana. The <br />petitioner is requesting a zone change from "R -2" Residential (County) to `B" <br />Residential, `B" Height and Area (City) to allow multi - family residential and a <br />community center for the residents. <br />This being the time heretofore set for the Public Hearing on the above bill, proponents <br />and opponents were given an opportunity to be heard. <br />There being no one present wishing to speak to the Council either in favor of or in <br />opposition to this bill, Councilmember Varner made a motion for favorable <br />recommendation to full Council concerning this bill as substituted, and set this bill for <br />third reading on June 14, 2004. Councilmember Kuspa seconded the motion which <br />carried by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. <br />BILL NO. 26-04 PUBLIC HEARING ON A BILL OF THE COMMON <br />COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, <br />ESTABLISHING NEW FUND TO BE KNOWN AS THE <br />SOUTH BEND RAINY DAY FUND ( #102) <br />Councilmember Pfeifer made a motion to hear the 2nd substitute version of this bill. <br />Councilmember Coleman seconded the motion which carried by a voice vote of nine (9) <br />ayes. <br />Councilmember Dieter, Chairperson, Personnel & Finance Committee, reported that this <br />committee met on this bill this afternoon and voted to send it to the full Council with a <br />favorable recommendation. <br />Mr. Rick 011ett, City Controller, 14'h Floor Council -City Building, South Bend, Indiana, <br />made the presentation for this bill. <br />Mr. 011ett addressed the changes in the 2nd Substitute version of this bill. He indicated <br />that the ordinance title has been changed to reflect the creation of this fund and is an <br />amendment to the South Bend Municipal Code. The enabling statute, Indiana Code §36- <br />1-8-5.1 has two versions, the Statement of Purpose and Intent of the Substitute Bill <br />confirms that the City of South Bend has selected the version of I.C. 36 -1 -8.5.1 that was <br />amended by Public Law 267 -2003 (also known as version "b "). This version seems to <br />grant broader authority to a political subdivision in the use of the fund, and it is the same <br />version cited by the County in its Rainy Day Fund ordinance. The proposed language has <br />been clarified, yet retains the same general grant of authority to use the fund for any other <br />purpose consistent with law. A subpart has been added to mirror the restriction set forth <br />7 <br />