Laserfiche WebLink
REGULAR MEETING <br />MAY 27. 1997 <br />BEND, INDIANA, AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS WITHIN <br />CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 6, ENTITLED TAX ABATEMENT <br />PROCEDURES OF THE SOUTH BEND MUNICIPAL CODE <br />This bill had first reading. Council Member Pfeifer made a <br />motion to refer this bill to the Community and Economic <br />Develop ontJunem9, it for The motion <br />reading motion <br />carried. <br />UNFINISHED BUSINESS <br />APPEAL OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECISION - 1414 E. <br />Wayne (Jennifer Lackman) <br />Council President Kelly gave the following statement: <br />All documents filed with the City Clerk by the Petitioner <br />and all documents filed by the Historic Preservation Commission <br />will be verbally identified and marked for purposes of <br />identification. <br />Governing Rules: <br />Petitioner will have twenty (20) minutes maximum which shall <br />include - specific issues under review, statement of position by <br />the petitioner's attorney if any, witness statements. <br />Historic Preservation Commission will have twenty (20) <br />minutes maximum which shall include - statement of position by <br />the HPC attorney, witness statements. <br />Council questions and disposition - fifteen (15) minutes <br />maximum. The Common Council should review the HPC action and <br />determine if was: <br />1. Arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or <br />otherwise not in accordance with applicable law; <br />2. Contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or <br />immunity; <br />3. In excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, <br />limitations, or statutory rights; <br />4. Without observance of procedure required by applicable <br />law; or <br />5. Unsupported by substantial evidence. <br />Roll call vote by City Clerk upon proper motion made and <br />seconded. <br />Dr. Jennifer Lackman indicated she felt it was unfortunate that <br />this situation has been played out in the TRIBUNE. She indicated <br />she was requesting the Council assistance in appealing the <br />decision of the HPC to deny a certificate of appropriateness for <br />a small section of a three foot white PV fencing extending in <br />front of my house. She also indicated that city attorney Aladean <br />DeRose attempted to justify the HPC's decision on legal grounds <br />that there were no other properties in the district with fences <br />extending beyond the setback line of the house, however, the <br />houses at 1417 E. Wayne and 301 S. Sunnyside both have fences <br />extending beyond the setback line. She indicated the majority of <br />neighbors support the completion of this project. She reported <br />that the HPC did not give her any written material or guidelines, <br />and when she raised the issue she was told they were out of the <br />handbooks, and the HPC Board conceded there was an ongoing <br />problem in communication with the neighbors. She indicated here <br />house was purchased "as is ", and required extensive renovation <br />1 <br />1 <br />F�l <br />