|
Rezoning Board August 19, 2002
The Vanderburgh County Rezoning Board
met in session this 19th day of August, 2002 at 7:00p.m. in
Room 307 of the Civic Center Complex with President Catherine Fanello presiding.
President Fanello: I need to go ahead and open the meeting. The advertised meeting starts at 7:00. So, call to order Board of Rezoning meeting. Commissioner Mosby: Motion to approve the minutes of the previous meeting. Commissioner Mourdock: Second. President Fanello: So ordered.
President Fanello: You'll have to forgive me, but I don't have an agenda. Commissioner Mosby: There's no first readings. Commissioner Mourdock: Yeah, first readings, we have none this evening. So, you are the only item of business. President Fanello: Yes.
President Fanello: VC-8-2002, petitioner, JJ Brodi LLC. Commissioner Mosby: Madam President? I'm just going to make a short statement. I have talked with Mr. Clark today. I've talked with Mr. Shopmeyer, and the petitioners. We were here last month, July the 15th, there was one gentleman present, which was this gentleman right here, and he had brought it to my attention that there was a restriction on this piece of property and this zoning. The restriction was basically for billboards, and it did not restrict the uses of the property. At that time, I had requested Mr. Shopmeyer to go back and negotiate with this gentleman to put restrictions on the property, because of the fact that an open C-4 would have allowed some hundred and some odd uses, and we won't go into that. He agreed, after a period of time, that he would go back and work with this gentleman. I didn't know it was going to lead to this, but I'm glad to see there's this many people interested. I thought he was a lone sailor for a while. What it is, is you have the opportunity now, over the next 30 days, and I would advise that you do this as quick as possible. We need to get this back on the Area Plan agenda for the first Wednesday of next month. So, he really needs to know what he's going to put in this use and development commitment. After talking with him this morning, I believe he was submitted some 59 uses that were considered undesirable. At that point, I believe, the petitioners have come to the conclusion that they could live with 46 or 47 of them uses. Some 85%, possibly. What I need you to do is get together, go back, try to negotiate what you think is the best deal. Now, you people might not get everything you want, and they might not get everything they want. Last month this would have passed as an open C-4, and every use would have been allowed, and it come out of Area Plan 10 to nothing. So, we could have passed this, and it would be a done deal. We didn't, but I would suggest that you work, and work in the spirit of compromise. I've been through many of these for 13 years. I would just ask you, that you work with the attorney, and his petitioner, and that he work with you all, and we come back here the third Monday of next month, and we'll have this zoning in front of us. So, at this time, I'm going to make a motion to continue this until next month's zoning meeting. Commissioner Mourdock: I'll second, and if there are any folks who want to make a comment, I guess, it's up to the board here if we care to hear anything, at this point. Commissioner Mosby: That's allowed. Unidentified: May I make a comment? President Fanello: Sure. Please just state your name, address. James Ehrsam: James Ehrsam, 5901 Winnett Drive. As you can tell, I am not the only one. I would like to thank- Commissioner Mosby: That's obvious. James Ehrsam: -everybody for showing up, and showing their support for our community. I would also like to apologize to Mr. Brodi, the Commissioners, and his attorney for the miscommunication on the second letter that went out. It wasn't necessary, because of the lack of communication. Again, thank you very much for listening to us, and noticing that we do care about our neighborhood. Thank you. President Fanello: Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to make a statement. Al Bragin: My name is Al Bragin, I live at 5816 Shoreham Drive. I have a question more than a statement. The question is, if this were to be rezoned today, with the restrictions, would that be C-4 with restrictions, or something else? Commissioner Mosby: No, it would be C-4 unrestricted. James Ehrsam: That's why we- Commissioner Mosby: That's why we're here. James Ehrsam: -wanted to table this, and we're going to work with them on the restrictions. Al Bragin: Okay, with the restrictions, would it be C-4 with restrictions? Commissioner Mosby: It would be C-4 with use and development- Al Bragin: Okay Commissioner Mosby: -which is the restrictions. Al Bragin: Does that mean at a later date those usages and restrictions can be changed? Commissioner Mosby: No. Commissioner Mourdock: Only if they come back through this whole process again. Al Bragin: So, okay, so what I'm saying...what the question is, C-4 is C-4, with or without restrictions? Would it be easier, you've been here 13 years, and I don't know how long you've been here, would it be easier to go from C-4 restricted, to C-4 unrestricted? Or easier to go from C-1, C-2, C-3 to C-4 unrestricted? Commissioner Mourdock: I'll answer this, and then I'll let David answer it. I want to answer first, since he's been here a little longer than I have. I've been here almost eight years, and I have never, ever, one time, seen any, it could be a C-2 with a use and development commitment, it could be a C-4 with a use and development commitment, I have never seen a petitioner come in here saying I have a C-4 with this use and development commitment, now I would like to weaken that use and development commitment and go to something else. I have never seen that happen. I say, it could happen, because legally it could, but I think the firestorm that would erupt would be pretty severe. So, I've never, as a practical matter seen it happen. I don't know if you have, David. Commissioner Mosby: I have once. I mean, and it was just due to the fact that the gentleman lost a tenant in a building, and the one use that they had eliminated, this gentleman was going to put a shop in, and it was agreeable by the neighbors. Al Bragin: Okay. Commissioner Mosby: And, usually, that's the only way it's going to happen. I mean, a use and development commitment is a very good tool that we were given by the state, and it will hold up at any point in time. I mean, we use them all the time. I feel very comfortable with them, and that's why I had asked last month that this come back this month with a use and development, but time didn't allow, and everybody didn't get together, and this is what we're at. Commissioner Mourdock: Let me define, and I'm not an attorney here, so, those of you who are attorneys, correct me if I say this wrong. Occasionally, we'll have people come in and they will offer the adjoining neighbors a private covenant, which simply means it's a deal between the person who wants the zoning and those adjacent neighbors, and he may say we won't put in, I heard a car wash mentioned, I'll use that as an example. I'll make a covenant with you that we won't put in a car wash. That's fine, but if he does put in a car wash, those private neighbors with whom he has the covenant have to bring legal action to challenge it. With the use and development commitment, the people who enforce it remain the county. Al Bragin: How about in the future if the property, the C-4 property changes hands, changes ownership? Then what? Commissioner Mourdock: It stays with, the zoning stays with- Al Bragin: It stays with the land. Commissioner Mourdock: -the property, and the restrictions stay with the property. Al Bragin: Okay. Commissioner Mosby: Shame on the person that buys it if he don't check it. Yes, ma'am. I'm sorry, it's her- Unidentified: (Inaudible. Not at the mike.) President Fanello: Could you please come to the microphone? Commissioner Mourdock: You need to come to the- Unidentified: Just a quick question. Commissioner Mourdock: Yeah, and- Commissioner Mosby: That's okay. Commissioner Mourdock: -and please state your name and address. Commissioner Mosby: We just need it for the record. Anita Ozete: Hi, my name is Anita Ozete. I live at 4245 Pembroke Drive. The question is, right now, it is zoned as? Commissioner Mourdock: C-4. Commissioner Mosby: C-4, and, well- Anita Ozete: Just a small portion of it. Commissioner Mosby: -75% is C-4, and 25% is R-3. If I'm- Unidentified: It's the other way around. Anita Ozete: I think it's the other way around. Is it not? Commissioner Mosby: It's the other way around? Okay. Anita Ozete: Is that- Commissioner Mosby: I know the part that's along Greenriver Road is a C-4, right? Commissioner Mourdock: Right. Commissioner Mosby: And then the other square is R-3? Commissioner Mourdock: Right. Anita Ozete: Certainly when we bought our lot, we had understood that just a small portion was C-4, and the rest was for residential, I thought R-3. So, this to me is a big change. What I'm understanding is that you're going from automatically presuming that you would make it an R, make it a C-4, with restrictions, as opposed to maybe even having it remain an R-3. Is that correct? Commissioner Mourdock: That's a very good question. I've not made that presumption, because, and as a board, we, the three of us cannot talk to each other. We never have in the year and a half these two have been here, and the previous time that I was here with others, we don't speak among ourselves as to how we feel a property should be zoned. As far as I'm concerned, when that zoning comes before us, in whatever final form, if, in fact, there is some agreement between the landowner and the petitioner, that's nice, but I make my decision based on what I see to be the full land use plan that this board has implemented with all the other things that affect zoning. Until I see everything in final form, I don't know how I will vote. Anita Ozete: Okay, well, that...thank you, that was my concern was it sounds almost as though we've already, that you as an advisory board has already agreed to change it from, yes, instead of it being staying as an R-3, will go to a C-4. Is that incorrect? Unidentified: That's incorrect, yes. Commissioner Mosby: I don't, yeah, I don't think- Anita Ozete: But it sounded prior on, before we opened this meeting, it didn't sound that way to me. So, I'm really now confused. Which, I guess, is good. James Ehrsam: We can talk all this off line, and- Anita Ozete: Okay. James Ehrsam: -try to answer any questions about what is going on. Try to ease everybody's concerns, and just so everybody can get a clear picture on what, as a neighborhood, what we're trying to do. Anita Ozete: And that would be when? So, that we all would know when to make- Madelyn Grayson: Mr. Ehrsam, I really need you to come to the mike, because we're, we type these verbatim, these minutes. James Ehrsam: I'm sorry. What we'll do, and we'll have to move on this quickly is answer your concerns and questions off line, outside of this meeting, and, as, for that matter, we could all stand out in that hallway, and you can ask questions till your heart's content. We can answer your questions at that point, and try to get everything worked out to benefit the neighborhood as a whole. I, you'll have to understand that we're not going to get 100% approval on the petition. We didn't get 100% signatures. So, we have to go with what the majority works for. That's what the democratic society is all about. So, anybody that has questions, we can be outside in the hallway, and you can ask questions of us, and deal with it at that point. President Fanello: Is there- Commissioner Mosby: Oh, go ahead. President Fanello: I was just going to say, is there anyone who has questions for these three board members? Commissioner Mosby: I just want to make a comment to her question, and then we'll- President Fanello: Okay. Commissioner Mosby: What I wanted to say is, and I understood exactly what you were saying, last month when this came before us, I mean, understand that this was sent to us from the Area Plan with a 10-0 vote, approval. That's why we're here tonight, I mean, we didn't do that, and, I guess, that's where you might have come up with the interpretation. When I was speaking, I might have made reference to the use and development commitment , there's been no vote taken by this body, but, it was recommended to us 10-0 for approval. That's why we're sending it back now to Area Plan, because they have to be the one's to look at the restrictions, which in my motion I need to restrict, or I need to restate that this go back to Area Plan, because I said continuance. So, we are sending this back to Area Plan for their September 4th meeting. Then it will come back here on September 16th. So, it will be heard here again September 16th. You'll be going to Area Plan on September 4th for a hearing there, and then will send us another approval. But, I did want to state that this goes September 4th, so that if we go past the time limit, Area Plan's vote would hold up. Commissioner Mourdock: Yeah. President Fanello: Do you need to, does he need to make another motion? Or amend his? Commissioner Mourdock: Yeah, he needs to amend it. Commissioner Mosby: I'll amend my motion to state that we send this to Area Plan on September 4th. Commissioner Mourdock: And I will again second. President Fanello: So ordered. Commissioner Mourdock: And just to be technically correct, the vote from Area Plan was 10-0-1. There was one abstention- Commissioner Mosby: One abstention. Commissioner Mourdock: - and that was me, because I serve on Area Plan. I'm the only one of these, of the Board of Commissioners who do serve on that body, and the reason I abstain when something is coming back to us is for exactly this reason. I didn't want to go on the record voting for something, and then have it come back to us as a board and have conditions changed. So, politicians get beat up enough reading about our changing thoughts in the paper. So, I don't want to give the newspaper too much ammunition. President Fanello: Is there any other questions for the Board of Commissioners? Commissioner Mourdock: Seeing none, I'll make a suggestion, since this is our only item of business, I'll move that we adjourn, and Mr. Shopmeyer, and the various representatives, if you would like to use this room, you're free to do it. We will get out of here, and let you do your thing. So, I move that we adjourn. Kevin Winternheimer: Did we, did you vote on the other? President Fanello: Yes. Commissioner Mosby: Not yet. Oh, we did? President Fanello: Yes. He seconded, and I so ordered. Kevin Winternheimer: Okay. Commissioner Mosby: Oh, I thought you meant, I thought you had to take a vote on it. President Fanello: Oh, do we need to take a roll call vote on that? Commissioner Mourdock: To send it back? I don't know. We can. Kevin Winternheimer: It doesn't matter, as long as you took a vote. Commissioner Mosby: I think on a, yeah, if you're sending it back, it has to be voted on. President Fanello: We'll go ahead and take one just to be safe. Roll call vote on the motion, Commissioner Mourdock? Commissioner Mourdock: Yes. President Fanello: Commissioner Mosby? Commissioner Mosby: Yes. President Fanello: And I vote yes. Do I have a motion to adjourn? Commissioner Mosby: Motion to adjourn. Commissioner Mourdock: Second. President Fanello: So ordered. The meeting was adjourned at 7:20
p.m.
Those in Attendance:
APPROVAL:
______________________________
______________________________
______________________________
|
