HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCM-11-05-79MINUTES OF THE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 5, 1979
The regular meeting of the City Council was called to order at 7:30
p.m. by President Pro-Tem Coots, who presided in the absence of the
Mayor, who arrived at 8:45 p.m. All Council members, Clerk-Treasurer
and City Attorney were present.
Councilwoman Doane gave the invocation, Councilman Coots led the
Pledge of Allegiance.
Councilman Garretson moved to approve the minutes of the last
meetings, Councilman Meacham seconded it and it passed unanimously.
Old Business :
Agenda Item #1: Report From Committee Chairmen: Councilman Swift
stated a budget committee meeting was set for November 14, 7:30 p.m.
New Business :
Agenda Item #2: Sub-Division Control and Zoning Ordinances:
Councilman Coots stated the Plan Commission had it's meeting held in
October, and by it's resolution, passed the proposed sub-division
control and zoning ordinsnces in their present form with
recommendation for passage to the City Council. Councilman Coots
stated that since the passage of the resolution, Ann Chapman, City
Planner, has come across three items as listed in the memorandum as
attached to the minutes. A discussion regarding the recommendations
was held. Some concern by members of the Council was expressed
regarding her recommendation #2 regarding setback requirements. Ms.
Chapman explained she was mainly concerned with being consistent.
Councilman Coots asked that the record show the ordinances as being
introduced with a request from the Council that the Plan Commission
consider the amendments presented in the memorandum prepared by Ann
Chapman.
Agenda Item #1. E D C Inducement Resolution: Anacomp: Councilman
Coots read proposed Resolution giving the Council's approval for
Anacomp to proceed with steps necessary for economic development
financing for relocation of its corporate headquarters to the
Fidelity building in Carmel, Indiana , said economic development
facilities to be building improvements and equipment acquisitions.
Mr. William Fletcher, representing Anacomp, was present and explained
the project. Mr. Ted Johnson, member of the E D C was present and
stated the E D C members had spent quite a lot of time in reviewing
the project before giving their approval. Gouncilwoman Doane moved to
approve the resolution, Councilman Meacham seconded it and it passed
unanimously.
Agenda Item #3: Increase on Sewer Rate Discussion : Mr. Jeff Laslie,
representing McCollough & Associates, appeared before the council and
presented the latest revised figures on the proposed sewer rate
increase. Councilman Garretson moved to hold a public hearing on the
proposed ordinance on November 19th, if that is adequate time for
publication, Councilman Swift seconded it and it passed unanimously.
Meeting was recessed at 8:45 p.m.
Meeting was re-convened at 8:50 p.m. by Mayor Pickett.
Agenda Item #4: Apartment Condominium Ordinance: A discussion was
held regarding the proposed ordinance regulating procedures regarding
conversion of residential apartments to condominiums. City Attorney
stated there is already a large body of law dealing with notices and
landlord-tenant relationship. In the condominium conversions, there
are people who are already under a contractual responsibility and
whoever is renting
Page 2
11/5/79
is a given kind of tenant and the notice requirements for each
kind of tenant differs and is set by statue. Mr. Knowles stated
the ordinance attempts to impose upon that body of existing law
different notice requirements and it concerned him that that could
be in contravention of state statue and thus nullify the
ordinance, however, the law does not address itselfito condominium
conversions other than the horizontal property act so it could be
argued that the notice requirements imposed by the statue we are
considering doesn't alter any existing notification requirements,
it just imposes new notification requirements on an entirely new
body of law. Councilwoman Reiman stated she had asked that this
item be put on the agenda because of her concern mainly for the
senior citizens and the disabled being displaced. Councilman
Garretson
suggested the Councilmembers look into the details of the
ordinance further before the next meeting. Ordinance was shown
as being introduced.
Agenda Item #5: Transfer Funds Ordinance: Mayor Pickett read
proposed Ordinance #B- 153 transferring funds within the MVH,
Police, Fire and Building Commission Budgets. Councilman Garretson
moved to adopt proposed ordinance, Councilman Meacham seconded it
and it passed unanimously. Councilman Garretson moved to suspend
the rules, Councilman Swift seoonded it and it passed unanimously.
Motion to adopt passed unanimously.
Agenda Item #6: Ordinance Prohibiting Parking at three Locations:
Mayor Pickett read proposed ordinance D-229 prohibiting parking at
3rd St. S.W., 2nd Ave. S.W., and 1st Ave. N.E. Councilman
Garretson moved to adopt proposed ordinance, Councilwoman Doane
seconded it. Councilman Garretson moved to suspend the rules,
Councilwoman Doane seconded it and it passed unanimously. Motion
to adopt passed unanimously.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30
p.m.
Approved:
Attest
TO: Mayor Pickett ~ 5-79
FROM: Ann Chapman, City Planner
SUBJECT: Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances
The proposed zoning and subdivision ordinances, which will be
reviewed by the City Council tonight, still contain a few problems
which should be straightened out as soon as possible.
1. The proposed zoning ordinance includes six zone districtsA(R-4, R-
5, B-4, B-6, B-7 and I-2) which must be served totally or partially
by community facilities (water, sewer, storm sewer) before being
developed. These particular zone districts would provide Carmel and
Clay Township with higher density residential land use and large-
scale industrial and commercial uses. These are the types of uses
which provide a stronger tax base while lessening the cost of
services. Unfortunately, the sewerage system in Carmel and the
township is presently unable to support additional loads, and
capacity will not be increased for at least 2 - 7 years. Therefore,
it would be in the best interests of the city to allow for
alternative methods of handling sewage disposal. The alternatives
could be reviewed by either the Plan Commission, B.Z.A., the
Technica]i Advisory Committee or the City staff with approval granted
only with the provision that city facilities would be utilized when
they became available.
2. The Entrance Corridor districts, EC-1 and EC-2, will be changed to
B-5 and B-6, respectively. Uses will remain the same, and a
special exception will not be mandatory for all uses. A problem arises
when setback requirements are examined, however. The current ordinance
requires a setback of 120 feet for both EC districts, with no front
parking. The front yard must be landscaped. The proposed ordinance
provides only a 60 foot setback in the B-6 district, and a setback of
15 feet in the B-5 district. Parking is allowed in the front yard. I
feel that the citizens of Carmel are concerned with the aesthetics of
the U S. 31 corridor, and I feel we should provide consistent
regulations along this corridor which will protect the area without
instilling any hardship to developers. One alternative would be to
develop an Entrance Corridor Overlay Zone (similar to the Flood Plan
Districts) which would border the limited access highways. This zone
could provide for a 60 foot setback, with a 25 foot landscaped buffer
next to the highway.
3. Tom Schellenberger, from the Soil Conservation Service, has
requested that easements for legal drains be shown on preliminary
plots. This requirement could easily be added to Section 5.2.4.