Area Planning Commission urges county council to deny rezoning of Speedway site after public uproar over rare Black Oak savannah

The Saint Joseph County Area Planning Commission on Sept. 17 voted to recommend the County Council deny a rezoning request from Indiana Auto Auction (IAA) that would convert the former South Bend Speedway property along State Road 2 into a vehicle auction and storage yard.

Commissioners voted to send an unfavorable recommendation on the rezoning (APC 3050‑24) and on the related special‑use permit after a combined public hearing that drew dozens of residents, conservationists and scientists who described the southern half of the 58.8‑acre parcel as a remnant Black Oak savannah of high ecological value.

Staff presented the petition, noting approximately 30 acres have hosted the racetrack use and that the petitioner seeks to rezone the full site to commercial, add a special use for an auto wrecking/auction yard and request two variances. Staff said the petitioner proposed written commitments limiting on‑site disassembly, maintenance and crushing of vehicles, requiring pre‑delivery leak checks and ongoing monitoring, and recommended approval of the rezoning and special use subject to those commitments. Staff also reported six written remonstrances and about 40 emails/phone calls to the county council opposing the proposal.

IAA’s counsel and technical team described the company’s nationwide environmental and operational approach. Attorney Richard Nussbaum said the company would operate the site in an “as‑is” auction model and that the written commitments would be recorded and “run with the land,” binding future owners. Dean Sturmer, IAA development manager, described truck turning designs intended to keep the largest vehicles off State Road 2 and estimated a combined truck load of about 50 vehicles per day across two nearby IAA sites. Tracy Miller, IAA environmental compliance manager, said the company conducted a Phase I environmental assessment and follows stormwater and spill‑response practices used at its other branches.

But public testimony was strongly negative and detailed. Environmental scientists, local naturalists, wildlife‑ and bird‑watching organizations, township officials and dozens of nearby residents argued the property contains rare plant communities and breeding birds, supports a “Black Oak savannah” remnant that experts called globally unusual in the Midwest, and provides corridor habitat that would not survive being reduced or fragmented. Speakers raised technical concerns about groundwater and aquifer vulnerability, the adequacy and enforceability of written commitments, dust and particulate migration, fire response and the persistence of stormwater contaminants. “This property is ecologically sensitive,” said conservationist Steve Sass, urging the commission to issue an unfavorable recommendation. Ecologist Samantha Beaupre said cutting the remnant in half would “reduce its ecological function” and could not be restored to current quality.

Commission discussion focused on missing technical details: commissioners and staff repeatedly asked for a defined footprint for the savannah, a precise calculation of how many acres of high‑quality habitat would be removed versus preserved, and detailed stormwater and impervious‑surface calculations. The petitioner and staff said some design elements remain preliminary and that county standards would govern final retention sizing; the petitioner said it had reached out to the Shirley Heinze Land Trust to explore protections.

After public comment and a petitioner rebuttal, Commissioner Tavernier moved to send an unfavorable recommendation on the rezoning to the County Council; the motion passed on a roll call vote. The commission sent an unfavorable recommendation on the special use as well. Separately, the commission approved two variances — allowing a 6‑foot fence and permitting an off‑street loading area ahead of the primary building — but those approvals were expressly made conditional on County Council approval of the special use.

What happens next: The Area Plan Commission’s unfavorable recommendation goes to the County Council, which has final zoning authority. The petitioner said in the hearing that written commitments will be recorded with the deed and would run with the land; the commission and many public speakers requested clearer, enforceable protections and a binding conservation instrument (for example, a land trust easement) before the Council acts.

Details and clarifying points

- Property and operations: total site ≈58.8 acres; IAA expects to use ≈34.9 acres with an operating/staging area of about 28.9 acres; petitioner indicated about 20–25 employees and roughly 25 trucks per day serving the site (with the two nearby sites combined estimated at ~50 truck movements/day). (Staff and petitioner figures presented during the hearing.) - Retention basin: site plan shows a preliminary 3.7‑acre retention area to be sized to county standards at permitting. (Petitioner/staff) - Commitments: petitioner listed written commitments on operations (vehicles sold “as is,” no dismantling/crushing, no routine maintenance draining on‑site, inspection for leaks prior to entry and continuous monitoring). The petitioner stated those commitments will be recorded and run with the land. - Permits: primary access on State Road 2 would require INDOT driveway permits and possibly turn lanes; NDOT/INDOT review and a major driveway permit were noted by staff.

Vote and formal actions (as recorded in the hearing record)

- Rezoning (APC 3050‑24): Motion to send an unfavorable recommendation to the St. Joseph County Council (mover: Mister Tavernier; second: not specified in the record). Roll call recorded unanimous 'Yes' (commissioners recorded as voting yes: Mister England; Doctor Lauck; Miss Hannan; Mister Krasinski; Mister Matzett; Mister Rausch; Mister Tavernier; Doctor Thacker; Mister Devon). Outcome: unfavorable recommendation (record forwarded to County Council).

- Special use (APC 3050‑24 special use request): Motion to send an unfavorable recommendation to County Council. Roll call recorded unanimous 'Yes' and the motion carried. Outcome: unfavorable recommendation.

- Variances (two variances: 6‑foot chain‑link fence in front yard; locating off‑street loading area in front yard): Commission approved both variances on a motion that conditionally attached the approvals to final County Council approval of the special use. Vote: carried (roll call in hearing record). Outcome: variances approved subject to County Council approval of special use.

Why it matters

The decision sends the most politically consequential item of the meeting to the County Council with a clear unfavorable recommendation. The hearing exposed a conflict between staff’s land‑use analysis (which found the petition consistent with the comprehensive plan’s guidance to cluster commercial uses along major corridors) and strong community and scientific testimony emphasizing the site’s rare ecological value and groundwater sensitivity. County Council members will now review the case, the recorded commitments, and the volume of public comment before making the final call.

Quotes from the hearing

- Richard Nussbaum, attorney for IAA: “Those written commitments will be, in fact, in writing. They will be recorded, and they will run with the land.” - Tracy Miller, IAA environmental compliance manager: “We have completed our phase 1 [environmental] site assessment. Depending on how everything moves forward there’s a potential to do a phase 2 so that we would do more sampling to ensure we’re in compliance with Indiana Department of Environmental requirements and local laws.” - Samantha Beaupre, environmental scientist: “This site represents perhaps the county’s last remaining sizable remnant. When you reduce the size, it does reduce the ecological function of the existing remnants.”

Next steps

The County Council will receive the Area Plan Commission’s record and public comments. The petitioner can present the written commitments and any legally binding conservation instruments to the Council. Residents and conservation organizations indicated they will continue to press for permanent conservation measures (for example, easements held by the Shirley Heinze Land Trust) if the property is to be developed.

Sources: Staff presentation (Area Plan Commission), petitioner presentations (Richard Nussbaum, Dean Sturmer, Tracy Miller), multiple resident and expert public comments, and the Area Plan Commission roll call votes recorded at the Sept. 17 hearing.