October 12, 2006

The Ellettsville, Indiana Plan Commission met in regular session on Thursday, October 12, 2006, in the Fire Department Training and Conference Room located at 5080 West State Road 46. Frank Buczolich called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. opening with the Pledge of Allegiance.

Roll Call: Members present were Frank Buczolich, President; Ed Bitner, Vice President; Sandra Hash, Secretary; William Evans, Don Calvert, Terry Baker and Dennis Williamson, Frank Nierzwicki, Director of Planning Services was also present.

Approval of the Minutes

Ed Bitner made a motion to accept the minutes as printed for the August 3, 2006 meeting. Terry Baker seconded. Motion carried.

Old Business

Parking Report - Discussion

Frank Nierzwicki, Director of Planning Services and The Planning Department conducted a study this past summer looking at options that to increase parking within the Town. This study was completed in August.

The Planning Department has considered going to a “Zonal Parking Plan” with three separate zones. One zone would be for “Old Ellettsville,” another zone for older subdivisions and a third for new subdivisions.

The Zonal Plan requires some on street parking within the Town. After meeting with the Town’s Public Safety Officials (Fire Chief, Town Marshal and Street Superintendent) it was agreed that a minimum street width of 28 feet would be required to allow on street parking. The Planning Department did not find streets wide enough to start an on-street parking program. The Zonal Parking Plan can not be started in Ellettsville as proposed.

During the Planning Department’s study, a couple of options were suggested by residents. One suggestion called for a pull off parking space parallel to the roadway. This pull off area would have a hard surface and allow for a vehicle to be completely off the roadway. This option may have some use in the older subdivisions within the Town. Another suggestion would be to limit the number of vehicles allowed at a residence. This option would not work because of the inability of the Town to determine the proper number of vehicles allowed at a residence. Another suggestion was a more aggressive enforcement policy with ticketing offenders.

William Evans asked what the Town defined as “hard surfaces”. Frank Nierzwicki stated in the Code; hard surfaces were defined as “gravel, pavers, concrete and asphalt”.

Frank Buczolich asked if there have been requests for an “off street spot”. Would the neighborhood be in favor of this? Frank Nierzwicki clarified there could be additional parking in the green space of the yard. In the past there has been a requirement on the percentage of the parking area you can have. The whole front yard could not be graveled for parking. The Town is trying to be flexible because not all the areas are the same. The older neighborhoods are harder to accommodate. The intent of the Town is trying to find places for people to park.

William asked why this has to be parallel to the roadway. Frank Nierzwicki gave an example of why this way could be used. In Kelli Heights, this has been popular because of the land form or if there are trees in the way. William questioned the use of parallel parking on Oak Street since it is dense. Frank Nierzwicki agreed parallel parking would be hard on Oak Street and Old Ellettsville but it would be easily achievable in the newer areas. He is open to review any suggestions or possibilities.

Richard Donley, resident on Heritage Drive invited Frank Nierzwicki to look at the parking situation in the Greenbrier Addition. He presented the Board with some pictures. He went over each picture and explained the parking problems with each picture. He presented a petition to the Town Board 25 years ago signed by 97 % of the people in his area. They were requesting parking on one side of the street at that time. His house and the ones around him were built very close to the street and on a sink hole. His street is 24 feet wide with the two curbs each being 2 feet wide making the whole area 28 feet wide. He feels this would support parking on one side and is asking for consideration. His driveway was widened 25 years ago but can not expand anymore. The Town Board, at that time, did grant permission to park on his side of the street.

Frank Buczolich asked if the studies were for one side parking. Frank Nierzwicki agreed and added this is why a pull off area would be best. A compromise could be looked at if that is what the Plan Commission would like the Planning Department to do.

Ed Bitner suggested starting with one area as an example and wait until other areas want the same thing taking traffic flow into consideration. Frank Nierzwicki wants to be fair and equal with everyone but the problem is the streets are not fair and equal to all. Frank Nierzwicki will start with this neighborhood as an example.

Drainage Report - Discussion

Frank Nierzwicki and The Planning Department have been asked to review some drainage issues within the Town over the last few months. The cases were varied in nature but they appear to have a general pattern. Residents are upset concerning rain water drainage and are attempting to improve drainage on their own. Some of these “home remedies” help the situation but most do not and some actually do more harm.

They have found two types of altered drainage patterns:

1. A private citizen tries to improve drainage on his or her property by changing the run off by putting more run off onto their neighbors.

2. A developer changes an approved drainage plan to construct new housing units.

Both of the above mentioned cases are doing harm to the community. The most direct improvement would be more education but the real answer may go beyond just educating the public. We may need to look at a more forceful attitude towards offenders and also look at more Town involvement on drainage.

Residents of Ellettsville may not think of having much in common with Rome, Italy or Cincinnati, Ohio but they do share one common item; hilly terrain. We need to address the drainage issue in a direct honest fashion.

Frank Nierzwicki and Rick Coppock have been called out with driveway permits to find people have moved the water off to a neighbor. It has been difficult to catch all of what is going on with people changing drainage patterns. This issue needs to be addressed with all the concerns. The Town is trying to follow Rule 5 and State requirements for run off.

Frank Buczolich asked what the Town’s current involvement with drainage is. Rick Coppock of Bynum Fanyo doesn’t know how you would define “involvement”. The Plan Commission approves a development plan for individual development and then the plan is constructed by the developer. Most of the problems arise after the developer has finished the project. The next developer comes in to build a house, have their own ideas and may not conform to the original designs. That is where the problems start. The Plan Commission needs to recommend to the Town Council to take some action to have the property owner, builder or who ever caused the problem to remedy the situation.

Frank Buczolich stated there is no recourse when a drainage plan has been altered. Rick Coppock said with the current ordinance; when the development is under construction there is some recourse but when it gets down to the individual building a home then it is more difficult to address that issue. The only way to handle the problem would be to make sure the problems are resolved prior to an occupancy permit being issued. Frank Nierzwicki said a recommendation would need to be carried forwarded to the Town Council.

Don Calvert read a letter he sent to two Town Officials: This is the results of the redirection of water from Lot 78 in the Springs Valley section on to me during the heavy rains Thursday. The pictures show the water gushing on to and flooding my property during the stated rains. The picture shows the side of my neighbor’s home with the water running through their lawn, under their deck and surrounding their out building. This is Springs Valley Phase I Lot 8. When Phase III was developed, flooding problems were eliminated until a contractor filled in the swell that catches and drains the water away from me into the drainage ditch. My dog kennel was an island today with the shallowest water being ankle deep. Please encourage (the contractor) to honor the requirements of the neighborhood and in fact all Ellettsville codes. I have additional photographs if necessary.

He received this message back: “I got your message and I called the contractor this morning. He said he will be out there and will regrade the swell to eliminate the problem. Take a look at it and let me know if there is anything else that needs to be done”. Don was not pleased with this response. It was sent at 8:31 p.m. on May 19, 2005. Since then he has had numerous contacts with two Town Officials and nothing has been done. As a member of the Commission he does not feel we are getting our job done. He has stated this publicly before. A year and a half is plenty of time for a citizen to deal with an issue like this especially when we are talking tonight about the same thing again. He did not identify the contractors or Town Officials. He is disappointed in them, eighteen months with numerous reports, visits, photographs and contacts is enough for anyone to get something done.

Sandra Hash has heard this issue come up many times. Drainage has been a problem but we do not have any one to go back and inspect the lay of the land when the project is complete. She would favor looking into a process to avoid drainage problems in the future. This should be done by a surveyor or someone who measures elevations. Frank Nierzwicki believes the City of Bloomington has inspectors that go out for site issues such as this, it is not uncommon. There are a number of people in town with strong views on this.

Sandra stated Monroe County has a Drainage Board and asked if this is something we might be able to utilize through an inter local agreement sharing resources like we did with the building permits. Frank Nierzwicki went on to say there are a lot of options to look at. Sandra asked, can this fall back on the developer or is it something the Town will need to fix. Rick Coppock suggested one way to get “plan performance” is to have the developer provide certified plans. Also town officials should be making some recommendations or given the authority, based on their judgment, to present to the Council for action. Frank Nierzwicki stated the approved plan by the developer is just fine but sometimes it gets altered. Don Calvert said it was on record that it had been changed. His neighbor will have to adjust his entire landscape to keep the water out. He can not believe there is no repercussion from the Town to get this corrected. This has been pointed out too many times and he believes the Plan Commission should do something. It is our job to see these things do not occur. Frank Nierzwicki would like recommendations by the Plan Commission to the Town Council on an ordinance allowing the Town departments more authority and actions in these areas. Sandra asked if the Plan Commission could pursue legal action. Rick Coppock said possibly but it would be up to Mike Spencer on how he wanted to pursue it.

Don Calvert did not have anything more to say on the drainage but gave thanks from the neighbors for the water line problem that has been corrected.

Frank Nierzwicki would like to have a proposal for the next meeting. Sandra stated if we wait too long, the ground will be frozen and there will be no action until the spring. Frank Nierzwicki said he would work quickly on this.

Russ Ryle stated Rick Coppock gave him a copy of the proposed plan for the Mustang Drive development. Rick Coppock clarified there were at least three plans on that subdivision. The copy Russ Ryle has was the second one showing the original grade before construction started. Mr. Ryle reviewed the plan and stated the elevation of Mustang Drive is nothing like the one on the plan. They clearly have drainage problems. The run off is coming across the property from the full section of the south part of the development. There are limited accommodations for peak run off to get across the property. He has learned at this meeting there is no plan in place to enforce developers to make the corrections when there are any issues like this. What are the practical options? Rick Coppock answered when the plans are approved by the Plan Commission and before the lots are platted; there has to be a final plat. At that time the roads, water and sewer are dedicated to the Town. If there are any issues, the subdivision has to conform to the approved plan. If not, the Town Council would not approve the final plat.

Russ Ryle asked what the difference is between approving the final plat and the street being accepted in the Town. Rick Coppock said the final plat accepts the streets into the Town. Russ said Mustang Drive has never been accepted as a Town street to his knowledge. Frank Buczolich said if the plat was approved the street was accepted because that is the normal procedure. If they posted a bond for it; the bond would be to assure the streets were built. Sandra said during the final plat approval; the top coat is not necessarily on the street. The Town does not accept streets until the top coat is on and they are inspected by the Town Departments. An ordinance is written to accept those streets before they are added to the road inventory. Frank Buczolich thinks part of the question is when is the road accepted into the Town; what is in place to say that what we are being accepted is what was looked at on paper.

Frank Nierzwicki stated one reason Mustang Drive has not been accepted is because the final top coat is not applied to streets that are still under construction. If it were accepted there would be heavy equipment driving over it breaking it up. From the Town perspective we would have to pay to fix it. The problem with Mustang Drive is the development phase has been so long and there is now a problem with the undercoat. Frank will be giving new developments a time line; a certain phase will be finished by a certain time or there will be no occupancy permits or building permits.

Frank Buczolich added there is another problem that comes up with developments and plans that are affecting existing areas and neighborhoods. He has walked the Mustang Drive area after heavy rains and sees water pooling up every where except at the drain. This is all part of having an older neighborhood with no effective drainage except to dump it across the road.

Frank Nierzwicki stated there is a grading permit on the books. There is a cost of $100 per acre (maximum of $500) associated with getting that permit. The incentive is for bigger tracts of land to get the grading permit at the same time to be graded. This is important so the whole drainage area can be looked at and not one lot at a time.

Russ Ryle, speaking as a tax payer, thinks Mustang Drive is no where close to being acceptable. He is not sure if there is any other pocket other than the tax payers to fix the problem. With all the paper work in place; the key words are enforcement and timely enforcement.

Evelyn Ryle’s thoughts on this would be before a final plat acceptance; the Town requires all the grading to be complete and acceptable to the original plan for the entire subdivision as a way to enforce all grading and drainage issues. This type of mechanism might be able to help the Town enforce those parts of the grading and necessary drainage arrangements are in and properly produced by the developer’s contractor and checked by the Town’s inspector.

Rick Coppock stated the Town should not release the posted bond or letter of credit before it expires. If there is something the Town doesn’t like or won’t accept the letter of credit would not be released. Russ Ryle asked if anything has been released for the Mustang Drive final plat. Sandra explained some bonds come with expiration dates and not all of them are considered performance bonds. There are also letters of credits from lending institutions. If the letter of credit expires a request to extend the date is made. That request is not always honored. What should be done in that case? Rick said if there is an expiration date; you would have to contact the lending institute the letter of credit is from to extend that date.

Frank Buczolich asked Frank Nierzwicki what he needs from this body to proceed. There were some suggestions and clarification discussed for a motion.

A motion to give the Planning Director and Town Engineer the authority to proceed with instruction for corrective measures and if the issues are not resolved within thirty days then it would be turned over to the Council for remedy.

Upon review of the Director of Planning and the Town Engineer; drainage issues that have not been corrected within thirty days will be transferred to the Town Council for action.

Frank Buczolich asked Frank Nierzwicki if this was enough to take to Legal for wording, have checked and brought back to the Plan Commission. Frank Nierzwicki said yes.

It is the desire of the Commission for Frank Nierzwicki to proceed in this manner.

Dennis Williamson so moved. Ed Bitner seconded.

Ed Bitner remembered Don Calvert bringing the drainage problem up before and he thought it had been taken care of since it hasn’t been addressed again. Frank Nierzwicki will speak with Don Calvert in the next few days. It was clarified the resolution approved by the Plan Commission will not only take care of the two mentioned incidents but will be universal.

Russ Ryle requested a written report from Frank Nierzwicki, Rick Coppock and Jim Ragle because he wanted something in writing so that in another ten years from now it will not be debated on what was going on. The report would be specifically for Mustang Drive laying this procedure out for the possible model for solving other problems.

Sandra Hash does not think additional authorization is needed. The Plan Commission approves the plan and if it is not constructed as show on the plan; that alone should be enough for the Town to enforce the corrections. The Plan Commission should not have to give our Town Engineer and our Planner authority to correct a problem. It should be standard procedure for them to have the authority to enforce the planning section of the Town Code. She reiterated Bloomington has a permitting process. The Town should also have a permitting process then the process would all be documented. The owner, developer and builder would have to all sign these permits and pass inspections. Then it would all be resolved and well documented.

Rick said once the land is certified by a land surveyor or engineer there is a document stating that. Frank Buczolich asked if there was a report available on the inspection that was done. Rick Coppock said no and it will be up to the Town Council to direct that to be done. Russ Ryle requested, as a citizen, the Plan Commission request the Town Council request a written report. He would like a motion the Plan Commission request the Town Council to request a written report on the status of Mustang Drive.

Sandra Hash announced there was still an open motion on the floor. A roll call vote was taken: Don Calvert – abstained; Terry Baker – yes; William Evans – yes; Frank Buczolich – yes; Ed Bitner – yes; Dennis Williamson – yes; Sandra Hash – yes. Motion carried 6-1.

Russ Ryle has requested the current status of Mustang Drive since he has the original contour. He also requested the approved plan of Mustang Drive and what the DNR approved as the flood plain drainage plan. Sandra Hash said both of those plans should be on file at the Recorder’s Office. Only the corrected plats are recorded and not the plans. Mr. Ryle wants to know what has been approved and what are we in compliance with. There will be a cost involved in this; cost in time.

Sandra Hash made a motion to request the Town Council to produce a written report of a summary to verify Mustang Drive complies with the approved plan. Terry Baker seconded. Roll call vote taken: Don Calvert – yes; Terry Baker – yes; William Evans – yes; Frank Buczolich – yes; Ed Bitner – yes; Dennis Williamson – yes; Sandra Hash – yes. Motion carried.

New Business

Early Childhood/Lifeway Baptist/Chapel Hill Wilderness Annexation

Frank Nierzwicki announced the Town has been approached by the Richland Bean-Blossom School Corporation, Lifeway Baptist Church and the Chapel Hill Wilderness LLC for voluntary annexation. This is a 100% voluntary annexation request. The amount of land in this annexation request is approximately 271 acres, located on the west side of Ellettsville. The RBBCSC and Lifeway Baptist Church properties are located on the south side of SR 46 while the Chapel Hill properties are located on the north side of SR 46. The Town has a common border with the proposed area requesting annexation on the south side of the properties.

Chapel Hill Wilderness LLC parcels, 001-00800-00, 001-00790-00, 001-04400-00, 001-00795-00, 007-18510-01 are being requested to be zoned A-1, General Agricultural. The agricultural zone is consistent with the farming operations currently in place on these parcels.

The RBBCSC parcel, 007-18510-02 and Lifeway Baptist Church parcels, 007-18510-00 and 007-31650-00 are being requested as a C-3 zone. The commercial zone request is consistent of property located along SR 46.

The Planning Department is recommending Plan Commission approval for the above mentioned annexation. The Fiscal Plan and map of the area are included in the packet.

Sandra spoke with Frank Nierzwicki on some changes she would like him to make with the Fiscal Plan. Section 5 on page 10; Financial Requirements – she would like it to be rephrased to say any hidden or unforeseen costs for providing service. Ed Bitner said as a church (501 C-3) they do not pay taxes to the Town; Sandra added they are a tax free entity not a 501 C-3 necessarily. Ed also brought up the school does not pay taxes either. Frank Nierzwicki said there will be about 245 acres that are not church or school out of the 271 asking to be annexed at this time. Ed asked if the agricultural land is the one Smithville Telephone recently purchased. Frank Nierzwicki answered the request is for agriculture zoning and any other questions would need to be addressed to the owner of the property.

Darby McCarty, President and CEO of Smithville Telephone clarified Smithville Telephone does not own that property; it is owned by Chapel Hill Wilderness LLC which is a separate entity.

Ed Bitner had a question on page 3 section A “approximately 20.33 of the boundary near west side SR 46 is contiguous”. Frank Nierzwicki stated 12.5% is the requirement for annexation. Ed’s next question is on page 8 section 4 “non Capital Improvements” section A second paragraph “near west side SR 46 annexation does not require expansion of existing Police, Fire or Town maintenance area”. Ed’s understanding is the Town does not take care of anything in that area. Sandra clarified the Town still won’t with this annexation. In regards to snow plowing, it is a State Highway. He then had a comment about page 9 “based on current expenditures by the Town’s Fire Department the Town will incur only an insignificant additional cost to provide adequate service to the near west side annexation area”. Currently when there is an ambulance run in the Ellettsville district, there is also a squad. By annexing this in it will increase the fire run tally, increase the vehicle maintenance and manpower later on. Sandra stated as this land develops the zone will change, the improvements will change and more revenue would be generated. It was clarified 118 acres are in Bean-Blossom. Ed questioned the funds coming out of the General Funds from money moved with Additional Appropriations and taxes adjusted accordingly. Sandra explained in order to qualify for Additional Appropriation you have to get permission from the Department of Local Government Finance and they will not grant you permission unless you have excess cash balance on hand to cover it. Transfers would reduce the cash you have on hand which could influence your next year’s tax rate but so far the Town has had minimal Additional Appropriations. The only way this would affect next year’s budget is if they realize this was a recurring expense and they would have to increase the budget by that amount in future years. This annexation would make our tax rate grow and spread it amongst more people. There is a tax rate on agriculture property. The added net assessed valuation for the proposed area is $154,700. This is a building block for Ellettsville.

Roger Salyers, Ellettsville Coon Hunters Club received a letter regarding this annexation. He would like to know if and how this will affect their club. They have been there for over 50 years and do not want to be run off. Frank Nierzwicki explained this will remain in agricultural use with no change proposed in the use of the land. When there is a request for change in use it will need to come before this committee for a rezone in a public meeting. The adjacent property owners would be notified. Mr. Salyers’ group has activities once a month six times per year with runs back to Red Hill. Frank Nierzwicki went on to say with different areas of zoning buffering is required. The owners of this property have no immediate plans on building homes on this property. The procedures for building on this property would be: public notice, adjacent property owners would be notified and a meeting with the Plan Commission.

Don Calvert asked if this was the property the Town Marshal was concerned about. It was answered yes and the Ellettsville Police would not be patrolling this area.

Roy Wever, adjacent property owner to the Chapel Hill Wilderness LLC property asked what the RBBCSC has to do with this and why are the taxpayers paying the registered letters. The letters for Chapel Hill Wilderness LLC came from the schools. There was no one from RBBCSC to comment but Frank Nierzwicki said there are three tracts. Darby McCarty stated the tax dollars are not paying for the letters; the schools were reimbursed for the costs.

William Evans made a motion that we annex the Early Childhood/Lifeway Baptist/Chapel Hill Wilderness area also know as the Near West Side SR 46 annexation area and implement the fiscal plan upon the effective date of the annexation. Terry Baker seconded. A roll call vote was taken: Don Calvert – yes; Terry Baker – yes; William Evans – yes; Frank Buczolich – yes; Ed Bitner – abstained; Dennis Williamson – yes; Sandra Hash – yes. Motion passed 6-0-1.

Meadowlands Section Seven Preliminary Plat

Frank Nierzwicki stated the petitioner is requesting approval of a 28 lot subdivision on 9.51 acres. The location of this subdivision is south east of the current Meadowlands subdivision and south of the Overbrook Subdivision.

The proposed subdivision is very straight forward in nature. There will be a new road constructed from Meadowlands Drive to the east with two short cul-de-sacs running to the north. There are sewer and water connections to this site.

The petitioner will be required to submit a grading plan before construction can start at this site. The Planning Department recommends approval.

Rick Coppock, Bynum Fanyo is representing the petitioner who is Charlie Wright. This is the last piece of vacant ground in the Meadowlands. This area is located between Forest View and Overbrook Subdivision. It is your basic single family subdivision with lots above the minimum lot size required by the Town. Some of the lots are over an acre. The sewer is already put in as part of the Union Valley Farms subdivision. The water runs from Meadowlands Drive. There will be an erosion control plan approved for the project. Sandra questioned the map stating Meadowlands Drive and she thought it was Daisy Drive. This question has come up before and Rick will speak to Mike Cornman about it. Rick went on to say there will be two retention ponds (storm water quality). Dennis Williamson asked if the water will flow west because he has a concern with the drainage. Rick said yes. Dennis sees a drainage issue. Rick pointed out the retention ponds on the map. There was discussion about the ponds, creek and water flow.

Frank Buczolich was informed another petitioner had a long drive home so the Plan Commission will move to another segment of New Business.

O’Reilly Auto Parts – Site Development Plan

Frank Nierzwicki read the Memorandum:

The O’Reilly Auto Parts Store of Springfield, Missouri has requested to build a 6,400 sq. ft. store at 5227 W. SR 46. The location of this site is adjacent to Papa John’s store.

Zoning: The site is Zoned C-3, consistent with the proposed use at this location.

Parking: The site plan calls for 25 regular parking spots along with two handicapped parking spots; all within Town Code.

Landscaping: The site plan calls for two Red Maple trees to be planted near SR 46 as well as grass planting along the building and near SR 46.

Ingress/Regress: The site plan calls for a shared drive way with the adjacent property owners. The traffic plan appears to be adequate for the proposed use. The Indiana Department of Transportation should also be notified of the use at this location.

Erosion Control: The site plan will have to be approved by the Town’s Engineer.

Grading Plan: The petitioner will have to submit a grading plan following approval of the site plan. The grading plan will be very important on this site.

Flood Plain Issues: The one area that may require additional supporting data before site approval concerns the flood plain issues. The Town Engineer has requested additional information from the petitioner on this issue.

Final Comments: The petitioner has done an excellent job in preparing the site plan for Plan Commission review. The Planning Department has found the petitioner very willing to supply information for review as requested.

Recommendation Conditional Approval: Final approval pending Town Engineering review.

David Wagner, O’Reilly Auto Parts representative just received the calculations for cubic feet fill. It is his understanding that they will not be able to accommodate what is needed; only 22k of the 40k cubic feet. O’Reilly will have to come up with another plan. They are proposing to make the entire rear side of the property area retention. He was not aware this area floods easily and is not sure his office is aware of this either.

Rick Coppock agreed this area is in a flood prone/hazard area. He spoke with their Architects and asked about the drainage calculations. They can not accommodate how much they fill with how much they cut out. Rick discussed the Town Ordinance which follows what DNR requires. This does not have a one square mile drainage area above it so it is not under DNR jurisdiction and will fall back to the Town. In the past, he has looked at this site and knew it would be a hard site to develop. He spoke with O’Reilly’s Engineer a few times and the Surveyor with this information. They all confirmed it when they saw it. If the Town approves the development that goes against DNR regulations they could look at losing their ability for people to have flood insurance. It will have to meet the requirement, by increasing the flood plain and elevation.

Frank Nierzwicki said some things can be attempted with this. They will have to go back and get the numbers to work. Mr. Wagner is not sure where they are with the property whether purchase is pending or they own it. He does not think they were aware of this because they do not do soil borings until the property is purchased. At this point Mr. Wagner will have to take this back to his office and Engineers to look at this property again.

The O’Reilly Auto Parts Site Development has been tabled.

Meadowlands Section Seven – continued

There was continued discussion on the drainage and water flow. Charlie Wright will be developing this property. Dennis Williamson stated the streets were too straight.

Terry Baker made a motion we approve Meadowlands Section Seven Preliminary Plat. William Evans seconded. Roll call vote: Don Calvert – abstained; Terry Baker – yes; William Evans – yes; Frank Buczolich – yes; Ed Bitner – yes; Dennis Williamson – no; Sandra Hash – yes. Motion carried 5-1-1.

Sign Fee Ordinance

Frank Nierzwicki informed the Plan Commission it has come to the attention of the Planning Department the “sign fee” portion of the Town Ordinance had been mistakenly removed this past year. It appears when a revision of the code was completed, the “sign fee” was removed. He is requesting for Plan Commission approval of this ordinance change; reinstate the $50.00 sign fee.

Sandra Hash made a motion to forward this recommendation to the Town Council to reinstate our sign permit fee of $50.00. Terry Baker seconded. Roll call vote: Don Calvert – yes; Terry Baker – yes; William Evans – yes; Frank Buczolich – yes; Ed Bitner – no; Dennis Williamson – yes; Sandra Hash – yes. Motion carried 6-1.

Planning Department’s Filing Fees and other charge.

Preliminary Plat $175

Final Plat $ 75

Planned Unit Developments $375

Development Plan Approval $100

Any Rezoning of Property $200

Variances $100

Driveway Permits $ 5

Building Permits $.05 per square foot plus $25 review fee

Grading Permit $100 per acre, maximum amount $500

Public Right-Of-Way Excavations or Borings: (a) $.75 per square foot for excavating, minimum fee is $75 (b) $.50 per lineal foot for any boring, minimum $50

Other: Any Planning Department Review not mentioned above $25.

Sandra requested this information so it will be an easy reference when people come in to pay the fees. William Evans asked to define the charge for Public Right of Way Excavations or Borings. Frank Nierzwicki said “Town Right of Ways”.

Privilege of the Floor – non Agenda Items

Don Calvert had someone ask him to make a suggestion for a flashing red light at the Fire Station. Frank Nierzwicki wrote a letter last year and tried to convince Seymour District Office of INDOT to install a light or a sign and they said no. The Traffic Engineer thought it would not be appropriate at that location with the traffic volume. Frank will get a name and telephone number. It might be a good idea for other people to call if there is a concern. Don has another road concern; when traveling east on SR 46 towards Bloomington, the intersection at Arlington and SR 46 is hard to see. There are no lights, at night you can not see the intersection because it is hidden and it is very hazardous. The residents of the areas off Arlington need to point this out. Dennis Williamson suggests the State put up a sign with an arrow. Frank Nierzwicki stated the traffic volume on SR 46 is only going to increase. Frank Nierzwicki will see Bill Williams and bring this up.

Sandra received a phone call from a Springs Valley resident who complained about the speeders. There is an increased traffic volume. Meadow Woods residents are cutting through Woodgate and Springs Valley to get to SR 46.

Adjournment

Ed Bitner made a motion for the meeting to be adjourned. Terry Baker seconded. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned 9:21 p.m.