April 1, 2010
The Ellettsville, Indiana Plan Commission met in
regular session on Thursday, April
1, 2010 in the Fire Department Training and Conference Room located
at 5080 West State Road
46. Ron Wayt called the meeting to order
at 6:05 p.m. with the
Pledge of Allegiance.
Roll Call: Members present were: Dan Swafford
(arrived 6:12 p.m.), Ron
Wayt, Don Calvert, Phillip Rogers, Clayton Sullivan, Phillip
Smith, Connie Griffin
and Sandra Hash.
Approval of the Minutes- March 4, 2010
Dan Swafford entertained a
motion for approval of the March
4, 2010 minutes. Phillip
Smith so moved. Phillip Rogers seconded. Motion carried.
Monthly
Conflict of Interest Statement
None announced.
Old Business
Ike Grimes
Annexation – 5027, 5033, and 5029 N. Lakeview Drive, Bloomington, IN 47404
& Zoning Change Request from Estate Residential and Limited Business
(Monroe County Classifications) to C-3 Ellettsville Zoning Classification –
Continued from last Plan Commission meeting – outstanding issues not completed.
Connie
Griffin, Planning Director – stated the outstanding issues are still not completed at this
time. There has also been some concern
that the hearing notices and the notification of the adjacent property owners
has been done in a haphazard way and not being sent out certified mail with
return receipt requested. It is being
discussed with the Town’s attorney to make sure we follow Indiana code. We have a couple of non-compliant things we
want to get taken care of. Once those
are done, the fiscal plan will come first through the Plan Commission and then a
public hearing will be advertised for the Town Council. This issue was tabled again for this meeting.
Chapter 152,
Sign Code Changes
Connie
Griffin – stated
she placed an earlier drafted phase into the public library, emailed it to
several people and she visited other businesses in the community as well. The code change has been slightly modified to
make it more business friendly. She then
reviewed the code changes since the discussion.
A hard copy of the code was provided to new member Clayton Sullivan. After the review of the changes there was
some discussion of LED sign specifics and it was decided each application would
be looked at individually regarding size and placement, not design or wording. Dan Swafford commended Connie
Griffin on her work on this code document and thanked her for
her time committed to working through this document.
Ron Swinney,
Swinney’s Discount Groceries – asked
if temporary sign footage is included in permanent sign footage guidelines. Connie Griffin
answered that a temporary sign permit is for a two-week period; and is not part
of the permanent signage total, it will be $20 and will have a sticker on
it. He asked if there was any provision
for repetitive temporary signs, such as movable lighted signs. Connie Griffin
replied that no, they had always been prohibited under the original sign
code. Sandra Hash commented that Jiffy
Treat converted a temporary sign into a permanent sign and stated this was
allowable. Connie
Griffin replied as long as it was permanently affixed and was
included in the total signage allowed for the business. Dan Swafford
entertained a motion to approve the sign code changes. Phillip Smith
so moved. Ron Wayt seconded. Roll Call Vote: Dan Swafford
– yes; Ron Wayt – yes; Don Calvert – yes; Phillip Rogers – no; Clayton Sullivan
– yes; Phillip Smith – yes; Sandra
Hash – yes. Motion carried 6-1. The changes will now go forward to the Town Council.
Protective Zoning
Overlay for Wishing Well
Nature Park
– Recommendation Zone Classification for 0093181000, 53-00-93-181-000.000-013 -
Municipal Public District (MPD) – Public Open Space
Connie
Griffin, Director of Planning – remarked this was a very important code to some of
our younger members of the community with the Wishing Well
Nature Park. It’s also one of our I-69 grant deliverables
to put a zoning classification over the Wishing Well
Nature Park
as a nature preserve. The zoning
classification she has proposed is called Municipal Public District (MPD) 1, 2
and 3. It stays consistent with our
commercial 1-2-3, residential 1-2-3 and industrial 1-2-3. This is a proposed acronym and is something
that could be discussed for changes.
There were only minor changes. Connie Griffin read the purpose of the MPD which is
as follows: The purpose of the
protection overlay zone is to provide and protect properties devoted to public
and semi-public uses and uses providing social and physical services to the
Town of Ellettsville. The zone is applicable to property owned or
managed by the Town of Ellettsville. She went on to say we need to make sure these
codes are found within our comprehensive plan.
She also read the permitted uses and restrictions. The MPD 1 district is the nature preserve and
the Wishing Well Nature
Park, the MPD 2 is our
public parks system, and the MPD 3 is the town-owned facilities such as water
treatment, parking lots, public agency training facilities, and rental
facilities. There are four new
definitions that will be added to Chapter 152.
Violations in these areas is steep.
It is a Class B ordinance violation which packs a $1000 fine for each
offense. Dan
Swafford asked for any input or problems with the fine
severity. He expressed his thoughts that
it is a steep fine, but as Connie Griffin
stated, we need to protect our park areas and town-owned property. No further comments were expressed. Sandra Hash asked if this would protect the Wishing Well Nature
Park area as a nature
preserve and Connie Griffin answered
that it would do so. Phillip Smith asked who would have jurisdiction over
the area – who would give permission to do volunteer improvements. Connie Griffin
replied we have it listed as a use for educational purposes. For improvements it is written in as the Town Council and the Parks Department will approve
any improvements or changes. Dan Swafford asked for clarification of MPD-1
District page 2(b) – what are non-motorized bicycles? Connie Griffin
clarified that these are regular bicycles and are prohibited. After some discussion, it was decided to
remove the last sentence – “Use by all-terrain vehicles and non-motorized
bicycles is prohibited.” Eventually, the
park system will need to be ADA
compliant since it will be receiving federal grant money. Connie Griffin
commented these code changes were adequate to meet the grant requirement. Don Calvert asked if the wastewater treatment
plant and the recycle center are in the Town limits and would be covered under
this MPD zone classification. Connie Griffin replied she obtained the
documentation from Sandra Hash and took it to the Monroe County Assessor’s
office for them to change the parcel numbers from 07 to 09 showing it is in the
Town limits of Ellettsville. Dan Swafford entertained a motion to adopt the new protective
zoning overlay for the Wishing
Well Nature
Park area as well as the
zoning classifications for Public Open Space and MPD 1-2-3.
Don Calvert so moved. Phillip Smith seconded. Roll Call Vote: Dan Swafford
– yes; Ron Wayt – yes; Don Calvert – yes; Phillip Rogers – no; Clayton Sullivan
– yes; Phillip Smith – yes; Sandra
Hash – yes. Motion carried 7-0. Dan Swafford
asked that an e-mail be drafted to Judy Morran’s fifth grade class inviting
them to the reading at the April 12 Town Council
meeting.
New Business
Assembly of
God Site Development Plan - State
Road 46 (Vacant lot next to the Fire Station) –
(Rick Coppock)
0092074000,
53-04-14-100-025.000-013
Rick
Coppock, Bynum Fanyo – stated since
they also do work for the Town, they have a conflict of interest statement on
file with the Town and the State. This
property has been owned by the church for several years and we are proposing a
new building and parking lots – front and back.
The structure will house the congregation, classrooms and gym
facilities. He provided plans to the
Commissioners. There will be a retaining
wall on the east side. Detention and
water quality treatment will be provided in the area between where the existing
drive is off of SR 46 and the Fire Station parking lot. The current landscaping along SR 46 will
remain in place with no grading taking place where those existing trees
are. There will be another water quality
pond to accept the runoff from the front parking lot parallel to SR 46 in the
southwest corner of theproperty. It’s a
ten acre site. We have a requirement for
a set-back. This is a C-3 zone which
allows this use but it is up against a different zoning designation therefore
the set-back must be doubled. The
required set-back from the Autumn Ridge subdivision will be 40 feet from the
property line. They are actually going
to provide close to 80 feet. That was
done to save some of those existing mature trees and will screen the site from
the Autumn Ridge subdivision. As it’s
shown now, the drive serves only the church property and parking area – it’s
not connected to the road stub up to the north.
Sanitary sewer will also be provided and the water line will be looped
through the property to Autumn Ridge.
Connie
Griffin – The
Development Review Plan Committee met about a week and a half ago. All the Town supervisors did meet and discuss
the connectivity. What we have to do as
a Plan Commission is to consider that in 2002 in the Comprehensive Plan
considered the connection from Autumn Ridge to SR 46 as a minor connector
collection. The Town supervisors were in
agreement that they wanted to keep the connection. By Town code 153.071 General Design
Considerations, safety is one of the largest concerns of the Fire and
Police. The time difference could be as
much as four minutes with the fire truck to go up and around compared to having
the road connected. The connectivity on
153.074 Extensions of Streets, (d) connectivity 1 – except for subdivisions of
ten lots or less of connecting streets through to channel traffic easily from
one subdivision to another is required.
Dan Swafford asked how this would affect the design of the
building. Rick Coppock replied it would
not affect the design of the building. There
will have to be some adjustment to the right of way that’s platted because the
right of way was provided when the Fire Station was built so that no property
would be land-locked. It won’t affect
the building site, but there will have to be some adjustments to the site plan
to swing the road over to tie it to the road that’s already there. Dan Swafford asked if it would then be a Town
street. Rick Coppock responded, yes,
after completion, it would be turned over to the Town for maintenance. There will be sidewalks required as well. Dan Swafford went on to ask if the church had
any negative or positive input regarding this.
Rick Coppock explained that the sidewalk will be an added expense. The streets are designed in accordance with
the current Town code which is the same as the street code. Phillip Smith asked if the road will be
connected to the parking lot. Rick
Coppock answered the parking lot will access off the road so you won’t drive
through the parking lot. There will be a
separation between the parking lot and the road. Ron Wayt asked if sidewalks are code and Connie Griffin replied they were. Ron Wayt asked if this would be built in
phases. Rick Coppock responded the
building would probably be built in phases.
It’s still in the planning process right now.
Bruce Frye,
Autumn Ridge resident – stated what
they heard in a previous meeting is different from what he is hearing tonight
and would like to have it clarified.
What he thinks he is hearing now is that there is going to be a street. At the last meeting they were told that the
street would not be opened because the result would be a lot of traffic into
Autumn Ridge. Dan
Swafford responded that it is code and he apologized for the
confusion, the road was not on the plans when they met with Autumn Ridge
previously. When they met with all the
supervisors it was found to be part of the thoroughfare plan and in town code,
it must connect. According to all the
supervisors, for safety, fire and police, they want this road because it could
cut up to five minutes in response time into Autumn Ridge. Sandra Hash added that the road was also in
the original design with Autumn Ridge as shown with the stub that leads
out. She was on the Plan Commission at that time and it was understood
that it would be available for any future development. Phillip Smith
added he understood it would not be connected to the parking lot; therefore,
there would not be that much increase in traffic into Autumn Ridge. Mr. Frye wanted to confirm that all the
traffic from the parking lots would funnel out onto SR 46. Sandra Hash responded to Phillip Smith’s comment the proposed road would have
an access to the church parking lots. Dan Swafford reiterated you won’t have to drive
through the parking lot, but there will be an access road. Phillip Smith
stated that wasn’t the way he understood it.
He thought they would be entering and exiting from SR 46. Rick Coppock explained they will have access
to the parking lot from the road, but they will not be driving through the
parking lot. Mr. Frye clarified that it
would increase traffic to Autumn Ridge.
Bill
Schneider, resident of Autumn Ridge –
wanted to clarify whether the stub will be moved to the east. Rick Coppock responded it would not be moved,
the road will be adjusted to meet up with the stub. He also wanted clarification of whether the
church will be hooking up to the current sewer system in Autumn Ridge. Rick Coppock answered, no; they will hook up
at SR 46. Mr. Schneider also asked if
there will be four entrances on this road that will go through up to Harvest Lane. That road which goes from SR 46 straight
through up to Harvest Lane
will have four accesses into four different church parking lots. Rick Coppock responded yes, that all the
parking lots are inter-connected. Mr.
Schneider asked how many cars total in the parking lots. Rick Coppock answered probably up to 300 or
330. Mr. Schneider expressed his thought
that no one in the housing addition would appreciate the possibility of that
much increase in traffic on a given day of worship. He added when he bought in Autumn Ridge, he
was told that stub was only going to be a construction access stub. Now that’s getting dramatically changed. In all good conscience, if there was that
much concern in saving four minutes, you should have put that road in seven
years ago. He didn’t think it was just
not to have consulted the community before deciding to put the road in. Sandra Hash responded that roads are
developed as the land is developed. The Town
doesn’t normally put in roads because it is a huge expense. So, as the land is developed, the developer
puts in the roads. That’s why the
developer of Autumn Ridge was not asked to put in that road because he wasn’t
developing anything on either side of it.
All subdivisions are supposed to have two ways in and two ways out. Anything could happen on Harvest Lane and it would give the
residents an alternative to getting in and out.
The same is true for the church; it gives them three access points to
get in and out to disperse the traffic.
Mr. Schneider responded no one was worried about trees, fire or police
seven years ago and this is a church, not another residential area. There’s only going to be limited traffic on
specific days. Dan
Swafford expressed his sympathy for Mr. Schneider’s concerns,
but pointed out that it is good that it is a church and not a Wal-Mart or a
Kmart. Mr. Schneider asked if there
would be any cost to the residents of Autumn Ridge for the construction of this
road. Dan
Swafford replied, no, the church would have to put the road
in. Rick Coppock explained the layout of
the road using the overhead projector. Dan Swafford asked Rick Coppock to explain the
purpose and design of the detention and water quality ponds again. Dan Swafford
asked how many storm drains will be going underneath that street for runoff
from the parking lots. Rick Coppock
answered there are inlets on the road itself to pick up the road drainage. He described the drainage process. Sandra Hash asked if he perceived the ponds
being empty except for during runoff.
Rick Coppock responded in the affirmative. He went on to say the final plans will be
submitted to INDOT for review of the drainage and the drive for the project.
Connie
Schneider, resident of Autumn Ridge –
asked if any consideration has been given to directing the traffic from the
church out onto SR 46. She expressed her
concern due to the increased traffic in the neighborhood in conjunction with
the poor condition of the roads after the winter. Sandra Hash stated it had been discussed in
their meeting, but it would actually be up to the church. Mrs. Schneider asked if the church would
consider asking their parishioners, as a matter of courtesy, to enter and exit
onto SR 46. Rick Coppock answered it
could be presented to the church. Ron
Wayt remarked that our hands are tied because it’s in Town code. Also, this becomes a city owned street, so
the church really doesn’t have any control over that once it becomes dedicated. Sandra Hash responded they could still have a
security person to direct traffic. St. John’s did until they
put up the light. Dan
Swafford informed the audience the road will be fixed by the
time this is complete. Any construction
traffic could be blocked off. Mrs.
Schneider added they had heard Autumn Ridge was selling two lots to the church
and asked if anyone knew what they would be used for. They had heard parsonage, playground and
parking lot. Dan
Swafford answered before they put anything there, they would
have to come before the Planning Commission.
Max Dixon,
resident of Autumn Ridge – stated he
would not be opposed to the road being put in, but feels the church should be
required to have their egress and ingress from SR 46 and not the road into
Autumn Ridge. He feels the Commission
should take into more consideration the impact of traffic on Harvest Lane. He felt the Commission should have to
communicate with Monroe County for the use of county roads for the church
since two of the additions impacted by this are not within the jurisdiction of
the Town of Ellettsville. He also stated there are several new
additions in Monroe
County which do not have
two entrances and exits.
Roger
Hargronek, resident of Autumn Ridge –
stated it took a church to finally get a second road. He asked if the church owns property on the
west side of the street and if so what their plans are. Dan Swafford
responded the lots are PUD’s and before the church could change any usage; it
would have to come back to the Planning Commission for approval. Sandra Hash read from the code: Under Extension of Streets – 153.074(d),
Connectivity. Except for subdivisions of
ten lots or less, a connecting street through to channel traffic easily from
one subdivision to another is required.
Then (e) Access, subdivisions over ten lots must provide two access ways
in and out of the subdivision for emergency vehicles. Dan Swafford
asked if he was the developer of this and the plan was against Town code, who he
would go to in order to change the code.
Would it go to the Board of Zoning Appeals or somewhere else? Connie Griffin
answered it would go to the BZA for an appeal.
The developer, the church, would have to go to the BZA in order to
change the requirement. Ron Wayt asked Connie Griffin if the Commission approves this, it
gets built; it does not go to Town Council. She responded in the affirmative. Clayton Sullivan asked if they were to
approve this, would it be with the road or not.
Are we approving the plan as shown here or with the design of the road? Rick Coppock responded it was however the
motion is stated. Phillip Rogers stated
he didn’t think the Commission should approve a plan until it was in its final
form. Ron Wayt replied that the
Commission could approve it conditionally just like requiring them to adopt our
landscaping plan. Connie
Griffin stated the Commission could do a conditional approval
but Mr. Rogers makes a valid statement that in order for you to feel the most
comfortable with it, you would probably want to see what the specifications are
with this discussion. Phillip Rogers
made a motion to table this until we see an updated print and we can make a
decision at that time. Ron Wayt asked
Rick Coppock when they could see the final plan. Rick Coppock responded it would be at the
next Plan Commission meeting (May
6). Don Calvert asked if there was any
time limit or time frames to consider with this. Rick Coppock answered not specifically, but
the church is ready to get approval so they can get bids in and start moving on
this because it’s getting to be the time of year to start moving dirt. Dan Swafford
stated there was a motion on the floor and asked if there was a second. Sandra Hash seconded the motion. Don Calvert asked if the church couldn’t
begin construction on the side away from the road. Sandra Hash replied they couldn’t begin
construction until the Commission approves the plan. Dan Swafford
confirmed that since this is a plat approval, they couldn’t begin until the
whole plat is approved. He added that he
brought up the front detention pond earlier because he wanted to make sure that
the storm drains put under the road are sufficient to handle the 100 year
rain. This is a big hillside and he’s on
the same hillside down the road and when there’s a rain, they have water
washing over the road. Rick Coppock
reassured the Commission the drains were large enough to handle the large
rains. Ron Wayt asked if the church
could do away with some of the parking lots without the Commission’s
approval. If they decided not to build
this building as large as it’s shown and do away with two of these parking lots
that are stair-stepped, could they do that without our approval? Rick Coppock answered they could probably do
that, but this would still be the approved plan. Ron Wayt asked if they were required to build
those lots. Phillip
Smith answered the Commission doesn’t put a time limit on
when they have to be built. Rick Coppock
responded they don’t have to build it all at the same time, but it would have
to be in conformance with this plan. Don
Calvert remarked they were getting off track.
We were looking at whether or not we’re going to connect the road and
all of a sudden we’re trying to change the design of their building. Ron Wayt responded he was asking what would
be the difference if they built with or without the road. Dan Swafford
answered when the Commission votes on this plat, the church can’t change it
without coming back to the Commission.
Rick Coppock added, if your point is about the road being a requirement,
they have to complete the public improvements or they would have to bond for it
since it’s a public road in a public right of way. Dan Swafford
asked for a roll call vote. Roll Call
Vote: Dan
Swafford – yes; Ron Wayt – no; Don Calvert – yes; Phillip
Rogers – yes; Clayton Sullivan – yes; Phillip Smith
– yes; Sandra Hash – yes. Motion carried
6-1.
Dan Swafford dismissed the Commission for a five minute recess.
Planning
Department Updates
Landscape Code
Connie
Griffin informed
the Commission this code was actually derived from six different codes. There are several things that will go along
with this particular new code such as a post construction certification form, a
design manual, a tree removal application, and tree density worksheets. Sandra Hash verified with Connie Griffin that the tree removal form is not for
residents. Connie
Griffin went on to say that what single-family residential
will be required to do is, if they put landscaping in, they will be required to
keep it up. They do not have the same restrictions
as commercial, multi-family and industrial will have. They will not be required to have a landscape
plan. She added other than making sure
they maintain it and don’t plant invasive species, that’s what will be required
by zoning. Phillip
Smith asked how the individual will know if it’s an invasive
species. Connie
Griffin answered she would provide a list in the design
manual. Dan
Swafford requested perhaps the definitions could be put to
the back of the document. There was some
discussion regarding this. Ron Wayt
mentioned it should be consistent throughout all the Town codes. Sandra Hash added the definitions are at the
beginning of all other Town documents. Connie Griffin went on to review the plan for the
Commission and asked if there were any questions. She reiterated this was just the beginning,
not the final copy. She asked the
Commissioners to get her the questions and comments before the next meeting.
Introduction: Abbitt Annexation
Connie
Griffin informed
the Commission Mr. Abbitt lives out by the Early Childhood
Development Center. He is just a little over 1/8 contiguous so he
does have the option of coming in for a voluntary annexation. He has petitioned for this. She will be going out next week to check for
any code violations.
Introduction: Ron Wayt Annexation
Connie
Griffin stated Mr.
Wayt is coming before the Commission requesting an annexation as well. He has some property behind his home that is
in the county that he would like to bring into the Town of Ellettsville.
Introduction: Rezone 200 S. First Street - Bloomfield State Bank
Connie
Griffin stated
Bloomfield State Bank owns the property next to Eagles Landing which used to be
an automobile upholstery business and is completely surrounded by asphalt from
the church parking lot. He is requesting
a rezone for that from C-1 to C-3.
New Code
Additions for Wireless Communication Facility Code Change
Connie
Griffin stated this
would be a new code change next month.
Adjournment
Dan Swafford entertained a motion to adjourn. Phillip Smith made the motion to
adjourn. Don Calvert seconded. Dan Swafford adjourned the meeting at 8:34 p.m. The next meeting will be May 6, 2010 at 6:00 p.m.
After the meeting, photos were taken for name tags for all Plan
Commission members.