Ellettsville, Indiana Plan Commission met in regular session on
Roll Call: Members present were Frank Buczolich, President; Ed Bitner, Vice-President, Terry Baker, Dianna Bastin, Don Calvert and Dan Swafford. Sandra Hash, Secretary and Frank Nierzwicki, Director of Planning Services was also present.
Approval of the Minutes
Bitner made a motion we approve the
Frank Nierzwicki presented a draft ordinance amending section 152.228 regarding parking enforcement that is open for discussion and changes before being submitted to the Town Council. Frank Nierzwicki read the proposed ordinance in its entirety as presented.
Dianna Bastin asked the definition of a “vehicle”. Frank Nierzwicki said “a vehicle is a licensed vehicle not a lawnmower; items that can be used on the road.” Dan Swafford asked what the purpose of this is. Is the Town trying to keep people from parking on the grass, abandoned cars? Frank Nierzwicki explained the long history of the parking issues:
Sandra Hash explained “no parking on the lawn is already in the Town Code”. This ordinance would give Frank Nierzwicki a way to enforce it with tickets. Special situations such as washing a vehicle or delivering groceries shall not warrant a “parking on lawn” violation. Early notice of an upcoming party would not be in violation. There is also an Appeal Board.
There was a discussion about “licensed” vehicles parked in high grass areas.
Ed Bitner is not in favor of a parking ban in your yard. He would be against four wheeling in the yard and mud throwing. He is against raising the driveway permit fee from $5 to $10. He feels there should be members of the public on the Appeals Board.
Sandra Hash suggested continuing this discussion at the end of the meeting because there were others in attendance to speak on other issues.
Fred Steinhagen, resident of Union Valley Farms asked if there is an ordinance against parking on the street. Frank Nierzwicki stated there is no parking on the street in most areas of Ellettsville. Mr. Steinhagen asked if a complaint needs to be filed before the police enforce it because the police drive by all the time and never give out tickets.
Frank Buczolich asked if it is the desire of the board to move this discussion to the end of the agenda. It was agreed upon and so moved.
Merle Lagneaux, resident of Union Valley Farms added to Mr. Steinhagen’s comments. There is a gentleman who lives on Nestle Down that has a trailer parked in front of his property on the street. The trailer is parked for 3-4 days a week and is a traffic hazard because it sits on a curve that can not be seen at night.
Mark Abplanalp, Union Valley Farms resident pointed out to his neighbors there is a restrictive covenant that was signed by all when their property was purchased. If there are persistent problems that warrant a change, any member of the Monroe County Bar would be happy to address the issues. Restrictive covenants also provide for the cover of legal fees.
Ed Bitner told a story of an incident that happened in the 1980’s. An ambulance needed to get into an apartment complex and asked a lady to move her car. She parked on the street to make room for the emergency vehicle and was ticketed for parking in the street.
Frank Nierzwicki tried the letter writing campaign and it was not very effective. He looked at alternatives trying to find streets wide enough for on street parking. He met with the different departments looking at all requirements. Letter writing did not work and feels ticket writing could be more effective. This has been two years in the making.
Frank Buczolich announced this will be moved to the end of the meeting.
Request for Preliminary Plat approval of
23 single family lots and 52 units paired patio home subdivision, adjacent and
just south of the
Frank Nierzwicki summarized the request. The property is just south of the Union Valley Farms subdivision. The staff recommends approval of the petitioner’s request for the new development. The supervisors met in June to look at the preliminary plans for the subdivision; safety issues, fire hydrant access and police service, they did not have a problem with the subdivision and would work with the developer as the plans become more set. The land request is to build 52 paired patio homes and 23 single family homes on a 30 acre tract. The land is currently zoned C-3 and would allow for a higher density than what is requested by the petitioner. Water and sewer is available to the area. The Town Engineer has reviewed drainage plans concerning water with the petitioner and is satisfied with the proposal. The site will require a grading permit before construction is permitted. There would not be an added financial cost for the Town with petitioner’s development plans. The petitioner would be required by the Town Code to provide the following:
construction phase, the Town will need to work with the developer on in and out
access to the site. If this development is
approved, the street conditions from
Kristen Taylor with Smith-Neubecker and Associates reiterated the proposed development is 23 single family lots and 52 paired patio units. There was a question regarding the buffering. Ms. Taylor explained the developer plans to make every effort to preserve all the tree lines on site. The ordinance requirements on the setbacks will be met and every tree that can be saved will be preserved. Sandra Hash asked if this property was known as the “Staggs annexation”. Rick Coppock clarified the Staggs annexation was to the north, this property is to the south and part of the Barry Gordon property. Don Calvert asked if these units will be rentals or for sale. Ms. Taylor answered these units will be individually owned and not rentals. Don Calvert commended Ms. Taylor and Rick Coppock on the admirable job of all the information pointed out during the review of the property.
will be around the two sink holes found.
Ed Bitner asked if all that was said tonight will be in writing. Frank Nierzwicki stated if the motion is
approved, all stipulations stated could be added in the approval. Ed Bitner asked if there will be
sidewalks. Ms. Taylor pointed out the
sidewalks on the reduced site plans that were passed out. Frank Nierzwicki stated all stipulations
could be added in the approval. Don
Calvert asked if there are plans for another entrance or exit other than
Dick, petitioner, outlined the reason for this type of housing. The patio homes are going to be restricted to
buyers age 55 and older. A lot of people
Ryle reminded the Commission this is the 15th construction season
Coppock addressed some of the comments Ed Bitner made. Sidewalks are required by Code and do not
need to be addressed in Frank’s report.
The difference between
Russ Ryle agreed with Rick Coppock on this new subdivision not being a PUD; but a PUD requires more oversight and enforcement that the Town never enforced. He questions “why do you think because it is not a PUD they would be any better at oversight and enforcement?”
Steinhagen asked if the County would consider making the intersection a three
way stop. Frank Nierzwicki explained a
traffic study would need to be conducted to see if there is enough traffic to
warrant traffic control. He could work
with the County when there are more cars going through this area.
Dan Swafford asked “with the Thoroughfare Plan coming through this area can we accommodate the stubs to three, including a turn lane”? Frank Nierzwicki stated this would be an engineering decision.
Campbell, resident of
Mark Abplanalp shared some concerns of the residents. They want to maintain the character of a preexisting neighborhood and make the community better. The Commission has correctly identified egress as a major concern; there is a blind exit out of their subdivision. There is constant traffic. His understanding of this is there is a developer who has purchased a land locked parcel and wants to develop it. Is it right to develop it now at our expense or wait until the Thoroughfare Plan is in place and allow this project to be done right. The other concern is property value; a well done, completed development will add to property value but a half completed development with on going construction and damage to the roads will have the opposite effect. His neighborhood can still be built out, homes are less and there is a frequent turnover so he is not convinced we need another batch of homes. Is there a plan in place for wild life to go? We keep taking away from them. His final point is parking on the streets; his neighborhood has restrictive covenants to protect them and hooking into another development will give his neighborhood a different feel. Will the new neighborhood be subject to the kinds of covenants that are presently in place?
Nierzwicki addressed some of the comments made by Mr. Abplanalp. From
Fresh, resident on
Ryle feels this development is another
Nierzwicki discussed a few items going on with this development. This is a C-3 zoning and not a PUD. The Sims’
Don Calvert encourages everyone not to become discouraged. People who purchased homes in Union Valley Farms surely realized the problem with the drive and intersection. There has not been any criticism on that. Don does not like to see a developer discouraged based on what someone else did. As a Commission, they get caught in the middle trying to correct previous mistakes. When you buy a home and see an open field, surely something is going to go there. When there is a stubbed road, it will lead somewhere. The owner of the property could change his plans and put in something no one likes. The Plan Commission likes the residents’ cooperation; they have had some good results dealing with the developer.
Dianna Bastin made some comments on past development issues and Union Valley Farms.
Hash asked if there was a possibility of a construction entrance through the
George property. Frank Nierzwicki said
no. The ideal construction road would be
Mark Abplanalp feels one of the benefits of waiting is because the residents of Union Valley Farm were notified less than a week ago about this development and there was no time to speak with the firm that reviewed the plans and many would like the opportunity to.
Frank Nierzwicki listed the options that are available this evening for the commission. He clarified if this is not a rezone and it is consistent with the zoning, it does not have to go to the Town Council.
Sandra Hash made a motion that we continue this issue until the next September meeting. Ed Bitner seconded.
A gentleman from the audience clarified if this is going to be a development for 55 years and older; persons of this age are more susceptible to medical problems and there is only one entrance for emergency access.
Dick understands everyone’s concerns. He
has developed buildings in
Ed Bitner received his notice on this development two days ago and if forced to vote on this tonight he would vote no. He prefers to look at the property and lay of the land. He would like to meet with the developer and get a visual of the plan.
Alan Dick has driven in and out of the subdivision many times. If there is an additional demand put on the intersection, would that force the county to do something? Frank Nierzwicki explained how the warrants work and gave an example; if there are two roads with a cross section and one road has 90% of the traffic, a stop sign will not be installed. If there are high volumes on both roads, there needs to be some kind of control device at that intersection. The more traffic there is at an intersection, the better chance of having a control device.
Bob Case, resident Union Valley Farms clarified for the people not familiar with the intersection; if you are driving a “car” at the intersection, you can not see the vehicles in the dip of Union Valley Road. When he is driving his van, he can see the roofs of vehicles in that dip.
Frank Buczolich announced there is a motion on the floor to continue and a second to continue. Roll call vote: Don Calvert – continue; Terry Baker – no; Frank Buczolich – no; Ed Bitner – continue; Dan Swafford – no; Dianna Bastin – no; Sandra Hash – continue. 4-3 vote for “no”.
Calvert asked if the petitioner is aware of what he can do with the
property. Frank Buczolich said yes. Frank Nierzwicki listed different structures
that could go into a C-3 zoning; auto repair, gas stations, commercial
businesses. Sandra would like to work with the George’s (original owners of the
whole parcel) to see if they would be willing to work with the town to put in a
construction entrance. Frank Nierzwicki
clarified there is a bridge between this property and the property on
The Plan Commission took a recess at and reconvened at
Dan Swafford, resident on
Frank Nierzwicki stated a lot of the stipulations are redundant with
Town Code. A video tape should be made
of the road’s surface now between
Baker made a motion to approve the plat with stipulations stated (construct
streets to Town Code, install street lights, provide sewer connections, provide
street trees and provide performance bonds on different sections on this to
also include road sections of construction
route from Union Valley Farms on Nestle Down to Andrea Lane as stated on the
Request for Development Plan approval
for the expansion of
Robert McCoy, construction manager for this new project announced the church has grown. Their daycare averages 115-130 children a day with 30 on a waiting list. This expansion will allow for 250 children including before and after school care. The plan calls for twenty-two new parking spaces and the church will be adding 107 giving them a total of 198 parking spaces. This church will be able to add 496 more people with the expansion. The building already has town water and sewer. The new building will have a sprinkler system that has been approved by the Deputy State Fire Marshal, Ellettsville Fire Department and the State Inspector for daycares.
Frank Nierzwicki read the staff report. The building is on a large track of land. This will expand the church building by 10,740 square feet. He pointed out the building on a map. The staff recommends approval on this.
Calvert informed the Plan Commission when the church was first given permission
to build; the question of sidewalks came up.
The original plans called for sidewalks but the Plan Commission gave the
church a variance at the time allowing for discussion if the church approached
the Plan Commission in the future. Don
asked if the area has built up enough to consider sidewalks while the expansion
is taking place or is the area still not in need of a sidewalk. Mr. McCoy feels a sidewalk on the side of the
church made more sense than putting one in front on the property. Frank Nierzwicki sees a sidewalk in front of
the church would be a benefit since Robinson Construction is developing across
the street allowing people the ability to walk to church. Mr. McCoy asked why the sidewalk would have
to be on his side of
Bitner, looking at the map, asked where the additional parking spaces would be
located. Mr. McCoy explained the parking
lot will be on the west side, looking at the map, with more parking on the
north side between the full parking lot and the church sign. Don Calvert stated the church is a nice, well
maintained, quality facility. The people
are very friendly. Ed Bitner asked about
the lighting in the parking lot. Mr.
McCoy explained the parking lot there has two, thirty foot poles facing both
the road and the building. There will be
two of the same lights on the west side.
The new parking lot, closer to the street will have lights pointing towards
the church and not
Buczolich entertained a request to approve the development plans for the
Request for voluntary annexation of
approximately 32 acres at
Frank Nierzwicki presented a staff recommended voluntary annexation of approximately 32 acres. The property is located adjacent to the Headley property, east of The Arbors at Woodgate and north of Highland Park Estates. There is water and sewer in the area. Any construction or additional buildings on this site will require site inspections by the Town Engineer and the Director of Planning Services. A grading permit will be required if and when this site is developed. The assessed valuation of this parcel is approximately $15,100. Frank Nierzwicki went over the Fiscal Plan of this property. There is no cost to the Town at this point. Any development in the future would have to follow the Town Code requirements on new developments. Sandra Hash asked if the petitioner presented any ideas of what he will be doing with the property. Frank Nierzwicki has not seen anything and they do not have to present anything during annexation. The petitioner is asking for an R-1 designation. Dianna Bastin had a question about the “Financial Cost”
and fire protection; the property is currently under
Coppock explained the petitioner will not be the developer; the property will
be sold and the developer wants to build an R-1 single family subdivision. The developer is the same one that built
Union Valley Farms. There will be road
connections; one to Woodgate and two connections to
Buczolich entertained a motion for voluntary annexation of 32 acres at
Request for change of façade and signs
Kevin Powell, representing
· Remove existing “blue” aluminum sheathing
· Increase parapet wall height one foot four inches
· Maintain elevation changes; steps
· Re-clad with a Stucco finish
· Level concrete pillars and apply Stucco finish
· Paint exterior block a complimentary color
· Update lighting
· Re-seal and coat parking lot
· Stripe lot, paint curbs and posts
Powell included photos of similar designs of a shopping center at Winslow and
Joe Walker announced all the tenants will be notified and their input will be used to make a schedule. Terry Baker asked if the signage will be backlit. Joe Walker answered yes and gave the example of Subway and CVS signs.
Frank Nierzwicki clarified sign permits will be required with this project. The Planning Department supports this request.
Buczolich entertained a motion to approve the request for change of façade and
Request to vacate the existing right-of-way
along the west side of
Frank Nierzwicki explained the petitioner is requesting the vacation of the public right-of-way. The Planning Department recommends approval with stipulations. This request is to have approximately .185 acres of public right-of-way vacated and reverted to adjacent property owners. The adjacent property owners would then allow the Town to have utility easements in this area. If the vacation is approved, 75 feet of right-of-way would remain at this location. There would be no cost to the Town to vacate the land and actually save the Town some money since they would not have to mow it anymore. Frank Nierzwicki went on to list the condition of approval:
Rick Coppock, Bynum Fanyo representing the petitioner, stated Charlie Wright owns the existing house shown in the plans. He summarized how this all came about by pointing things out on the map. There were continued questions, answers and discussion about the plans. Ed Bitner questioned the adjacent property owners having to install sidewalks. Rick Coppock explained the developer will install the sidewalks for Lots 33 & 34. Frank Nierzwicki added that the main issue is to have a sidewalk on the corner of McNeely. Frank Nierzwicki would like to start a sidewalk system along McNeely with new buildings.
Buczolich entertained a motion to approve the request to vacate the existing
right-of-way west side of
Resume discussion on parking ordinance at 9:45 p.m.
Ed Bitner would like the driveway permits to stay at five dollars. He asked why members of the public are not on
the Appeals Committee. Sandra Hash
explained “with the Clerk Treasurer and two employees, you can meet during the
day for an appeal”. Frank Nierzwicki
explained the City of
Dianna Bastin feels ten dollars for a driveway permit is more than fair with the time put in to approving and checking on it. Frank Nierzwicki suggested if this passes, have it affected in the spring of 2008.
Dan Swafford stated there are going to be so many appeals and it will be overwhelming to whoever is on the Appeals Board. Frank Nierzwicki suggested taking digital pictures of the offenses; parking on the grass and other offenses, so having proof should cut down on the appeals. There was a lengthy discussion about different offenses and situations.
Dan Swafford does not think there is an answer to this. If this ordinance passes, it will become complaint driven. Frank Nierzwicki has noticed an increase of vehicles parked on the street than in the past. Sandra clarified a “ticket” process is what we are driving for, more appropriate for the problem and should take away from being complaint driven.
Terry Baker suggested taking the “parking time limit” out of the ordinance. Dianna would like to keep “except holidays”. Don Calvert would like to take out “Monday thru Friday”. Frank Nierzwicki asked which date to use; upon passage or in the spring. Frank Nierzwicki asked Sandra to read back the changes that have been suggested for the ordinance:
The Planning Department shall enforce lawn parking violations excluding Town Holidays.
Any and all offenses will be ticketed. The tickets will be levied at $15 per offense if paid within 10 days. The ticket will increase to $30 after 10 days.
The tickets will be paid in the Clerk’s office. Sandra explained the Town Attorney wrote up an ordinance violation bureau and Sandra thought that would solve the problem. She explained the procedure for police ticket collections and was informed it was not cost efficient for the attorney to take them to court. Mike Spencer suggested Sandra contact a collection agency for police tickets.
Russ Ryle reiterated “if you are not going to enforce it don’t put it on the books”.
Terry Baker made a motion we retain it until the next meeting. Dianna Bastin seconded. Motion carried.
Privilege of the Floor – non Agenda Items
Ed Bitner recently read in the paper that
Calvert asked about the Jack & Jill sign and the flooding issue in
Russ Ryle asked Frank Nierzwicki if there were any further updates on attempts to talk to the people behind his property. Frank Nierzwicki will find out what Mr. Fish is doing.
Ed Bitner made a motion for the meeting to be adjourned. Everyone seconded. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned 10:10 p.m.