Get Adobe Flash player

 

 

APC MEETING – March 14, 2016

 

The White County Area Plan Commission met Monday March 14th, 2016, at 6:00 p.m. in the Cafeteria of the Twin Lakes High School, 300 S Third St. Monticello, Indiana.

 

Roll Call: Present: Charles Anderson, James Annis, Richard Bender, Mark Bentlage, Richard Lynn, Doug Pepple, Dave Rosenbarger, Mike Smolek, Dennis Sterrett, Dave Stimmel, Brad Ward, Joseph Rogers (Non-voting), Abigail Diener (Non-voting) & Tina Cronkhite (Non-voting).

 

Registered visitors were: (See attached Visitor Registration)

 

The meeting was called to order by Charlie Anderson.

 

 

****

 

Opening Business:

 

 

MINUTES: There was a motion by Brad Ward and a second by Dennis Sterrett to approve the meeting minutes of 1/11/16 APC, Findings of Fact for Minor Subdivision #333-Hlatko Subdivision, Findings of Fact for Amended Subdivision #SA102915-Hinterland Trails, and 01/14/16 APC Special Meeting. Approved unanimously, so moved.

 

TECH REVIEW COMMITTEE – Appoint members for 2016…continued from 01/11/16. Director Rogers advised the Board that, generally, the APC has appointed four people to serve on the Tech Review Committee. Currently, there are only three, Don Ward, Dennis Sterrett and Mike Smolek. By a show of hands it was decided to leave the three appointees previously decided upon and not to add a fourth.

 

 

****

 

Rezones

 

#1037 – Kingsley: B-2 (General Business District) to R-2 (Single & Two-Family Residential District); 6101 E US HWY 24, Monticello, IN 47960. This application was continued from 08/10/2015 and rescheduled for 03/14/16 per applicant request. Applicant requested to continue until 04/11/2016 per phone call on 02/09/2016.

 

#1044 – White County Redevelopment Commission: A-1 (General Agriculture District) to B-2 (General Business District); US Hwy 24, Reynolds, IN 47980. The application is for the proposed use of the White County Highway Garage. Joe Rogers, APC Executive Director, was in person to represent the request for this rezone and the adjoining parcel in rezone petition #1045 being considered as well. It is the intent to establish a common zoning district assignment with the subject parcel and the one to the South (#1045) so they can be combined to form a single, functional site for the new White County Highway Garage. John Heimlich, President of the White County Commissioners explained that both parcels were acquired by the White County Redevelopment Commission for the development of the County Highway Garage. Mr. Heimlich stated there was no definite time table for completion of the building, however rezoning and combining the parcels were necessary first steps in this process. The only questions that have been posed to the Commissioners regarding this development are the access point. Access to the new garage will be off of US Highway 24, Reynolds, IN 47980. INDOT has no opposition to access from Highway 24 but asked that the access point be directly across from the current access to businesses directly to the South of the highway.

 

There being no additional questions, ballots were passed out by Abigail Diener.

 

Ballot Summary:

 

1. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the White County Strategic (Comprehensive) Plan and any other applicable planning studies and reports, as adopted and amended from time to time. 10 Agree; 1 No Opinion; 0 Disagree; Comments: None

2. The proposed rezoning is compatible with the current conditions (e.g. existing lots, structures and uses) and the overall character of existing development in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.

11 Agree; 0 No Opinion; 0 Disagree; Comments: None

 

3. The proposed rezoning is the most desirable use for which the land in the subject property is adapted.

10 Agree; 1 No Opinion; 0 Disagree; Comments: None

 

4. The proposed rezoning will not have an adverse effect on the value of properties throughout the jurisdiction. 10 Agree; 1 No Opinion; 0 Disagree; Comments: None

 

5. The proposed rezoning reflects responsible standard for growth and development. 11 Agree; 0 No Opinion; 0 Disagree; Comments: None

 

President, Charles Anderson announced the results, as follows: 11 votes cast; 11 in Favor - 0 Opposed – 0 No Recommendation. Rezone request will be certified to the appropriate legislative body with a “Favorable” recommendation.

 

#1045 – White County Redevelopment Commission: White County Redevelopment Commission: I-1 (Heavy Industrial District) to B-2 (General Business District); 343 E US Hwy 24, Reynolds, IN 47980. The application is for the proposed use of the White County Highway Garage. This petition is a partner to the above request #1044 with nothing additional to mention.

 

There being no additional questions, ballots were passed out by Abigail Diener.

 

Ballot Summary:

 

1. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the White County Strategic (Comprehensive) Plan and any other applicable planning studies and reports, as adopted and amended from time to time. 10 Agree; 1 No Opinion; 0 Disagree; Comments: None

2. The proposed rezoning is compatible with the current conditions (e.g. existing lots, structures and uses) and the overall character of existing development in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.

11 Agree; 0 No Opinion; 0 Disagree; Comments: None

 

 

3. The proposed rezoning is the most desirable use for which the land in the subject property is adapted.

10 Agree; 0 No Opinion; 0 Disagree; Comments: None

 

4. The proposed rezoning will not have an adverse effect on the value of properties throughout the jurisdiction. 11 Agree; 0 No Opinion; 0 Disagree; Comments: None

 

5. The proposed rezoning reflects responsible standard for growth and development. 10 Agree; 1 No Opinion; 0 Disagree; Comments: None

 

President, Charles Anderson announced the results, as follows: 11 votes cast; 11 in Favor - 0 opposed – 0 No Recommendation. Rezone request will be certified to the appropriate legislative body with a “Favorable” recommendation.

#1046 – MPL Properties LLC: R-2 (Single & Two-Family Residential District) to B-2 (General Business District); 409 Dodge Camp Road, Monticello, IN 47960. The application is for the proposed use of a restaurant, bar & retail establishment. Joe Rogers, APC Executive Director, read into record a letter that was received in the office from Judy Catterlin, 301 Tioga Rd., Monticello, IN 47960. Judy’s letter included concerns regarding the proposed rezone that were primarily related to traffic and noise (see rezone file). Ken Hardebeck, property owner of 409 Dodge Camp. Rd., Monticello, IN, was in person to request the rezone. Ken read a letter into the record from Shane and Jodee Harley, lift rental and gas customers at Dodge Camp, that supported the rezone request (see rezone file). Ken is proposing to add overflow parking for the proposed restaurant/pub at the north end of the parcel which is accessed from Armory Road. Several residents of Armory Rd., along with Monticello Parks/Recreation Director, Mitch Billue spoke of concerns and opposition to the rezone request. Monticello City Mayor, Ken Houston was also in person to state opposition from the City of Monticello due to limited parking and ADA accessibility.

 

Mr. Hardebeck responded to the concerns expressed by the neighboring property owners and the City representatives. After much discussion surrounding the main concerns of noise, alcohol sales and parking/traffic, ballots were passed out by Abigail Diener.

 

Ballot Summary:

 

1. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the White County Strategic (Comprehensive) Plan and any other applicable planning studies and reports, as adopted and amended from time to time. 1 Agree; 6 No Opinion; 4 Disagree; Comments: Would like to see property subdivided

2. The proposed rezoning is compatible with the current conditions (e.g. existing lots, structures and uses) and the overall character of existing development in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.

1 Agree; 2 No Opinion; 8 Disagree; Comments: Access is a huge problem; Residential Area/One lane road; Too small an area

 

3. The proposed rezoning is the most desirable use for which the land in the subject property is adapted.

1 Agree; 3 No Opinion; 7 Disagree; Comments: Too close to park; Many other uses are possible

 

4. The proposed rezoning will not have an adverse effect on the value of properties throughout the jurisdiction. 3 Agree; 4 No Opinion; 4 Disagree; Comments: Access is a problem

 

5. The proposed rezoning reflects responsible standard for growth and development. 1 Agree; 6 No Opinion; 4 Disagree; Comments: New business to lakes area

 

President, Charles Anderson announced the results, as follows: 11 votes cast; 1 in Favor - 9 Opposed – 1 No Recommendation. Rezone request will be certified to the appropriate legislative body with an “Unfavorable” recommendation.

 

Amendments - #A47: CH 3 Specific Use Requirements and Performance Standards – 3.1 Home Occupations; 3.1.1-Purpose & Scope & 3.1.6 Childcare Home-Special Restrictions & CH 8 Parking & Loading Standards – Table 8.6 Off-Street Parking Requirements. Joe Rogers, APC Executive Director outlined the purpose of this amendment which is to find resolution to “Intensity of Use” of Childcare Homes/Houses in residential neighborhoods. In addition to the proposed changes presented in January, there was feedback that indicated a need to modify the parking requirements to include vehicles used in conjunction with a Childcare home; thus, the proposed amendments today include a change in the parking chapter of the zoning ordinance. Language has also been cleaned up to bring consistency to the Definition section of the ordinance in that anywhere the word “Daycare” was mentioned, it has been amended to “Childcare” to bring that consistency between the chapters as well as state statute. Charlie Anderson questioned the proposed 1000 ft. restriction and whether it was too much. Brooke Johnson, Owner of Little Ras-kel’s Daycare was in person to oppose the proposed amendment. Little Ras-kel’s has been the primary reason for the need to amend the zoning ordinance with 3 houses in approximately 1 ½ blocks operating as a Childcare Homes. Brooke outlined additional factors that she feels need to be considered before passing this amendment as proposed. Neighborhood residents, Kevin Swygman and Don Miller spoke in favor of the need to amend the zoning ordinance to limit the number of Childcare Homes allowed in a single residential neighborhood. Ken Houston, Monticello Mayor, stated that his opinion is that Brooke has complied with all of the city, building, and zoning requirements to date and should be allowed to continue to operate without change. A recommendation was made to reduce the proposed 1000ft. to 500ft. between Childcare Homes in residential neighborhoods. Richard Lynn made the motion to approve the proposed amendment as written with the exception of changing the 1,000 foot separation requirement to 500 feet. Denny Sterrett seconded the motion. By show of hands, motion carried, unanimous.

 

#A48: CH 2 District Boundaries and Standards – 2.5.1 A-1 General Agricultural District; 2.5.2 A-2 Agricultural Industry Standards & CH 3 CFO/CAFO Additional Development and Use Standards – 3.17.1-Setbacks and 3.17.2-IDEM. Joe Rogers, APC Executive Director, introduced this amendment proposal. Additionally, a language clarification was added to the amendment proposal presented relating to IDEM permit requirements. The previous proposal raised the question that Area Plan would require an applicant to acquire and IDEM permit prior to a rezone request. Joe stated that has never been the practice in the Area Plan office and it was not the intent to imply that. The language was changed to clarify that an IDEM permit is only required by the Building & Planning office prior to issuance of an Improvement Location or Building Permit, but not prior to rezone of a parcel. County Commissioner President, John Heimlich outlined the proposed changes which included that an A-2 (Agricultural Industry District) cannot be located within one (1) mile of the unincorporated town areas of Idaville and Buffalo, utilizing such boundary lines as provided for on the White County Official Zoning Map. The proposal also includes a one and one-half (1 ½) mile buffer from any Lake Shafer, Big Monon, Tippecanoe River or Lake Freeman shoreline boundary as provided for on the White County Official Zoning Map; a 1,760 ft. setback from the property line of any parcel of land legally platted within a recorded subdivision and which subdivision has at least six (6) lots developed with residential dwelling units. Additionally, provisions were made for a “Right to Waiver”. (see file).

 

Supporters of the proposed ordinance amendment that spoke in favor of the amendment included Joe Roach, Director of SFLECC; John Collins, Indiana Beach General Manager; Bonnie Woods, property owner on Stahl Rd. in Monticello and also read into record a letter of support from Real Estate Network in Monticello (see file); Karen Neumann, Stahl Road resident; Annette Rebar, Big Monon Resident; Frank Spogis, Big Monon Resident; Paul Neumann, President of Sycamore Acres Homeowners Association on Stahl Road; Candy Gentile, Lake Resident.

 

The President of Guardians of the Grand Lake St. Marys, Kate Anderson, presented information and documentation on the contamination of the lake at the Ohio State Park due to high levels of algal toxins. (Information submitted is available in amendment file).

 

Several community members voiced opposition to the proposed amendment and proposed an alternative 1 mile setback buffer area to the lakes, along with a need to protect future development. Community members that spoke against this proposal included Jeff Demerly, Daniel Dahlenburg, Chris Wiese, Bill Schroeder, Mike Lehe, Joel Putt, Brian Furrer, Gary Rice, Brad Smock, Mike Veenhuisen, and Troy Viecher.

 

Tom Getz, BioTown Ag Environmental Compliance Manager presented an abundance of documentation showing the multitude of operating records and documentation requirements needed for IDEM compliance. Joel Putt, a confined feeding operation owner, also demonstrated the strict guidelines set forth by IDEM in order to operate in compliance and ensure Environmental Safety in Indiana. Mr. Putt also provided an IDEM report of violations on file from January 1, 1995 to March 14, 2016 that shows 80 case files for violations in the county that document only 8 (10%) are related to confined feeding operations. Of those eight cases, two (2) were due to improper notification that construction had been completed on a project, three (3) were due to expired IDEM permits, one (1) was due to operating records not being completed correctly. Only two (2) of these 8 violations related to confined feeding operations were due to improper manure application. *All documentation read into record and provided to the APC Board is available in the #A48 Amendment file.

 

County Commissioner President, John Heimlich closed in saying the goal is to provide an amendment to adequately and fairly protect the Ag Sector, the Manufacturing Sector and the Tourism Sector of the county. A recommendation was made by Joe Rogers, Area Plan Executive Director, to vote to continue consideration of this amendment proposal at a Special Meeting of the Area Plan Commission between now and the next APC meeting scheduled on April 11, 2016. This motion was made by Dave Rosenbarger with a second from Dave Stimmel. Motion was passed by a unanimous show of hands.

 

Other Business: 1) Compact Housing Update - Continued from 01/11/16 - Appendix B – Bulk Use Standards Amended and Committee Recommendations. Continued to 04/11/16

 

2) Comprehensive Development Plan – Ongoing – Updates & highlights from Stakeholder & Steering Committee Mtgs. On 02/19/16 and 02/26/16. Continued to 04/11/16

 

****

 

There being no further business, Charlie Anderson made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:41p.m., with a second from Jim Annis. President Anderson called the meeting adjourned.

 

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

Tina M Cronkhite, Secretary

White County Area Plan Commission

 

 

Joseph W. Rogers, Executive Director

White County Area Plan Commission

 

 

 

 

Document Prepared By: White County Area Plan Secretary, Tina Cronkhite “I AFFIRM, UNDER THE PENALTIES FOR PERJURY THAT I HAVE TAKEN REASONABLE CARE TO REDACT EACH SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER IN THIS DOCUMENT, UNLESS REQUIRED BY LAW.”

 

WHITE COUNTY AREA PLAN COMMISSION

 

PUBLIC NOTICE OF REGULAR SESSION

 

March 14, 20166:15 p.m.

***Twin Lakes High School Cafeteria***

300 S 3rd St., Monticello, IN 47960

 

**********************************************************************************************

AGENDA

 

The White County Area Plan Commission will meet in Regular Session pursuant to Indiana’s Open Meetings Law, I.C. 5-3-1-2 (b):

READING OF THE MINUTES – Approve 01/11/16 APC Meeting Minutes & 01/14/16 APC Special Meeting

 

TECH REVIEW COMMITTEE Appoint members for 2016 (2015 Members: Don Ward, Dennis Sterrett, Cathy Gross, & Mike Smolek)…continued from 01/11/16

 

REZONINGS – #1037 – Kingsley: B-2 (General Business District) to R-2 (Single & Two-Family Residential District); 6101 E US HWY 24, Monticello, IN 47960. This application was continued from 08/10/2015 and rescheduled for 03/14/16 per applicant request. Applicant requested to continue until 04/11/2016 per phone call on 02/09/2016.

 

#1044 – White County Redevelopment Commission: A-1 (General Agriculture District) to B-2 (General Business District); US Hwy 24, Reynolds, IN 47980. The application is for the proposed use of the White County Highway Garage.

 

#1045 – White County Redevelopment Commission: White County Redevelopment Commission: I-1 (Heavy Industrial District) to B-2 (General Business District); 343 E US Hwy 24, Reynolds, IN 47980. The application is for the proposed use of the White County Highway Garage.

 

#1046 – MPL Properties LLC: R-2 (Single & Two-Family Residential District) to B-2 (General Business District); 409 Dodge Camp Road, Monticello, IN 47960. The application is for the proposed use of a restaurant/retail establishment.

 

AMENDMENTS – #A47: CH 3 Specific Use Requirements and Performance Standards – 3.1 Home Occupations; 3.1.1-Purpose & Scope & 3.1.6 Daycare Home-Special Restrictions & CH 8 Parking & Loading Standards – Table 8.6 Off-Street Parking Requirements.

 

#A48: CH 2 District Boundaries and Standards – 2.5.1 A-1 General Agricultural District; 2.5.2 A-2 Agricultural Industry Standards & CH 3 CFO/CAFO Additional Development and Use Standards – 3.17.1-Setbacks and 3.17.2-IDEM

 

BUSINESS - 1) Compact Housing Update – Continued from 01/11/16 - Appendix B – Bulk Use Standards Amended and Committee Recommendations.

2) Comprehensive Development Plan – Ongoing – Updates & highlights from Stakeholder & Steering Committee Mtgs. On 02/19/16 and 02/26/16.

 

 

Individuals requiring reasonable accommodations for participation in this event should contact the White County Title VI Coordinator a minimum of 48-hours prior to the meeting at: Leah Hull, Title VI Coordinator -110 N MAIN ST, PO BOX 260, MONTICELLO, IN 47960. 574-583-4585