Get Adobe Flash player

BE IT REMEMBERED, that the White County Commissioners held a regular meeting on Monday, March 21, 2016. The meeting was held at the White County Building, 2nd floor Commissioners’ Conference Room, beginning at 8:00 a.m.

Commissioners present were: President John C. Heimlich and Commissioner Steve Burton. Also present was Auditor Gayle Rogers, County Attorney George Loy and the Commissioners’ Assistant Donya Tirpak. Commissioner David Diener was absent.

Commissioner Heimlich called the meeting to order.

MINUTES

· Commissioner Burton made a motion to approve the minutes from the regular meeting held on March 7, 2016, seconded by Commissioner Heimlich. Vote: Unanimous

PAYROLL

· Commissioner Burton made a motion to approve the payroll for March 21, 2016, seconded by Commissioner Heimlich. Vote: Unanimous

CLAIMS

· Commissioner Burton made a motion to approve and pay the claims as presented, seconded by Commissioner Heimlich. Vote: Unanimous

NAMING A BAY ON LAKE SHAFER

Ruth Bortscheller, 5050 E. Bay Front Court, asked what the process was for getting your name put on a bay. She is with the Lake Shafer Welfare Association and someone would like to have the bay outside of the Isle of Homes named. She contacted Shafer-Freeman Lakes Environmental Conservation Corp., (SFLECC) and they weren’t aware of what the procedures were or whom to even call.

Commissioner Heimlich said that Keens Bay and Hoagland Bay are named after the ditches that feed in to them.

Area Plan Director Joe Rogers said he is not aware of any procedures or process where you could go and designate a certain portion of the lake, or a shoreline.

After a short discussion, Commissioner Heimlich said that they will try to find an answer.

AREA PLAN

Area Plan Director Joe Rogers presented the following rezoning request:

Rezone Petition No. 1044

The White County Redevelopment Commission is requesting to rezone 16.12 acres from an A-1 (General Agricultural District) to a B-2 (General Business District).

Director Rogers explained that there are two parcels that the county would like to combine for the new Highway Department. Before the parcels are combined, they both must be the same zoning.

The Area Plan Commission held a public hearing on March 14, 2016, in regards to this petition. At that time, the APC voted 11 Yes and 0 No to recommend this request to the commissioners. No one was present at the APC meeting objecting the request.

Commissioner Heimlich asked if there was anyone present to speak about this request. No response.

· Commissioner Burton made a motion to approve Rezoning Petition No. 1044 (Ordinance No. 583-16) rezoning 16.12 acres from an A-1 to a B-2, seconded by Commissioner Heimlich. Vote: Unanimous

Rezoning Petition No. 1045

The White County Redevelopment Commission is requesting to rezone 4.47 acres from an I-1 (Light Industrial District) to a B-2 (General Business District). This property will be combined with the previous petition for the future Highway Department.

The Area Plan Commission held a public hearing on March 14, 2016, in regards to this petition. At that time, the APC voted 11 Yes and 0 No to recommend this request to the commissioners. There were no objections at the meeting.

Commissioner Heimlich asked if there was anyone present to speak about this request. No response.

· Commissioner Burton made a motion to approve Rezoning Petition No. 1045 (Ordinance No. 584-16) rezoning 4.47 acres from an I-1 to a B-2, seconded by Commissioner Heimlich. Vote: Unanimous

Request to Amend the Zoning Ordinance

Director Rogers gave a brief background of a Child Care Facility that has brought on some community disruption. Looking for a reasonable solution, an amendment to the zoning ordinance is being presented. He said the amendments clean up the language of the ordinance to provide a mechanism of reducing the intensity of use. The amendments will also allow existing operations to continue with their business until their license expires.

The following amendments were presented:

CHAPTER 3 - Specific Use Requirements & Performance Standards:

3.1 HOME OCCUPATIONS

All home occupations must satisfy the requirements of this Chapter in addition to any standards or regulations found elsewhere in this Ordinance register with the Area Plan Commission Office which, when necessary, will forward such on to the appropriate legislative body for approval within an incorporated area.

3.1.1 Purpose and scope

It is the intent of this Section to regulate all home occupation uses except those that conform to the standards set forth in this Ordinance, as amended from time-to-time. The standards of this Section are intended to insure compatibility of home occupations with the residential character of any neighborhood establishing them as a clear secondary or incidental use to the permitted residential use of the principal structure. For the purposes of administering and enforcing this Section, a home occupation exists if an owner, lessee, or other person legally residing in a residential dwelling is also conducting a legitimate business from the home or property. Such home occupation shall be subject to the conditions and requirements of this Section.

3.1.6 ChildDay care homes - special restrictions

The restrictions of Subsection 3.1.6 apply to Child Care Homes whether operating as a home occupation or out of a residential structure not used as a dwelling.

1. In any residential district where a Child Care Home operates, each parcel is restricted to one (1) Child Care Home license.

2. A Child Care Home and a Child Care House may not operate on the same parcel.

3. No two residential district parcels, upon which facilities are used, or are planned to be used, to operate a Child Care Home, may be located any closer than five hundred (500) feet, as measured in a straight line, without regard to intervening structures or objects, between the closest parcel lines of each parcel.

4. All residential district parcels used or intended to be used for a Child Care Home must install a 6’ foot, opaque privacy fence along any property line abutting a residential district which is used for dwelling purposes.

5. A Childday Ccare Hhome, as defined in Chapter 14, Definitions, when operating on the same parcel upon which a dwelling is located, shall meet all requirements of a home occupation as set forth in this Chapter with the exception of those standards which are inconsistent with state licensure requirements as contained in Indiana Code 12-7-2-33.7 and 12-7-2-33.8 as amended.

6. A Childday Ccare Hhome shall meet all requirements for licensure under state law, and shall be operated in such a manner as to maintain the residential nature of the neighborhood in which it is operated.

All Child Care Homes legally operating as of January 1, 2016 and not in compliance with the standards required of this Ordinance, will be provided legal non- conforming status until such time as one of the disqualifying events listed below occurs.

Disqualifying Events:

a. Child Care Home activities cease for a period of six (6) months or more;

b. A Child Care Home has its license:

1) revoked by the appropriate State agency;

2) lapse;

3) re-licensed under a person or entity name other than the name under which the license operated at the time of adoption of this Ordinance Amendment;

c. Title of the property is transferred to another party.

Upon occurrence of one of the “Disqualifying Events”, a Child Care Home shall cease operation or be brought into compliance with current Ordinance requirements. Failure to execute one of the actions above will be considered a civil zoning violation and subject the site to enforcement proceedings as provided for by Ordinance.

The Childday Ccare Hhome may have such employees as required by state law or regulation, and may operate in that part of the residence necessary to meet licensure requirements.

The Childday Ccare Hhome shall operate in such a fashion as not to cause abnormally unsafe or disruptiveincreased vehicular traffic congestion in the day care home neighborhood. On-street parking of employees shall be limited to two (2) one (1) parked vehicles during the day care operating hours but only for locations where the parcel of the Child Care Home abuts a street where on-street parking is allowed and where the parking allowance is not in conflict with any other standard or requirement of this Ordinance.

Permit required

A State of Indiana Approval Certificate shall be on file with the Executive Director.

CHAPTER 8 – Parking & Loading Standards:

USE CATEGORY MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS

Child care center

1 space per employee on the largest shift plus 1 space per 5 children plus 1 space for each vehicle used in conjunction with the Child Care Center

Child care home *(1), (2)

1 space per employee on the largest shift plus 1 space per 5 children plus 1 space for each vehicle used in conjunction with the Child Care Home activity; this is in addition to the spaces required for dwellings if the site is also as a residence.

Child care house *(1), (2)

2 spaces; these spaces may be shared spaces with those satisfying the residential requirements of the site 1 space per employee on the largest shift plus 1 space per 5 children

Day care center, adult

1 space per employee plus 1 space per 5 adults plus 1 space for each vehicle used in conjuction with the Day Care Centerchildren

(1) A facility is allowed to utilize two on-street parking spaces toward satisfying their off-street parking requirement- as long as the street abutting the property allows on-street parking and this allowance does not conflict with any other standard or requirement of this Ordinance.which has two employees or less is exempt from the Table 8.6 minimum parking requirements of this chapter upon satisfying the employee number certification requirement of footnote (2) below.

(2) A certification as to the number of employees on-site at any given time must be provided to the Area Plan Office no later than January 31 of each calendar year. Failure to provide said certification in the required time frame or filing a false or erroneous certification will be considered a civil zoning violation and enforced under the provisions of Chapter 13 in the White County Indiana Zoning Control Ordinance. The staff will establish the certification procedure and provide the form(s) necessary for satisfying this requirement.

APPENDIX A: Childcare Home/House Standards:

USE

CFO

L-1

A-1

A-2

RR

R-1

R-2

R-3

R-4

B-1

B-2

B-3

I-1

I-2

I-3

AED

Child Care Center

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

Child Care Home

AP

AP

AP

AP

AP

AP

AP

AP

P

Child Care House

PA

PA

PA

A

PA

PA

PA

PA

PA

The APC held a public hearing on March 14, 2016, in regards to the amendments. At that time, the APC voted 11 Yes and 0 No to recommend these amendments to the commissioners.

Commissioner Heimlich asked if there was anyone present to speak about the amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. Councilman Art Anderson suggested that the county have a place for these people to go to before they dump them. He discussed how hard it is for people to find child care and the difficulties for people to find work.

Director Rogers explained how the amendment doesn’t displace anyone.

· Commissioner Burton made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 16-03-21-01 (Amendment No. 47) to CH 3, CH 8, & Appendix A: Childcare Home/House Standards, seconded by Commissioner Heimlich. Vote: Unanimous

ORDINANCE NO. 16-03-21-01

AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF

WHITE COUNTY, STATE OF INDIANA

WHEREAS, the White County Area Plan Commission has initiated and prepared this ordinance to amend the White County Zoning Ordinance pursuant to IC 36-7-4-602© and IC 36-7-4-607;

WHEREAS, the White County Area Plan Commission has reported that it held a public hearing concerning this ordinance on March 14, 2016, after timely notification of the hearing was given by publication in the Herald Journal, Monticello, Indiana at least 10 days prior as required by IC 36-7-4-604;

WHEREAS, the White County Area Plan Commission has reported that it paid reasonable regard to the factors enumerated in IC 36-7-4-603 in consideration of the ordinance and determination or recommendation to be made to the legislative body of White County;

WHEREAS, the White County Area Plan Commission has certified this ordinance to the legislative body with a recommendation by a majority vote in favor of adoption pursuant to IC 36-7-4-603 before acting on this ordinance amendment;

WHEREAS, the legislative body recognizes that the ordinance is required for the reasons summarized below;

WHEREAS, the legislative body has determined that this ordinance should be adopted without amendment as certified by the White County Area Plan Commission pursuant to IC 36-7-4-607; therefore,

BE IT ORDAINED AND ADOPTED BY THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF WHITE COUNTY, INDIANA:

AMENDING CHAPTERS:

CHAPTER 3 – Specific Use Requirements & Performance Standards: Section 3.1 Home Occupations; Subsections 3.1.1 Purpose & Scope & 3.1.6 Daycare Home-Special Restrictions

CHAPTER 8 – Parking & Loading Standards: Table 8.6 Required Off-Street Parking Spaces

APPENDIX A – Official Schedule of Uses: Child Care Center; Child Care Home, Child Care House

The purpose of this amendment is to create standards applicable to child care homes and child care houses to assist in minimizing any non-compatible impacts from those facilities to residential uses.

CONTRACT FOR HIGHWAY GARAGE

County Attorney George Loy explained that in September 2015 the commissioners requested proposals for architectural and engineering services for the new White County Highway Department. Proposals were submitted and an interviewing committee was put together to hear presentations from HWC Engineering, American Structurepoint and Cripe. American Structurepoint was awarded the project and after negotiations, a contract has been submitted.

The cost of the contract is as follows:

Topo and Route Survey $15,500

Civil $53,100

Structural $24, 800

MEP $39,800

Architectural/Project Management $95,000

Total Contract: $228,200.

Councilman Art Anderson said that he would like to have the design team come to a joint meet so the council can give input on what they would like to see in the new Highway Department.

· Commissioner Heimlich made a motion to accept the contract and enter into an agreement with American Structurepoint as presented, seconded by Commissioner Burton. Vote: Unanimous

At this time, Council President Butch Kramer called the council members to order in joint session with the commissioners. Council members present:

President Butch Kramer Jim Annis Jim Davis

Arthur Anderson Denny Carter

Councilman Casey Crabb and Bruce Clear were absent.

Commissioner Heimlich announced that the first order of business for the joint meeting is a Public Hearing beginning at 9:00 a.m. for an additional appropriation by the County Council.

ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION – PUBLIC HEARING

Council President Kramer explained that $80,000 from Meadow Lake Wind Farm, Phase V project, will be coming in to the County pursuant to an Economic Development Agreement. These funds will be used to pay the county’s legal fees, financial advisory fees, and other expenses related to the negotiation, execution and implementation of agreements between Meadow Lake Wind Farm and the County for Phase V.

· Councilman Anderson made a motion to approve the additional appropriation of $80,000 from the Wind Farm Economic Development Fund #221 as presented, seconded by Councilman Annis. Vote: Unanimous

REPORTS

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Economic Development President Randy Mitchell presented the Business Summary for March 2016.

Mr. Mitchell reported that he’s received two leads for the shell building. One being a manufacturer of pet foods and the other being a local enterprise.

Rick Spencer/Teri Hammond have opened up a new business in Monticello, P&K Diner.

Mr. Mitchell met with Sara DeYoung who is the new Executive Director with the Remington-Wolcott Community Development Corp.

A Regional Workforce Attraction Focus group has been put together with Workforce One. Their first meeting will be held in Delphi. This will give local businesses a chance to get together with bigger companies from Lafayette, like Caterpillar, to discuss business.

BUILDING DEPARMENT

Area Plan Director Joe Rogers said that building permits are running about the same as last year.

The Comprehensive Plan update is moving forward with community workshops being held in Monticello and Reynolds. The next one will be held on April 12.

ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER

Environmental Officer Jim Reynolds presented the Environmental Report for March 2016.

· Issued 2 septic permits.

· Made 8 landfill inspections.

· Participated in table top exercise for Ebola.

· Met with Mr. Allen Melvin from IDEM and residents from Stahl Road to discuss issues with private and public wells.

AIRPORT –LUSE ROAD

White County Board of Aviation Commissioners President Phil Gutwein said that the new turnaround on Luse Road seems to be too small. CHA Consulting thinks there’s enough money in their runway grant to move the guard rail and the fence so they can make a turnaround big enough for a large school bus to turn around. He asked the commissioners if this would be okay as long as they stayed on their own property. Commissioner Heimlich told him to discuss this with the Highway Superintendent and the Area Plan Department.

Mr. Gutwein also reported that the taxiway that they have now is too close to the runway. They do have a $3 million grant that will be used to build two new connectors from the runway to the parking area. After this project is done, they are hoping to get funding to build a taxiway to the north end and then hoping to get funding the year after that to build a taxiway to the south end. They also want to put up a fence around the new airport property that they just acquired. Before they get approval to put up the fence, they have to do a wildlife assessment which will cost $43,000.

Commissioner Heimlich asked when funding was going to be available to relocate Luse Road.

Mr. Gutwein said that they are at least three, maybe four, years away to receiving funds to replace Luse Road. All the work with the taxiways and fence have to be completed first. He suggested the idea of buying all of the property on the east and west side of the runway, all the way north, to build Luse Road. He said they won’t need all the land to the east and west, but it will control the neighbors.

Commissioner Heimlich suggested getting preliminary cost estimates on replacing the road, and also sitting down with city representatives to get their thoughts on where the replacement of Luse Road should be.

There being no further business to come before the council, they adjourned to their own meeting room.

There being no further business to come before the commissioners, their meeting was adjourned.

 

 

 

___________________________ _____________________________ ____________________________

John C. Heimlich, President Steve Burton, Vice President David Diener, Member

ATTEST: _________________________

Gayle Rogers, Auditor