Get Adobe Flash player

APC MEETING – July 8, 2019

The White County Area Plan Commission met Monday, July 8, 2019, at 6:00 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Second Floor, County Building, Monticello, Indiana.

Board Members Present: Charles Anderson, James Annis, Sid Holderly, Doug Pepple, Stacy Selagy, Mike Smolek, Denny Sterrett & Brad Ward. Absent members were: Abbey Gross, Ralph Hasser & Richard Lynn.

Planning Department Representatives: Joseph Rogers, Executive Director, Tina M. Tiede, APC Secretary; and Makenzie Martin (Attorney)

Registered visitors were: See attached. The meeting was called to order by APC President, Charlie Anderson.

****

Approval of The Minutes: Denny Sterrett asked for a correction to add his name to the 06/10/19 meeting minutes as present. There was a motion by Board Member Jim Annis and a second by Board Member Doug Pepple to approve the meeting minutes of the 06/10/19 APC Regular Meeting with the above correction. Approved unanimously, so moved.

****

REZONES:

1) #1112 – Owner: Parish Susan M 1/3 Martin E Parish Ii 1/3 Nannette Parish 1/3; Applicant: Big Monon Camp c/o Jeff Milligan; The subject property is identified by: OUT E/S NE; 06-27-03; 6.905; Union Township; Parcel ID #91-73-06-000-002.900-020 (014-09850-00); 4816 N West Shafer Dr, Monticello, In 47960. The proposed zoning map amendment involves consideration of a change of the zoning districts from: L-1 (Lake District) to R-4 (Mobile Home Park Residential District). The proposed rezone is to bring the site into compliance with the current use and possible expansion.

The subject site is registered on the Indiana State Department of Health (ISDH) Mobile Home Community Construction Approval and Facility Licensing Program. The ISDH inspects and licenses mobile home communities and reviews and approves plans for construction or alteration of such communities. Licenses to operate a mobile home community are good for a period of four years. Under the current Ordinance, a manufactured home park is only allowed in an R-4 District. The current site is grandfathered so continued use as a manufactured home park is allowed; however, any intentions of expanding, modifying or altering the operations becomes prohibitive under the current Ordinance. The applicant’s request is to bring the site into compliance so that the park may be expanded, modified or altered as allowed for by Ordinance. This zoning district change will bring the site into compliance.

The Staff advised the Board that this was a legal use for an R-5 District under the 1972 Ordinance. In the process of adopting replacement ordinances, district assignments were changed in a manner which created this non-conforming status.

Jeff Milligan was in person to represent the request for rezone. Commissioner, Doug Pepple asked Jeff Milligan if there were plans to provide a buffer on the north side of the parcel to preserve the integrity of the residential neighborhood. Jeff Milligan stated that there have been no formal plans drawn up for development at this time, however he intends to be in compliance with any ordinance requirements. Board President, Charlie Anderson asked how much expansion is planned for the area. Jeff Milligan responded that there is 2-3 acres of area they are considering whether it is viable for future expansion, although there are no plans have been put on paper. Director Rogers referenced the White Count Zoning Control Ordinance and verified the buffering requirements for this parcel.

Near-by & adjacent property owners Frank Spogis, Greg Waller, Patty Westcott, and Randy Rowland were all present to voice concerns about the speed limit, the increased traffic and the opposition to RV’s. Frank Spogis also stated that several members of the neighborhood would like for the County to regulate the park. Director Rogers explained that there is no provision in State law for the County Area Plan Dept. to take over management responsibilities that are assigned to the state for manufactured home parks of 5 units or more. The County role at the local level is that they can regulate how far a manufactured home must be from a property line or buffering requirements. Frank Spogis also read into the record a letter opposing the rezone request by Betty Hadley.

There being no additional questions, ballots were passed out by Makenzie Martin.

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. 7 Agree; 1 No Opinion; 0 Disagree; APC Comments: to put back to proper zoning

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. 8 Agree; 0 No Opinion; 0 Disagree; APC Comments: None

3. The proposed rezoning is the most desirable use for which the land in the subject property is adapted. 8 Agree; 0 No Opinion; 0 Disagree; APC Comments: None

4. The proposed rezoning will not have an adverse effect on the value of properties throughout the jurisdiction. 4 Agree; 4 No Opinion; 0 Disagree; APC Comments: At this point the rezone is appropriate. However, at the time of development, I would stipulate an adequate buffer (eg: sufficient trees)

5. The proposed rezoning reflects responsible standard for growth and development. 6 Agree; 2 No Opinion; 0 Disagree; APC Comments: None

Director Rogers announced the results as follows:

8 votes cast – 8 in Favor; 0 Opposed; 0 No Recommendation

Rezone request will be certified to the appropriate legislative body with a “Favorable” recommendation.

SUBDIVISIONS: NONE

AMENDMENTS: The following amendments were presented to the Board Members for consideration only. No vote was taken on the following White County Zoning Amendments. The city/town representatives will take these amendments to their respective boards for consideration and comments or suggestions.

1) #A38 – Micro Farming: CH 4 Specific Use Classification & Provisions – 4.3 Accessory Use Provisions: 4.3.2 Domesticated Animals, 4.3.3 Exotic Animals & 4.3.4 Livestock Animals & Bees; CH 14 Definitions - The purpose of this amendment is to satisfy the statutory requirements of Senate enrolled Act No. 529. This amendment contains provisions for 4-H animals within city/town limits so Director Rogers specifically asked the Commission members representing the towns/city to discuss this topic with their respective councils and report back a proper reading on the mood of the town/city councils on this allowance. Board Member Mike Smolek recommended that the weight limit for 4-H animals be increased to 25lbs. All Board Members agreed to this recommendation.

2) #A51 – Cell Towers: CH 3 Specific Use Requirements & Performance Standards - 3.10 Wireless Support Structures and Wireless Facilities, 3.10.2 New Wireless Support Structures and Wireless Facilities, 3.10.3 Existing Wireless Support Structure and/or Wireless Facility (Substantial Modification), 3.10.4 Application and Approval Procedure-Collocations & 3.10.5 Construction, Placement or Use of Small Cell Facilities. The purpose of this amendment is to comply with new state codes.

3) #A58 – Event Barns: CH 3 Specific Use Requirements & Performance Standards - 3.16 Special Exception Use Criteria & Requirements: 3.16.10 Category 9: Event Barn; CH 8 Parking & Loading Standards – Table 8.6 Required Off-Street Parking Spaces; & Appendix A: Official Schedule of Uses. The purpose of this amendment is to accommodate celebratory activities such as weddings, family reunions, anniversary parties, etc., in a forum not covered by the current zoning ordinance. JT Faker asked the Board to clarify some developmental and parking requirements and if you could apply for variances for any of those standards. The Board answered Mr. Faker’s questions and advised him that the standards are available for variance consideration. Mike Smolek questioned the 500’ frontage requirement. After discussion, the Board agreed to leave the amendment as is since a variance can be requested in situations where the 500’ frontage standard is not met. Mike Smolek asked for there to be an allowance for a site to use port-a-pots vs commercially sized septic system. All agreed Director Rogers should incorporate this allowance into this amendment package.

4) #A60 – Fences: CH 9 Landscape Standards – 9.6 Fences. The purpose of this amendment is to bring into compliance fencing regulations, permitting, & security. Director Rogers pointed out several major changes in the amendment from the current standards. He advised the Commission that this amendment re-instates a permitting process for fences within a municipality or the defined limits of Buffalo and Idaville. Also, various restrictions are incorporated for fencing planned within a front yard or front yard setback. Various other minor changes were also discussed. Director Rogers asked the Board members to consider these more restrictive standards and to report back at the next meeting whether or not they are comfortable with this level of fence management.

BUSINESS: None

There being no further business, Commission Member, Doug Pepple made a motion to adjourn the meeting, with a second from Commission President, Charlie Anderson. The meeting adjourned at 7:17 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Tina M. Tiede, APC Secretary

White County Area Plan Commission

Joseph Rogers, Executive Director

White County Area Plan Commission

Document Prepared By: White County Area Plan Board Secretary, Tina M. Tiede “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. X____________________________________________________________________

WHITE COUNTY AREA PLAN COMMISSION

PUBLIC NOTICE OF REGULAR SESSION

July 8, 2019 – 6:00 p.m.

2nd Floor Conference Room, White County Building

110 N Main St., Monticello, IN 47960

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

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):

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Approve 06/10/19 APC Regular Meeting Minutes

REZONINGS:

2) #1112 – Owner: Parish Susan M 1/3 Martin E Parish Ii 1/3 Nannette Parish 1/3; Applicant: Big Monon Camp c/o Jeff Milligan; The subject property is identified by: OUT E/S NE; 06-27-03; 6.905; Union Township; Parcel ID #91-73-06-000-002.900-020 (014-09850-00); 4816 N West Shafer Dr, Monticello, In 47960. The proposed zoning map amendment involves consideration of a change of the zoning districts from: L-1 (Lake District) to R-4 (Mobile Home Park Residential District). The proposed rezone is for bringing into compliance with the current use and possible expansion.

SUBDIVISIONS: NONE

AMENDMENTS:

5) Continued...#A38 – Micro Farming: CH 4 Specific Use Classification & Provisions – 4.3 Accessory Use Provisions: 4.3.2 Domesticated Animals, 4.3.3 Exotic Animals & 4.3.4 Livestock Animals & Bees; CH 14 Definitions - The purpose of this amendment is to satisfy the statutory requirements of Senate enrolled Act No. 529, as well as provide an allowance for 4H Animal projects.

6) Continued...#A51 – Cell Towers: CH 3 Specific Use Requirements & Performance Standards - 3.10 Wireless Support Structures and Wireless Facilities, 3.10.2 New Wireless Support Structures and Wireless Facilities, 3.10.3 Existing Wireless Support Structure and/or Wireless Facility (Substantial Modification), 3.10.4 Application and Approval Procedure-Collocations & 3.10.5 Construction, Placement or Use of Small Cell Facilities. The purpose of this amendment is to comply with new state codes.

7) Continued...#A58 – Event Barns: CH 3 Specific Use Requirements & Performance Standards - 3.16 Special Exception Use Criteria & Requirements: 3.16.10 Category 9: Event Barn; CH 8 Parking & Loading Standards – Table 8.6 Required Off-Street Parking Spaces; & Appendix A: Official Schedule of Uses. The purpose of this amendment is to accommodate celebratory activities such as weddings, family reunions, anniversary parties, etc., are currently not covered by the current zoning ordinance.

8) #A60 – Fences: CH 9 Landscape Standards – 9.6 Fences. The purpose of this amendment is to bring into the compliance fencing regulations, permitting, & security.

BUSINESS: NONE

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: 574-583-4585; Leah Hull, Title VI Coordinator, 110 N MAIN ST, PO BOX 260, MONTICELLO, IN 47960