| Greg Volk | Tom Ryan | Attorney Tim Kuiper |
| Mike Forbes | Steve Kozel | Pete Faberbock |
| Tom Redar | Steve Kil | |
| Mike Ryan |
Mr. Forbes nominated Tom Redar as Secretary of the Plan Commission for the year of 2012; Mr. Mike Ryan seconded the motion. There were no other nominations. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0).
Mr. Forbes nominated Mr. Tom Ryan for the position of Vice-President for the year of 2012; Mr. Mike Ryan seconded the motion. There were no other nominations. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0).
(Mr. Bisaga submitted the soil borings to the Board.)
Mr. Faberbock stated that he would review the soil borings results, and any concerns he had he would address with the engineer. Mr. Faberbock stated that the waivers that are listed in the letter could be addressed at final plat approval and recorded on the final plat. Mr. Volk stated that he did not recall discussing all of the waivers; he asked about the waiver for the detention requirement. Mr. Faberbock stated that the Bisaga Woods parcel has sufficient natural drainage to meet its detention requirements.
Mr. Faberbock stated that the motion should include contingencies for the following: submission of the soil borings in the event changes have to be made to the soil to support the sewer, permit to build in the wetland area from the Army Corps, submission of a Notice of Intent per the IDEM Rule 5 Permit along with the erosion control plan/storm water control.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil noted that the public hearing on Bisaga Woods was properly continued. Mr. Volk opened the public hearing. He called for public comment. There was no public comment. Mr. Volk closed the floor to public comment and brought the matter back before the Board for consideration.
Mr. Volk called for a motion for or against primary plat approval for Bisaga Woods, a two lot subdivision. Mr. Volk outlined the motion for primary plat approval for Bisaga Woods, a two lot subdivision as follows: four contingencies - soil borings to be submitted for review, wetland impact, erosion/sediment control and the sidewalk that will be required along the frontage of Lot 2. The waivers included in the motion were as follows: no sidewalks along Deodor or the front of Lot 1, detention pond, Title 3, Section 3 (names and addresses of adjacent property owners to be included on final plat). Mr. Volk incorporated the findings of fact into the motion. Mr. Forbes concurred with the motion. Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0).
A TRUE COPY
____________________________________________
SUSAN E. WRIGHT, RECORDING SECRETARY
| Greg Volk | Tom Ryan | Attorney Tim Kuiper |
| Mike Forbes | Steve Kozel | Pete Faberbock |
| Tom Redar | Steve Kil | |
| Mike Ryan |
Mr. Kil stated that he and Mr. Eenigenburg discussed the agreement on the frontage road, which was if the frontage road went in on the back of the property the frontage road in the front would be vacated. Mr. Volk concurred. Mr. Kil noted that the frontage road all across Lot 1 would be vacated. Mr.Volk stated that this frontage road would be deeded back to the Town in exchange for the new frontage road behind the buildings.
(General discussion ensued.)
The easements were discussed. Mr. Faberbock stated that the existing easements should remain untouched, but the building lines would be changed. Mr. Kil told Mr. Eenigenburg that all of the existing building lines should be eliminated. He stated a new building line should be configured sixty feet from the right of way taking the existing buildings into consideration. Mr. Forbes stated that the building lines should be set at the current standards and it would not affect the buildings.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Eenigenburg stated after receiving a permit he would tear down a portion of the building on Lot 2. He noted after the tear down the building would occupy 90 feet instead of 150 feet. Mr. Eenigenburg noted a 40 foot easement in front of Lot 7. Mr. Eenigenburg noted that he no longer owns Lot 7 and it should not be reflected on the plat. Mr. Faberbock directed Mr. Eenigenburg to have Torrenga Engineering draw up a new plat that reflects exactly what is being subdivided. Mr. Faberbock stated that the portions no longer owned by Mr. Eenigenburg should be eliminated from the plat so the Board has an accurate depiction of the proposed subdivision.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Eenigenburg informed the Board that he was written permission for ingress/egress between Lots 4 and 5. Mr. Kil stated there must be access all the way through so the parcel is not landlocked. Mr. Kil noted that it was Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 that would be reflected in the new plat.
Mr. Faberbock stated that he will have to review the drainage. He stated the original drainage reflected pond modifications. He stated he will have to verify whether or not after the parcel is subdivided there will be adequate drainage. Mr. Eenigenburg stated, “I don’t think he’s going to allow that. He doesn’t want to lose that. He wants to put parking.” Mr. Kil noted that this issue has already been addressed and that this area is already deemed drainage and cannot be used for parking.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Faberbock stated an easement would have to be placed if Mr. Eenigenburg wanted to use the swamp area for drainage. Mr. Eenigenburg concurred. Mr. Faberbock reiterated he would verify the drainage calculations.
Mr. Kil (drawing on plat) suggested to Mr. Eenigenburg how the parcel it should be subdivided. Mr. Kil also noted that documentation would be drawn up reflecting vacating the frontage road.
The Board recommended Mr. Eenigenburg consult with Torrenga Engineering and have the plat currently being discussed modified. Mr. Eenigenburg could then present modifications to the plat at the next regular meeting.
Mr. Kil stated he would leave the meeting to obtain his texts on the Model Lighting Ordinance for continued discussion.
Mr. Faberbock informed the Board that Saddle Creek, Phase One and Silver Leaf, Phase One, have indicated that they will request a release of existing letters of credit. Mr. Faberbock stated Saddle Creek , Phase One and Silver Leaf, Phase One. would be required to provide a maintenance bond of fifteen percent. He stated that he will review these requests and establish maintenance bonds for both Saddle Creek and Silver Leaf.
(Mr. Kil re-enters room.)
Mr. Redar asked if Mr. Lenahan addressed the street sign and street lighting issues with Mr. Faberbock. Mr. Faberbock stated he was informed that new signs had been ordered. Mr. Redar noted that there are missing street signs, broken signs and poles mounted at the wrong height. He stated these issues were addressed long ago and nothing has been done. Mr. Redar stated that these issues should be taken into consideration when the maintenance bond is calculated.
Mr.Kil stated that he informed the developer if the Town has to replace these signs they will be replaced with the standard signs used by the Town. Mr. Faberbock informed that Board he would look into this issue before the next meeting.
The Board discussed the lighting at a gas station located at Route 30 and Cline in Schererville. The Board concurred that this lighting was, for the most part, the type of lighting (for businesses) that the Board envisions for the Town.
A field trip was discussed.
Mr. Faberbock told the Board he had researched the measurement of illumination that was discussed at the last meeting. He explained that one nit equals one tenth of a foot-candle.
Mr. Volk stated that the Board would continue to review the Home Glen ordinance in addition to starting their review on Page 5, Commercial and Industrial. Light trespass was discussed. External illumination was discussed, including landscaping, flags, etc. Mr. Forbes stated that an example of acceptable external lighting should be included to illustrate exactly what was meant by this type of lighting.
Residential lighting was discussed. Lighting around the sports field was discussed. Enforcement of the lighting ordinance was discussed, and timing schedules for the lighting was discussed.
Mr. Volk stated that the Model Lighting Ordinance would be further discussed at the next meeting. He asked the Board members for further comment.
Mr. Forbes informed the Board that he has been attending meetings for several years regarding the proposed Illiana Expressway. He stated he met with a group of consultants earlier in the day regarding the proposed Illiana Expressway and its routes/corridors. He stated that the consultants were looking for specific input from each community.
Mr. Forbes stated that the proposed routes affecting St. John for the expressway follow either the A&R pipeline and/or Route 231. He stated that these two routes represent the two most northern corridors. He stated that the paths have been refined to 2000 foot wide corridors. He stated that this space would allow placement of a 400 foot wide expressway.
Mr. Forbes stated that he enlightened the expressway consultants of the infrastructure located in the St. John area include Shrine of the Passion of Christ, the church, a well site and the Town’s water treatment plant. Mr. Forbes stated one of the proposed routes also goes directly over a park in Town. Mr. Forbes stated that all of the routes proposed for the Illiana Expressway have several obstacles and problems to overcome.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes stated that consultants are now down to eight to ten corridors. Mr. Forbes opined that the route would probably end up in the Lowell/Beecher area. Mr. Forbes stated there is a public work shop scheduled on February 8, 2012 at Avalon Manor in Hobart. There was no further discussion from the Board.
A TRUE COPY
____________________________________________
SUSAN E. WRIGHT, RECORDING SECRETARY
| Greg Volk | Tom Ryan | Attorney Tim Kuiper |
| Mike Forbes | Steve Kozel | Kenn Kraus |
| Tom Redar | Steve Kil | |
| Mike Ryan |
Mr. Volk introduced and welcomed Mr. Kenn Kraus, a representative of Haas & Associates, as the Board’s engineer. He stated that Haas & Associates have been appointed as the Town’s engineering firm.
Mr. Volk remarked that he anticipated that the Board would hear from Mr. Eenigenburg in February or March.
Mr. Kil stated that Petitioner, Mr. Lanahan, was present if the members had any questions. The Board had no questions.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to accept the amendments for Lots 17 and 18 of Silver Leaf Subdivision; Mr. Mike Ryan seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0). Mr. Kil asked the Board to sign the mylars. Mr. Kil instructed Mr. Lanahan to record the amended plat.
Mr. Volk stated that on January 24, 2012, Steve Kil, Pete Faberbock, Attorney Tim Kuiper and he met with representatives of Lake Central High School construction team to discuss the proposed construction project. He stated that Turner Engineering and Construction Management representatives were present. He stated there were approximately 15 people present during these discussions.
Mr. Volk stated that the representatives presented the construction project that they have laid out thus far and location of where construction would begin. Mr. Kil gave the construction representatives the time constraints that would have to be met in order to break ground on the construction planned for July, 2012. Mr. Volk stated that demolition is scheduled for June and construction of the first building to commence in July.
Mr. Volk stated that the first building to be constructed is an academic building located behind the existing two story building, and a swimming pool. Mr. Kil clarified that the swimming pool will be located on the south side where the modules are currently located.
Mr. Volk stated that the Board should have received a copy of the staff notes that were taken by the construction representatives and also by Mr. Kil. He recommended that the Board review these notes to enlighten themselves about the Lake Central High School construction project.
Mr. Kil stated that the construction representatives are prepared to attend the Plan Commission’s March study session.
Mr. Volk explained that Clark Middle School is also included in the construction project. He clarified that Clark Middle School will be the very first phase of the construction project. He stated that a proposed football field will be installed directly behind the vacant lot at Clark Middle School. Mr. Kil stated that the construction representatives will be in front of the Plan Commission for site plan approval.
Mr. Kil stated that the Clark Middle School construction project includes a track, field and bleachers and improved lighting. Mr. Kil stated that when Lake Central is under construction the football field there will be completely demolished and the new field will be moved to the north and changed to a north/south direction. Mr. Kil explained that during the course of that construction the Clark Middle School facility will be utilized with its proposed track/football field.
(General discussion ensued.)
The lighting was discussed. Mr. Kil stated that it was represented to him, “they can’t imagine the lights being on after, like, 10:00.” Mr. Kil stated that the lights would be on on game nights. Mr. Kil stated that the Clark Middle School project would be the first issue that would be presented to them.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil stated that the project is running on a very tight time line. Mr. Kil stated that on or about July 9, 2012, it is anticipated that they will be ready for a foundation. Mr. Kil explained that a foundation would allow the project to continue underground. He stated that they would not be able to do anything vertical until they receive final plat approval. Mr. Kil stated that the construction project is being run on an aggressive schedule.
Mr. Kil stated that he would keep the members apprised of the progress of the project by disseminating the staff notes on a timely basis. Mr. Kil informed that Board that is a 160 million dollar project and that the members should review the notes in order to keep abreast of the progress.
Mr. Kil noted that there will be no additional curb cuts in the Lake Central construction project and that the three existing ingress/egress onto Route 41 will continue to be used.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes remarked that as the construction dates draw near he anticipates more people to show up at the meetings.
Mr. Tom Ryan asked if the Board was obligated to allow them to install lighting. Mr. Volk stated that the Board is not obligated to allow lighting and that is one of the reasons the Petitioner has to appear before the Board.
Mr. Kil stated he provided the Petitioners with all of the information they needed to fulfill the requirements to commence construction. Mr. Kil stated he informed Petitioner that the Board would be concerned with and require all of the following: elevations around the building, exterior of the building, encroachments, dimensions, landscaping plan, lighting plan and traffic flow plan. Mr. Kil stated that the Board would not concern themselves with the engineering.
Mr. Volk remarked that the Board should be watchful of the west side of the high school near the residential area. He stated one of the proposed buildings would be 50 feet from the property line.
Mr. Kil stated that the traffic flow will be presented to the Board.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Tom Ryan referred to the memo wherein it is uncertain about lighting on the baseball field. Mr. Kil stated that if there is money available they will install lighting but at this time it is undetermined for financial reasons.
Mr. Redar mentioned asbestos in the building. Mr. Kil stated that they are aware that the asbestos has to be disposed of properly pursuant to EPA and IDEM regulations.
Mr. Volk stated that the members will be regularly updated on the project. There was no further discussion.
* * * * *
Mr. Volk stated that he was in receipt of a Construction Summary for the month of January; permits were issued for five single family homes.
(General discussion ensued.)
The Board concurred that the Plan Commission should retain control of lighting plans and reviewing them on a case by case basis.
(The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m.)
A TRUE COPY
____________________________________________
SUSAN E. WRIGHT, RECORDING SECRETARY
| Greg Volk | Tom Ryan | Attorney Tim Kuiper |
| Mike Forbes | Steve Kozel | Kenn Kraus |
| Tom Redar | Steve Kil | |
| Mike Ryan |
Mr. Teibel informed the Board that he is proposing a 5200 square foot building with mixed use. He stated that there is currently one national tenant (Subway) to be located in the building. This tenant would occupy approximately 1700 square feet of the building. He stated that the other available 3500 square feet may be used for insurance and medical related businesses.
Mr. Teibel referred to the site plan stating that a part of this building has frontage and will be facing Route 231. Mr. Teibel stated that this unit has a potential for a proposed drive-thru on the west end of the building. He stated at this point in time the drive-thru will not be used but may be in the future.
Mr. Teibel asked the Board for feedback on his proposed site plan. Mr. Forbes remarked he was trying to envision how the drive-thru would work. Mr. Teibel stated he thought about eliminating the access drive from the back and bringing two lanes in from Maple Street. He stated he could landscape to round out the corner. He stated this configuration would enable cars to circle the building. He stated that Subway has limited drive-up.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Teibel stated he could reconfigure the site plan to allow for more stacking of cars in the back of the building. He stated that the plan could be reconfigured to have the drive up lane come from the back of the building. Mr. Teibel stated that the existing storm and sanitary sewer to the property originate from the original plans to the subdivision.
The drive-thru and employee parking was discussed. Mr. Teibel stated that the entrance could also be reconfigured. Mr. Kil and Mr. Forbes made some recommendations for placement of the future drive-thru. Mr. Teibel stated he would be happy to make the recommended changes. Mr. Teibel stated that he will be using a trash enclosure similar to the one used at St. John Wine and Spirits, a full enclosure.
Mr. Teibel stated that he has envisioned going from 106’ of frontage (to 100-101’) on the building and losing five to 10 feet of the building. Mr. Kil concurred. He stated that the location where there is a 90 degree turn even five additional feet would make a difference.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Teibel stated there are 47 parking stalls for the building. He stated that this should be adequate parking for the proposed businesses. Mr. Teibel stated that if it is determined that parking is not sufficient he will do a cross access easement. Mr. Forbes recommended that the landscaping should be concentrated where it abuts the residential.
Mr. Kraus asked if the tenant would want to re-locate to the opposite side of the building which would eliminate any problems with the drive-thru. Mr. Teibel explained that the retailer selected the unit because of its visibility.
Mr. Teibel stated that he will make the recommended changes and submit them for Mr. Kraus’s review prior to the next regular Board meeting.
Mr. William Ledyard, Lake Central High School, Director of Facilities, introduced the following persons, Mr. Tom Neff, principal, Schmidt Associates; Mr. Duane Dart, architect, Schmidt Associates; Mr. Kyle Miller; Scott Atchison, lead superintendent of high school project; and, Attorney Cheryl Zic,
Mr. Ledyard informed the Board that Clark Middle School is a small part of the Lake Central High School construction project. He stated that the high school’s track will be relocated to Clark Middle School. The track is being relocated because the new academic wing for the high school project is going to be built on the high school’s existing track. Mr. Ledyard stated that this would be the first phase of the project. Mr. Ledyard turned the meeting over to Mr. Miller to walk the Board through the Clark Middle School project.
Mr. Kyle Miller informed the Board that Schmidt Associates have been hired to do the Lake Central project. He stated that he and his colleagues have met with Town representatives a few times previously and they appreciate the time spent working with the Town and its staff. Mr. Miller stated that although the project is running on a tight schedule they want to follow all of the steps that the Town requires.
Mr. Miller produced a site plan for the Board’s reference. Mr. Miller showed on the drawing where the proposed track, bleachers, natural turf football field, concession stand and hardscape will be built. He stated that the football field will be used by the middle school. He stated that the primary reason that this track has to be built is because a part of the project at the high school will be covering up the existing running track. Mr. Miller stated that this will give the high school students a place to run track for the next few years.
Mr. Miller stated that this construction will be to the south of the Clark Middle School in a big open area. Mr. Miller stated that their civil engineer is working closely with Mr. Ken Krauss to calculate the drainage and place any detention that is needed. Mr. Miller stated that this project will most likely be done in budget phases but they would like to have all of the site development approved at once. Mr. Miller stated that the building which is a concession, locker and rest room building will be Phase II.
Mr. Miller stated lighting on the football field had been discussed at previous meetings. He stated that the lighting would also be a Phase II item. He stated that it is understood that a photometrics plan would be required when the time comes. He stated that the lighting would probably be in Phase II of this project.
Mr. Miller stated that the project will commence in spring as soon as the weather allows. He stated that they want to start covering up the track at the high school and have the new track in by as soon as next track season.
Mr. Volk asked about the location of the bleachers. Mr. Miller stated that the idea with the bleachers was to get them as far away from the subdivision as possible. He stated there is a buffer on both sides. Mr. Forbes noted the drainage. Mr. Forbes stated he does not recall any discussion on drainage at all regarding all of the property between the school and Renaissance subdivision. Mr. Forbes remarked that there is probably work to be done on the drainage because there is a significant amount of wetlands and water.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil noted that the landscaping is clustered close to the field so that it can be used as a buffer to the subdivision. Mr. Forbes recommended some landscaping on the east side for a sound barrier.
Mr. Miller stated that the bleachers would probably be composed of aluminum/steel sitting on concrete on grade. He said that if footings were needed for the bleachers they would be installed. Mr. Forbes asked where the rest rooms would be located. Mr. Miller stated that the building would contain a concession, lockers, rest rooms and a basic type of press box.
Mr. Forbes stated that without seeing a photometric plan, he would not be able to approve any kind of lighting. He stated he would require some information on the lighting and would like to see the proposed lighting fixtures. Mr. Miller concurred and stated that he will provide information on the lighting.
Mr. Miller went through the tentative schedule with the Board. March 21 study session, present site plans for Clark Middle School; April 4, regular meeting, approval for Clark Middle School; April 18, Lake Central High School, status; May 2, request permission to advertise for public hearing for primary subdivision approval for the high school; May 16, study session, review process for the high school; June 6, regular meeting, public hearing for primary plat approval, request a special meeting to be held on July 11, for secondary plat approval.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes stated that with the fast pace of this project, the sooner the Board has drawings for review the more likely they would be able to move forward. Mr. Forbes stated that if the plans are not reviewed ahead of time not to expect much to be accomplished.
Mr. Kil asked the representatives to touch upon the lighting at Clark Middle School. Mr. Ledyard stated that lighting was discussed at the last meeting. He stated that lighting would be for varsity track athletes. He stated that these events start early. Mr. Ledyard stated that middle school track and middle school football also starts very early. He stated that the school would be more than willing to have a strict curfew of 9:00 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, 10:00 p.m. on Friday and Saturday. He stated that the school is very willing to have a curfew enforced for the proposed complex.
(General discussion ensued.)
The high school project was discussed next. Mr. Duane Dart, project manager/architect for the high school project appeared. Mr. Dart presented a drawing for the Board’s review. Mr. Dart showed one section of the addition where a three story classroom/academics wing with some vocational is to be located.
Mr. Dart showed the Board where the pool will be located and how it will lay over where the modular classrooms are presently located. Mr. Dart stated that the three story, classroom addition will be located on the west side; the pool addition will be located where the existing modulars are. Mr. Dart stated that the three story classrooms and pool will be the first phase.
Mr. Dart explained that during the second phase the following will be built: auditorium, music area, administration, main entry, media center and a gym. Mr. Dart showed the Board the floor plan for the three story classroom. He stated that the gym would have two floors. Mr. Forbes asked where the street would be located. Mr. Dart showed him the location of the street.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Dart pointed out the location of the new bus lot, the student parking and staff parking. Students would not be allowed access to the bus lot. Mr. Dart also stated that there would be emergency vehicle access to the fields in the back. Mr. Dart stated that they will not be changing ingress/egress from Route 41. He stated what is being changed is the traffic pattern when you enter the school grounds. Mr. Dart stated that the parking lot would work much like a shopping center with an interior loop and an exterior loop with parking in between. He stated there would be an additional 200-300 parking stalls.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Dart explained that the buses will be more easily monitored once the buses are integrated into one space. He also showed on the drawing the student/visitor entrances. Planting for a buffer was discussed.
Photometrics were discussed. Mr. Dart explained that they are now looking at LED lights that are somewhere between “standard normal lights” and “pure dark sky lights”. He stated that the dark sky lights do not put out much light and don’t do much for security as they are not really meant to be used for a school. He stated they are attempting to use LED lights for low energy. Mr. Forbes stated that the Board was concerned about the glare from the lights.
Mr. Kil indicated that NIPSCO will have to build a substation to accommodate power at the high school. Mr. Dart stated they are converting from gas heat to electric heat. Mr. Dart explained that the school will have a variable refrigerant system. He stated that there will be no compressors running, and the energy system will be much more efficient.
Mr. Dart stated that although they did not have a lot to show the Board at this meeting they are diligently working on the project back at the office. He stated that in a short time they will be sharing a lot more drawings with the Board, probably within the next week or two.
Mr. Volk stated the project was nice.
Mr. Kil stated that there are some things that will have to happen that are not on the schedule. He stated that the zone change for a piece of property is a part of this construction project is a process before the Plan Commission. Mr. Kil stated he did not anticipate any problems with the zone change. Mr. Ledyard explained that the school corporation is in the process of closing on a piece of property located between Taco Bell on the far southeast corner of the building consisting of 1.38 acres. He stated that the closing should happen within the next thirty days.
Mr. Kil stated that the July 11, 2012, date for final plat approval for the high school is an important date. He stated that a foundation release will be required immediately. He stated that a foundation release will enable the architectural team to do its work. He stated that a permit cannot be issued until final plat approval is granted. He stated that a foundation release should be received from the State Building Commissioner.
Mr. Forbes asked Mr. Kraus if he had reviewed the calculations. Mr. Kraus stated that they have discussed rainfall intensity, co-efficient and what computer programs to use. He stated they have discussed the concept of underground detention. Mr. Kraus stated that he is considering the subdivision control ordinances as a minimum standard and the project engineer has offered plans that are more elaborate, more modern and exceed the ordinance requirements. Mr. Dart stated that much more material will be provided in the near future.
Mr. Forbes asked if any waivers required. Mr. Kil stated there would be waivers related to landscaping in the parking lot. Mr. Kil stated that there are not a significant amount of waivers.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil stated that he has requested that during this project they consider constructing a tower on top of the high school so that it would free up antennae space for the Town. He stated that currently the school corporation leases antennae space from the Town. The project representatives stated they are investigating this matter. Attorney Zic reminded Mr. Kil that the school corporation leases antennae space from the Town. Mr. Kil stated that on a project this size it would make sense to consolidate the tower at the high school.
Mr. Kil asked about the disposition of the trailers and the AC unit at the bus barn. Mr. Dart stated that the HVAC would be disposed of, but there are no plans for the trailers at the present time.
The project engineers again thanked Mr. Kil, his staff and the Board for their time.
Mr. Volk asked Mr. Kil about the status of the dumpster enclosures. Mr. Kil stated he has had no input on the dumpster enclosures but he would follow up on this matter.
(General discussion ensued.)
(The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m.)
A TRUE COPY
____________________________________________
SUSAN E. WRIGHT, RECORDING SECRETARY
| Greg Volk | Tom Ryan | Attorney Tim Kuiper |
| Mike Forbes | Steve Kozel | Kenn Kraus |
| Tom Redar | Steve Kil | |
| Mike Ryan |
Mr. Volk noted that the main issues were the traffic flow and the drive-thru window. Mr. Teibel outlined the issues as follows: improving the drive-thru; “softened” the parking around the southeast corner of the lot to make the turn easier; decreased the size of the building by six feet in order to widen the green space on the east side of the building; increase the landscaping on the east border of the property; reposition the in/out access points for the garbage dumpster; and last, a lighting plan that was added to the site plan (a copy of the lighting plan of the McDonalds in Dyer).
Mr. Teibel apologized for not having the final plat engineering ready for Mr. Kraus’s review before the meeting. He asked the Board, in the event that they do approve the site plan, to stipulate that the approval would be contingent upon Mr. Kraus’s review and approval of the final engineering before a permit could be secured.
Mr. Volk noted that the garbage dumpster is set farther back from Maple Lane. Mr. Teibel stated that the set back is 15 feet.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Volk asked about additional tenants. Mr. Teibel stated that the Subway will take up approximately 1700-1800 square feet, and that he is working with two prospective tenants at the present time.
Mr. Redar noted that the site plan reflects a 30 foot building line on the west side of the lot. He asked if this would pose a problem with the dumpster being over the building line. Mr. Kil stated that the dumpster is not a structure but an enclosure. Mr. Teibel stated he would move the dumpster back if necessary.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kozel asked if there would be any semi trucks going through the parking lot. Mr. Teibel stated that he did not anticipate any semi trucks coming through the parking lot.
Mr. Kil noted that all new construction in the Routes 41 and 231 corridors are required to be brick with dumpster enclosures like and kind to the primary structure.
Mr. Forbes stated that he would prefer a special meeting be held before the next study session in order to give Mr. Kraus an opportunity to review the final plat engineering. Mr. Teibel stated he would be willing to move the matter to the April 4 meeting. Mr. Volk asked for additional information on the proposed lighting plan.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to defer this matter to April 4, 2012; Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. The matter was unanimously carried by voice vote (5/0).
Mr. Volk noted that the Petitioner had received preliminary plat approval in November, 2011; he noted that the approval was contingent upon recommendations being reviewed by the Town’s former engineering firm, Robinson Engineering. Mr. Volk noted that Mr. Kraus had also reviewed the recommendations and submitted a letter to the Board. Mr. Volk noted that the letter reflected that the final plat drawing dated February 10, 2012, was satisfactory. This included a revision on March 3, 2012.
Mr. Rettig informed the Board that Petitioner understood that a building permit could be secured only after the necessary fees are paid (developmental fee, SWYPPP fee, letter of credit) and the mylars are signed. Mr. Rettig stated, in the event that the Board approved final plat, the fees would be paid before securing a building permit or recording the final plat.
Mr. Volk asked about the front commercial lot. Mr. Rettig informed the Board that he has commenced work on the commercial lot, but Mr. Meyers is still in negotiations with his neighbors to the south whose property contains stop light access on to Route 41.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil noted that no fees have ever been paid on this project. He stated that there is a developmental fee of $900 and $150 SWYPPP fee.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to grant final plat approval to Meyer’s Addition, Unit Two, contingent upon receipt of a letter of credit in the amount of $45,130.80, a $900 developmental fee, $150 SWYPPP fee, and Mr. Kraus’s final, satisfactory review of SWYPPP plan. Mr. Redar seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (5/0).
Mr. Muenich stated that presently there is a purchaser for Lot 10 and purchaser intends to build a home. He stated he would be asking for a partial waiver of sidewalks. He stated that he submitted previous drawings so that Mr. Kraus can review the as-builts that were accepted by the Town some time ago.
Mr. Muenich asked the Board for permission to advertise for public hearing at the April meeting for both primary and final plat approval.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes noted that Lot 8 reflected a 100 foot building line; he asked if there was a 100 foot building line. Mr. Muenich stated to his understanding the building line is 100 feet. He stated he will confirm these numbers.
Mr. Redar noted the rear yard building line on Lot 10. Mr. Kil explained that he is not sure why these building lines appear on the drawings. He stated that the Plan Commission had interpreted that the zoning ordinance requires a rear yard setback and not a rear building line. Mr. Kil stated that this line could be removed.
Mr. Muenich stated that he would eliminate the rear building line and designate the front of Lot 10 as the western face so that the lot has a front lot building line designated. Mr. Muenich stated he will require the structure on Lot 10 face west.
Mr. Tom Ryan asked about a garage. Mr. Muenich stated that his understanding was there would be no access off of Prim Rose. Mr. Forbes recommended that the plat reflect “no access easement”.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to authorize Cardinal Cove to advertise for public hearing at the regular meeting on April 4, 2012. Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (5/0).
Mr. Miller indicated that the construction group wanted to ensure that they are on the same page as the Plan Commission before they seek approval at the April 4, 2012 meeting. Mr. Miller gave a brief recap.
Mr. Miller stated that the drawing had not changed much since the last time the Board viewed it. He reiterated that the plan includes a football field, running track, bleachers, lights and some pavement. He stated that the proposed building would not be constructed until Phase II. He stated that the reason the building was reflected on the drawing was to ensure that the drainage calculations are accurate.
Mr. Miller stated that the project was going to be used mainly for high school track for the next couple of years since they will be building on top of the existing high school track. He stated that at the completion of the high school project the football field would become the middle school’s football field.
Mr. Miller presented the landscaping plan to the Board. He stated that the school corporation would like to focus the landscaping more around the football field itself. He stated this would provide a screen. He stated that it would be decidedly less landscaping around the football field than landscaping the entire property.
Mr. Miller showed the Board the layout of the trees and shrubs. He stated there would be a mix of oaks and maples. Mr. Miller stated that some of the trees will grow to 30 feet and some trees will grow to 80 feet. He stated that this mix will create a pretty good screen. He stated that the trees would be packed in densely around the field, as reflected on the drawing.
Mr. Volk asked about the distance from the south property line. Mr. Miller stated that these proposed landscaping would be 150-160 feet at the closest point to the property. Mr. Miller showed the Board the open area reflected on the drawing as a wetlands.
Mr. Miller moved on to the photometric plan. He stated that the goal was to have zero level light around the perimeter of the property. He stated that the light spill is zero all the way down the property line. Mr. Miller stated that the school has agreed to a light curfew shutting the lights off at 9:00 p.m. during the week, and with a 10:00 p.m. shut off on Thursday, Friday and Saturday.
Mr. Miller moved on to the audio system. He stated that the audio would be used for football games and track events. He stated that all of the sound would be directed towards the bleachers. He stated that the press box will be heard at the edges at times. He stated that a PA system is necessary for school sporting events.
Mr. Volk asked if the planting of trees close to around the perimeter of the whole field and track would be better for blocking sound. Mr. Miller concurred in that the tree line would probably catch the sound. Mr. Volk noted that it would do nothing for blocking the lights. Mr. Volk stated that he would prefer to see the trees all the way around the field. He stated there a quite a few neighborhoods to the east and sound carries.
Mr. Miller stated that they are somewhat limited in placing trees all the way around because of the proximity to the bleachers. He stated that there is some growth on the east side of the property at the present time.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Ledyard explained that there are wild grasses and wetland type of plants growing on the east side of the property.
Mr. Kraus had a question about the ground water table and whether or not under drains would be needed under any impervious surfaces. He stated he has not seen any soil borings on this site.
Mr. Miller stated that soil borings have been ordered but he doesn’t have the results yet. He stated that the football field will be a natural turf football field. Mr. Miller stated that under drains are planned for the field and if under drains are needed under the pavement they will be installed there as well.
Mr. Kraus asked about the future building and how it how it would be served with sanitary sewers and water. He also wanted to know if the service lines will be installed under the pavement now or if they will they be installed later. Mr. Miller explained that when the building is erected there will be new pavement. He stated that utilities will be easily added in the future. Due to budget constraints, the service lines won’t be installed until Phase II. Mr. Miller stated that they are undecided on the sewer.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Ryan asked about the seating capacity of the bleachers. Mr. Miller stated that the bleacher capacity is 1600 for visitors and home both on the same side. Mr. Tom Ryan asked if there was ample parking. Mr. Ledyard stated that the entire south side of the building has parking. Mr. Ledyard stated that it is rare for the bleachers to fill up entirely for high school track or middle school football. Mr. Ryan asked about future use and having to add additional bleachers. Mr. Ledyard stated they would not have the ability to add bleachers on the east side.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Volk asked about high school football being played at Clark Middle School. Mr. Ledyard stated that the high school would never play football at Clark Middle School. He stated that the high school would reach out to their opponents and switch the game to the opponent’s school.
Mr. Volk asked the Board for their thoughts on the proposed landscaping. Mr. Kozel asked for more details on the landscaping that would include what type of trees, spacing of trees, how big the trees will be. He noted that oaks will take a long time to grow.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Ryan asked how tall the trees that are being planted would be. Mr. Miller stated that they would have a 2 1/2 “ caliper. He stated that the trees would probably be six to seven feet tall. Mr. Forbes stated that the Board wanted to get as much out of the landscaping as possible for controlling sound and lighting.
Mr. Volk stated that the back should be filled in more; he recommended the addition of some evergreens outside of the tree line. He stated that the evergreens would be additional buffer and year round color.
Mr. Redar remarked that the tree line may have to be moved because as the trees mature they will be too close to the bleachers and crowded.
Mr. Volk stated that the Board would like to see more of an evergreen type of tree around the outer perimeter and also see what can be done on the east side of the property. He stated that these trees would not have to be as densely packed as the trees around the football field are. He stated that the evergreens would balance the plantings with some year round green and also absorb some of the lower sound that would travel.
Mr. Ledyard asked the Board if they really wanted plantings on the east side. He remarked that it’s an almost natural area, “almost like a wetland drainage” type of area. He noted that there are no residences close to this area. Mr. Ledyard stated they are trying to shield the south and the west sides as best they can.
Mr. Volk asked about soccer. Mr. Ledyard stated that the soccer would be more middle school P.E. soccer.
Mr. Volk noted there will be four banks of lights. Mr. Miller stated that there will be four main light posts for lighting up the field with zero spill all the way around the property line.
Mr. Ryan asked if all the lighting was absolutely necessary. Mr. Ledyard stated that the lights were necessary because middle school football games in the fall often run into the dark, and track starts in early spring where lighting is needed.
Mr. Volk asked about lighting other than the stadium lighting. Mr. Miller stated that when the building is constructed it would contain wall packs for security. Mr. Miller stated that there would be parking lot lights also.
Mr. Redar asked how people would access the bleachers. Mr. Miller showed on the drawing how the bleachers are accessed.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Miller stated that there would be a four foot, chain link perimeter fence around the football field.
Mr. Dart stated that they will provide additional information on the lighting posts and fixtures.
Mr. Forbes asked if there was a lighting standard that was being used for the football field. He stated that different sports have different lighting level standards. Mr. Miller stated that NFHS has guidelines that are being followed. The Board discussed differences between Musco and GE lighting.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Miller stated that a sound consultant put the sound system together. He stated that this audio system was designed to be sensitive to the property lines. He stated that the sound would be directed towards the seats. Mr. Miller stated that the sound level can be adjusted. Mr. Dart stated that the four speakers will be mounted to the light standards and all aimed towards the east.
Mr. Kil informed the Board that he provided them with copies of the staff meeting notes. Mr. Dart summarized the recommendations made by the Board, add some pine trees around the edges, clarify what can be done with the east side of the property, possibly adding some wetland(s) plantings. There was discussion of moving the entire field to the west, but this was not considered feasible.
Mr. Miller stated that they would continue to work on the project and he encouraged the Board members to communicate any feedback to them. Mr. Kil stated that Petitioner should attend the March 21, 2012, study session.
Mr. Kil recommended that the Board members read their staff notes to keep abreast of the high school construction project.
Mr. Volk reminded the Board members to bring their Model Lighting Ordinance books to the study session.
Mr. Volk asked Attorney Kuiper for an update on the dumpster compliance. Attorney Kuiper stated he would update the Board on the dumpster compliance at the study session.
(The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m.)
A TRUE COPY
____________________________________________
SUSAN E. WRIGHT, RECORDING SECRETARY
| Greg Volk | Steve Hastings | Attorney Tim Kuiper |
| Mike Ryan | Steve Kozel | Kenn Kraus |
| Tom Redar | Steve Kil | |
| Mike Forbes |
Mr. Muenich was not present when the matter of Cardinal Cove was announced by Mr. Volk. Attorney Kuiper recommended that the Board move this matter to the end of the agenda. He stated it was unusual for Mr. Muenich to be late for a meeting.
Mr. Forbes asked what the Petitioner was building. Mr. Kil stated that there would be two duplexes built. Mr. Volk noted that the duplexes are to be like and kind to the existing duplexes. Mr. Krauss stated that he had previously reviewed the mylars.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to authorize signing of the mylars for Meyer’s Addition, Unit Two, and make a recommendation to the Town Council to accept the letter of credit for Meyer’s Addition, Unit Two; Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0).
Mr. Ledyard stated that the lights were going to be bid on alternate. Mr. Ryan asked if funds were available for the lights at the present time. Mr. Ledyard explained that it depended on how the bids come in. He stated that all of the infrastructure for the lights will be completed in the initial phase of the project, but the lights themselves will be bid as an alternate. Mr. Ryan asked about the cost of the lights. Mr. Ledyard explained that it depended on the market, but estimated the cost of the lights in the ballpark of $150,000.
Mr. Volk noted that the Board is in receipt of a letter from Dr. Veracco, school superintendent. Mr. Volk stated that that letter mainly referenced the lights.
Mr. Volk paraphrased Mr. Kenn Kraus’s letter of April 4, 2012: The project is to add a running track, soccer/football field and bleachers with ancillary supporting systems (e.g. lighting, irrigation, drainage, etc.) to the school site; the drawing dated March 26, 2012 are satisfactory; the fee for the review and inspection of the Storm Water Pollution Plan SWYPPP is $733.50; and, the Developmental fee is $900.00.
Mr. Volk stated that he has concerns about the lights. He stated that he mentioned at the last meeting that he would like to limit the lighting to a number of events. He stated at the last meeting he heard a number of events including soccer and Pop Warner. Mr. Volk stated that the letter from Dr. Verraco references charitable events that may or may not be held at the proposed football field at Clark Middle School.
Mr. Volk stated he does not have a problem with the light shut-off times of 9:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. He stated that, theoretically, that could be seven days a week. Mr. Ryan asked how the light curfew would be enforced. Mr. Ledyard stated that the light curfew will be the parameters for any event. Mr. Ledyard stated that most middle school football games are over by 8:30 p.m. He stated that if the event was not over by the light curfew time the event would either be suspended or called as is. Mr.Ledyard stated that the light curfew would be strictly enforced.
Mr. Ryan asked if there would be any type of penalty if the curfew was not enforced. Mr. Ledyard reiterated that the curfew would be followed. He stated that the light curfew would be a part of the playing rules for the field and would be strictly enforced.
Mr. Ryan asked when they were projecting the field would be ready. Mr. Ledyard stated that the football field will not be used until calendar year 2013. Mr. Ryan stated that a couple of years from now perhaps there would be laxity with the light curfew. Mr. Ledyard stated that the lighting curfew would be one of the ground rules for the field.
Mr. Ryan reminded Mr. Ledyard that he had stated at a previous meeting that he is not fond of the lights at all and wondered if they were really necessary. Mr. Ledyard stated that the lights are absolutely necessary.
Mr. Ledyard stated that the lights on the proposed field meet all of the Town’s codes, the lights do not spill over property lines and the curfew recommended by the Board and Mr. Kil has been agreed to.
Mr. Ledyard stated that the facility is being paid for by taxpayer money for the students of Clark and the community. He stated that he would not want to limit the community from the facility. Mr. Kozel stated he does not believe they are trying to limit people from the facility; the Board is concerned about the usage.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Ledyard reiterated that the school has agreed to the light curfew suggested by Mr. Kil. Mr. Kozel noted that at least four events have been proposed to be held at the facility. Mr. Ryan asked how many more events would be added. Mr. Ledyard stated that he was not able to answer the question; he stated he would not want to deny the community/taxpayers use of the facility. He stated that the school is a public entity. He stated that the ground rules as established with Mr. Kil and the Board would be strictly enforced.
Mr. Volk concurred in that standards for the lighting have been met. He stated that it is not so much the light curfew, but the number of events that may take place there. Mr. Ryan added, from his point of view, it is both the light curfew time and the number of events. Mr. Ryan recommended that there be more discussion on the light curfew and number of events.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Volk noted a section of the letter referencing the charitable organizations and waiving the light curfew; he asked Mr. Ledyard to explain. Mr. Ledyard stated that there are a couple of charitable organizations that the high school partners with, one being Relay for Life. He stated that the high school track will not be available to them during the construction period. He stated that in the event that the high school partners with a charitable organization and they chose to use the Clark Middle School track he wanted the Board to be made aware of it. Mr. Volk asked about the sentence reading “The light curfew will not apply to these events.” Mr. Ledyard explained that the Relay for Life is a continual 24/36 hour walk that is held to raise funds for cancer. Mr. Ryan noted this event would require the lights to be on all night.
Mr. Volk stated, in his mind, the matter at hand is the number of events per year. Mr. Volk concurred that the curfew has been agreed to. Mr. Volk stated that the Board would have no control over the number of events, and the neighbors around the school also have to be taken into consideration. Mr. Ledyard pointed out that the lights don’t spill into the neighbors’ yards as per the photometric drawing. Mr. Volk concurred but remarked that there would still be glare.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Hastings asked if there were any other events that may be held at the football field that Mr. Ledyard could call to mind. Mr. Ledyard explained to the Board that there are people coming to him every year for various causes but the Relay for Life is one that comes to mind being a multiple day event.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Ledyard stated he sent a letter to Mr. Kil with the approximate number of high school varsity girls and boys track and middle school football events. Mr. Volk stated he recalled there to be thirty-some events. Mr. Leyard stated it was probably between 36 and 40 events. Mr. Volk stated he would feel more comfortable having an idea of how many events will actually be held there per year. Mr. Ledyard explained that some events during the week day will not even require lights.
Mr. Ledyard reiterated he does not want to limit the taxpayers the use of the facility. Mr. Ryan remarked that he would like to limit the amount of time the lights are on. Mr. Ledyard reiterated that the curfew would be adhered to.
Mr. Ryan asked if it would be possible to approve the site plan for the football field and defer the issue on the lights to a later date. Mr. Ryan stated that the situation with the lights, number of events and times needs more discussion.
Attorney Kuiper stated that if the Board wanted to defer approval on the football field lighting that they would need to articulate reasons for doing so.
Mr. Volk stated a myriad of reasons, the lights, the noise, the number of events, the PA system. He stated that the neighbors should not have to be subjected to events every night.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Volk asked Mr. Ledyard to ascertain who will be using the football field and how often. Mr. Ledyard stated he would never be able to answer this question in a finite manner. He stated he would be able to give an approximation of the Lake Central sanctioned events. He stated as far as community events, organizations or people that want to use the field, he could not provide a number for the Board. Mr. Ledyard stated he did not want to limit taxpayer use of the facility.
(General discussion ensued.)
Attorney Kuiper stated that the football field lighting would be taken up for further discussion at the study session. He further stated that approval of the rest of the site plan would be prudent tonight.
Mr. Ryan made a motion to defer approval of the lighting at the Clark Middle School football field and have more discussion at the May 2, 2012 meeting, but approve the site plan for the football field and track field with amenities. Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0).
Mr. Volk noted that the lots in Cardinal Cove have been resubdivided from four lots into three. Mr. Muenich concurred. He stated that Lot 10 is now approximately 1.5 acres and the remaining two portions of Lots 8 and 9 are each 1.1 acres. Mr. Muenich stated that a five foot no-access strip along Primrose Drive is noted on Lot 10. A five foot setback line for any fence that might be installed on Lot 10 was also added, the purpose being to provide sufficient room for equipment to work in the easement area where utilities are currently located.
Mr. Muenich stated that two notes have also been added, one, no vehicular access is allowed to Primrose Drive from Lot 10, and two, any residential structure on Lot 10 shall face west. Mr. Muenich stated that there is a request for a waiver on the sidewalk along Primrose as the Petitioner does not want to be surrounded by sidewalk. Mr. Muenich stated that the geographic image reflects a pedestrian crossing will be provided in the southwest corner at the intersection of Cardinal Court and Primrose on Lot10.
Mr. Muenich stated that all of the changes that were requested at the last meeting were complied with. He stated that all of the improvements are in, and there are no additions or changes to any of the existing improvements. Mr. Muenich informed the Board that the dividing lines between Lots 8 and 9 have been slightly skewed in order for the currently installed utilities to service Lot 9.
Mr. Muenich stated all of the lot lines meet the Town’s standards. Mr. Muenich stated there is a 100 foot building line on Lot 8. Mr. Muenich stated that it appears that the plan has passed Mr. Kraus’s review. Mr. Kraus concurred.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Redar noted on the re-plat reflects the rear yard building line and the no access strip. Mr. Muenich stated that the ordinance requires a rear yard building line. Mr. Kil clarified that a rear yard setback is required. Mr. Muenich stated the rear yard building line would be removed.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes stated he has no issues with the plat itself, but he is not in favor of waiving the sidewalk. Mr. Ryan asked why he did not want the sidewalk. Mr. Muenich stated that the Petitioner does not want to be surrounded by a sidewalk. Petitioner is putting up a very expensive house and he doesn’t want people, in effect, looking through his back yard.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes stated that without the sidewalk pedestrian are going to have to walk in the street. He stated he believed this to be a safety issue. Mr. Muenich stated that the waiver for the sidewalk is just on Primrose Drive. Mr. Forbes stated it’s an unfortunate effect of having a triple-fronted property. Mr. Volk concurred; he believed the sidewalk should be put in.
Mr. Volk opened the floor for public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING
Peter Kohut, 8833 Monfort Drive
Mr. Kohut stated his residence is just east of Cardinal Cove. He stated he is here representing Wanda and Joe Jacik also, who live east of Cardinal Cove within 300 feet of the subdivision. He stated neither he nor the Jaciks are against combining of the lots so that the lot is large enough to handle the home to be built on it. He stated he wanted to take this opportunity to make the Plan Commission aware of a problem they have been having in Starwood Estates. He stated that there are sidewalks up and down the Starwood Estates subdivision, but to the immediate north of Starwood there is an older subdivision with no sidewalks at all.
Mr. Kohut stated they have no access to any parks in this area. He stated there are parks on the south, southwest and northeast section of Town. He stated there are only a few “pocket parks” near him.
(Mr. Kohut submits pictures to the Board.)
Mr. Kohut asked that the Plan Commission recommend to Mr. Kil and the Town Council to take the 87th Lane which would connect Monfort Drive to Primrose Drive to make a path.
Mr. Volk stated he would like to hear Mr. Kohut’s idea, but for the time being, focus on the item at hand, Lots 8, 9 and 10 in Cardinal Cove. Mr. Volk stated he would give him an opportunity to speak about his idea later.
Mr. Kohut stated the matter is related because Cardinal Cove has cut Starwood off from the park. He asked the Board if the Cardinal Cove could provide Starwood access to the park which is located immediately west of Starwood.
Mr. Forbes stated that when the southern square develops Monfort will continue and there will be a connection. Mr. Kohut stated Monfort Drive was never intended to go through as a thoroughfare. Mr. Kohut stated that he does not oppose Mr. Muenich’s development of the lots. He just wanted to ask if the right of way could be improved even if it’s nothing more than an asphalt path to get from Starwood to the next subdivision. He stated he is referring to 87th Lane.
Mr. Volk assured Mr. Kohut that he would have Mr. Kil look into this matter related to 87th Lane. Mr. Volk asked Mr. Kil to bring a drawing to the next study session.
Mr. Volk called for further public comment. There was no further public comment. Mr. Volk closed the public hearing and brought the matter back before the Board.
There was no further discussion by the Board. Mr. Ryan made a motion to approve the resubdivision of Lots 8, 9 and 10 in Cardinal Cove and not include the waiver for sidewalks. Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0).
Mr. Muenich requested that the Board approve the final plat for Lots 8, 9 and 10 at Cardinal Cove and authorize the authorities to execute the same. Mr. Kraus asked if Mr. Muenich had the mylars. Mr. Muenich stated that he can bring the mylar in by Friday.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes made a motion to waive Plan Commission rule regarding the thirty (30) day wait between primary plat approval and final plat approval. Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved by voice vote (6/0).
Mr. Forbes made a motion to approve final plat for Lots 8, 9 and 10 at Cardinal Cove, contingent upon review and approval of mylars by Mr. Krauss. Mr. Hastings seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0).
Mr. Kil informed the Board that there has been a request from a property owner to begin construction on a home. The property owner purchased approximately three acres north of Wall Street on the west side of Patterson. They tore down the existing house. The proposed new home is an approximate 7300 square foot ranch.
The homeowner has encountered a problem in that they need to turn the property into a lot of record. Mr. Kil stated nothing needs to be done to the property other than having it platted. Mr. Kil stated it is currently metes and bounds. Mr. Kil stated that the homeowner would like to start on the earth work and foundation work. Mr. Kil stated he would like to issue a foundation permit only to commence work on the site.
Mr. Forbes asked if the drainage needed to be reviewed.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil stated that the existing lot will be taken and turned from metes and bounds to a plat, a two lot subdivision. Attorney Kuiper stated that he and Mr. Kil had conferred on this matter and if the Plan Commission is agreeable they could waive the requirement for the building to be on a subdivided lot and issue a foundation permit only. In the meantime, the property could be platted and will come to the Board for its customary review. Mr. Kuiper stated that since, in this case, it is only one lot and otherwise exceeds all of the Town’s ordinance requirements, he would only recommend it in this case.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to authorize Mr. Kil to issue a foundation permit only for 9120 Patterson. Mr. Redar seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0).
There was no further discussion by the Board.
(The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m.)
A TRUE COPY
____________________________________________
SUSAN E. WRIGHT, RECORDING SECRETARY
| Greg Volk | Steve Hastings | Attorney Tim Kuiper |
| Mike Ryan | Steve Kozel | Kenn Kraus |
| Tom Redar | Steve Kil | |
| Mike Forbes |
Mr. Rettig, Land Technologies, appeared before the Board to review site plans on the Meadows of St. John. Mr. Rettig stated that the Meadows of St. John is located at 85th and Farmington, immediately south of Bingo Lake. He stated that the infrastructure is already in place. Mr. Rettig stated that four lots were planned but Petitioner has decided to add a fifth building. Mr. Rettig stated that Petitionr is requesting a re-plat of what has already been designated as the Meadows of St. John, Phase Two. Mr. Rettig stated sewer and water taps would have to be reworked. He requested that the Board schedule this matter for the next meeting in order that Petitioner may request permission to advertise for public hearing.
(Board examining documents.)
Mr. Forbes asked when this matter was presented. Mr. Rettig stated it was brought in approximately a month ago by Mr. Kil, just a brief review of the project. Mr. Forbes stated that he has not seen the plans before tonight. Mr. Kraus stated that Mr. Kil presented this matter briefly.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Rettig explained to the Board that the site plan reflects the old Tract lines 7, 8, 9 and 10. He noted that the lettered tract lines reflect the original lot lines, and the numbered tract lines reflect the proposed tract lines for the re-plat. He explained that he identified the new configuration with letters in lieu of numbers to make it less confusing.
Mr. Forbes remarked that he recalled that the last time this parcel was platted there were existing homeowners who were adamant in that they wanted the proposed structures to be like and kind to what currently exists there. Mr. Rettig stated that the proposed residences are very nice project. Mr. Rettig stated that Mr. Meyer just completed a similar project in Schererville, north of Route 30 off of Janice Drive called Woody Creek.
Mr. Hastings noted that he did not see sidewalks reflected on the site plan; he asked Petitioner if they planned on putting sidewalk all the way around the project. Mr. Rettig stated that Petitioner would prefer not to. He stated that there are “some sidewalks out there there.” He reiterated Petitioner would prefer not to but that the sidewalks could be discussed at a later date.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Meyer explained to the Board that there is a very small cul de sac located there. He stated that the type of building being proposed will attract middle-aged and older people and not usually people with small children or kids. He stated that the design of the building is more for empty nesters. He stated that there would be no through traffic in this subdivision.
Mr. Kraus asked about the parking spacing. Mr. Rettig explained the parking. He stated there is parking for two cars for each unit and 19 extra parking spaces for visitors.
Mr. Rettig requested that the Board schedule this matter for the next meeting in order that Petitioner may request permission to advertise for public hearing.
Mr. Ledyard stated the presentation includes the following information: a site plan, views of the proposed building, logistics plan, and submittal schedule to the Plan Commission. Mr. Ledyard stated that there are several engineers on the Lake Central project. He stated that the engineers have been presenting the project to Mr. Kraus in pieces so that he has the opportunity to review it and is not inundated with all of the information at once.
Mr. Ledyard first presentation was an overview of the site plan. The Phase One project showed the location of the pool, a three-story academic wing and a two-story vocational wing. Going around the building the location of the auditorium, administration offices for the high school, and freshman center main and entry were shown. The gym location was pointed out. Mr. Ledyard stated that the football field will retain the same footprint but be turned ninety degrees. He showed the location of the new varsity baseball field. Mr. Ledyard pointed out the practice field for several sports and also the location of the underground detention tanks.
Mr. Ledyard stated that Mr. Krauss and the civil engineer have been working diligently on the underground detention tanks.
Mr. Ledyard stated that no entrances onto Route 41 will be altered in any way so INDOT would not have to be consulted on the project. Mr. Ledyard pointed out the location of the bus staging where there is room for 60 buses. He pointed out the location of the staff parking and the student/visitor parking lots. He showed the location of the lot where band practice will take place.
Mr. Ledyard also presented an overview what the site will look like from all sides and directions. The representations depicted elevations from various directions. Mr. Ledyard stated that the building will consist of masonry and metal panels with and EPD roof. The screen walled landscaping was also depicted.
Mr. Miller submitted the brick and metal panels for the Board’s review...
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Ledyard next presented the logistics plan. Mr. Ledyard stated that this logistics plan has been reviewed with the police and fire departments. Mr. Ledyard stated after meeting with the police and fire departments a few changes were made.
Mr. Ledyard stated that the safety of the students, staff and community members is of paramount importance in this project. He stated that there will be two staging areas. He stated that he is anticipating receipt of a permit for a temporary curb cut from INDOT. He stated a curb cut will be in place for all of the construction traffic. He stated that the construction traffic will be entering and exiting in one spot. He stated no construction traffic will be allowed in the Heron Lake subdivision. Mr. Ledyard stated that there will be “No Lake Central Construction Traffic” signs at the entrances of Heron Lake.
Mr. Ledyard stated that a perimeter road will go all the way around the facility, but slightly altered. He stated that the road was made a little wider after discussions with the Police and Fire chiefs. Mr. Kraus remarked that there will also be a construction traffic sign placed at Ventura Drive to keep construction traffic out of this subdivision.
Mr. Ledyard stated that safety and being good neighbors to residents on the west and the south are of the utmost importance. Mr. Ledyard stated that every subcontractor will receive a copy of the logistics plan.
Mr. Forbes asked if the INDOT permit requested for the construction entrance would be for full access. Mr. Ledyard stated that this entrance would be right in/right out only with signs posted, and the construction entrance is temporary for only the duration of the project.
Mr. Forbes asked if this area would be fenced. Mr. Ledyard stated that all staging areas would be fenced along with all of the Phase One projects being fenced.
Mr. Ledyard discussed a schedule. He stated that last week Mr. Kraus was presented with landscaping, site plan and photometric plans; he stated Mr. Kraus has been reviewing the same. Mr. Ledyard stated that this week Mr. Kraus will be presented with a site plan that includes all the parking, traffic flows and bus flows. Mr. Ledyard stated that on April 26, Mr. Kraus will receive the balance of information including storm sewer and storm sewer calculations, water line, erosion control/SWYPP plan and the demolition plan. Mr. Ledyard expressed his appreciation to Mr. Kraus for working with the civil engineers on an almost daily basis.
Mr. Ledyard stated that he submitted a consolidation plat drawing to Mr. Kil along with sufficient copies of the same for the Board.
Mr. Ledyard stated that Mr. Kraus received a copy of the landscape plan approximately one week ago. He stated that there are over 2000 plantings at the site at the present time. Mr. Kraus remarked that there are three trees included in the landscape plan that are not on the Town’s list. He stated that these trees will be located under NIPSCO high voltage power lines. Mr. Ledyard explained a substation is being installed for the high school and NIPSCO has strict requirements for landscaping located near high voltage lines. Mr. Ledyard stated that NIPSCO’s arborist consulted with Mr. Kraus and the project’s landscape architect to determine what trees would be acceptable plantings near the high voltage lines.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Ledyard stated that he has also submitted the site lighting along with all the statistics on the site lighting and the photometric plan. Mr. Ledyard stated that manufacturer specs for the lighting were also submitted.
Mr. Ledyard stated that an additional 500 parking spaces will be added. He stated that the additional parking will improve the congestion problem at the high school. Mr. Ledyard explained that the bus staging lot will also eliminate the gridlock. Mr. Ledyard stated a student/parent drop-off will be added.
Mr. Ledyard showed the location of the underground detention near the practice field that will service the entire site. He stated that the underground detention will release into a detention basin. He stated that the water loop servicing around the building has been discussed with the Town’s fire chief. Mr. Ledyard stated that there will be an 8” water loop around the entire building, and hydrant locations have been identified.
Mr. Ledyard presented a list of waivers that Petitioner will be requesting. The waivers requested were as follows: roof materials; height of building exceeding 50’ feet, (the auditorium fly space); angled parking with one-way lane access//reduction in maneuvering lane width; reduction of interior tree planting in the parking lot (for security reasons – to maintain clear lines of sight);change in tree species (to meet NIPSCO requirements); no irrigation in area where native plantings will be incorporated; and substituting a five foot height continuous screen wall on the perimeter of the residential area with continuous plantings.
(General discussion ensued)
Mr. Forbes asked if the Petitioner had discussed pedestrian traffic and safety with the police and fire chief related to the football field. Mr. Ledyard stated that these matters have been discussed especially the accessibility of an ambulance.
Mr. Ledyard showed the Board where the trees that NIPSCO required would be located. The Board was shown the location of the substation.
Mr. Ledyard concluded his presentation and stated he would be happy to answer any questions members of the Board may have. Additionally, Mr. Ledyard thanked Steve Kil, Tom Redar and Kenn Kraus for their time and help with this large project.
Mr. Kozel asked about the parking. Mr. Ledyard explained one lot currently in existence is freshman parking. He stated it is used about sixty percent of the year for parking and the other forty percent of the time it is used for band practice. Mr. Ledyard explained that in the future this parking lot would be designated as staff parking.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Redar asked if vehicular traffic going out the back of the school would be cut down once the new traffic patterns are in place. Mr. Ledyard opined that the traffic would be cut down. He stated that the new parking would make drivers more likely to exit onto Route 41.
Mr. Redar asked about the island being placed in the right in/right out entrance. He asked if this island would have a mountable surface for emergency vehicle access. Mr. Ledyard stated that the curb will be a six inch high rolled curb.
The Board had no further questions. Mr. Ledyard thanked the Board for their time.
* * * * *
Mr. Forbes asked the Board if they had any further comments. Mr. Kraus informed the Board that there are two lighting plans, the entire lighting plan and the security light plan.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Redar asked about landscaping. Mr. Kraus stated that most of the landscaping is located on the perimeter, and there are really no depressions for rain gardens.
Mr. Redar asked if curbing would be installed that would direct water in certain direction. Mr. Kraus stated he had discussed flood routing at one of the meetings. He stated that a one hundred year storm event has to be handled on site. He stated that the storm sewers are only rated for a five or ten year storm. Mr. Kraus stated that he has requested information on the routes of the water to ensure that water will be making it to the detention basin.
(General discussion ensued.)
There was no further discussion from the Board.
A TRUE COPY
____________________________________________
SUSAN E. WRIGHT, RECORDING SECRETARY
| Greg Volk | Steve Hastings | Attorney Tim Kuiper |
| Mike Ryan | Steve Kozel | Kenn Kraus |
| Tom Redar | Steve Kil | |
| Mike Forbes |
Mr. Volk stated he was going to amend the agenda by taking Item C – Public Hearing for Ordinance 1483 and moving the same to the end of the agenda. Mr. Forbes made a motion to amend the agenda as recommended; Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0)
Mr. Volk noted that this project has been reviewed extensively. He noted that the Board had requested changes be made to the traffic flow, revision of the drive-thru and the dumpster enclosure and location. He stated that the lighting and landscaping plan have yet to be submitted to Mr. Kraus.
Mr. Kraus stated that the lighting reflected on the drawing shows two lighting poles, one at the southeast and southwest corner along the Route 231. He stated he has not received any information reflecting the type of fixtures to be erected. Mr. Teibel stated he does not have a final photo cell plan. He stated that he has requested his architect to prepare this plan but he has not received it yet.
Mr. Teibel stated that he submitted an updated landscape plan last Wednesday. Mr. Teibel stated that the dumpster enclosure has been moved. He stated that he submitted two updates one, the architectural plan, and two, the engineering site plan. He stated that the engineering site plan does not reflect the dumpster enclosure as repositioned, but the updated engineering does reflect the dumpster enclosure has been moved back behind the building setback line.
Mr. Teibel apologized for not having all of the plans with him. He requested that the Board grant the preliminary approval subject to Mr. Kraus’ receipt, review and approval of the outstanding lighting plan. Mr. Teibel stated he hoped that he had answered all questions and fulfilled all obligations except for this one item.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes made a motion to approve Martin’s Commercial Addition, a three lot subdivision, contingent upon receipt, review and approval of the lighting plan by Mr. Kraus. Mr. Tom Redar seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0).
Mr. Rettig stated that this is an existing project which, at the present time, contains several existing townhomes. All of the streets and infrastructure are in place. Mr. Rettig explained that this parcel was previously set up for townhomes. He stated that this is a four acre tract. He stated that the re-plat would increase the lots on the tract from four lots to five lots, and Petitioner is now proposing a total of 20 condominium units (five four-unit buildings) instead of 14 units.
Mr. Rettig stated that Mr. Meyer has recently completed a project similar to this in Schererville and is proposing the same basic building style for the Meadows of St. John. He stated the Schererville project (Woody Creek) is located right off of Route 30 on Janice Drive. He recommended that the Board members go and look at this project. Mr. Rettig stated that these proposed units will sell in the price range of $160,000-$170,000.
Mr. Rettig stated he was requesting permission of the Board to advertise for public hearing at the next regular meeting. Mr. Rettig stated he would be happy to answer any questions that the Board may have.
Mr. Volk stated that his understanding was that the lots were going to decrease from seven lots to five and that duplexes were being built. Mr. Rettig stated that the Petitioner is proposing to build five four-unit condominium buildings with the units stacked two units over two units. He stated each unit has its own garage and separate entrance.
Mr. Volk noted that the Petitioner is actually increasing the number of buildings. Mr. Rettig concurred. Mr. Volk stated his understanding was that the number of units were being decreased and the number of lots were being increased by one. Mr. Rettig explained that Petitioner is adding one lot and in lieu of three and four unit buildings Petitioner is proposing to add all four unit buildings.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Volk stated he recalled duplexes being discussed. He asked about the parking. Mr. Rettig stated that each unit will have a one car garage and parking in the driveway for an Additional vehicle. Mr. Rettig added that the site has the luxury of 19 additional parking spaces for visitors. Mr. Kil stated that this project is the same concept as Western Ridge.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes stated that it appears that more discussion is necessary on this project. He made a motion that that the advertising for public hearing for the Meadows of St. John replatting be deferred so further discussion can be had at the study session; Mr. Hastings seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously passed by voice vote (6/0).
Mr. Rettig stated he would like to keep the project on schedule for a public hearing at the regular meeting in June. Mr. Volk stated that the Board would make an effort to go through Woody Creek in Schererville.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil stated that the property is not being changed in any manner. Attorney Kuiper noted that the notices and publications were in order for the public hearing. Mr. Volk opened the floor for public comment.
PUBLIC HEARING
Ms. Eileen Sneerly – Ms. Sneerly stated she was representing her father, who lives next to Dean Schilling. She asked why the parcel is being called an estate. She asked if the parcel was in a trust. Mr. Homier stated that McKenzie Estates was simply the name of the subdivision. Ms. Sneerly asked if this parcel would contain one house.
Ms. Sneerly wanted to know what procedure would have to be followed in the event Mr. Schilling wanted to further subdivide the property in the future. Mr. Volk stated that the Petitioner would have to come back before the Plan Commission to further subdivide the property. Ms. Sneerly stated she was inquiring about these matters on behalf of her father to find out if he had anything to worry about.
Attorney Kuiper stated that the old house was taken down and Petitioner is simply replacing it with another house. He stated that the Petitioner has to make the subdivision into one lot in order to adhere to the Town’s codes in order to build on it. Mr. Kuiper stated that the subdivision process in this case is taking the parcel from a metes and bounds description and putting it into a lot of record. Attorney Kuiper stated that this is a formality that is required in order for the Petitioner to reconstruct a house on the parcel.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Volk called for further public comment. There was no further public comment. Mr. Volk closed the public hearing and brought the matter back before the Board. The Board discussed the waiver of the sidewalk.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to approve McKenzie Estate, a one lot subdivision, waiving the requirement for sidewalks along Patterson Street, waiving the detention requirements of the Subdivision Control Ordinance and incorporating the findings of facts by reference; Mr. Redar seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0). Mr. Homier thanked the Board.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to suspend the rule requiring thirty (30) days between the primary plat approval and final plat approval; Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously passed by voice vote (6/0).
Mr. Forbes made a motion to grant final plat approval for McKenzie Estate, a one lot subdivision, and authorize signature on the mylars. Mr. Forbes asked if the development fee had been paid. The development fee had not been paid. Mr. Forbes amended the motion to approve final plat and signature on the mylars contingent upon receipt of the developmental and SWYPPP fees. Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved by voice vote (6/0).
Mr. Ledyard appeared before the Board seeking a favorable recommendation to the Town Council to rezone the recently purchased 1.8 acre parcel at the southeast property of the high school adjacent to the Taco Bell. Mr. Ledyard stated that the parcel was zoned commercial when it was purchased, and for purposes of the high school the parcel needs to be rezoned Public. Mr. Ledyard stated that the Petitioner has met all of the technical criteria as far as advertising and notices to adjacent property owners.
Mr. Volk remarked that this matter was a simple request. He asked the Board members for any questions or comments. Mr. Forbes stated that once this property is rezoned it will be used on a temporary basis for a construction staging area. Mr. Ledyard concurred that the parcel will be a construction staging area during the project as well as an area for construction trailers.
Attorney Kuiper informed the Board that all of the notices and publications for the public hearing on this item were in order. Attorney Kuiper also informed the audience that the parcel being referred to at the present time is strictly for the rezoning from commercial to public use. He stated that this is a 1.84 acre vacant parcel between the current parking facilities at the high school and the Taco Bell. Attorney Kuiper stated that this parcel would unify the entire parcel for public use by the high school.
Mr. Volk opened the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING
ATTORNEY MICHAEL MUENICH - Attorney Muenich appeared before the Board on behalf of Jennifer and Daniel McClure, residents of Heron Lake subdivision adjacent and in back of the parcel in question. Mr. Muenich stated he was “somewhat confused” as he was not able to find an Application for Zoning Change in the Town’s records on this date. He stated he is not sure exactly how it’s being structured and what is being processed.
Mr. Muenich noted under the Town’s Schedule of Uses, Chapter 3, in the current Zoning Ordinance, U.S. Highway 41 Overlay District, public use is prohibited under the Schedule of Uses. Mr. Muenich stated if he is interpreting the ordinance correctly this item should be processed as a special exception, and public zoning is not permitted in the overlay district.
Attorney Kuiper stated that his understanding is that the underlying zoning district allows for this use regardless of the overlay district. Attorney Kuiper reiterated there is an overlay district with an underlying zoning district along U.S. Route 41.
Attorney Muenich stated that there is a problem with this argument. He stated that the Preamble to the Town’s Zoning Ordinance states “except as otherwise provided use, size, and height of building hereafter erected converted, moved, enlarged or structurally altered and the use of any land shall be in compliance with the regulations established herein.” Mr. Muenich that the grandfather clause cannot be used to meet this requirement.
Attorney Kuiper acknowledged Mr. Muenich’s comment and noted that the public hearing should continue.
Joe Heroux, 11723 South Oakridge Drive – Mr. Heroux stated that since the Board was going to be considering a one lot subdivision as the next item, he thought it inappropriate to consider this item first. He stated a comprehensive traffic study should be done. He stated that it’s unknown at the present time if there is going to be another entrance to the high school, and for that reason, he remonstrates against the rezoning.
Mr. Heroux stated a traffic study is required to ascertain whether another traffic light is necessary on Route 41. He stated he does not believe that there are enough facts at the present time to make a decision and he asked that this matter be deferred.
Mr. Forbes stated that the Board has knowledge that there will not be an additional road cut off of this parcel onto Route 41. He stated that this matter has been thoroughly discussed. Mr. Forbes stated that the only entrances and exits to the school property will be the existing entrances and exits.
Mr. Volk stated that there will be a temporary road cut. Mr. Ledyard stated that the high school has just received a temporary curb cut permit from INDOT in the past week. He stated this temporary road cut is for the duration of the project in order to keep construction traffic out of Heron Lake subdivision. He stated that the curb cut will be eliminated when the construction project is done.
Mr. Heroux recommended that an additional traffic signal be added in the event that the temporary access is changed later on.
Mr. Volk called for additional public comment. There was no further public comment. Mr. Volk closed the public hearing and brought the matter back before the Board.
Mr. Forbes stated he wanted to clarify the access issue. He stated that he does not believe that granting a rezone should be contingent upon an access easement. He stated if the Board was going to consider adding a new access easement in this area it should be done at the time of the platting.
Mr. Forbes stated, given his statement about the access easement, he would make a motion to send a favorable recommendation to the Town Council to rezone the 1.8 acre parcel (Colet property) from C-2 to Public, and the findings of facts were incorporated into the motion by reference; Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0).
Mr. Ledyard stated copies of the presentation, drawings, storm calculations and V-3 survey drawings have been submitted. Mr. Ledyard stated he would go through the presentation and take questions.
Mr. Ledyard walked through a Power Point presentation for the Board and the audience. He addressed the site plan, 3D views around the site, a logistics plan and the paperwork that has so far been submitted.
Mr. Ledyard showed the overall site plan. He showed the existing freshman center and field house area; he stated that this part of the building will remain. He pointed out the location of the new swimming pool, a two story vocational building and a three story academic wing all included in Phase 1 of the project.
Mr. Ledyard next pointed out the new band and choir area, the auditorium and a competitive gym. He stated that the varsity baseball field will be moved and the football field will be turned in a north/south direction.
Mr. Ledyard pointed out the three existing entrance/exit to Lake Central High School. He stated that these entrances will remain as is. He showed the location of the parcel that the Board had just rendered a favorable recommendation on. Mr. Ledyard showed the location of an athletic practice field.
Mr. Ledyard showed some 3D views of the site from the vantage point of the central office, new gym, existing field house, pool area, auditorium, band area and the proposed three story academic wing.
Mr. Ledyard also showed some overviews from the vantage point of the soccer field, football/baseball fields, gym, new main entrance of the high school, auditorium, band area, three story academic, existing freshman center and pool.
Mr. Ledyard pointed out the bus staging area for arrival and dismissal. Mr. Ledyard stated that there are over 60 buses each morning and afternoon. Mr. Ledyard stated a staging area is planned for the buses.
Mr. Ledyard showed images of the school from the vantage point of the north end of Heron Lake subdivision. Mr. Ledyard pointed out the landscaping. He stated that the Heron Lake residents will be “pleasantly pleased” that there will be “much much more landscaping that we currently have.” He stated that the property line is almost entirely landscaping.
Mr. Ledyard showed the west elevation of the proposed high school, he stated that this view is almost directly from Heron Lake.
Mr. Ledyard showed the south elevation facing Ventura Estates. He noted all of the landscaping on the west side.
Mr. Ledyard noted that vast scope and magnitude of this project. He stated that the architects and engineers have worked attentively on this project along with Steve Kil and Kenn Kraus. He stated that he produced a slide to show the infrastructure/mechanical elements of the project. He showed a few additional slides of the infrastructure of the project.
Mr. Ledyard moved on to the logistics phasing plan. He pointed out the new construction, portions of the school that would remain and the construction staging area. He stated that the staging area will be fenced off.
Mr. Ledyard stated that a lot of time and effort has been expended to ensure that the site is as safe as possible for the students, staff and the general public during construction. He stated that chiefs of the Police Department and Fire Department were consulted with on this project. He stated some ideas were implemented per the recommendation and direction of both the police and fire chief. He stated there will be full access to the site. He stated that the educational facilities used during construction will be separated from the ongoing construction.
Mr. Ledyard stated that due to the magnitude of the project, portions of the project were submitted to the Town’s engineer (Mr. Kenn Kraus, Haas & Associates) for his review so that he would not be inundated with all of the information all at once. Mr. Ledyard gave a time line of the information that was turned into Mr. Kraus.
Mr. Ledyard stated that there is an enormous amount of landscaping. He stated that over 2000 plants will be added to the project. He stated that the Petitioner has met all of the Town’s landscaping requirements.
Mr. Ledyard talked about the site’s lighting plan. He stated that the photometric plan measures the amount of light output. He stated that the Petitioner has met the Town’s lighting requirements and zoning ordinance. He stated there is zero light spillage onto adjacent properties. He presented a slide reflecting what the site will look like at nighttime when it is illuminated.
Mr. Ledyard presented the traffic flow for cars only. He reiterated that the main entrances off of Route 41 will remain as is. He showed the parent drop-off area. He stated that there are currently 972 parking spaces, and when the project is complete there will over 1500 parking spaces. He stated that this will cut down on the congestion around the school and Route 41.
Mr. Ledyard presented the bus flow and the bus staging area. He stated that the bus staging area will be twice a day for arrival/dismissal.
Mr. Ledyard presented some drainage calculations. He stated that there will be an underground storage tank (ten year rain fall event capacity) under the athletic practice field. He stated that the site will be engineered for a 100 year rain fall event capacity. He showed the natural detention area, and explained the flow of the water on the site.
Mr. Ledyard presented a list of waivers that Petitioner will be requesting. He stated that the waivers being requested are not detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of the general public or the students and staff. The waivers were listed as follows: roof material visible from the field house; height of the building (fly space of the auditorium) at 52 feet; angle parking with one-way lane access; 5’ high continuous, obscure wall on the perimeter of the residential area; reduction of parking lot perimeter trees for security purposes; change of tree specifications to accommodate NIPSCO requirements for high voltage lines; exclusion of sidewalks on Route 41.
Mr. Ledyard pointed out the location of the NIPSCO substation. He stated that the school will have its own substation.
Mr. Ledyard concluded his presentation; he thanked Steve Kil, Kenn Kraus and Tom Redar and the St. John town staff for all of their help.
Mr. Volk noted that the file contained a letter addressed to the Board from Haas & Associates stating that the review is not yet finished, mainly because of the volume. He stated there was also a copy of the most recent staff meeting minutes in the file. Mr. Volk stated that there is plenty to cover. He stated that parking, traffic flow, lighting and landscaping should be reviewed in more depth even though it has been discussed already. He asked the Board if they had any questions.
Mr. Volk asked about the five foot wall on the west boundary. He asked if the Petitioner was referring to landscaping and not an actual wall. Mr. Ledyard explained that Petitioner was asking for a waiver of the five foot wall because there will be a landscape barrier.
(General discussion ensued)
Mr. Volk noted that the bus staging will be in the back area and never in the front. Mr. Ledyard talked about the bus routes depending on whether a bus was headed north or south on Route 41. Mr. Volk asked about the volume of buses that would exit Sesame Street and go through the subdivision. Mr. Ledyard stated that he does not have an exact number, but possibly 15-18. He informed the Board that Petitioner is in the process of installing GPSs in the buses, and they hope to reduce some of the bus routes upon installation of the GPSs. He stated he does not have an exact number but it will not be more than 64 buses.
Mr. Volk again asked to look at the landscaping at the west boundary of the school. He asked what the width of the landscape barrier would be. Mr. Ledyard stated there would be approximately 30’ of green space located here. Mr. Volk stated he would like to review the landscaping because it is a concern of many of the residents.
Mr. Volk noted that it appears that the landscaping is staggered with trees and shrubs. Mr. Ledyard stated there is quite a bit of planting, over 2,100 plants. Mr. Volk noted that the landscaping will probably reduce the noise going into the residential area.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Ledyard stated that there are approximately 50 root top units on the existing school. He stated the new high school will have no roof top units, all will be self-contained inside. He stated there will be two small cooling towers on the site. He stated that the noise level will be very much reduced because of the design of the building and the HVAC system.
Mr. Volk asked about the two-story vocational building. He noted that this building is closest to the residential property. Mr. Ledyard stated it is approximately 55’ feet from the property line.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes stated that this discussion could be continued, if necessary, at the next regular meeting.
Mr. Volk stated he would open the public hearing and take comments. Attorney Kuiper noted that all publications and notices were in order for the public hearing. Attorney Kuiper also noted, for the record, that there was a two page written remonstrance on file containing several signatures opposed to the project. He stated that the file also contained a written remonstrance filed by John Plaskota.
Mr.Volk read portions of the remonstrance petition signed by approximately 50 people who oppose the one lot subdivision proposed by Lake Central Corporation and/or its affiliates because it will devalue properties, various pollutions will negatively impact community peacefulness and reduce the enjoyment of homes and properties. Mr. Volk stated that this written remonstrance will be entered into the record.
(Audience members state they can’t hear.)
(Mr. Volk adjusts audio system.)
(Mr. Muenich submitted documents to the Board.)
Mr. Muenich stated that his remonstrance will be amended for the next proceeding. Mr. Muenich stated that he would again raise the issue of the use section of the municipal zoning ordinance which requires a special exception for the proposed facility in the Route 41 Overlay District which the Lake Central High School falls within. Mr. Muenich stated that if he is reading the use table accurately this project may require a special exception generally.
Mr. Muenich stated Mr. & Mrs. McClure are equity owners in real estate immediately adjacent and west of the facility. Mr. Muenich noted, again, he was not able to locate an Application for Rezoning in the Office of the Planning and Zoning Administrator when he examined the records earlier on this date. Mr. Muenich stated his understanding of and what was confirmed by documents he reviewed earlier in the day, the dates reflect that the engineering drawings and site plans were delivered to the Town of St. John and its engineer on April 26, 2012, exactly four (4) business days ago. Mr. Muenich stated that the Town’s rules and regulations require that drawings and site plans be submitted at least thirty (30) days prior to a public hearing.
Mr. Muenich stated he believes that the public hearing on this project is extraordinarily premature. Mr. Muenich stated that after listening to Mr. Ledyard’s presentation, he realized that meetings have been going on with various members of the St. John staff and Petitioners representatives for some period of time. Mr. Muenich noted that the members of the audience were not privy to these meetings being held.
Mr. Muenich stated that there were adjacent landowners who went to the offices of the Planning and Zoning Administrator to review the drawings and they were informed that there were no any documents/drawings available. Mr. Muenich stated that the drawings did not become available until last Friday morning. Mr. Muenich stated he believes the Town’s engineer received drawings/plans some time Thursday afternoon. Mr. Muenich stated he obtained copies of the site plans and drawings only earlier on this date. He stated that the remonstrance is extremely short because it does not include a complete review of the plans and documents including the Subdivision Control Ordinance, Storm Water Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Muenich stated that the documents are so intermixed that it is difficult to ascertain between the proceedings for engineering drawings for preliminary subdivision and the site plan. He stated that the plans are extremely detailed and complex. He states it is almost impossible to determine which requirements are being met for purposes of the Subdivision Control Ordinance, and which requirements are being met for the purpose of the site plan approval.
Mr. Muenich stated he is not aware of any application for a site plan approval. Mr. Muenich stated he does not understand how site plan approval is being processed absent the application for the same.
Mr. Muenich stated his clients are concerned about Paragraph 5. He stated there were plans and information submitted and confirmed earlier this evening that indicate that a band practice area is going to be stripped off, occupied and used immediately adjacent to the McClure real estate.
Mr. Muenich stated he cannot imagine living in the homes along the portion of the property where the band will practice. Mr. Muenich acknowledged that band and music are necessary elements of the education process. He suggested that the band practice area be located in front of the school where at least the school building will act as an insulator and/or sound barrier.
Mr. Muenich stated to the extent of his review, the purported plans fail to comply with Chapter 12 of the Town’s Zoning Ordinance, specifically Section A8 which requires a study analyzing projected traffic volume and parking demand. He stated that the school corporation is conveniently ignoring the requirement for an INDOT review on Route 41 by maintaining that the existing streets are adequate.
Mr. Muenich stated that the school corporation has been building a high school for some 20 to 30 years. He stated that there is no question that the high school is an existing facility. He stated that this does not imply that the Board has to approve of or agree with substandard conditions, nor does the Board have to reduce the Town’s standards or ordinances just to satisfy the school corporation.
Mr. Muenich stated that his clients realize a school will be built at this location. He stated that the Board is responsible that the project being built will conform with the community and not necessarily to satisfy and whims and wishes of the Lake Central School Corporation.
Mr. Muenich stated that this is the time to correct and not exacerbate existing usage problems including the traffic problems at this facility. Mr. Muenich stated that this project requires a traffic study. He stated that the Town’s ordinance requires a traffic study be done. He stated that to accept the very unsatisfactory conditions existing at the present time at this location in order to avoid a traffic study is not the proper way to plan and zone this particular parcel of property.
Mr. Muenich stated that the parcel fails to meet the requirements of Section B1 for Senior High Schools as to parking demand. Mr. Muenich stated that he was not able to find a loading dock on the site plan. Mr. Muenich stated that the Town’s ordinance requires loading docks, and the number of loading docks required is based upon the square footage of the structure.
Mr. Muenich stated that this is a one million square foot structure on an 84 acre parcel and the school corporation cannot expect it to be reviewed and approved in four days so they can meet some self-imposed schedule.
Mr. Muenich stated that the plan fails to comply with Section C1F requiring 25’ setbacks and landscaped areas 15’ feet in width. Mr. Muenich stated at the beginning of the presentation the landscaping was depicted as adequate and exceeding the Town’s standards for landscaping, and then Petitioner turns around and asks for a waiver on perimeter landscaping. He asked why Petitioner needed a waiver on perimeter landscaping.
Mr. Muenich states that Section C1G of the ordinance requires a continuous and obscuring wall. Mr. Muenich states that the Petitioner does not want to put this wall up and he wants to know why. He asked if anyone would want to have buses staging in their backyard twice a day at 7:00 a.m. and 2:30 p.m.
Mr. Muenich pointed out Section C1, concerning perimeter and interior landscaping. He stated he was not sure what security issue the school corporation is referring to. Mr. Muenich stated that the Board, at a minimum, should require the school corporation to meet the standards that the Town has established for landscaping.
Mr. Muenich stated that the project fails to comply with Section E1 concerning the installation of pedestrian paths.
Mr. Muenich stated that the project fails to comply with Section D concerning handicapped parking, pedestrian circulation and pedestrian connections to adjacent developments. He asked the Board where were the connections to the adjacent developments. Mr. Muenich noted that in any project where he has asked for a sidewalk waiver, Mr. Forbes has been adamantly opposed. Mr. Muenich stated this is one project where a sidewalk is necessary for pedestrians along Route 41. He stated that the sidewalks on this project should not be waived.
Mr. Muenich stated that the project fails to comply with Section GF concerning existing proposed grading plans. Mr. Muenich pointed out that the Town’s ordinance requires berming whenever a public district adjoins a residential district. He stated that the Town’s ordinance on separation of districts between public and residential are being entirely ignored.
Mr. Muenich stated that the project fails to comply with Section G2 concerning fences and other accessory structures. He stated that there is a failure to comply with Section G2L, which requires tabulation displaying relevant statistical information to evaluate compliance with parking requirements, landscaping requirements and traffic study requirements. Mr. Muenich pointed out that, again, the Petitioner requested a waivers on these items.
Mr. Muenich pointed out that the project fails to comply with Section K which concerns interior planting and landscaping. The project fails to comply with Section O, which concerns U.S. Highway 41 Overlay District Landscapng standards. Mr. Muenich pointed out the overlay district’s landscaping requirements are different from the standard, commercial and public districts. Mr/ Muenich stated that the overlay district contains additional landscaping requirements that are not found elsewhere. He stated that the project fails to comply with the total landscaping requirements which are set out in detail as to the number of trees, plants and shrubbery are required per square foot. Mr. Muenich acknowledged that there are 2,200 proposed plants, but the parcel is 84 acres. Mr. Muenich asked the Board to require the Petitioner to adhere to the standards of the Town’s ordinance.
Mr. Muenich stated that the documentation submitted does not set forth a separate and clear primary plat capable for review that is distinct and separate from a site development plan. He stated that the documents that he has reviewed were entitled a Plat of Consolidation. He asked the Board for the meaning of Plat of Consolidation. He queried the Board if they were conducting a final plat of subdivision at this meeting, or if this was matter was being considered for primary subdivision and site plan approval. Mr. Muenich stated he cannot ascertain the exact nature of the proceedings tonight from his review of the records currently filed.
Mr. Muenich noted that some of the documentation fails to comply with Section 3 of the Subdivision Control Ordinance. He stated this ordinance requires that the documentation be submitted not less than thirty (30) days prior to the public hearing.
Mr Muenich cited Subsection J, Paragrah J, Pragraph M. Mr. Muenich had questions on the building set back lines, flow and storm water information, FEMA Flood Plan information and Master Drainage Plan. Mr. Muenich stated that he only once found any information on the Master Drainage Plan.
Mr. Muenich stated that the documentation submitted fails to comply with the Storm Water Control Ordinance. He stated that the hydraulic calculations are not included in the documents and are not on file in the Building and Planning Department. Mr. Muenich stated that this information was allegedly submitted to Mr. Kraus this past Thursday. He stated that this late submission would give Mr. Kraus only four business days to review the storm water/hydraulics.
Mr. Muenich noted that the underground detention for this 84 acre site, if he correctly calculated it, is approximately less than five acre feet. He noted there will be acres of parking and acres of roof. He stated that the run off coefficient is calculated at one. Mr. Muenich stated that the detention system that does not reflect the drainage courses, the receiving streams or the release rates. He stated this information is required under the Storm Water Control Ordinance. He stated that the public has not been able to review this document.
Mr. Muenich stated he was unable to locate any hydraulic calculations. He stated that based upon the information he has he believes the storage is less than five acre feet. He stated that the topographical grading plan does not reflect any secondary storm water detention system that he could locate. He stated that the plan does not appear to address run off from existing improvements located north of the immediate development area. He stated many improvements have been included in the north portion of the project which are being conveniently being ignored in the drawings that he has reviewed. Mr. Muenich stated that the Storm Water Control Ordinance ordinance requires that the site be addressed as a whole.
Mr. Muenich stated he has been unable to complete a review and analyze the drawings primarily due to the late submittal of the documents. He stated that the information that has been submitted is inaccurate and does not appear to comply with the fully with the requirements of the zoning ordinance, subdivision control ordinance or the storm water ordinance.
Mr. Muenich stated, on behalf of his clients, he would reserve the right to raise additional remonstrances and concerns. He requested a deferral of the proceedings to several dates certain, until such time that the Lake Central School Corporation fully complies with the filing requirements of the rules and regulations of the Plan Commission, the Subdivision Control Ordinance and the Zoning Ordinance.
(The audience applauds.)
Joe Heroux, 11723 South Oakridge Drive – Mr. Heroux stated he wanted to remonstrate against the approval of the plat approval. He stated that he would like to incorporate the objections and remonstrances submitted to the Board, and incorporate, by reference, Attorney Muenich’s comments.
Mr. Heroux stated that the project is tacking on more building on to buildings. He asked the Board to look at the drawing and find the evacuation area for 3,000 people. He asked where the fire engines be located if there was a major fire. He stated that this project is a disaster, a safety disaster ready to happen. He stated he believed the proposed project would be unsafe.
Mr. Heroux stated if one looks at the future of St. John and the way the entire complex is laid out, that this is a major disaster. He stated there could be hundreds of deaths. He stated there is no way to get in and out of the site quickly especially during times when the site is congested.
Mr. Heroux stated that the entire project should be relooked at. He stated there should be a totally new design. He stated there should be separation of the buildings. He stated there should be a way for people to evacuate quickly, and that this is the biggest hazard. He stated that the biggest responsibility here is to protect the lives of the people who will be in the buildings.
Mr. Heroux stated for the aforementioned reasons, he objects and remonstrates against this project. He stated when he went to obtain documents he received “a little packet of nothing.” Mr. Heroux opined that this project is totally mismanaged and it represents what the Lake Central School Board is. He stated that the Board needs to get some backbone and stop the project now and reorganize it.
Linda Boros, 8527 Kellyt Court – Ms. Boros stated that the freshman wing is her backyard. She stated for the past twenty years she has heard the band, the noise of people at 3:00 a.m. She stated that they will now be inconvenienced even more. She asked where the thought process was.
Ms. Boros stated that another school is needed. She stated that people did not vote for a $90 million dollar project, but now a $180 to $200 million dollar project is on the table. She asked where the logic was. She stated this project should be placed on the back burner and re-examined.
Ms. Boros stated she put five children through the school, and the school was so large her kids would get lost in it. She stated that 70 teachers are being laid off and the school corporation is talking about putting up trees. She stated that the school does not take care of the existing landscaping. Ms. Boros stated she lives on a hill and it is all mud. She stated her property is moving because it’s disintegrating. She stated that the project is a disaster waiting to happen.
Don Farris, 8524 Kelly Court – Mr. Farris if the cyclone fence would be taken down and just replaced with shrubbery. He stated if that was the case, then people will be walking through the residents’ yards. He stated that 19 or 20 years ago the school planted 36 trees in the freshman parking lot; he stated today there are 12 still remain. He stated of those 12 trees, approximately half of them are dead and have just not fallen down yet. He asked who would maintain the proposed landscaping. He stated the landscaping is not maintained now. He stated that this is a concern for him because the freshman parking is his back yard. He stated he would like to see the shrubbery if they would maintain it. He stated this is a concern for everybody.
Brenda Bagherport, 8347 Heron Lake Road – Ms. Bagherport stated that she is not too thrilled with the bus staging area. She stated that the location where band practice will take place is unacceptable. She stated that residents were informed that band practice would take place in a different location. She stated the proposed band practice lot is right in her back yard. She stated that the band practices from 7:00 a.m. until 10: 00 p.m. She stated that reverberations from the instruments is constant, all day long. She stated that it’s now going to be moved even closer to the residents. She stated that the band practice location needs to be moved to the front of the building.
She stated that the traffic is now going to be two lanes going in and out. She stated when the area where the buses will be located is opened up it will mean more traffic for her subdivision.
She concurred with Mr. Farris’s comments about the landscaping. She stated that there are only a few maintenance men. She stated that she watched the trees die. She stated that all of the trees will be planted and just removed when they die. She stated none of the trees that died before were replaced, just removed.
Ms. Bagherport stated that these were just a few of her concerns. She stated that if there is a three story building erected and it is equipped with cameras then the cameras will be pointed at the residents’ homes. She stated she does not want cameras pointed at her home.
Ms. Bagherport talked about the lights. She stated that the proposped three story building will be taller than her home and closer to her home. She stated that there will be illumination coming from within the three story building. She stated that she will have to buy sheers for all of her windows so she can feel a sense of privacy in her own home.
Ms. Bagherport stated that when the back gate opened up vehicles will flood the area. She stated that this is especially true because the drivers will not want to sit on Route 41 and wait in traffic.
Audrey Klite, 9319 Olcott Street – Ms. Klite asked who was going to pay for the permits. She asked if the taxpayers were paying for them or if the permits were going to be waived. Mr. Volk told her that Lake Central School Corporation will be paying for the permits. She wanted to ensure that the permit fees were not going to be waived today. Mr. Volk stated that he was not aware of any fees being waived at this time. She asked Board who would be able to tell her that the fees were not going to be waived.
Mr. Kil stated that in the event that Lake Central School Corporation would asked for a waiver of fees that would take place at the Town Council meeting. He stated that the school corporation will be requesting a waiver of fees at the May 24, 2012, Town Council meeting; he further stated that he has no knowledge if that request will be granted or denied.
Ms. Klite asked who would have the authority to waive the fees; she asked if the Plan Commmission had the authority to waive the permit fees. Mr. Kil stated that this decision would be made by the Town Council. She asked if the Town Council meeting would be an open forum. Mr. Kil stated that there would be no public hearing for an item like this, but it is a public meeting.
She asked how the residents could get involved if they don’t want to see the any of the permits waived. Mr. Kil recommended that a letter in favor or against waiving of fees could be submitted ahead of time to make the Town Council aware of your opinion.
She asked how she could make sure that the permit fees are not waived. Mr. Kil stated he could just make sure that the Town Council is in receipt of her letter, if she chooses to write one.
Jeff Bagherport, 8347 Heron Lake Road – Mr. Bagherport asked about the landscaping wall that is proposed for between the school and the Heron Lake subdivision. He stated that there is an approximate five foot dip between the properties. He noted that putting in plants and shrubs will not do anything; he stated it would probably be about even with the back yards of the subdivision. He stated that it was a misrepresentation that reflected the large trees. He stated that the three story building will tower over the entire neighborhood. He stated that the picture does not accurately depict how the landscaping will look because of the five foot dip in the properties.
Paul Strubing, 8377 Heron Lake Road - Mr. Strubing stated that his house is located in approximately the middle of the practice field. He stated he has a major issue with the bus staging area. He stated that 64 buses just idling there and spewing out pollution right into his back yard.
Mr. Strubing stated he also has an issue with the lighting. He stated that the Petitioner is maintaining there will be no light trespass. He stated he can see a shadow or glow of light by the bottom of the building right now. He stated Petitioner is now proposing to build something closer and higher and maintains no light will fuse onto the adjacent properties. He stated that there is light fusing right now.
Mr. Strubing stated it is very disappointing to hear what the school corporation proposed one month ago, and then come in with changes. Mr. Strubing stated that he is not able to sleep in on Saturday mornings. He stated now the band will be even closer to his home with the proposals made by the school board.
(Mr. Strubing bangs loudly on podium.)
He invited the Board to come by at 8:00 a.m. on a Saturday morning to listen to the band.
Thomas Padjen, 8408 Heron Lake Road – Mr. Padjen stated that his neighbors are very concerned about the bus staging area. He stated that common sense will tell you what 3,000 students being dismissed, 60 buses running and students exiting the parking lot will create a log jam. He stated that the buses will not be able to exit to Route 41. He asked about a set back for the buses that will be adjacent to the residential property.
Scott Bender, 8557 Heather Court - He stated he has a couple questions. He stated he has been a engineering manager for a top 35 corporate company. He stated that the project is pretty large. He stated it costs him approximately $600 per year to have True Green come out and maintain his property. He stated if you walk behind the high school the property has dandelions up to your knees. He asked where is the budget.
Maggie Orchu, 8422 Heron Lake Drive – She stated she does not like the bus staging area. She stated this really upsets her. She wondered why the put the buses in the back of the residents yards. She stated it is unbelieveable that whoever designed this project could think of this. She stated that the kids and grandchildren are playing out in these yards adjacent to the bus staging area. She stated everything will be polluted. She asked the Board if they knew what pollution is. She stated that the exhaust pipes will be spewing diesel fumes. She stated that the buses will be on all of the time. She stated that the residents will be subjected to benzene and diesel fumes and these chemicals will stay on the grass in the yard. She stated everything will be contaminated and the children will not be able to play outside. She stated what pollution does to kids is given them cancer and lower their IQs. She asked if this is what the school wants. She stated the project is a poor design. She stated it is a horrible thing to do. She asked that the buses be relocated to the north side and get the buses away from the residents homes.
Mr. Volk called for further public comment. There was no further public comment. Mr. Volk closed the public hearing and brought the matter back before the Board.
Mr. Volk stated that there was never any intent that this project would be approved at this meeting. He stated that the engineers and the school board were interested in hearing the public’s comments. He stated that there was also a neighborhood meeting. Mr. Volk stated that the waivers have not been granted yet. He stated that the only waiver that may be granted is the landscaping in the center of the parking lot. He stated that the engineering is not yet available to the general public. He stated that this information will be made available. Mr. Volk stated that the Plan Commission is not privy to the staff meetings either. He stated that these meetings are held to help stream line the project.
Mr. Volk stated that all of the concerns have been noted and they will be addressed.
Attorney Kuiper stated that he would like to review the documents that were given to him at the meeting before making any comments.
Mr. Forbes added that no approvals have been given at all tonight. No waivers have been been given. Mr. Forbes stated that all of the waivers are still under discussion as well as the project. Mr. Forbes stated as far as the staff meeting goes, the staff always meets with developers. He stated that meeting with developers is not uncommon and it is not top secret. He stated that the Plan Commission ultimately makes the decisions to grant waivers. He stated that waivers presented to the Board are not taken lightly.
Mr. Forbes stated as far as emergency exits the police department and fire department have been heavily involved in the project from the beginning and they are still involved. He stated that not all of the engineering drawings have been received. He stated that typicall the Board does not review the engineering; he stated that is why the Town has an engineer. He stated that the Board relies on the engineer to review all of the technical information presented to it.
Mr.Forbes stated that he has noted several of the comments made by audience members. He stated that there will be several more study session on the project because it is far from complete, far from ready to build. He stated that the items that were noted will be addressed at the study sessions. Mr. Forbes stated that the Board is not prepared to move forward on this matter tonight. He stated it will be at least another month before any approvals are given.
Mr. Volk asked if the Board had any further comments. There was no further comment from the Board. Mr. Volk stated he would defer any further discussion on this matter to the next study session. Mr. Volk stated it will probably be at least a couple of weeks before Mr. Kraus has fully reviewed the documentation submitted. Mr. Volk stated that the comments made tonight will be addressed.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to defer the Lake Central High School the public hearing to the next regular meeting on June 6, 2012. He stated that this item will next appear on the Board’s study session agenda in two weeks, May 16, 2012. Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote.
Mr. Volk stated no action would be taken at the study session and the meeting was open to the public.
(General discussion ensued.)
Attorney Kuiper stated that the ordinance was drafted in such a way that a waiver can be requested from the enclosure requirement if the dumpster is generally concealed from the public. He stated that a waiver from the actual building materials can be requested so that the dumpster does not have to be the same as the principal structure. Mr. Kuiper stated that although these items are included in the ordinance it is completely within the Plan Commission’s discretion whether or not to grant the waivers.
(General discussion ensued.)
Attorney Kuiper stated that after that everyone will have to comply with this ordinance after six months, or request a waiver and appear before the Board.
Attorney Kuiper stated that all notices and publications for the public hearing were in order. Mr. Volk opened the floor to public comment. There was no public comment. Mr. Volk closed the public hearing and brought the matter back before the Board. There was no further discussion by the Board.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to send a favorable recommendation for approving Ordinance Number 1483, an Amendatory Ordinance and incorporate the findings of fact by reference. Mr. Redar seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0).
Attorney Kuiper recommended that the Certification and Resolution for signature be circulated for signature.
Mr. Volk adjourned the meeting at 9:16 p.m.
A TRUE COPY
____________________________________________
SUSAN E. WRIGHT, RECORDING SECRETARY
| Greg Volk | Steve Hastings | Attorney Tim Kuiper |
| Mike Ryan | Steve Kozel | Kenn Kraus |
| Tom Redar | Steve Kil | |
| Mike Forbes |
(The Pledge of Allegiance was said.)
(Mr. Rettig submitted photographs to the Board.)
Mr. Volk noted that one building has been built on the parcel. He stated that Meadows of St. John was originally approved for five lots with four unit townhomes. Mr. Rettig noted that the parcel was previously approved for five lots; he stated that one lot currently has a four unit building on it. He stated that there are four lot lefts. The previously approved plan was slated to have an additional 14 units between the four lots, two four unit and two three unit buildings. Petitioner is now requesting to re-plat the four lot subdivision into five lots with four units on each lot, totaling 20.
Mr. Rettig submitted photographs of a project completed in Schererville last year, Woody Creek. Mr. Rettig stated that it is Petitioner’s intention to build the same type of building depicted in the photographs in the Meadows of St. John. Mr. Rettig stated that the Woody Creek project is right off of Route 30 and Janice Drive in Schererville.
Mr. Rettig stated that each unit will have a one car garage, separate outdoor entrances, parking in the driveway, extra parking in the island, units will be in the 1300-1400 square foot range and a sales price in the $160,000-170,000 range. Mr. Rettig stated there would be two different styles because the lots are of shallow depth.
Mr. Rettig stated the entire infrastructure is already in place. He stated that some of the sewer will have to be reconfigured. He stated this is simply a matter of replatting four existing lots into five lots.
Mr. Rettig stated that the more expensive, larger buildings are not selling in the economy so Petitioner is proposing to downsize a bit in order to build more affordable units. Mr. Rettig stated that the Schererville project is one hundred percent occupied. He stated that the Woody Creek project contains 24 units and sold out in approximately one year.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Volk asked if the project followed the Town’s guidelines for anti-monotony. Mr. Kil stated that the anti-monotony rule applied to single family dwellings. Mr. Kil stated that in the event that the Board approves this project, he would ask that the Petitioner clear up the property lines wherein certain patios cross property lines. Mr. Forbes stated he thought that the property line matter had been resolved. Mr. Kil stated that this matter was never resolved.
Mr. Rettig stated that Mr. Meyer has met with all of the owners whose patios cross property lines. He stated that Mr. Meyer has expressed a desire to give the owners an additional 15 feet of property, which would encompass the patios. Mr. Rettig stated that this cannot be done until Mr. Meyer owns the property. Mr. Rettig stated that this property line issue could be resolved with the replat.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Meyer stated he has met with the four owners whose patios are affected by the property line. He stated that he will meet with the owners who will be backed up to the proposed project within a week. He stated that he anticipates that all of the interested parties he meets with will be in attendance at the next Board meeting. Mr. Volk stated that the original approval was based on the residents’ concerns.
Mr. Hastings asked about the split driveway between Tracts C & D. He asked if there would be a division between the driveways. Mr. Rettig stated that it could marked. Mr. Rettig stated that the project is a PUD. Mr. Meyer stated that the PUD would have an association and all of the outside maintenance would be performed by the association including snow removal, lawn care and sprinkler systems.
Mr. Forbes stated he is not in favor of the plat change; he stated that he saw no reason to increase the density in the subdivision. He stated that four lots in this area are sufficient to continue the development. He noted that with the replat Tract B and C residents would be right on top of each other with absolutely no back yard to speak of. Mr. Forbes stated that the driveway issue was resolved when the subdivision was previously approved.
Mr. Meyer stated that the project will not work with four lots. He stated they were trying to improve the subdivision. Mr. Meyer stated that all of the Town’s requirements would be met.
Mr. Volk stated that he concurred with Mr. Forbes in that he is not in favor of the re-plat. Mr. Rettig stated that he understood the Board’s position. He stated he would consult with Petitioner and decide how to proceed.
Mr. Neff had a Power Point presentation prepared for the Board. Mr. Volk noted that this was a study session and that the floor would not be opened for public comment at this meeting. He stated that public comment could be made at the Board’s next regular meeting on June 6, 2012.
Mr. Volk stated that the Board was presented with the final project plans approximately two weeks ago. He stated that Mr. Kenn Kraus was currently reviewing the plans. Mr. Volk stated that at the first public hearing the Board noted the many concerns voiced by the residents. He stated that the School Board was asked to address the questions and concerns of the residents.
Mr. Neff stated that a group of slides have been prepared to address some of the concerns voiced at the last meeting. He thanked the staff for their help. Mr. Neff stated that the meetings with staff commenced on January 24, 2012. He stated that the meetings were held approximately every other Wednesday to ensure that every issue was addressed.
Mr. Neff stated that all of the required items for the Board’s approval have been submitted. He stated that the Petitioner is hopeful for a June 6, 2012, approval by the Board. Mr. Neff stated that Mr. Kraus is reviewing the final pieces of information that were presented to him. Mr. Neff stated that Petitioner has received some excellent comments from Mr. Kraus that they have been able to address. Mr. Neff stated that a substantial amount of documents have been traded back and forth in an effort to keep the project on track.
Mr. Neff stated that the Petitioner wanted to address the bus staging area. He stated that the buses arrive in the morning and are there for 15 minutes to drop students off. He stated at dismissal the buses arrive at 2:00 and are departed by 2:18 p.m.
Mr. Neff noted that there is a new Indiana Administrative Code 410, which deals with air quality. He stated that this code has enacted statutes and limitations for schools. He stated every school must have a policy in place regarding air quality. Mr. Neff stated that one of the issues addressed by the code is related to bus idling. He stated that Lake Central High School has a policy in place at the current time wherein buses are not allowed to idle.
Mr. Neff stated that the buses at Lake Central High School must pull up and shut off. He stated that the only time that the buses are allowed to idle is if the temperature is below 30 degrees, and even with temperatures below 30 degrees the buses are only allowed to idle for 10 minutes and then must be shut off. Mr. Neff stated that the indoor/outdoor air quality of schools is heavily regulated by the Board of Health through the State of Indiana.
Mr. Neff moved on to the landscaping. He stated that Lake Central School Corporation will actually maintain the chain link fence on the west side of the high school. He stated there was never any intent to get rid of the fence. He stated in terms of a barrier the fence would remain. Mr. Neff stated that the chain link fence barrier would be softened with plantings. He stated that some of the plantings that were intended for the parking lot will be moved to the perimeter in order to get a more dense level of barrier.
Mr. Neff stated that native plantings are also being considered. He stated that native plants require less maintenance. He stated that this type of native landscaping would be no different than what one sees along state highways. He stated that native plantings would be sustainable, and would be a “green gesture” from the high school. He stated that the native plantings would minimize the need for additional water as well as ongoing maintenance and would have good survival rates.
Mr. Neff stated that invitations were issued by the school corporation to every single person in the surrounding neighborhood for a meeting on March 13. He stated approximately 12-13 neighbors attended the meeting. He stated that everything that the residents brought up was discussed. He stated one issue was having a gate that would allow access. He stated that a gate would be located on the north side of Sesame Street which would be a passing gate with a sidewalk. He stated that there is a sidewalk on the north side in Heron Lakes. He stated that the new sidewalk would provide a safe crossing zone for students who walked to or away from school.
Mr. Neff stated that the gate that is currently in place will be changed to a sliding gate. He stated that the sliding gate would be closed during the day or when the buses have departed. He stated that the gate is part of the project, but not discussed in response to neighbors’ comments. He stated that the gate will be improved as a part of the project to improve its use.
Mr. Neff stated that the number of students who walk to and from the high school is pretty low. He stated that the number of students who have been monitored using the crosswalk is between 12-15. He stated that the gate will be opened and closed to allow minimal traffic back and forth.
Mr. Neff stated the new layout of the high school would actually eliminate students who would be leaving from this area (the back) due to all of the student parking being moved to the east side of the site. Mr. Neff stated what is now the freshman parking lot will become staff parking. He stated that this was a conscious effort on the part of the school corporation to move the student traffic away from Sesame Street. He stated that the bus traffic will probably stay about the same. Mr. Neff reiterated that the buses would not be idling when the buses are at the school.
Mr. Neff stated that it has been decided that Lake Central High School will be providing a sidewalk on Route 41 as required. He stated that there is also a sidewalk that comes from around the area of Zig-E’s, joins with another sidewalk and enters into the high school by the football field area. He stated that there will be sidewalk in front of the building leading to the athletic entrance and the pool entrance. Mr. Neff pointed out another sidewalk on the slide that leads back out to Route 41.
Mr. Neff stated that the sidewalks would comply with the ordinance that requires a sidewalk to connect the primary building to Route 41. He stated that a safe route/walking zone has been created with the sidewalks in order for students or any pedestrian to access the building. He stated that the Petitioner has complied with the intent of the sidewalk connection to Route 41 as well as a sidewalk along Route 41 to connect to known access points on the site.
Mr. Forbes asked about the sidewalk connections. Mr. Neff stated that sidewalks would be installed along the entire length of the site parallel to Route 41. Mr. Neff stated that Petitioner is providing sidewalks all along Route 41 as well as sidewalks that lead into the site. Mr. Forbes noted that these sidewalks would keep people out of the traffic lane and the parking lot. Mr. Neff concurred.
Mr. Volk asked how far off the sidewalk set back would be from the curb. Mr. Neff stated that Petitioner would align the new sidewalks with the sidewalks already in place.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Neff stated that the Petitioner has received a request from the Town to provide a traffic examination. He stated that the school corporation has contracted with a traffic engineer to study the traffic along Route 41. Mr. Neff stated that the results of this traffic study should be provided in the packet submitted on May 31 for the meeting on June 6, 2012.
Mr. Kil informed the Board that First Group Engineering has been hired to do the traffic study. He stated that Denny Cobb, president of First Group, will actually be conducting the study himself. Mr. Kil stated that Mr. Cobb has been supplied with accident data from the 8200 block to the 8600 block of Wicker Avenue/U.S. Route 41 from 2006 to present. Mr. Kil stated that this data would be analyzed and a recommendation will be made. Mr. Neff stated that this traffic study is being done independent of Schmidt Associates.
Mr. Neff stated that NIPSCO informed the school corporation that a new substation will be constructed for the high school. He stated that the new substation will be provided for sole use by the high school. The new substation will disengage the adjacent neighborhood from the same power grid as the high school and should spare the neighborhood from future power outages or glitches. Mr. Neff stated that the size of the proposed substation is 36x45. He stated that the area containing the substation will be fenced off. Mr. Neff stated that NIPSCO refers to this substation as a “low profile substation” and the equipment is approximately six to eight feet high. Mr. Neff stated that NIPSCO specified the placement of the substation. He stated that the substation will be behind the strip center.
Mr. Neff stated that there will be a landscape screen around the substation which is in compliance with the Town’s requirements. He stated that the school corporation must plant certain tree types approved by NIPSCO to comply with NIPSCO’s requirement for trees planted near high voltage wires. Mr. Neff stated that the substation was made as unobtrusive as possible.
Mr. Volk asked about the location of the substation. Mr. Neff stated that the substation will be located in the rear of the strip center and in a low area.
Mr. Neff reviewed the waivers requested by Lake Central School Corporation. He stated that the waivers were previously requested as follows: roof materials that are visible; height of building; angled parking with one-way access; deletion of sidewalk (which has been deleted from the list of waivers); reduction of interior tree plantings in parking lot (security and site lines); change of tree species under the 69KVA line on Route 41 to comply with NIPSCO requirements; reduction or elimination of irrigation where the native planting would be incorporated (grasses and native plantings not requiring additional irrigation); substitution of the plantings for the five foot high continuous screen wall on the perimeter.
Mr. Forbes asked about irrigation and maintenance of the trees that will be planted. Mr. Forbes stated, according to the residents, the current landscaping is not being maintained. Mr. Forbes asked how maintenance, upkeep and liveliness of the plantings could be guaranteed without the irrigation. Mr. Neff stated that, pursuant to the Town’s ordinance, they would use native plantings. Mr. Neff cited a native planting, such as the river birch (planted at St. John’s Target); he stated this type of native tree would work well in this native setting.
Mr. Neff stated that the trees at the high school that died are trees that are located in the islands and these trees were basically starved out. He stated the native trees and grasses would be planted in a more sustainable bed. He explained that the idea is to plant native plants and develop a planting bed that would fall within normal swales and take advantage of normal irrigation from rain.
Mr. Neff stated that any irrigation system would require maintenance and upkeep. He stated as far as the maintenance, that he could not answer that question because this would fall under the operation of the school corporation. Mr. Forbes concurred with Mr. Neff in that if native trees are planted in a more a more open setting where Mother Nature could take care of them they would have a better chance of survival.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Neff stated that the trees being planted are substantial. Mr. Kyle Miller added that there are technical specifications for the trees as to root ball diameter, fertilization and one year warranty for the proposed trees. Mr. Miller stated they will be “engineered trees”.
Mr. Hastings asked about students being able to “enter out the back gate.” He stated that the school corporation should enforce a rule to forbid students to go out the back gate. Mr. Hastings stated one of his biggest fears is that students leaving early from school will zip around through the students and the buses and someone will be injured. He stated that he does not want to see the students driving through the parking lot with the buses even through the teacher’s parking. He stated that the best way to prevent this is to deny the students access to the back gate.
Mr. Forbes concurred. He stated that this is another gray area where the subject of access to the back gate needs to be discussed with the school corporation. Mr. Hastings stated no access to the back gate would be his recommendation. Mr. Forbes stated that the buses should hinder the students from going through the back. Mr. Forbes stated that he agreed that the school corporation should investigate implementing a rule to prevent vehicles from traveling through and around the building and exiting onto Sesame Street.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Neff stated that everything has been done to make it very inconvenient for students to exit out the back of the school.
Mr. Volk noted that Chief Frigo was present. Mr. Volk asked Chief Frigo if he had any concerns with the traffic flow at the high school or the use of Sesame Street. Chief Frigo stated that the exit is now patrolled at dismissal time.
Mr. Volk asked if not allowing cars access to the back gate could be made a condition of the approval. Attorney Kuiper noted that this is an access point previously approved as a part of the subdivision. He noted that the new layout will make it less convenient to use. Mr. Volk stated it would be impossible to eliminate cars altogether. He stated that the back gate issue would have to be addressed with the school board.
Mr. Neff asked Dr. Veracco to talk about the band.
Dr. Veracco appeared before the Board. He stated he was not present at the last meeting, but he has been attending the Wednesday afternoon work sessions with Mr. Kil and Mr. Kraus. Dr. Veracco stated that when he caught heard that residents were upset about the band or making an issue with the band he decided to be a part of this presentation.
Dr. Veracco wanted everyone to know how important the band is to the high school. The band has received accolades and national recognition. He stated that the band is a very important extra-curricular activity. He noted that the strongest students are involved with more than just class work. He stated that the band provides opportunities for nearly ten percent of the student body.
Dr. Veracco stated he was Assistant Principal at Lake Central High School for eight years prior to moving to the Central Office. He stated he has been superintendent for the past two years. He stated he has not had anyone come to him and complain directly to him that the band should not be practicing in the back. He stated that the band has been practicing in the back for the past 20 years. He stated that the band has always practiced in the back mainly for safety purposes.
Dr. Veracco stated that there is constant traffic in front of the school because that is location of the entrance/exit. He stated when the back gate issue was discussed at Good Neighbor night the back gate being open 24/7 was quickly addressed. He stated that the gate is now open for approximately 90 minutes during arrival and dismissal.
Dr. Veracco stated that no one complained about band practice on Good Neighbor night although many issues and concerns were voiced. Dr. Veracco stated that it was unfortunate that the neighbors vented their concerns about school operations in front of the Town Council. He stated that he believes this is an issue that should be brought directly to the school corporation since it is a direct operation of the school. He stated that if anyone wished to discuss how the school operates it needs to be done with the school corporation.
Dr. Veracco reiterated how important the band is to the high school along with all of the other extra-curricular activities. He emphasized that band is in the back because there is minimal traffic around the back of the school. He stated that since access has been limited to Sesame Street, there is not as much traffic. Safety is a major concern and the band students must be able to move without automobiles in their way.
(General discussion ensued.)
Dr. Veracco stated this is the third straight year for budget cuts. He stated that a transportation study is being done at the present time which may reduce the number of bus routes. He stated that he has heard the residents in Heron Lake, and if the buses can be re-routed onto Route 41 rather than through the subdivision he would do his best to address this issue.
Mr. Volk asked if the band would be practicing in the bus staging area. Dr. Veracco stated it the band will be practicing in the bus staging area. He stated that the freshman center parking area where band practice currently takes place will become the faculty parking lot. He stated that this parking lot will be painted like a football field for band practice.
Mr. Neff concluded his presentation.
Mr. Volk stated that opaque screening is required between the high school and the residential neighborhood. He asked Mr. Kraus if he had reviewed the landscaping. Mr. Kraus stated he had reviewed the landscaping and there are lots of shrubs, grass and trees along the wall. Mr. Volk asked if the landscaping density meets the Town’s requirements. Mr. Kraus stated that the landscaping does meet the Town’s requirements.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kraus stated that evergreens are not included in the Town’s ordinance but he stated they are denser, lower to the ground, and probably make a better sound deterrent especially in the winter time. Mr. Volk stated possibly some of the deciduous trees could be swapped out for evergreens. Mr. Volk stated he would like to review the entire western boundary to see if anything could be done to tighten up the areas where there are spaces between the trees.
Mr. Volk asked about landscape maintenance. He asked if there was any way to assure the residents of the subdivision that the trees will be “somewhat maintained.” Mr. Veracco explained that the school corporation has been aware that the landscaping needs a major overhaul. He stated that this is the reason that no money has been put into the landscaping. He stated that the new landscaping will present a dramatic change and a major expense for the school corporation. He assured the Board that the school corporation takes pride in their facilities and will take care of the same.
Mr. Volk asked if there was a complete waiver on the irrigation. Mr. Kil asked Mr. Neff to go through the irrigation for the Board. Mr. Neff stated that the practice field and the baseball field will be irrigated. He stated that these areas are like “a lawn” and so they would have to be irrigated. He stated that the irrigation would take place through a well. Mr. Neff stated that conifers and native grasses are not irrigated. He stated that the landscape specifications call for native plantings within a reasonable radius range. He stated that due to the caliper of the plants required, the plants will be already acclimated to the environment.
Mr. Volk stated that once the plants are established (two years) that they should thrive without any type of irrigation. He noted that there will be a one year warranty on the plantings. He asked if the school corporation would implement any type of maintenance program to replace any of the bushes, shrubs and trees that die. Mr. Volk stated that he wanted to ensure that the purpose for requiring trees as a buffer/block would not fall by the wayside.
Mr. Neff stated that Dr. Veracco has committed to make the school wonderful. Mr. Volk stated his concern is that the landscaping maintenance may not be taken care of due to budgetary constraints. Mr. Neff noted that there is not much vandalism on planting screens. He stated that in terms of maintenance there is less maintenance with planting screen walls than with a physical screen wall.
Mr. Volk asked about the lighting; he stated that the parking lot and road lights meet the Town’s ordinance at 15 feet. Mr. Kil stated that site lighting was discussed. He stated that he has been supplied with a cut sheet for the light fixtures. Mr. Kil stated that all of the light fixtures do meet the Dark Skies requirements. Mr. Kil stated that Mr. Kraus has reviewed the site lighting which is zero light trespass at the property line.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes remarked that when the football field is turned the grandstands will block the direction that the light currently travels. Mr. Kil stated that the lights will face east/west. Mr. Volk asked if a cut-off time needs to be established on the field lighting. Mr. Kil stated that a cut-off time would be an option. Mr. Kil stated that there is no issue at the present time with the field lighting so there should not be an issue going forward.
Mr. Forbes noted that the lights in the parking lot are currently high pressure sodium. He asked if these lights were going to be changed to metal halide. Mr. Dart stated that the lighting would be metal halide. Mr. Neff stated that the metal halide lighting is more efficient. Mr. Forbes stated he tends to favor high pressure sodium lighting. Mr. Volk concurred. Mr. Volk stated that the lighting new ordinance, when it is enacted, will require high pressure sodium. Mr. Forbes asked Petitioner to give the lighting matter some consideration.
Mr. Neff stated that the best control is had with the metal halide lighting. He stated that the school corporation also considered LED lighting, but LED lighting is cost prohibitive.
Mr. Volk asked if the Fire Department had done a full review. Mr. Kil stated that all of the hook-ups around the building, inside suppression system, location of hydrants, lane width and circulation around the site have all been reviewed with the fire chief. He stated that all of the accommodations and requirements of the fire chief have been met.
Mr. Neff stated that the circulation on the site works very well. He stated that the parking will be broken down into different groups from grade level assigned parking to event parking.
Mr. Volk asked what was being done to enhance the three entrances to the high school. Mr. Neff stated the entrance/exit will not be touched, but the inside circulation of the site is being improved. Mr. Kil stated that the First Group will be taking a look at the ingress/egress and may have some recommendations.
Mr. Volk asked Mr. Kraus about the status of his review. Mr. Kraus stated he hoped to have a review letter done by next Wednesday. Mr. Kraus stated so far the review is looking well. He stated he has a voluminous amount of information to review.
Mr. Neff stated that Mr. Kraus has been very timely in his review, and this makes the collaborative effort work much better.
Mr. Volk asked if there were any further questions or comments. The Board had no further comments.
Mr. Volk stated that the June 6, 2012, will be a continued public hearing. He stated that the Board will look into the high pressure sodium lights, review the west landscaping boundary and look forward to the receipt of a First Group Engineering traffic study and a letter from Mr. Ken Kraus on the site review.
Mr. Volk adjourned the meeting at 8:45 p.m.
A TRUE COPY
____________________________________________
SUSAN E. WRIGHT, RECORDING SECRETARY
| Greg Volk | Steve Hastings | Attorney Tim Kuiper |
| Mike Ryan | Steve Kozel | Kenn Kraus |
| Tom Redar | Steve Kil | |
| Mike Forbes |
Mr. Steve Kozel made a motion to approve the minutes of May 2, 2012, with the aforementioned correction; Mr. Forbes seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0).
Mr. Volk noted that the final engineering plans had been received and reviewed by Mr. Kraus. Mr. Volk stated the Board had received a letter from Mr. Kraus, Haas & Associates Engineering, regarding the review. He stated that the review encompassed the list of waivers submitted by Lake Central School Corporation.
Mr. Volk noted that First Group Engineering has completed the traffic study. The Board was in receipt of a letter from First Group Engineering with recommendations. Mr. Kraus stated that First Group Engineering had three recommendations. The recommendations were as follows: 1.) the northern most driveway approach for the deceleration lane should be lengthened and widened; 2.) eliminate the driveways off of the main entrance drive into the parking lot; and, 3.) buses be required to use the lighted exit.
Mr. Volk noted that First Group Engineering recommended that the signalized main entrance be moved up to a Level Service C. Mr. Kraus stated that this was a timing issue. Mr. Kraus stated that these recommendations are reflected on the current set of plans.
Mr. Forbes stated that he wanted to clarify that First Group’s recommendation was addressing buses that exit onto Route 41 and will not prevent the use of the back exit. Mr. Kraus concurred. Mr. Forbes stated that these recommendations would not prevent the usage of Sesame Street for bus exits. Mr. Kraus stated that First Group’s recommendation was that buses leaving the high school and exiting onto Route 41 use the signalized entrance.
Mr. Volk stated that the Board also received a letter from Schmidt Associates pertaining to the use of metal halide lighting in lieu of high pressure sodium. He stated that this letter would be reviewed at later on.
Mr. Volk stated that Lake Central School Corporation has submitted a list of waivers to the Board. The waivers were as follows: the sloped roof (Chapter 8, K.5); auditorium stage fly that will exceed the 50 foot height limit by two feet (Chapter 8.4, F.3); parking lot aisle width, proposed lane widths are less than 24’ and greater than 12’ (Chapter 12, C.1 b); 5’ obscuring wall, in lieu of wall retain cyclone fence in addition to native deciduous and evergreen landscaping (Chapter 12, C.1, g); parking lot perimeter plantings related to areas where visibility lines for school security areas and direct observation are necessary (Chapter 13, P.1); parking lot interior planting requirements, relocating landscaping volume to residential area borders (Chapter 13, P.2);tree planting species consistent with NIPSCO species requirements (Appendix 1); and, native plantings to the area which are intended to thrive with natural watering sources (Chapter 13, F.5, b).
Mr. Volk asked about the video surveillance cameras; he stated concerns were voiced during the last public hearing related to these cameras. He asked if the cameras will focus off of school property. Mr. Dart stated that the cameras are stationary. He stated that the cameras will be focused on the parking lot.
Mr. Volk noted that tonight was a continued public hearing on the Lake Central High School primary approval. Mr. Volk outlined some of the concerns voiced at the last public hearing, cameras, HVAC system noise, noise from band practice, power lines, substation location/structure and traffic study.
Mr. Dart stated that the HVAC unit is not completely noise free, but will emit a lot less noise what is coming from the existing HVAC system. In addition, the new HVAC system will be located towards the center of the roof.
Mr. Volk noted that the noise from band practice is one concern that is beyond the control of the Plan Commission Board. He stated that this issue should be addressed to and a compromise made with the Lake Central School Board (between subdivision residents and school corporation).
Mr. Volk stated that a determination had been made that the pick-up and drop off time for students is approximately 20 minutes in the morning and afternoon. He stated that the bus idle time would be on a controlled basis. Mr. Dart stated that the bus idle time would be a 10 minute maximum and this 10 minute bus idling is only allowed when temperatures dip below 30 degrees.
Mr. Volk noted that the Sesame Street exit would be gated and opened for approximately 90 minutes in the morning and afternoon and closed at all other times.
Mr. Volk noted that the school corporation has represented that they are going to review their bus routes and minimize the number of buses going into the subdivision.
Mr. Volk stated that the west boundary buffer will retain the existing fence. The fence will have slats placed in it. He noted that at the last study session there was discussion of filling certain voids in the landscaping. Mr. Kraus concurred. Mr. Kraus stated that deciduous trees were switched out for evergreens; he stated that the plan reflects three evergreens and one deciduous tree in groupings. Mr. Kraus stated that the voids in the fencing have been filled in with trees.
Mr. Volk noted that the photometric plan had been reviewed and there was no light trespass. He noted that all of the lighting was Dark Skies compliant. He remarked that the glare will be reduced when compared to the present lighting. He asked about glare from the high school’s interior windows. Mr. Dart stated that the high school’s windows would be “very tinted” in part for energy savings. Mr. Dart stated that the lighting system will be operating on an occupancy sensor whereby if there are no persons in the room the lights turn off automatically.
Mr. Volk invited Mr. Dart to make a presentation before he opened the public hearing.
Mr. Dart stated that all plans have been submitted to the Board and Mr. Kraus. He stated that relative to the landscaping nearly all evergreens will be planted along the west property line. He stated that there will be shade trees spaced in the landscaping also. Mr. Dart stated that the intent of the landscaping is to create a visual screen. Mr. Dart stated shrubs will also be added.
Mr. Dart stated that a traffic examination had been performed and the results of the same have been included in the documents submitted to the Board. He stated that the bus traffic has been re-routed pursuant to the recommendations of the traffic study. He stated that all of the buses exiting onto Route 41 will be directed to the signalized light leaving the right turn out for vehicular traffic. Mr. Dart stated that three drive openings out of the parking lot into the entrance/exit road will be closed so there is less merging traffic. He noted there is a recommendation to adjust the signal light timing specifically to address the heavy traffic volume. Lastly, Mr. Dart stated that he agreed with the official wording in the letter regarding the waivers being sought by the school corporation.
There were no questions for Mr. Dart. Mr. Volk opened the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING
Attorney Michael Muenich, 3245 45th Avenue, Highland
Attorney Muenich appeared before the Board representing residents from two subdivisions adjacent to Lake Central High School to the west and the south, Heron Lakes and Ventura Estates. He submitted formal remonstrance evidence.
Attorney Muenich submitted plans and booklets to the Board. He explained that the first portion of the booklet contained a copy of each slide he would be showing in Power Point, the second portion of the booklet contained an Appendix that includes data, information and sources utilized to back up the presentation he would be giving.
Attorney Muenich stated the information contained in the booklet was as follows: excerpts from St. John’s Zoning Ordinance, Lake County Noise Pollution Ordinance, traffic study accident data and material provided by the St. John Police Department, band activities, layout documents, the band schedule, tabulations from the plans related to the tree landscaping, articles related to noise pollution and vegetation’s role in reducing noise pollution.
Attorney Muenich presented census data. He stated St. John represents 22% of the population (2010 census )when added with the populations of Schererville, Dyer, St. John and St. John Township. He went over assessed valuations from 2011-2012 for the aforementioned communities; he stated that St. John has the smallest assessed valuation, but all of the burden for the high school facility falls upon the Town of St. John and its residents, particularly the neighbors to the west. Attorney Muenich stated if anything is to be imposed upon anybody, it should be imposed upon the school corporation and not the residents of the community.
Attorney Muenich cited the Town’s Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 1, § B Purpose, Page 1 “The purpose of this ordinance is to adopt zoning regulations and districts *** specifically, to adopt minimum standards requirements to promote the health, safety *** aesthetics and general welfare of the municipality.” He stated this ordinance was created for the citizens of St. John and not the Lake Central School Corporation. He stated that the Board’s duty is to no one other than the citizens of St. John.
Attorney Muenich stated that provisions of the Town’s ordinance are to be interpreted as minimum requirements not the maximum requirements. He stated that all of the waivers being requested by the Lake Central School Corporation are waivers from the minimum standards that the Board is charged with protecting for the residents of the community.
Attorney Muenich stated that Lake Central School Corporation seems to be of the mindset that whatever exists on the parcel is acceptable and grandfathered in, and that is not the case. He cited Chapter 2 § C, Page 1 which states in part “the use, size, height of buildings, converted, moved, enlarged or structurally altered and the use of any land shall be in compliance with the regulations established herein.”
Attorney Muenich stated that Lake Central School Corporation is relying upon a grandfather clause but there is no grandfathering in the Town’s zoning ordinance or land development ordinances. Attorney Muenich approximated the proposed building at nearly one million square feet. He stated 500 hundred parking spaces will be added. He stated that a considerable space is being added to the facility; a material renovation of the structure.
Attorney Muenich stated that there is no grandfathering for Lake Central’s chain link fence, and there are no grandfathering clauses for the current violations that exist at Lake Central at the present time.
Attorney Muenich stated that pursuant to the Town’s ordinance any activity or operation that emits noise should comply with all regulations of the municipality, Lake County, state and federal governments. Attorney Muenich included the Lake County Noise Ordinance in its entirety into evidence in the Appendix. Attorney Muenich stated that the Town must, pursuant to the Lake County Noise Ordinance, control to noise emitted from Lake Central School Corporation.
Attorney Muenich stated that the Lake Central School site actually encompasses 84 acres. He stated that the school corporation is presenting to the Board approximately one-half of the 84 acre site. He stated that there is ample area to the north of the school corporation’s parcel to build facilities. He stated that the school corporation is not restricted to building on the southernmost 40 acres of the parcel. He stated that the reason they are restricting the building to this area of the parcel is because of costs.
Attorney Muenich played video clips of the brass band, horns and drum corps. He stated that this noise is what the residents of the subdivision are subjected to when sitting outside of their homes. Attorney Muenich stated that he would provide the Board with a schedule of the Lake Central Band.
Attorney Muenich played audio recording of Lake Central band practice on May 23, 2012, at 7:40 p.m. at the southwest corner of the parking lot. Attorney Muenich played an audio recording of Lake Central band practice at 8:19 p.m. He stated that this noise is not tolerable for someone using their backyard. Attorney Muenich read an excerpt of a letter (author omitted) complaining of the band’s thirteen hour practices last summer. The neighbors felt that they did not have a summer due to the noise of band practice.
Attorney Muenich submitted a 2012 revised band schedule. He cited the hours that the band will be practicing and the addition of a band camp. Attorney Muenich stated that these hours reflect Lake Central being a “lousy neighbor without any consideration for anyone except themselves.”
Attorney Muenich stated that his clients are not opposed to the band. He identified three sites on Lake Central’s parcel where the band could practice without bothering neighbors. He stated that one of the sites he pointed out would have the school as a block for the noise. Attorney Muenich stated that one of the reasons cited by Dr. Veracco for not moving the band to the front of the high school was not being able to “control the kids and the parking and what went on.” Attorney Muenich questioned if the students cannot be controlled in the front whether they would be able to be controlled in the back or anywhere else on the site. Attorney Muenich stated this is not a valid excuse.
Attorney Muenich stated that the school corporation continues to ignore the west gate, Sesame Street. He stated this poses a severe problem. He stated that a 90 minute restriction in the morning is not being applied. He stated that buses start lining up at 6:00 a.m., exchange students and enter and exit. He stated this activity has been watched and timed and probably goes on for closer to two to two and one half hours and is of the same duration in the afternoon.
Attorney Muenich submitted a Route 41 traffic count for 2009. He stated that INDOT is concerned enough with the intersection that a traffic counting section was established at the site. He stated the data from INDOT is contained in the Appendix of the evidence he submitted to the Board.
Mr. Muenich cited St. John Police Department accident statistics for the period of 2006-2012. He stated that the school administration and the school board should be ashamed of these statistics. He stated this matter should have been addressed years ago. He stated that the school corporation was forced to do a traffic study. He stated that the school administration’s general philosophy is “once it’s off the school property it ain’t our problem.”
Attorney Muenich stated that it is unknown whether or not the traffic study conducted by First Group Engineering and the recommendations made by Mr. Cobb will solve the traffic problem. He stated that there will continue to be accidents and fatalities. He stated that this problem needs to be fully addressed. Attorney Muenich stated he does not have enough information about how the traffic study was conducted to draw any conclusions as to whether it will work or not.
Attorney Muenich showed slides of the west gate traffic and traffic on Sesame Street and Heron Lake Drive at approximately 6:15 a.m. with traffic bending around the curve to the north; he stated that the same traffic situation exists in the back of the school in the afternoons. Attorney Muenich showed slides and audio of vehicle traffic exiting the school and entering the subdivision. Attorney Muenich stated that “it’s the buses as well as the kids; there’s no control back there at all.” He stated if the school corporation cannot control their student body then they should not be allowed to use the exit. He stated perhaps the school corporation could engage in the services of a security guard to control this traffic out of the west gate in some fashion, or prohibit the traffic altogether.
Attorney Muenich showed slides of other west gate incidents, and traffic statistics for the west and east gates (page 12 of red book). Attorney Muenich stated that these statistics were gathered by going to the site with hand counters and monitoring the traffic flow. He stated that there is a “substantial traffic incident or situation” going on at the school every day winter, summer and fall.
Attorney Muenich showed a slide of the chain link fence that the school corporation proposes to put strips in. He stated of the fence, “it’s misaligned, it’s rusted, it’s garbage.” He stated that slats in cyclone fences get torn out, removed, bent and are not maintained. He stated that the school corporation does not maintain anything on the perimeter of its property or the exterior of the facility.
Attorney Muenich showed slides of chain link fencing located in the interior of the parcel at the high school. He stated that the Town’s ordinance requires certain types of barriers and cyclone fences are not included. He cited the Town’s ordinance “Chain link fence is prohibited when adjacent to an existing residence or residential subdivision unless a solid buffer is provided on the residential side of the chain link fence.”
Attorney Muenich stated that the school corporation wants to continue to use a broken down, rusted, out of repair fence and place strips in it. He stated that developers usually put up masonry walls or other sound barriers to protect residents from street noise. He stated that the school is not interested in erecting a wall to shield its neighbors from the noise and activities going on at their public facility. He stated a solid wall would prohibit vandalism and property damage. Attorney Muenich showed slides of storage at the back of the school property where unused/unwanted property is stored.
Attorney Muenich showed a slide of a trailer that used to be parked on the high school’s property that has been moved to the bus barn. He stated that this type of storage next to residential property is prohibited by the Town’s ordinance. Attorney Muenich showed a slide of vermin that crossed the boundary line.
Attorney Muenich proposed that the school corporation be required to erect a six foot vinyl fence. He showed slides of several different styles of vinyl fencing. He stated these vinyl fences are maintenance free. He stated that a six foot vinyl fence is defined in the Town’s ordinance as an acceptable alternative to a masonry wall.
Attorney Muenich informed the Board that it is their duty to protect the aesthetics, safety and welfare of the residents of the Town of St. John. He stated it is not the Board’s obligation to protect the school corporation. He reminded the Board that their residents are bearing the burden of costs for this project.
Attorney Muenich stated that the Town’s ordinance requires 2.5” caliper trees. He stated that the ordinance also specifies six to eight foot trees. He stated there are a wide variety of trees that can be planted to comply with the Town’s ordinance.
Attorney Muenich stated Petitioner is required to produce an Interior Planting Requirement Table and he is unable to find any table other than LP101 reflected on the drawing set. Attorney Muenich stated that Petitioner is proposing to plant 285 full size trees; he stated this amount of trees will not create much of a barrier and will not handle any noise pollution. Attorney Muenich stated the Town’s ordinance for interior plantings at an institutional setting requires one tree for every 1,000 square feet of yard. He reminded the Board that this requirement is for interior plantings and not the exterior/perimeter. He stated that the school corporation maintains that they are moving all of the required trees from the interior planting space to the perimeter planting site, and this is not the case. Attorney Muenich stated if the data on the table is adhered to the interior would require between 600 to 800 trees. He stated not even this many trees are being planted on the perimeter plantings. He stated, mathematically, this is not the case, and believes Petitioner is short of approximately 1,000 trees.
Attorney Muenich stated noise pollution is recognized by the EPA in that it reduces the quality of the environment and is detrimental to human health. He outlined the non-auditory stress effects of noise pollution in his evidence booklet (page 21, red booklet). Presented into evidence as one of the effects of non-auditory stress is helplessness. Attorney Muenich assured the Board that every one of his clients feels helpless from being subjected to noise “day after day, night after night…it’s like Chinese water torture.” Attorney Muenich stated that the school corporation seems unwilling to address this issue. He incorporated four to five articles on the effects of noise into the Appendix of the booklet he submitted as evidence.
Attorney Muenich showed a slide of what would make an acceptable sound barrier (page 22 of booklet.). He stated the designs he is recommending would reduce exterior noise from 5 to 15 dBA depending upon the design.
Attorney Muenich stated that the shrubs and grasses Petitioner proposes to plant are required by the Town’s ordinance to anchor the soil and would have nothing to do with sound absorption. He showed a slide on how to create a sound barrier (page 23, red booklet). He cited the Town’s Zoning Ordinance “Bufferyards that are intended to physically separate and visually screen adjacent land uses that are not fully compatible must be a solid, opaque screen (Chapter 13,§ 1, page 6). Attorney Muenich stated that Chapter 13 of the Town’s ordinance contains a number of different standards and it is difficult to interpret some of the standards and how and where they apply. He cited a catchall phrase in the ordinance “where there are conflicts or where there are discrepancies the toughest standard applies throughout.”
Attorney Muenich cited Chapter 13, §1.2, page 7, “A landscaped and maintained yard shall be provided, including a solid visual buffer or screen ***. The width shall be as follows: A) Next to Existing Residences or a platted Residential Zoning Development: 40 feet.” Attorney Muenich stated he does not believe the buffer is close to 40 feet. He stated a 40 foot buffer would allow a mound to be built and an adequate vegetative barrier placed that would absorb sound. He showed slides on how to accomplish the building of a berm and a staggered tree screen (page 25, red booklet). He stated that, at an absolute minimum, the buffer should surround the houses on the south and the west. He stated that the proposed berm should have a solid vegetative barrier with all gaps filled and with enough depth to absorb sound coming off of the parking lot.
Attorney Muenich showed a slide of St. John’s Target store (page 26, red booklet); he stated that the deciduous trees on this parcel are healthy and growing. He compared these trees with the trees in Lake Central High School’s parking lot. He stated that the trees at the high school are 10 to 15 years old, not growing, half of the trees dead and a third of the trees removed. He stated that the trees that are growing at the high school are still about the same size as they were when they were first planted. Mr. Muenich stated that the trees at the school are not maintained, watered or fertilized.
Attorney Muenich showed a slide on the Corridor Buffer Strip (page 27, red booklet). He stated that the new poles are placed on the state highway right of way and not on the school property. He stated, to his knowledge, no trees will be planted on the state highway right of way. Mr. Muenich stated that the Town’s Greenbelt Ordinance for the Route 41 Corridor requires a 50’ greenbelt off of their property. He stated that the request for waiver and different plant species has nothing to do with trees growing up under the power lines that are not on their property. Attorney Muenich stated that the new poles are set to the paved side of the right of way; he stated that the Town’s ordinance requires (50’ feet back) a full landscaping plan that Petitioner simply does not want to comply with.
Attorney Muenich provided the Board with a drawing of a NIPSCO substation. He explained the drawing contains one green box, galvanized channel, resistors aimed up in the air, electrical components and switch gear hanging up in the air (page 28, red booklet). He stated that he understood the proposed substation would contain three green boxes that would fit environmentally into the Route 41 Corridor. He stated that this substation would be located right at the entrance to the subdivision. He stated that property is being demolished and concrete is being poured and he’s not sure a permit has been issued. He stated that Petitioner is anticipating that the Board is going to grant them a wholesale waiver for them to move forward on the project.
Attorney Muenich showed a slide of Gordon Food Service delivery truck at 4:50 a.m. at the high school (page 29, red booklet). He stated under the Petitioner’s revised plan, a loop for vehicle traffic goes from the entrance around the north side of the school and around the back of the lot which is adjacent to his clients’ property. He stated there will be semi tractor-trailers (deliveries) coming into the school at approximately 4:00-5:00 a.m. He stated that there are no loading docks reflected on the drawings he has reviewed.
Attorney Muenich showed a slide of the construction staging area (page 29, red booklet). He stated that Petitioner is proposing to use an area on the southwest corner of the existing parking facility and an area near Route 41 (on recently purchased property) for construction staging areas. He asked the Board what provisions they are requiring of Petitioner concerning dust control, trash, runoff, noise abatement and screening. He stated that the proposed project is slated to run for approximately two to two and one-half years. He stated that the proposed construction staging areas are adjacent to residential neighborhoods. He stated that there is an abundance of acreage on the parcel to the north where construction staging would not be bothersome to residential structures.
Attorney Muenich stated that the Board has the authority to compel the Petitioner to comply. He stated “You have the authority to make them do things. You have the authority to make them comply. If you do not require Lake Central School Corporation to meet, at a minimum, St. John’s standards, the Town of St. John and its taxpayers and these residents, my clients, will bear any condition or expense associated with that failure. You have one opportunity to require the school corporation to cure, correct or ameliorate current and potential deficiencies in this project. Don’t miss the opportunity. Hold them to the standard. Your duty is to the residents of this Town and particularly to residents that adjoin this project. You are the guardians of the gate and we hope you do your job. Thank you.”
Joe Heroux, 11723 South Oak Ridge Drive, St. John
Mr. Heroux stated that the way in which the high school has expanded in the past has created a nuisance. He stated that the proposed plan has many defects. In his opinion, the plan was put together by incompetent people. He stated that the school is too big for the property that it is located on.
Mr. Heroux stated his main concern is the safety of the occupants of the building. He stated he brought this concern up at the last public hearing. He stated he has not seen an evacuation plan or a pre-plan reflecting how the building will be serviced for an emergency or a fire. He stated that the buildings are clustered together for 3,000 occupants. He stated, in his opinion, it is an unsafe condition and the Town will be liable for approving an unsafe condition, both individually and as a Commission and as a Council.
Mr. Heroux urged the Board to require Petitioner to redesign the entire project so that there are multiple buildings. He stated that the buildings should not be clustered together because this has created all of the additional problems. Mr. Heroux stated that the design is wrong. He stated the entire concept is wrong as far as the safety aspect of the occupants of the buildings. He stated that the Board should occupy themselves, first and foremost, with the safety of the occupants of the building. He stated the prime responsibility is the safety issue.
Mr. Heroux asked to be shown a pre-plan, how to get in and out of the facility and fire department access. He stated this information has not been presented. He stated, “I saw nothing in the minutes of the study session that has not been addressed. That safety hazard is still there and that should be your biggest concern”
Mr. Heroux stated two schools should be built. The land is not suited to “scab onto one piece that’s the anchor of the project.” He stated this creates neighborhood problems and safety problems for access. He reiterated that the design is flawed.
Mr. Heroux stated he has lived in St. John for 35 years, and it has been a very strict town. He stated that St. John has turned into a nice town because Boards like the sitting Board require residents to adhere to the zoning ordinance. He stated that when this doesn’t happen the character of the town is ruined.
Mr. Heroux stated that the members of the Board have taken an oath to follow the laws and the rules. There should be no exceptions made and no property values destroyed. He stated this is an ethical and legal responsibility that the Board members have.
Mr. Heroux stated that if the project is not done right there will be people suing them. He stated that the Town will be held liable if injury occurs because the project was not done right. He stated that the Board can avoid all of these problems by enforcing the Town’s ordinances.
Mr. Heroux repeated that the design is flawed. He stated that construction has commenced without a building permit. He stated that St. John shuts down projects that have started without building permits. He asked who has blinders on that doesn’t see that construction is going on at the site without a building permit. He asked who is responsible for that. He stated that there is no building permit “and this thing is going like it’s greased lightning and it’s an incompetent and deficient plan.”
Mr. Heroux urged the Board to look at this project as a management problem. He stated that the Board does not have to buy into “incompetent management of this school and this project.” He stated that the Board has an obligation to the citizens to keep them safe and protect their property values.
Mr. Heroux stated that three school board members are coming up for election in November. He recommended that the Board ask them for a new plan that solves all of the residents’ problems, solves all of the safety problems and defer action until after the November election. He stated that the voters in Town and the voters in other cities can decide if they want to buy into what he considers incompetent management by the school board in designing this plan. He stated that there should have been two schools because the acreage does not fit if you use a section of the anchor and continue on.
Mr. Heroux stated for the aforementioned reasons, he remonstrates against this project and requests that the matter be deferred until after the school board elections in November. He stated if new people come in they will have a new perspective, a new view and they will straighten this mess out. He stated the project is a mess and a nuisance to the Town. He thanked the Board.
Mr. Volk asked for further public comment. There was no further public comment. Mr. Volk closed the public hearing and brought the matter back before the Board.
Mr. Volk stated he would like the Board to review some of the comments made during the public hearing. Mr. Volk stated that Mr. Muenich’s presentation was extensive and he did not think the Board would be able to address all of the questions tonight.
Mr. Volk stated that some of the comments made by Mr. Heroux have been touched upon before. Mr. Volk asked about the building permits. Mr. Forbes stated that NIPSCO has a building permit. Mr. Kil stated that NIPSCO has an electrical permit for the substation work, which is all of the work on the project going on at the present time.
Mr. Heroux made a comment. Mr. Forbes noted that the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
Mr. Forbes stated that the Board is, once again, faced with an intermingling of Town Code Enforcement and Plan Commission duties and responsibilities. He stated that if the band was an issue for so long it should have been brought to the attention of the school corporation. He stated he, as a councilman, has never received a complaint about the high school band.
Mr. Forbes stated that the neighborhood issues are being dropped on the Plan Commission Board looking for resolution. He stated that the Board’s duties and responsibilities do not encompass these issues.
Mr. Forbes stated that the interior operation of the building is not within the Plan Commissions purview. He stated that several entities inspect the building and property including the State and the local Police and Fire Departments. Mr. Forbes stated that the Town does not sign off on interior design and/or operation of a building.
Mr. Forbes stated that the State Fire Marshall and State planners will inspect this building. He stated that the interior design and operation of buildings in Town are not within the scope or range of Plan Commission duties and responsibilities.
Mr. Forbes stated that there are individuals who do not want this building built and are using this opportunity to stop it and this issue needs to be taken into consideration also.
Mr. Forbes stated he personally believed the plan to be a good plan. He stated he will not argue about the engineering of the building.
Mr. Forbes stated that the requests that were made of the Board were addressed. He stated that a traffic study was asked for and the Board ordered a traffic study be done. He stated there will be changes due to the recommendations in the traffic study.
Mr. Forbes stated that a bunch of high school kids leaving high school was brought up. He stated there are going to be accidents because there are inexperienced drivers pulling out onto Route 41, which for all intents and purposes is an expressway. He stated that even though the speed limit is only 35 miles per hour in this area, as evidenced by the amount of tickets written by the St. John Police Department the speed limit is ignored. He stated that the accidents are not the school’s problem. He suggested that it is up to parents to teach their children responsibility. Mr. Forbes stated that he could direct Chief Frigo to cite every driver if that is what is necessary. He stated that this will only compound the problems in the neighborhood.
Mr. Forbes stated that he believes everything has been discussed and reviewed. He stated that that one issue that could be discussed is the condition of the chain link fence.
Mr. Forbes stated that the Town’s ordinance requires the buffer be opaque but not sound proof. Mr. Forbes stated that this same argument has been brought up before. He stated of the fence, “nowhere no how is it going to be sound proof.” He stated if someone has a problem with the band to talk to the school. He stated that in reviewing the band’s schedule he believes it complies with the hours set out in the Town’s noise ordinance. He stated that it is unfortunate that the band is practicing as soon as is allowable, but the Town’s noise ordinance is not being violated.
A member of the audience stated, “Why don’t you go ahead and buy one of them houses and move in to where you can listen to it to see how this gets on your nerves”
(Several audience members begin speaking at once.)
Mr. Forbes stated that the public hearing portion was closed. Mr. Volk stated he is not sure what authority or what can be done by the Plan Commission regarding the Lake Central Band. He stated that, as he mentioned earlier, this issue of band practice is an issue for the school board. He stated that the residents should go to the school board. An audience member stated that residents have gone before the school board for several years.
Another unidentified audience member stated that if this Board is not able to help the residents, as their councilmen, there is nothing that the residents can do. He stated that the residents are relying on the Board. He stated that the residents are trying to work with the school. He stated that 13 hours every day is a lot of practice. He stated it is the same thing over and over and it is monotonous.
(Discussion amongst audience members.)
Attorney Kuiper stated if the Board wanted to continue a dialogue with the audience the public hearing should be reopened so that the residents’ remonstrance can be properly recorded for the record.
Mr. Volk reopened the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING
Audrey Klitsch, 9399 Olcott Street, St. John
Ms. Klitsch stated that she hears the band at her house. She stated it is loud and obnoxious and she can’t even sit on her back porch without listening to the band playing all of the time. She stated that they repeat and repeat and repeat. She stated it is ridiculous for the people living closer to the high school.
Ms. Klitsch stated the residents will probably not be able to sell their homes. She stated the home values are probably way downhill. She alleged that Mr. Veracco has lied to the people, many times.
Mr. Forbes requested that Ms. Klitsch direct her comments to the Board. Ms. Klitsch asked the Board to put themselves in the residents’ position. She stated if she can hear the band from a mile and one half away to think how it affects the nearby residents with small children. She asked the Board what was wrong with them to let the school dictate to them. She said this is wrong.
Debbie Brach, 8421 Heron Lake Road
Ms. Brach stated that she resides very near the high school (where the truck was located). She stated that she graduated from Lake Central High School 25 years ago. She stated that she loves the band and used to be a part of the band. She agreed that the band is loud. She stated at one point the drumming started at 6:00 a.m. right near in her back yard and it is loud. She stated that life is too short for everyone to get so upset about the band.
Ms. Brach stated that the high school is doing a wonderful thing and the band consists of the “good kids” at Lake Central. She stated these are the students that are doing great things for the community. She stated she understands everyone’s concern, but it is disheartening that everyone is so upset about the band. She stated that people should have a little heart.
Ms. Brach stated that there are a lot of parents in the room whose children are in the band. She stated the band members are awesome kids. She stated kids who are members of the band are not the ones she’s worried about. She stated she’s more apt to be worried about the kids who are driving and disregarding traffic rules. She thanked the Board for their service.
Brenda Bagherpour, 8347 Heron Lake Road
Ms. Bagherpour stated that everyone keeps alluding to the residents’ being against the band. She stated that the residents are only asking that the band be relocated up front, for a little buffer. She stated that the band practice gets obnoxious having to sit there and listen to the same thing over and over again. She stated noise from sporting events is once a week but band practice is every night from June 14 until October or November.
Ms. Bagherpour stated that it would be a whole different story if band practice was once a week. She stated that the residents are not saying the band can’t practice; she stated they want the band to move away so they can have a buffer. She stated when she closes her windows she wants quiet; she stated closing her windows is useless because the band is that loud.
Ms. Bagherpour stated she has to go into her basement and turns on her television to get away from the band practice. She stated that the noise is unnerving after a while and so many years.
Ms. Bagherpour maintained that a bulldozer commenced at 7:20 a.m. on this date. She stated that she could hear the “beep” while it was backing up and digging. She stated she believed the noise ordinance stated a 7:00 a.m. start time. Mr. Kil stated that during the business week work is allowed to start earlier (6:00 a.m.) such as garbage trucks and deliveries. He stated some latitude is allowed especially during the summer to start earlier and quit earlier due to the heat. Mr. Kil stated he tries to work with people. Ms. Bagherpour stated that the residents are just asking for “a little bit of a buffer.”
Ms. Bagherpour addressed Mr. Volk, Mr. Forbes and all of the Board in saying that her property is going to be very near a proposed road. She stated that there are activities at the school seven days a week and there is constant traffic commencing at approximately 5:00 a.m. until 11:00 p.m. She stated that there will be parking in the freshman center parking lot and buses entering and exiting. She stated for the aforementioned reasons the existing fence is not high enough. She stated the fence “goes down.” She stated placing slats in the fencing will not help because the fence is not high enough on large parts of the fence.
Ms. Bagherpour asked where the band would be practicing when construction commences. She stated they would not be able to practice in their usual location.
Mr. Forbes told Ms. Bagherpour that the Board does not control the band.
Ms. Bagherpour stated that the residents do not dislike the band nor do they want the band to stop, they just want the band to move. Ms. Bagherpour stated that the Plan Commission members have directed members of the audience to go to the school board to discuss band issues. Ms. Bagherpour stated that residents have gone to the school board. She stated that every time one goes to the Board unless you have one hundred percent neighborhood attendance the school board will tell them not everyone is in agreement. She stated that’s how the school board treats the residents.
She stated whenever there is problem , residents have gone to the school board and it’s “whatever.” She said this treatment gets tiresome and that is why the subdivision residents come to the Town. She stated that the Town is supposed to be looking out for them.
Mr. Forbes stated that over the last year he has done quite a bit in attempt to help Ms. Bagherpour. Ms. Bagherpour concurred. Mr. Forbes explained that the Plan Commission. Ms. Bagherpour stated that the Plan Commission recommends proposals and the Town Council approves proposals because the Plan Commission made a recommendation. She asked where do the residents go for help then.
Mr. Forbes stated that the Plan Commission is not approving where the band plays. Ms. Bagherpour stated she was talking about the fence. Mr. Forbes stated asked her what issue she wanted to address. Ms. Bagherpour stated that the band should be relocated to another part of the property where there’s a buffer. Ms. Bagherpour disagreed that the trees will buffer noise car traffic, buses and diesels. She stated that she believes that kids will use the back entrance.
Ms. Bagherpour stated that the residents would like a solid fence for some privacy. She stated that the school is presently far enough away that she has a sense of privacy. She stated that proposed school will be much closer. She stated she was going to get a pool, but has changed her mind. She stated she never dreamed that the school would ever move any closer to her home than it is now.
Ms. Bagherpour stated that the residents are not trying to stop the school corporation from building, they are just seeking fair compensation in the form of a solid fence for privacy.
Mr. Volk asked if a six foot fence would be sufficient. Ms. Bagherpour stated that a six foot fence would be fine if it were level all the way across.
Mr. Muenich, 3245 45th Avenue, Highland
Attorney Muenich stated that the issue of whether or not the Plan Commission has control over the band is an issue that will probably be resolved in a different forum at a later date. He stated he understands this and has explained it to his clients.
Mr. Muenich stated that he believes that the Plan Commission does have control over the band through the Town’s Development Standards and Provisions. He stated Lake Central probably thinks otherwise.
Attorney Muenich stated one thing that the Board does have control over is the fence, the sound buffers, landscaping buffers and the irrigation. He stated there is no question who controls these items because the ordinances states it.
Attorney Muenich stated that if the Plan Commission cannot make the band go elsewhere, if this is the Board’s determination, then the Board should make the school corporation go to the nth degree to try and buffer it. He stated that asking that a buffer be placed between the neighborhoods and the school is within the Board’s power and authority. He stated that if they don’t want to move the band then require them to do something for it that is within the Board’s jurisdiction.
Attorney Muenich stated, “To my knowledge, none of my clients, and I’m certainly not adopting Joe Heroux.” Mr. Muenich stated that this issue was fought last fall and Mr. Heroux lost, and the school board is going to build a school. Mr. Muenich stated that a number of his clients have children that will attend Lake Central at some point. Attorney Muenich stated, to his knowledge, the consensus of his clients believe the school will be advantageous to the community as a whole.
Attorney Muenich stated that there are things that the Board can do, within the power of the Town’s ordinance, to protect the residents as best they can. He stated that this is all the residents are asking them to do. He stated that the perimeter landscaping, the perimeter fencing, the interior landscaping and security cameras are concerns. Attorney Muenich stated that the perimeter and the west and south sides are under the rule of the Plan Commission. He stated that the aforementioned items fall within the framework of the Town’s ordinance. He stated that the Board can order that a vinyl fence be erected, that mounds and berms are made, that a 40’ strip is installed and vegetation planted. Attorney Muenich stated he is not sure whether this will work or not. He stated it is something that the Board can do. He stated that if the school corporation is not willing to adhere to the fencing, etc. maybe they will move the band somewhere else.
Mark Hill, 10005 Pheasant Lane, St. John
Mr. Hill stated that the Board has a tough job. He stated that Lake Central High School not only includes St. John, but Schererville and Dyer. He stated he heard a lot of legitimate concerns from the residents who live near the school. He stated he did not hear one thing about the students. He stated that the school is being rebuilt to take care of the tremendous growth that the three communities have had. He stated people moved here to be a part of these communities.
Mr. Hill stated that people have to quit getting emotional about this topic and not resort to name-calling. He stated he’s heard, “bad neighbor, liar.” He stated this is not constructive and will not help this situation. He stated that everyone should be rational.
Mr. Hill reiterated that the residents have some legitimate concerns. He opined that the Board is handling this matter in the best way they know how, and he doesn’t think anymore can be asked for than that. He stated if decisions happen to make some people unhappy, he empathizes with them. He stated that this issue needs to be worked at constructively and get the emotion out of the subject. He stated there should be talk amongst everyone whether they are for it or against it. He stated this is a more constructive way to deal with the subject and more positive things will happen.
Mr. Hill opined in most communities anywhere in the United States their biggest, single source of pride of the community is their school system. He stated it is hard to listen to some of the things being said and it really hurts him. He stated St. John, Schererville and Dyer are three great communities. He stated his children live in Indianapolis and are proud of their school and support it. He stated Lake Central High School wins national awards in competitions and state championships, academic super bowls. He stated that extra-curriculars are important.
Mr. Hill stated people should realize that the school corporation “will put a darn nice product out there that the whole community is going to benefit from.” He wants the arguing to stop and recognize that the school should be something everyone can be really proud of. He stated all of the issues will get worked out eventually.
Joe Heroux, 11723 South Oak Ridge Drive, St. John
Mr. Heroux stated that this issue is not about the referendum. He stated that the Town has a Master Plan and a Zoning Ordinance, and the Board has all taken an oath. He stated people will be damaged by this project. He stated that Board should not allow anyone to tell them they don’t have the authority to straighten this mess out.
Mr. Heroux stated it is not just the State that has the responsibility for the health, safety and welfare of the residents of St. John. He stated that it is the Board’s responsibility. He stated that this issue falls on the Board’s shoulders. He stated that it is a tough decision and the Board should weigh the facts as they see them. He stated this issue is not about the referendum, it is about the Board’s responsibility to take care of the health, welfare and safety of the children that come to St. John from all of the surrounding communities.
Mr. Heroux stated that there are ordinances that have the effect of law, and the Board should support those.
Mr. Heroux thanked the Board.
Don Paris, 8524 Kelly Court, St. John
Mr. Paris stated that a fence would be nice and help everyone. He stated that a fence would make things more attractive. He stated that the construction that is going on that was mentioned earlier is not for the power plant but for water lines. He stated that one of his concerns on this construction project is that the back gate should be blocked off for the kids’ safety. He stated kids on motor scooters are cutting through the gate of the freshman parking lot and entering into the construction zone.
Mr. Paris stated that he has talked to the band director. He stated that the band director “pretty well told me to go shove it.” He stated that the band director does not care about the residents and this is a sad thing.
Mr. Paris thanked the Board.
Dale Andrees, 9505 Julia
Mr. Andrees stated that the audience saw both good and bad things reflected on the video clips that were shown. He stated it is really all about the kids. He said the school corporation is attempting to put a facility together for all three cities. He stated that the school corporation tries to do the best they can.
Mr. Andrees stated that kids are going to cut through yards and not just by a high school. He stated he sees the same thing go on in his neighborhood. He stated these things happen and are going to happen because they’re kids.
Mr. Andrees stated that he has two children and he believes if they cause problems they will have to take responsibility for it.
Mr. Andrees stated that the band and noise have been an issue. He stated the band is there and they do a great job. He stated everyone in the school does a great job and tries to do the best they can. He stated even the band director is doing his job, bad demeanor or not. He stated that the band has to practice and it is no different than athletic practice or any other type of practice. The band has to practice.
Mr. Andrees stated that the band has to have somewhere to go and practice. He questioned whether or not there is another area for the band to practice. He stated the residents can check with the school corporation. He stated he realizes that it is not the responsibility of the Plan Commission to police the high school band. He stated he could understand how it may be a problem for the residents living near the high school. He questioned whether or not the project would drastically reduce their home values; he stated he sincerely doubted it. He stated it is a great school corporation and they do a good job. He stated people move to this area for the schools. He stated everyone should back up the students.
Mr. Andrees thanked the Board.
Scott Moran 8301 Heron Lake Road
Mr. Moran stated that he wanted to talk about value. He stated he used to live at 12939 West 96th Avenue. He stated he built a spec home at 8301 Heron Lake Road and could not sell it. He stated everyone complained that it was the school. He stated he sold his house on West 96th Avenue and moved to 8301 Heron Lake Road. He stated it was his intention live in it until it was sold. He stated that he has tried to sell this house for many years and he’s still there. He stated that the school does affect the property and the value.
Mr. Moran stated the residents do not want to get rid of the band, the school or the athletics. He asked for everyone to hear what the residents are saying. He stated that the residents want the band repositioned. He asked if there would even need to be a sound barrier of the band was repositioned to the front of the school.
Mr. Moran stated maybe the green trees will be enough. He stated no one has talked about all of the thousands and thousands of leaves that the trees are going to produce and shed. He stated if there is a chain link fence will there be leaves, paper and debris piled up there. He stated he realizes the school corporation is on a budget, but it is tough for everybody. Mr. Moran stated St. John has an ordinance that he needs to maintain his lawn whether or not he has a hardship. He stated that the school corporation should be held to the same standards.
Mr. Moran stated that the residents are here to simply remind the Board of the ordinances that are in force. He stated they are not trying to change any of the ordinances. He stated that the residents are present to encourage the Board to hold fast to the ordinances.
Mr. Moran stated he has built several homes in St. John. He recalled Tim Foley and the high standards he was held to by Mr. Foley when he built homes in St. John. He stated these high standards made him believe that St. John is a nice place to build. He stated that this is why he moved here and continues to live here.
Mr. Moran stated that he has tried to sell his home at 8301 Heron Lake Road several times and has had to drop the price considerably. He stated this was before the referendum.
Mr. Moran stated he has a concern whether the parking lot in the back will become a new parking lot for buses. Mr. Moran stated that the school board maintains that the traffic exiting after school into the subdivision is of 10 minute duration. He state there are 350 cars going through the stop sign and it takes longer than 10 minutes. He stated that he thinks the school board’s numbers are unrealistic and the facts that they are providing are unrealistic in an attempt to make light of the situation.
Mr. Moran stated that residents have complained about the band for many years and it has fallen on deaf ears. He stated residents have just given up because it does not going to do any good. He stated that this public hearing is the residents’ opportunity to be heard. He stated that if nothing is done now, in 20, 30, 40 years things will still be the same.
Mr. Moran pleaded with the Board to consider some of the residents’ proposals. He stated that the residents are at the mercy of the Board.
Mr. Moran thanked the Board.
Mr. Volk called for further public comment. There was no further public comment. Mr. Volk closed the public hearing and brought the matter back before the Board.
Mr. Volk stated that the fire, safety and evacuation plan has been addressed by the local Fire and Police Department. Mr. Volk stated there is also a State review of the high school.
Mr. Kil stated that the State has an architectural staff who reviews the design; he stated that the Town does not approve the design of the building. He stated that Mr. Heroux is well aware of this fact. Mr. Kil stated all relevant plans including the circulation plan and the placement of the remote hook-ups have been reviewed by the Fire and Police Department. He stated everything is fine and works well. Mr. Kil stated there is emergency service access flowing properly.
Mr. Kil stated that the Town conducts their inspection pursuant to the State approved plans; he stated if there is a question, it will be communicated to the State for clarification. Mr. Kil stated the Town does not design or approve the building.
Mr. Volk asked about the location and aesthetics of the NIPSCO power lines and substation. He agreed that he does not find the NIPSCO substation aesthetically pleasing, but a necessary evil. Mr. Volk noted that NIPSCO determines the location of the substation. Mr. Volk remarked that the Plan Commission has no power over NIPSCO. He stated there is not much that can be done by the Board about the substation.
Mr. Volk stated that he heard too many buildings are being clustered on the south end of the property and not utilizing the entire 80 some acre site. Mr. Volk stated he’s not sure how much is not being used on the north end. He stated that there are wetlands located on the north end that are problematic.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Volk addressed the construction staging. He stated that the Board may address this more closely as far as dust, noise and other safety concerns. Mr. Kil stated that the primary staging area is in the southeast quadrant of the facility along Route 41. Mr. Kil stated that there will also be another staging area on the west side of the building where the construction of the academic center will take place. Mr. Kil stated that Petitioner will have to be cognizant of the issues brought up and guard against such problems.
Mr. Kil stated as far as securing the construction site and the staging areas; he stated this is the job of the construction management firm. He stated that no one will be allowed in this area. Mr. Kil stated that the staging areas would be fully secured. He stated this has been addressed at the staff meetings.
Mr. Kil stated that some fencing around the NIPSCO substation construction would not hurt. He stated he’s sure this matter will be addressed after the comment made during the public hearing.
Mr. Kil stated there was a dust problem in Town at the time Stracks and Target were being built because it was extremely dry. He stated this is the only time in the past 12 year he can recall a dust problem. Mr. Kil stated this area will be a little more confined. He stated there will not be as much site work going on this parcel which would be apt to cause a dust problem. He stated that the Town will certainly police these matters.
Mr. Volk addressed the band noise. He stated he did not realize until tonight how many hours a day the band practiced. He stated this was a little shocking to him. He stated if he lived adjacent to the school he would find the noise annoying too. He stated he believes the Board realizes it is annoying.
Mr. Volk stated that this is “almost a school board issue.” Mr. Volk stated that the Board can take another look at sound deadening and review the fence and the elevation of the fence. He stated he heard the residents state that the school is encroaching on them closer than they thought that it would. He noted that the residents are asking for a buffer.
Mr. Volk stated that he believed there is something within the Town’s zoning ordinance that the Board can apply to the fence. He stated that he is not sure he can say exactly what it is tonight. He stated he would like to revisit this issue.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kozel concurred that he would like the Board to re-visit waiver number 4 on the letter from Lake Central School Corporation dated June 6, 2012.
Mr. Volk opined that the band seems to be the biggest issue of residents adjacent to the high school. He stated he would like to take one more look at this issue and maybe do something over the next couple of weeks.
Mr. Kil stated that he would strongly recommend that the Board not try and negotiate the hours of band practice. Mr. Kil noted that Dr. Veracco is sitting in the audience and heard every single thing that was said during the public hearing. Mr. Kil agreed that the band practices long hours.
Mr. Kil again urged the Board to avoid dealing with the band scheduling. Mr. Forbes concurred. Mr. Kil stated that this matter should be brought directly to the school corporation. Mr. Kil stated that if the Plan Commission feels that there should be a solid, opaque fence erected that they order the school corporation to erect one. He stated that a solid, opaque fence could be a contingency of the approval. He recommended that the Board move forward.
Mr. Kil stated that the Board is not going to be able to negotiate band hours for a high school. Mr. Forbes stated that if these negotiations are made a part of the Board’s contingencies they are opening themselves up for a lawsuit. Attorney Kuiper concurred. Mr. Forbes guaranteed this would be a loser.
Mr. Kil stated he believes that it is within the Plan Commission’s authority (if the chain link fence is an issue) to order the school corporation to erect a vinyl, solid, opaque fence and keep the landscape in place. Mr. Kil reiterated that the Board should avoid negotiating the band scheduling at all costs.
Mr. Volk concurred. He stated he was not implying that the Plan Commission should set the practice schedule for the school band. He stated that he hoped that during the time it takes to review the fence that the school corporation would have some ideas to present to the Board. Mr. Volk reiterated that he is not opining that it is within the Board’s scope of authority to set the high school’s band practice schedule.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes stated that the Board cannot actually approach the buffer problem with any kind of percentage or any kind of sound reduction. He stated that the intent is there with the green space to quiet things down. He stated aesthetics are also involved. Taking this into consideration, Mr. Forbes opined that it seems residents would be happier looking at the vinyl fence and landscaping. He stated that the Board cannot commit to any noise reduction. He stated that the band will still be heard even if they were relocated to the front of the school.
Mr. Forbes asked the school corporation for their thoughts on a vinyl fence. Larry Veracco, Superintendent for Lake Central School Corporation, appeared before the Board and stated that the school corporation would be willing to comply with the vinyl fence request.
Mr. Forbes stated that the ordinance calls for 5 foot fence, but he would like a taller fences, six or at feet. Mr. Veracco stated he would defer to his construction crew; he stated six foot fence sounds reasonable. Mr. Veracco consulted with his construction expert and said a six foot fence would be acceptable.
Mr. Forbes stated that the Board is not going to ask that the topography to be altered for the buffer. Mr. Veracco stated that there are areas of disrepair on the current chain link fence which would be corrected when the vinyl fence is erected. Mr. Volk asked if the vinyl fence would run along the same fence line. Mr. Kil stated that the topography would not be altered, but the area would be straightened out. Mr. Kil stated if the topography was altered it could produce a host of new problems including drainage problems.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Moran asked Chief Frigo if the Police Department would be called to a resident’s home if music was turned up very loud. Chief Frigo answered questions from Mr. Moran related to the Town’s noise ordinance, loud music coming from residences, hours of the noise ordinance and how the Police Department addresses these types of complaints.
(General discussion ensued)
Mr. Moran stated that the Police Department can count on receiving future calls from residents related to noise coming from the Lake Central band.
Mr. Volk stated he believed all of the issues were covered and most voiced concerns about the band noise and the fence. Mr. Volk stated that the school corporation has agreed to install a six foot vinyl fence. Mr. Kil recommended a tan or earth-toned fence. Mr. Volk noted that the surveillance cameras would be focused off of the school property.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Ryan asked about the trees. The Board discussed trees along the Route 41 Corridor and near the substation.
Mr. Redar stated that the construction fence that was mentioned during the meeting should be addressed. He stated that the fence should be secured for safety reasons.
Mr. Forbes asked about the fence going across Sesame Street. Mr. Ledyard stated there will be a heavy electric sliding gate comprised of chain link. Petitioner stated they would put slats in the chain link fence.
Mr. Hastings noted there will be no irrigation in the plantings along the perimeter of the high school. He remarked that trees need water especially during the first year. He asked Petitioner if they were prepared to ensure that the plants would be watered so they will be properly established and grow right. Mr. Eric Miller stated he believes that the landscaping contractor has to take care of the trees and plantings to establish them for the first year. He stated there is a one year warranty on the plantings and trees. He stated if a plant has to be replaced the one year warranty would start again on the plant replacement date.
Mr. Volk stated that Petitioner responded to the Board’s queries about the high pressure sodium lights versus metal halide lighting in the letter they submitted. Mr.Volk asked the Board how they stood on this issue. The Board had no comment. Mr. Volk stated that the new ordinance, when enacted, would require high pressure sodium lighting. Mr. Volk stated if the Board approves what is reflected in Petitioner’s drawing it will be metal halide lighting. Mr. Kozel remarked that the school does not have that much around with it, and didn’t think the metal halide lighting would interfere. Mr. Volk concurred that the lighting probably would not interfere.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil remarked that the school performed their due diligence by researching and answering the Board’s questions on the lighting. Mr. Volk stated not hearing any concerns, the metal halide lighting was acceptable.
Mr. Volk stated he would entertain a motion on the request for primary approval of the one lot subdivision for Lake Central High School.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to approve all of the waivers on the Lake Central School Corporation letter dated June, 6, 2012, and include the requirement for a solid, opaque vinyl fence 6’ tall, tan in color along the western and southern boundaries of the school property that abuts the residential property. Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0).
Mr. Forbes made a motion approving preliminary plat for Lake Central High School, 8400 Wicker Avenue, incorporating the findings of fact by reference and including all of the previous contingencies and waivers previously voted on as well. Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0).
Mr. Dart requested final plat approval for Lake Central High School in July.
The regular meeting of the Plan Commission meeting falls on July 4, 2012. The Board scheduled a special Plan Commission meeting for Wednesday, July 11, 2012.
(The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m.)
A TRUE COPY
____________________________________________
SUSAN E. WRIGHT, RECORDING SECRETARY
| Greg Volk | Steve Kozel | Steve Kil |
| Tom Ryan | Steve Hastings | Kenn Kraus |
| Tom Redar | Attorney Tim Kuiper | |
| Mike Forbes |
Mr. Rettig submitted a revised drawing to the Board for their review. He stated that the plan has changed a bit. At the last meeting Petitioner was proposing to erect five buildings. Since that time, Petitioner has eliminated one of the buildings. Mr. Rettig reminded the Board that four buildings were previously approved by the Board.
Mr. Rettig stated that there are four proposed tracts, tracts 7, 8, 9 and 10. He stated that Petitioner has adjusted the lot lines to accommodate the building size. Mr. Rettig stated one building has been removed and Petitioner is now proposing four four unit buildings in lieu of five four unit buildings. This is a decrease from a proposed 20 units to 16 proposed units. He stated that this proposal lessens the density as was discussed at the last meeting. He stated that he has also separated the driveways so the driveways will not be close together or touching.
Mr. Volk asked if the style of the proposed buildings has been changed. Mr. Rettig explained that the garages will not be in front of the buildings as reflected on the current plan. Mr. Rettig also explained the encroachment of the patios of four existing landowners. He stated, at the present time, four patios are over the building line. He stated that Petitioner is willing to grant residents whose patios are over the building line an additional 15’ to clean up the lot lines. He stated that this would be accomplished with the resubdivision.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Meyer stated that there will be only four buildings. Mr. Hastings stated it would be nice to have sidewalks, and that the Petitioner should finish the sidewalks as the ordinance states that sidewalks are required. Mr. Meyer stated he did not believe that sidewalks were necessary. He stated that the existing building has the only sidewalk. Mr. Forbes asked if there would sidewalks on the interior circle. Mr. Rettig stated that Petitioner would prefer not to install sidewalks. Mr. Forbes stated he is not in favor of waiving the sidewalks.
The private street was discussed and the fact that the Homeowners Association would be responsible for maintaining this private street. Mr. Kil noted that the private street would have to be plowed during the winter by the Petitioner. Vacating the existing street and making it a right of way was discussed. Mr. Kil stated an out lot could be platted and dedicated to the Town with a description on the plat to explain what it is.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Rettig stated that there may be a water service issue during construction as the road may have to be torn up. He stated, by law, the buildings must be sprinkled. Mr. Meyer stated that there will be two water meters per building, one for the water to the units and one for the sprinkling. Mr. Forbes questioned if four units could be served off of one meter. Mr. Meyer stated that four units can be served by one meter. He stated that the Homeowners Association pays the water bills for the units. Mr. Forbes stated he had never heard of four units being serviced by one meter.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil stated that the existing sidewalk needs to be cleaned up because at the present time the sidewalk is on private property. He stated that public sidewalks should not be located on private property. He stated that the sidewalks should be located in a public right of way. Mr. Kil recommended moving the lines and dedicating a right of way to the Town where the sidewalk is located.
(Mr. Kil draws on plan.)
Mr. Rettig stated he will review the dedication. Mr. Kil stated notes could be included on the plat for a dedicated utility/drainage easement.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kozel asked if there was a sufficient setback. Mr. Forbes noted that this development is a PUD and there is more flexibility with a PUD. Mr. Rettig stated that there is a 20’ setback on the existing unit. Mr. Kil noted that the proposed buildings will have bigger back yards. The proposed setback is 15-25’.
Mr. Meyer stated that the rest of the property will be fenced, the north and west property lines along 85th and Kolling.
Mr. Hastings thanked the Petitioner for making changes to the plan. He stated that the plan now being proposed is much neater and cleaner looking with more room in the back.
Mr. Rettig asked the Board for permission to advertise for public hearing. Mr. Kil informed the Board that they would have to move the next regular meeting From July 4th, 2012 to July 11, 2012.
Mr. Meyer asked the Board if the dumpster enclosure could be waived at Lake Central Plaza since it was not visible from the street. Mr. Forbes recommended that Mr. Meyer bring in pictures of the dumpster for the Board’s review on July 11, 2012. An appeal is being filled out for waiver of the dumpster enclosure. Mr. Volk stated that the dumpster will be looked at before the July 11, 2012, meeting.
OLD BUSINESS:
Mr. Kil stated that 50 letters were sent out regarding the dumpsters. He stated he has not had too many calls on the dumpsters by those who have been sent notices. He stated that St. John Evangelist has three dumpsters and is requesting waivers on two of them. Mr. Kil informed the Board that there will be Petitioners seeking waivers on dumpster enclosures on the July 11, 2012 agenda.Mr. Volk remarked that there would probably be more since it has been one and one half years. Mr. Volk also requested that the members of the Board bring their materials on the Dark Skies ordinance to the next study session. Mr. Volk stated that Mr. Kil would be able to provide Mr. Kraus with all of the information and documents regarding the Dark Skies ordinance.
(The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m.)
A TRUE COPY
____________________________________________
SUSAN E. WRIGHT, RECORDING SECRETARY
ST. JOHN PLAN COMMISSION
| Greg Volk | Steve Hastings | Attorney Tim Kuiper |
| Mike Ryan | Steve Kozel | Kenn Kraus |
| Tom Redar | Steve Kil | |
| Mike Forbes |
(The Pledge of Allegiance was said.)
(The Pledge of Allegiance was said.)
Mr. Kraus stated that he had reviewed the site plan and all of the recommended changes had been made; he stated he would draft a letter for the file within the next few days. Mr. Volk noted that since the sidewalk is being installed the Town will be plowing and maintaining the street. Mr. Kil concurred that the street would be dedicated.
Mr. Tom Redar asked if the curb and sidewalk were ADA compliant. Mr. Kraus stated that the driveway can be used as a ramp. Mr. Redar asked if the curb should be depressed where it meets the sidewalk. Mr. Meyers concurred that a part of the curb near the sidewalk would be made ADA compliant.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil stated that Out lot B where the sidewalk intersects with the curb has to be handicap accessible. Mr. Kil also asked if Out lot B was going to be deeded to Tract 4.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil stated he wanted to make certain that the patios are straightened out. He stated the final plat should reflect that Out lot B is deeded to Tract 4. Mr. Kil explained that the final plat should reflect the right of way line would be moved to take care of the patio lot lines once and for all.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Volk asked if a fence would be placed along Kolling Road. Mr. Meyers stated that a fence would be placed on 85th and all of the way down Kolling Road, but not in the back.
Mr. Kil stated that the only discrepancy he saw was the right of way as it follows along Out lot B. He stated that there cannot be a patio in front of a right of way. He stated that the line on the site plan needs to follow the back of the sidewalk. Mr. Kil stated that this is a final plat issue. Mr. Kraus noted that there are a couple of steps and where it is higher than 31” tall a rail would be needed. Mr. Meyers concurred. He stated that there would be a decorative fence/split rail with shrubs and bushes.
Mr. Kil stated that the final plat should reflect Out lot A would be dedicated to the Homeowners Association; Out lot B dedicated to Tract 4; Out lot C dedicated to Tract 5, and Out lot D (sidewalk) be dedicated to the Town. He stated that he wanted to clarify possession of the out lots so as to avoid confusion as to who is responsible for each out lot. Mr. Meyers concurred and stated that the out lots would be noted as aforementioned on the final plat. He stated if Mr. Rettig had any questions he would contact Mr. Kil.
(General discussion ensued.)
Attorney Kuiper stated that all of the notices and publications were in order for the public hearing. Mr. Volk opened the floor for public comment.
Pam Star, 10937 Beacon Court
Ms. Star stated she lives in one of the original 14 townhomes in the Meadows of St. John. She stated she has several concerns with the proposed condominiums. She stated that when she first moved to St. John her realtor told her that St. John has a “no apartment” clause.
Ms. Star stated currently there is one building in the Meadows containing four units and only one is sold, the rest are being rented. Mr. Star stated it appears to her that the proposed 16 units would be rented out. She noted that the proposed condominiums are not comparable to the original townhomes in square feet or price.
Ms. Star stated that Farmington is a private street owned by the Homeowners Association and they would have to share Farmington Street with the rest of the units. She stated that Farmington was recently repaved.
Ms. Star asked how there could be a Homeowners Association with brand new buildings and buildings that were built in the 1990s. She stated that the needs of the buildings would be totally different for the old section and the new section.
Mr. Volk stated he would try and address these concerns at the conclusion of the public hearing.
Winfred Martin, 8612 Farmington Street – Mr. Martin thanked the Board for straightening out the property in the back. He also thanked Mr. Meyers. He stated that Mr. Meyers came to the residents and showed them the plans for the proposed condominiums.
Mr. Martin stated he has looked at the properties that Mr. Meyers has built and found them to be very nice properties. He stated he believes the new condos will be a positive for the Meadows of St. John. Mr. Martin stated the project is a win-win situation all of the way around; he stated that the ugly field behind him will be eliminated and new properties will be placed on the tax rolls.
Sharon Robinson, 11006 Beacon Court – Ms. Robinson stated this is the first meeting that she has been noticed for and also the first meeting she has attended. Ms. Robinson asked if she could examine the plans.
Ms. Robinson wanted to know how the Homeowner’s Association would work after the new condominiums are built. She asked if the street would remain private or become public.
Mr. Forbes stated that the circle street would be dedicated to the Town.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Volk suggested that Ms. Robinson review the plan with Mr. Meyers.
Mr. Volk called for additional public comment. There was no further public comment. Mr. Volk closed the public hearing and brought the matter back before the Board.
Mr. Volk addressed the concerns about rental units.
Mr. Meyers stated that he met with Meadows of St. John residents a few weeks ago. He stated he and the residents discussed whether or not one Homeowners Association should be formed. He stated, in his judgment, it would be a good thing to form one association. He stated it would be in every resident’s best interest to have one Homeowners Association. He stated that he would like to have another meeting with the residents to discuss this matter.
Mr. Kil stated that the by-laws would have to be reviewed by the residents. He stated they would have to determine whether or not they would want to merge into one Homeowners Association. Mr. Meyers concurred and stated this was a matter that would have to be handled by a lawyer.
Mr. Meyers stated that all of the proposed condominiums would be for sale. He stated that if the units can’t be sold he will rent them out. He stated these would be high rental units, $1400-$1500 monthly. He stated that a developer cannot put up a project and let units sit vacant. Mr. Meyers stated he hoped to be able the sell the units quickly.
Mr. Kil stated he understands the residents concern over rental units. He explained that when a unit is sold the owner can rent it out if they wish. He stated that the Town has no control over housing once it is sold. He stated that typically, the Town does not build apartment buildings and most residences are owner occupied. He reiterated that the Town has no control over a residence once it is owned by a private party. Mr. Meyers stated that the proposed units are not apartments.
An audience member stated that that the street she is on are privately owned and the proposed condominium s would have public streets. She stated that the Town would plow their streets but not the private street. She stated it doesn’t seem fair. Mr. Kil stated that when the Town plow comes to Beacon Court he stated he doesn’t believe they will only plow a portion of Beacon.
Mr. Kil stated that it was the decision of the Plan Commission to have a publicly dedicated street because they want a sidewalk. Audience member asked if Beacon Court would be owned by the Town also. Mr. Kil stated Beacon Court would still be private. He stated the only part that would be public is the new Beacon Court.
Ilene Sage 10944 Beacon Court – Ms. Sage stated that Farmington is a privately owned street. She stated that Farmington was recently paved at the expense of the Homeowners Association. She asked what recourse the residents would have if their private road was torn up during construction.
Mr. Kil stated that this was a valid point. Mr. Meyers concurred that this could be an issue. Mr. Kil asked if the entire Beacon Court could be dedicated.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil stated that a temporary construction entrance off of 85th could be installed. Mr. Kil stated that concerns for Farmington Road could be eliminated if there was a separate construction exit. He explained that the temporary entrance would come off of 85th and go across Tract 7, or a route could be figured out in the field.
There was no further discussion from the Board. Mr. Volk stated that he would entertain a motion for approval/disapproval of primary plat approval for the Meadows of St. John, Unit Two.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to approve the Meadows of St. John, Phase Two, for primary plat, and incorporated the findings of fact by reference. Mr. Tom Redar seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (5/0).
Mr. Volk asked Mr. Kenn Kraus to update the Board on his review of the Lake Central High School site plan. Mr. Kraus informed the Board that he had submitted a letter dated July 3, 2012, to the Board and the plat review was acceptable, all of the fees have been paid and he believes the project is ready to be signed off on by the Board. Mr. Volk stated he was in receipt of the mylars.
Mr. Bill Ledyard appeared before the Board seeking final plat approval for Lake Central High School, a one lot subdivision.
Mr. Volk asked the Board if they had any questions. Not hearing any questions, Mr. Volk stated he would entertain a motion.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to approve final plat for Lake Central High School, a one lot subdivision and incorporated the findings of fact, by reference. Mr. Tom Redar seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously passed by voice vote (5/0).
Mr. Forbes made a motion to waive the requirement for a letter of credit for the Lake Central High School, one lot subdivision.
Attorney Kuiper, for the record, noted that the only reason the letter of credit was being waived in this situation was due to the limited amount of public improvements, and also the items are required to be in place prior to occupancy. He stated that this is a unique situation that does not typically present itself. Mr. Forbes noted that Lake Central High School will not receive their occupancy permit until the improvements are in.
Mr. Redar seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (5/0).
Mr. Ledyard thanked Steve Kil, Kenn Krauss and the members of the Plan Commission.
Lisa Preston, primary owner of St. John Animal Clinic, appeared before the Board seeking a dumpster enclosure waiver. She stated that the dumpster is 250’ from the road. She stated that it is parked in front of every day except Wednesday mornings which is trash pick-up day.
Ms. Preston stated that 12 years ago the building was remodeled and a trash enclosure installed. She stated that the garbage company alleges they cannot get the garbage truck into the parking lot to pick up the garbage from this location.
Ms. Preston presented pictures to the Board.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Ryan asked why it wasn’t enclosed. Ms. Preston stated that there were two reasons, one, it was already an existing facility, and two, the dumpster is not really seen from the road. She stated it would be an added expense and she is trying not to add expenses to the business at the present time.
Mr. Volk noted that the dumpster is sitting on a concrete pad. Ms. Preston explained that there had been a concrete pad on the asphalt and the garbage trucks kept ruining the asphalt so another concrete pad had to be installed. Mr. Volk asked if the main reason for not putting up an enclosure was the cost. Ms. Preston concurred that avoiding additional expenses was the primary reason for not putting up an enclosure.
Mr. Volk noted that the dumpster is set quite far back from Route 41 but it could still be seen. He state that the dumpster can also be seen from Kolling Road and the new Lake Central High School will be facing her business. Ms. Preston stated the dumpster cannot be seen from behind because of the tree line.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes stated he has a problem with this dumpster location. He remarked that the dumpster can be seen from behind the bank. He stated that the dumpster looks to be out in the middle of everything until you are directly behind it. Mr. Forbes remarked he can see the dumpster from Route 41, from Kolling and Bingo.
Ms. Preston stated that the dumpster is far back from the road. She asked what the purpose of the ordinance was. Mr. Volk stated that for any corridor in Town, including the Route 41 Corridor, the Town is attempting to conceal dumpsters so that they cannot be seen at all for aesthetic reasons. He stated that garbage would be contained by the enclosure on windy days.
(General discussion ensued.)
Ms. Preston asked about existing facilities receiving a waiver for the dumpster enclosure. Mr. Volk noted that a dumpster enclosure waiver can be sought but it is not automatically granted. He stated that each case is reviewed individually.
Ms. Preston asked if the dumpster enclosure had to be of the same material as the building. Mr. Volk informed her that this requirement had been changed.
Mr. Forbes stated that the enclosure that she has now can be used; he stated it does not have to match the building. Mr. Volk stated that she could move the dumpster enclosure that she had installed when she did her remodeling 12 years ago.
Mr. Forbes stated if she moved her current enclosure she would probably be looking at purchasing six new posts. Mr. Volk stated that the new ordinance gives two options, one, the dumpster does not have to match the building, different types of material can be used; and two, the opportunity to come before the Board and request a waiver.
The Board members stated that it looked like she could just relocate her current dumpster enclosure. Mr. Forbes stated putting up a cyclone fence with slates would be a drastic price reduction as opposed to what the previous ordinance required.
Mr. Ryan asked if Petitioner if she had ever asked the driver to from the waste hauling company to get out of the truck and wheel the dumpster over to the truck. She stated she was told this could not be done by the waste hauler. Mr. Forbes noted that the dumpster at the clinic does not have wheels.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Ryan stated he is not inclined to grant the waiver. Attorney Kuiper stated that it would still be considered a waiver from the building requirements if Ms. Preston had the existing dumpster enclosure moved to the new location. He stated that the purposes of the ordinance would be met.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to grant the waiver on the material requirements for the dumpster enclosure at St. John Animal Clinic; Mr. Hastings seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (5/0).
Mr. Forbes explained to Ms. Preston that in the event the dumpster has to stay at its existing location all she would have to do is build a cyclone fence with slats, but if she is able to move the dumpster back into the existing enclosure she would have nothing to worry about.
Ms. Preston thanked the Board.
Mr. Kijanowski stated that the dumpster cannot be seen from 93rd Avenue. He stated that one of the reasons the dumpster is not located in the back is because the garbage trucks tear up the black top parking lot.
Mr. Kijanowski stated that the VFW is a not-for-profit organization that runs on a shoe string budget. He stated most of the money made by the VFW is given back to the community.
Mr. Kijanowski stated that there are neighbors located in the back of the VFW. He stated that this leaves the Post with very few places to locate the dumpster. He stated that he tries to be a good neighbor, and in turn, the neighbors are good to the VFW. He stated out of consideration to the neighbors in the back, he does not want to move the dumpster to the back because it would be too close to the neighbors’ yards.
Mr. Kijanowski stated that the dumpster sits on the side of the building where it can’t be seen if you are going east or west on 93rd Avenue. He stated maybe only a part of it can be seen from the curve on 93rd Avenue.
Mr. Kijanowski also cited the costs of putting up a dumpster enclosure. He reiterated that the VFW runs on a shoestring budget, and that is the reason he is asking for a waiver for the construction of a dumpster enclosure.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Redar asked how close the dumpster was in relation to the building. Mr. Kijanowski stated it is approximately one foot from the building. Mr. Redar stated that he might want to think about moving the dumpster further away from the building in case of a fire.
Mr. Volk stated from where the dumpster is sitting now, it can be seen from 93rd Avenue. Mr. Forbes asked that this matter be tabled until the August 1, 2012, meeting; he stated he would like to go back out and look at the VFW and behind the building again.
Mr. Ryan asked if there was any problems with the neighbors. Mr. Kijanowski stated he has good neighbors, no problems. He stated he helps the neighbors out and they help the VFW out.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to defer the dumpster enclosure waiver request for the VFW Post 717; Mr. Redar seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (5/0).
Attorney Kuiper noted that the next regular meeting was scheduled for August 1, 2012, at 7:00 p.m.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to grant a 12 month extension for the final plat approval for Rose Garden. Attorney Kuiper noted that the 12 month extension would be granted with the same contingencies that were laid out with the original final plat approval. Mr. Redar seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (5/0).
Mr. Bar stated his problem is with John Eenigenburg and the Town. He stated that the Board is probably familiar with his situation. He said he has several grievances for “what’s going on over there.” He has “no idea what’s going on over there. “ He stated he wants it corrected immediately.
Mr. Volk stated that Board has some ideas of what’s going on but no formal complaints have been filed. Mr. Kil stated everything is going to be platted. Mr. Bar asked “when?” He demanded the platting be done right now.
Attorney Kuiper stated things would get done when a permit was applied for. Mr. Bar stated that he’s gone through all of this before. Attorney Kuiper, speaking as the attorney for the Plan Commission and the Town, stated that once an application is filed for subdivision approval the Town can file procedures and Mr. Bar will be notified as an adjacent property owner within 300 feet.
Mr. Bar stated he wants something done tomorrow. He stated he is going to get an attorney because he has weed problems, signage problems and street problems. He stated that he has invested $150,000 into the subdivision. He stated he has been patient for a long time.
Mr. Bar requested a street sign be put up. He stated there used to be a street sign but it’s gone and he would like the street sign replaced. He stated there is an old sign up that has been up for five years. He asked that the sign be taken down or painted over. Mr. Bar stated that he has weeds surrounding him and Russell Case’s Winnebago in front of him. He stated that the Winnebago must go. He stated he has clients coming back to his business laughing at him.
Mr. Bar asked what John Eenigenburg is doing. He stated he has half of his building torn down. Mr. Kil stated that he’s working on the property. Mr. Kil stated he talked to Mr. Eenigenburg’s attorney on the telephone today for an hour. He stated he finally impressed the need for business to get done on Mr. Eenigenburg’s attorney. He stated that the attorney is now going to push John Eenigenburg along. Mr. Kil stated he needs to move quick.
Mr. Bar stated that he has tried to sell his property for some time and he cannot even sell it for $30,000. He stated it is unsellable. Mr. Bar stated that he is caught between a rock and a hard place.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Bar stated he has his woodworking shop set up. He stated he wants the business in front of him cleaned up and he is not waiting another six months. Mr. Bar stated he wants three things, one, a street sign, two, the paint shop sign taken down; and, three, the weeds cut down.
Mr. Kil stated that the sign would come down when Mr. Eenigenburg applied for a permit. Attorney Kuiper stated that the sign was not on Town property and was not a Town issue. Mr. Kil stated that the Town cannot force Mr. Eenigenburg go do anything.
Attorney Kuiper told Mr. Bar he is trying to answer the questions that he can answer. He stated that the street sign can be put up and the weeds can be dealt with. Mr. Kil told Mr. Bar he is going to have to be patient and wait for the property to be replatted, the pole barn to be torn down and then things will move along and be taken care of.
(General discussion ensued.)
(The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.)
A TRUE COPY
____________________________________________
SUSAN E. WRIGHT, RECORDING SECRETARY
| Greg Volk | Steve Kozel | Steve Kil |
| Tom Ryan | Steve Hastings | Kenn Kraus |
| Tom Redar | Attorney Tim Kuiper | |
| Mike Forbes |
Mr. Ryan asked if there had been any changes made to the plan. Mr. Meyers stated that the name of the project was changed from Meyers Development to Meadow View Condos, LLC, and since there were two Lot “A”s one Lot “A” was changed to Lot “E” to eliminate any confusion.
Mr. Ryan asked Mr. Meyer if Lot “E” was considered parking. Mr. Meyer concurred that Lot “E” was considered parking. He stated there were no other changes to the site plan.
Mr. Ryan asked if any of the other Board members had any additional questions. Mr. Forbes stated he was looking at two letters from Mr. Kenn Kraus, one dated July 27, 2012, and the other dated July 31, 2012. Mr. Kraus noted that the Board should have a letter dated August 1, 2012, with two items that were changed, out lot A was Changed to out lot E, and the name of the development was changed to Meadow View Condos, LLC, and the letter of credit was calculated in the amount of $40,476.39. Mr. Kraus concurred. Mr. Kraus stated that the original letter of credit expired in February of this year. He stated with the additional information he gathered, he recalculated the letter of credit.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes noted that the letter of credit had not been received yet. He stated that final plat approval, if granted, would be contingent upon receipt of the letter of credit in the amount of $40,476.39. Mr. Kil stated typically signatures are withheld on the mylars until the letter of credit is received. Mr. Meyers stated that the Town would have the letter of credit by Monday along with the mylars.
Mr. Kraus stated that the only thing not listed on the plat is the owners of the out lots. He stated that the out lots could be conveyed by fee simple deeds after the plat is recorded. Mr. Kraus stated that the certifying surveyor was reluctant to place this language on the plat, and said the out lots could be conveyed by fee simple deeds. Mr. Kil stated he would like to review the out lots so everything is clarified related to the out lots.
Attorney Kuiper stated that typically only the public dedications are seen on a plat instrument, and the out lots can be done via a deed conveyance. Attorney Kuiper stated the plat should be recorded and the out lots conveyed back to back so there is no confusion.
Mr. Kil stated he has no objection to the out lots being conveyed by deed as long as it is clear that Out lot E will be deeded to the Homeowners Association for the resubdivision of the Meadows, Out lot D will be deeded the Town of St. John, Out lot C will be deeded to Tract 5 and Out lot B will deeded to Lot 4. Mr. Meyer stated he would follow whatever recommendations the Board gave him. Mr. Kil stated that the aforementioned information should be reflected in the findings of fact.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Ryan requested a motion on the Meadow View Condos, LLC. Mr. Forbes made a motion to grant final plat approval for Meadow View Condos, LLC, with the findings of fact incorporated by reference, and the contingencies that the mylars will be signed upon receipt of the letter of credit, and the out lots be recorded appropriately as follows: Out lot B, deeded to Tract 4, Out lot C deeded to Tract 5; out lot D deeded to the Town of St. John, and out lot E deeded to the Homeowner’s Association of the Meadows of St. John. Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. Mr. Ryan requested a roll call vote. Mr. Kozel – yes. Mr. Forbes – yes. Mr. Redar – yes. Mr. Ryan – yes. The motion was unanimously carried by roll call vote (4/0).
Mr. Forbes made a motion to send a favorable recommendation to the Town Council for the letter of credit in the amount of $40,476.39 for the Meadows of St. John, Phase 2. Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. Mr. Ryan requested a roll call vote. Mr. Forbes – yes. Mr. Kozel – yes. Mr. Redar – yes. Mr. Ryan – yes. The motion was unanimously carried by roll call vote (4/0).
Mr. Ryan stated it appears one of the dumpsters is hidden by trees and bushes. Mr. Meyers explained that this dumpster was located way in the rear of the building.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil remarked that he has been in Golden Pond and in the Lake Central Plaza hundreds of times and has yet to see a dumpster. Mr. Ryan showed Mr. Meyers an excerpt from the Town’s Fire Code.
Mr. Forbs noted that most of the dumpsters are hidden from Route 41 by the building itself with the exclusion of the Blue 82 side of the development. He stated these dumpsters can be seen from Route 41.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Meyers stated that he believed this to be a grease trap. He stated they would put up another section of fence similar to the fencing that is already up. Mrs. Meyers stated if another section of fence section is put up in front of the grease trap nothing will be able to be seen at all. Mr. Meyers stated he would do whatever the Board recommended they do.
Mr. Forbes made a motion (pursuant to the aforementioned discussion) to waive the dumpster enclosure for Lake Central Plaza with the condition that one section of fence be erected on the north end of the development (Blue 82), and possibly add another section of fence later on if the Board deems it necessary. Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. Mr. Ryan requested a roll call vote. Mr. Forbes – yes. Mr. Kozel – yes. Mr. Redar – yes. Mr. Ryan – yes. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (4/0).
Mr. Forbes noted that some concern had been voiced about the close proximity of the dumpster to the building. Mr. Kijanowski stated that he had conferred with a retired St. John fire fighter(and a member of the VFW house committee) who recommend some changes. He stated that the dumpster was moved out , and a line will be painted for the placement of the dumpster.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Ryan asked if there were future plans for a concrete pad. Mr. Kijanowski stated this would have to be worked into their future plans. He stated a fund raiser would have to be held to raise the funds for a concrete pad. He stated he would bring this matter up at the next meeting.
Mr. Blankman stated they would much rather install a pad than put up a fence. He stated that a fence would hamper the VFW drastically.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes stated in this instance the Board is in a tight spot. He stated that the dumpster can’t be moved because it would be too close to the neighbors. He stated this is a unique circumstance. He stated that the fire hazard has been addressed. Mr. Kijanowski stated that his neighbors don’t have any objections, and the VFW tries to keep their neighbors satisfied.
Mr. Kil stated he concurred with Mr. Forbes in that the dumpster placement is as good as it is going to get. Mr. Forbes reiterated that it is a unique situation regarding the VFW’s surroundings. Mr. Ryan asked the Petitioner to work on the concrete pad.
Mr. Ryan stated he would entertain a motion. Mr. Forbes made a motion to grant a dumpster waiver request for VFW Post 717, per the Board’s discussion. Mr. Redar seconded the motion. Mr. Ryan requested a roll call vote. Mr. Forbes – yes. Mr. Redar – yes. Mr. Kozel – yes. Mr. Ryan – yes. The motion was unanimously carried by roll call vote (4/0).
Mr. Kijanowski thanked the Board for their consideration.
Mr. Ryan stated he would entertain a motion on the two year maintenance bond. Mr. Forbes made a motion to send a favorable recommendation to the Town Council for a two year maintenance bond for Silver Leaf, Phase One, in the amount of $576,631.94. Mr. Ryan seconded the motion. Mr. Ryan requested a roll call vote. Mr. Forbes – yes. Mr. Redar – yes. Mr. Kozel – yes. Mr. Ryan – yes. The motion was unanimously carried by roll call vote (4/0).
Mr. Forbes made a motion to send a favorable recommendation to the Town Council for a letter of credit reduction in the amount of $1,015,963.33 for Silver Leaf Subdivision, Phase Two. Mr. Redar seconded the motion. Mr. Ryan requested a roll call vote. Mr. Forbes – yes. Mr. Redar – yes. Mr. Kozel – yes. Mr. Ryan – yes. The motion was unanimously carried by roll call vote (4/0).
Mr. Ryan stated he would entertain a motion. Mr. Forbes made a motion to forward a favorable recommendation to the Town Council for a two year maintenance bond in the amount of $285,124.07 for Saddle Creek Subdivision, Phase One
Mr. Ryan requested a roll call vote. Mr. Forbes – yes. Mr. Redar – yes. Mr. Kozel – yes. Mr. Ryan – yes. The motion was unanimously carried by roll call vote (4/0).
Mr. Ryan requested a motion for Saddle Creek Subdivision. Mr. Forbes made a motion to send a favorable recommendation to the Town Council for a letter of credit reduction in the amount of $527,161.53 for Saddle Creek, Phase Two.
Mr. Ryan requested a roll call vote. Mr. Forbes – yes. Mr. Redar – yes. Mr. Kozel – yes. Mr. Ryan – yes. The motion was unanimously carried by roll call vote (4/0).
Mr. Redar stated that there were some erosion problems but they were addressed. Mr. Kil concurred. He stated that the property looks perfect now and is maintained. He stated that they can remove the silt fence now. Mr. Kil stated he would get in touch with the Walgreen’s representative.
Mr. Ryan asked about reconfiguration of the intersection. Mr. Kil stated that INDOT does have plans to rebuild the 231/41 intersection. However, there are no plans to meet with INDOT until October.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to approve the one year extension of site plan approval for Walgreen’s at the intersections of Route 41 and Route 231. Mr. Kozel seconded the motion.
Mr. Ryan requested a roll call vote. Mr. Forbes – yes. Mr. Redar – yes. Mr. Kozel – yes. Mr. Ryan – yes. The motion was unanimously carried by roll call vote (4/0).
(The meeting adjourned at 7:59 p.m.)
A TRUE COPY
____________________________________________
SUSAN E. WRIGHT, RECORDING SECRETARY
ST. JOHN PLAN COMMISSION
| Greg Volk | Mike Forbes | Steve Kil |
| Tom Ryan, Vice-President | Steve Kozel | Attorney Tim Kuiper |
| Tom Redar, Secretary | ||
| Steve Hastings |
Mr. Courtney stated he would like to receive input from the Board on the overall footprints of the buildings, elevations, floor plans and the materials used. Mr. Courtney gave a brief outline on the history of Providence Life Services. Mr. Courtney stated that there were plans for a continuing care/retirement community at this location. He stated due to a down turn in the economy they were not able to put together the financing for this part of the development. He stated that they had always intended to build the skilled nursing aspect of the project.
Mr. Courtney stated that they have since acquired an additional piece of property in the Gates of St. John where they propose to build a skilled nursing facility. He explained to the Board that skilled nursing facilities are usually one story, barracks type buildings containing one hundred or so private and semi-private rooms. He stated these types of nursing facilities are more institutional, hospital level care.
Mr. Courtney explained that many states are moving towards small house care. He stated that the proposed skilled nursing facility would be small house care with completely private care. Providence is proposing two different styles of homes; one home is a one story building with ten private rooms for ten patients. The other style of home would be a two-story home with fifteen rooms per floor. He stated that the two story structure is meant as more a rehabilitation/short term stay. The one story, ten room home is for long term residents.
Mr. Courtney stated there are studies that show that there is an increase in life expectancy and quality of care for patients living in a ten room skilled nursing facility as opposed to the institutional environment.
Mr. Courtney informed the Board that his organization is the first in Illinois to receive permission to erect this type of skilled nursing development. The State of Illinois has awarded Providence Life Care with a Certificate of Need and approvals from IDPH. He stated that the Village of Homer Glen is finalizing their decision, and they hope to break ground for a 50 bed facility (three buildings) in Homer Glen similar to the one they are proposing to for St. John.
Mr. Courtney stated that this is an overall picture of Providence’s plan. He asked if the Board members saw any need for this type of facility in St. John. He stated that he did a quick search of skilled nursing facilities in the area and the closest ones are located in Merrillville, Highland and Dyer. He stated market studies have been done that show a need for skilled nursing facilities in this area. Mr. Courtney stated this is a need driven market. He stated that it would be Providence’s responsibility to building the facility, provide the services and fill the buildings.
Mr. Courtney stated that the development would initially start with the two one story/ten resident buildings and one two story building/thirty residents per building.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Hemphill informed the Board that they would like to move ahead with the skilled nursing portion of the development. Mr. Courtney stated he has received direction from the CEO of Providence Life Services to move ahead on the project with a construction start-up for early spring, 2013, if possible. Mr. Courtney stated that the architect and engineer that Providence is using for their Homer Glen project are also licensed in Indiana.
Mr. Kil requested that Mr. Courtney run through the buildings’ exterior, if possible. He stated that the Town has exterior building requirements. Mr. Courtney stated that the renderings before the Board at the present time are from the Homer Glen location. He stated that the building exteriors are brick with a certainteed, fiber-cement siding. He stated the first floor elevations are kept with as much brick as possible.
Mr. Courtney showed the Board the side elevations of the two story building and explained the design. Mr. Kil noted that the Town has a solid brick requirement. Mr. Courtney explained that input from the Board will enable him to engage his architect to look into the local building codes and ordinances and report back to him. He stated information gathered by his architect would enable him to ascertain whether or not any waivers would be needed. Mr. Courtney explained that his goal is to not to request any variances at all.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Courtney stated that the project is actually the “front door” of the Gates of St. John so Providence is very concerned about the overall appearance of the development.
Mr. Courtney directed the Board’s attention to renderings of the Homer Glen development that contained all three buildings. The renderings showed some Victorian styling on the one story buildings. Mr. Hemphill stated that the CEO of Providence likes a full brick building but they are trying to achieve a residential type atmosphere.
(General discussion ensued.)
The exterior of the buildings were discussed.
Mr. Volk asked about the price for a skilled nursing placement, compared to Hartsfield Village.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Volk stated he was inquiring about the prices because he was concerned about the affordability. He stated he did not want to see the project falter. Mr. Hemphill informed the Board that 30 of the rooms will be Medicare certified. He said these rooms would be directed towards short term/rehabilitation needs. He stated that the private pay would be in the one story/ten room building. Mr. Hemphill stated that the rates would probably be comparable to other nursing homes in the area.
Mr. Volk remarked that the use of all brick for the project will affect the costs of the development. Mr. Courtney stated he is more interested in finding out if the Board would support the concept presented. If so, he stated he would next present the Board with civil engineering, architecture, landscaping plans and photometric plans. He stated he would gather all of the information needed to ensure that the project will meet the local codes and ordinances.
Mr. Volk stated he liked what he saw in the presentation. Mr. Forbes stated he likes the project more now that additional property has been acquired, especially the corner. Mr. Forbes stated he did not see a problem with the project and he liked the idea of multiple buildings in lieu of one large building.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kozel remarked that the project is more like a community. He stated he liked the idea. Mr. Hastings remarked that there is nothing available in the area of skilled nursing in the area. Mr. Hastings stated there is a definite need for such a facility.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Courtney stated he is excited to get the project started. Mr. Kil stated that he believed that the proper zoning was in place. Mr. Hemphill asked about the zoning of the parcel that was most recently purchased.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil ascertained that the property in question is zoned R-2. Mr. Forbes stated that the property would have to be rezoned to R-3. Mr. Kil stated he did not anticipate a problem with the zoning. Mr. Kil stated that the parcel would have to be subdivided into one lot. He stated that the zoning and the replatting could be done simultaneously.
Mr. Volk noted that the site plan included a 30’ easement between the project and the Route 231 corridor. Mr. Kil noted that there is a 60’ set back on Route 231. The Board discussed the right of way off of Route 231.
Mr. Courtney stated that the proposed buildings on the development would also include patios.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil explained the road and highway right of ways to the Board. Mr. Volk stated that he would like to see the project as far off of the road as it could get.
Mr. Courtney showed the Board the proposed locations of the outdoor patio which would be facing west. Mr. Courtney explained the proposed parking for skilled nursing is rather low, and he explained the parking for staffing and visitors.
Mr. Forbes stated he was satisfied with moving forward with the project. Mr. Volk concurred. Mr. Redar asked about the separation between the proposed development and the residential development to the west; he asked if there would be landscaping or fencing. Mr. Kil noted that they are zoned the same.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes stated that given the nature of the project and the traffic he thinks there should be some consideration given to landscaping or buffer so there is some separation between the proposed project and any future development. Mr. Redar concurred.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes asked about retention ponds. Mr. Kraus stated that he would have to review the original plan for the entire subdivision to ascertain what is needed. Mr. Redar stated that there is a large detention pond in that has not yet been built; he stated that’s where all the drainage would go.
There was no further discussion from the Board. Mr. Courtney thanked the Board for their time.
* * * * *
Mr. Kil informed the Board that Eenigenburg/McDonald’s would be at the next regular meeting. He showed the Board some preliminary plans.
(The meeting adjourned at 8:13 p.m.)
A TRUE COPY
____________________________________________
SUSAN E. WRIGHT, RECORDING SECRETARY
ST. JOHN PLAN COMMISSION
| Greg Volk | Steve Hastings | Steve Kil |
| Tom Ryan | Steve Kozel | Kenn Kraus |
| Tom Redar | Attorney Tim Kuiper | |
| Steve Kozel |
(The Pledge of Allegiance was said.)
Mr. Kil stated that Mr. Eenigenburg’s site plan would also be ready for review at the September 19, 2012, study session. Mr. Kraus added that Torrenga Engineering was working on the Eenigenburg plan.
Mr. Kil reminded the Board that he had supplied them with a copy of Eenigenburg’s plat at the last meeting. Mr. Kil stated that the idea is to move the project along in an attempt to receive a final approval by November. He stated that Mr. Eenigenburg must secure a building permit to erect his new building prior to McDonalds tearing down Eenigenburg’s old building.
Mr. Kil stated that his understanding is that McDonalds wants to commence construction in the spring, approximately March. He stated that McDonalds project will be completed in 90 to 100 days.
Mr. Kil asked if the Board had any questions on the Eenigenburg plat. He stated that the plat is the same one that Mr. Eenigenburg has submitted to the Board for the past year to year and a half.
Mr. Kil informed the Board that the frontage road would be relocated to the back of the buildings. He stated that the right of way in the front and the easement that runs through the McDonalds site will be vacated. Mr. Kil stated that certain requirements must be met before the Town vacates an easement and McDonalds is working on this issue at the present time. Mr. Kil stated once the plat is approved all the new easement and right of way will be dedicated.
Mr. Kraus stated that there are three things that need to be dealt with at present, the McDonalds plan, the Eenigenburg plat and the Eenigenburg site plan. Mr. Kil stated that he went through the requirements of the US 41 Overlay District with the McDonalds representative today. He stated that due to the nature of the site, not all of the landscaping requirements are going to be met. Mr. Kil stated that he recommended that the representative adhere as close to the US 41 Overlay requirements and then submit a list of waivers to the Board.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil stated that he has seen the basic site plan for McDonalds. He stated that there would be an entry off of Earl Drive in the back. He stated there would be no cuts onto 97th Lane or US 41. He stated these cuts would have to work for the McDonalds drive-thru.
Mr. Kil stated he would rather see the drive-thru on the rear of the building. He stated that locating the drive-thru and reader board at the front of the building would detract from McDonalds appearance. Mr. Kil stated that he would rather grant a waiver to alter the building line a bit than see the drive-thru at the front of the building.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes remarked that the Board faced a similar situation with Dunkin Donuts, and it worked out well there. Mr. Volk asked about the size of the McDonalds. Mr. Kil stated that McDonalds will not too large, but it will be McDonalds newest, most recent design.
The direction of the front of building and the drive-thru lane location was discussed. Mr. Volk stated that he liked the idea of the drive-thru in the back of the building. Mr. Volk asked about the number of parking stalls. Mr. Kil stated he did not have a number on the parking stalls at the present time. Mr. Kil stated that there are a couple ways to calculate the parking, one, based on net floor area or two, the seating.
Mr. Forbes asked if all of the drainage/detention issues had been resolved. Mr. Kil stated that the detention will be directed to the rear of the buildings to a basin near the railroad tracks. He stated that this basin would be enlarged.
Mr. Forbes stated that the developer would have to make certain that there is nothing inside the drainage easement that is going to be vacated. Mr. Kil stated that if there is something in the easement it will have to be removed and relocated. He stated it would be relocated in the McDonalds green space.
Mr. Volk asked if the right of way on Route 41 would have a deceleration lane to pull onto 97th. Mr. Kil stated he was not sure what would be done with the deceleration lane. He stated this is an issue for the Board to address at the study session.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Redar if any consideration had been given to foot traffic from the west side of US 41 to the east side. Mr. Kil stated that he discussed the matter of a pedestrian walk button with an INDOT representative. He stated that the INDOT representative discouraged the pedestrian walk button as it would create havoc with the timing of the traffic signal.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil informed the Board that he told McDonalds that the Board does not like pork chops for ingress/egress.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to authorize a public hearing on October 3, 2012, for McDonalds and Eenigenburg. Mr. Redar seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (6/0).
* * * * *
Mr. Volk stated he would like to finish reviewing the draft lighting ordinance. He stated he would like to have the final draft done by the end of the year or early next year. Mr. Volk asked the Board to gather their notes and bring them to the next meeting.
(The meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m.)
A TRUE COPY
_____________________________________
SUSAN E. WRIGHT, RECORDING SECRETARY
ST. JOHN PLAN COMMISSION
| Greg Volk | Steve Hastings | Attorney Tim Kuiper |
| Mike Ryan | Steve Kozel | Kenn Kraus |
| Tom Redar | Steve Kil | |
| Mike Forbes |
Mr. Kil stated that the attorneys will prepare a timetable on the project and submit it to him by next Wednesday. Mr. Kil stated when he receives this information he will present it to the Board so as to determine exactly when Petitioners will be ready to proceed.
Mr. Kraus informed the Board that he has received a copy of the plat from Torrenga Engineering and the site plan for Lots 1 and 2. He stated he has been exchanging information with Gary Torrenga. He stated he has not received anything from McDonalds to date.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Volk indicated that the lighting ordinance review had been placed on hold for quite some time. Mr. Kraus commented this was the first time he has discussed the lighting ordinance at a Board meeting and he’s been on the job for nine months. Mr. Volk asked Mr. Kil to provide Mr. Kraus with all of the information that he would need to be brought up to speed on the matter.
Mr. Volk stated that the Board had taken a field trip in St. John, Dyer and Schererville in the past to look at the lighting on businesses in those communities. He stated that the Board did like some of the building lighting that they saw in Dyer.
Mr. Volk indicated that the Board is using the Homer Glen lighting ordinance as a guide. He stated the Homer Glen ordinance is comprehensive and easy to understand. Mr. Kraus asked if the McDonalds is using the Dark Skies lighting.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Volk remarked that the lighting at the McDonalds, the Speedway on the north side of Route 30 and the Texas Roadhouse are all in compliance with the Dyer’s lighting ordinances, and these were the buildings with lighting that the Board approved of. Mr. Forbes stated that the Board would like to eliminate any glare from the lighting.
(General discussion ensued.)
(Mr. Kil exits room)
Mr. Volk stated that the Board would start on Chapter 4, Page 6. He stated they are starting to get into technicalities of actual lighting.
(Mr. Kil re-enters meeting.)
Full Cut-off Requirement for Commercial/Industrial Lighting Zones. Mr. Kil stated that this paragraph required full cut-off on the lighting, and no other issues.
Mr. Volk moved on to Street Lighting. Mr. Kil informed the Board that the Town has two design standards for street lighting (using 100 watt lights) aluminum spun pole and a decorative standard. He stated a developer is allowed to use either type poles. Mr. Volk stated that the Board would like to see high pressure sodium lighting used. He stated he has noticed a couple of lights in Town being replaced with metal halide bulbs.
Mr. Kil stated that for the Town to go out and change all of their bulbs to high pressure sodium lighting would require that the ballast be replaced to accommodate the high pressure sodium bulbs. Mr. Kil stated it would be cost prohibitive to change all of the bulbs at once. He stated the lights could be changed going forward. Mr. Kil stated that when the ordinance is passed NIPSCO would be provided with the updated copy.
Mr. Kil stated that relative to the decorative poles and/or aluminum spun poles a note should be added (see Town design standard).
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Redar stated that pictures were taken of all of the different lighting styles found in Town. He asked if there would have to be an inventory of the different styles of lights. Mr. Kil stated that if a light is put up that the Town has to maintain the Town would require that it adhere to the Town’s design standards, aluminum spun pole or decorative. Mr. Kil stated whether a light is privately owned or publicly owned it should adhere to the Town’s design standards. Mr. Redar stated he wanted to make the Board aware of the plethora of styles of the light poles in Town.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Redar remarked in one spot in Town there are two different decorative light poles being used; he stated they look very similar but are not the same. Mr. Forbes stated that he understood what Mr. Redar was trying to explain and he concurred. He stated that the Board would have to review the Town’s standards and amend the language there as well. Mr. Kil remarked that the Board could update the design standard. Mr. Forbes stated that the lighting ordinance would reference back to the design standards, which would have to be updated.
The Board had no further comment on the street lighting. Mr. Volk moved on to
Installed Height. Mr. Volk stated that the maximum heights are listed. Lighting poles in residential areas are 20’ maximum and commercial/industrial lighting pole heights are set at 25’ maximum. Mr. Kil stated this section was acceptable with him. The Board set the standard height for lighting poles for playing fields at a 25’ maximum.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Volk stated that he believed that the light poles for playing fields was under special exception. Mr. Forbes referred the Board to Page 314. Mr. Forbes stated that a standard has been set and anybody who wants to deviate from the light pole height standard would have to come before the Board for consideration on a case by case basis. Mr. Volk concurred; he stated this rule applied to both playing fields and automobile lots.
Mr. Volk moved on to Number Five, Prohibited Outdoor Lighting. He noted that flickering, flashing lighting and laser lights were prohibited. He stated this would fall under the sign ordinance. Mr. Forbes noted that the language was consistent with the Town’s sign ordinance language and he had no problem with this.
(General discussion ensued.)
Flag lighting was discussed. Mr. Forbes noted that the lighting for a flag would be angled lighting.
The Board discussed Number Eight, Outdoor Display Lights and eliminated it altogether.
Mr. Hastings stated he would like to revisit Number Two. He stated that he has seen signs scroll, rotate and flicker. Mr. Kil stated that the Town’s sign ordinance addresses these issues. He stated digital signs are prohibited by the Town’s ordinance, but anybody can request a variance. He stated that the Petitioner must appear before the Board of Zoning Appeals who sets the limits on the usage of the digital signs.
Mr. Volk moved on to Number Six, Outdoor Lighting Exempt. The Board changed the language from “village” to “town or state.” The same language was changed in Number 5.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Volk moved on to Number Seven, Procedural Requirements, Plan Submissions for Subdivisions and Land Development Applications.
Mr. Redar stated he would like to revisit Number Six. He stated that the high school has temporary lighting at the present time. Mr. Kil stated that they are allowed to use the lighting per the ordinance from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., which coincides with the noise ordinance.
Mr. Volk returned to Number 7. The Board made no changes on Section 7.1. Section 7.2, Post Approval, Alternations. The Board made no changes on Section 7.2.
Mr. Kil recommended that language should be added “can only be approved as a waiver from the Plan Commission.” 7.3, Right of Inspection. Mr. Kil stated that the first sentence should be struck. Mr. Forbes stated that the Plan Commission granting a waiver for the full cut off requirement would be defeating. This language was struck. Mr. Volk concurred. Mr. Kil recommended “administrative request” be changed to “waiver request.”
Mr. Volk moved on to Section Eight, Definitions. Mr. Kil remarked that he had made himself a note to remind him to replace Administrative Variance definition with the Waiver Request definition. Mr. Kil stated that the other definitions are acceptable. Mr. Forbes stated that the Town’s attorney would ensure the accuracy of the definitions when he does his review. Mr. Volk stated that the definition language could be handled by the Town’s attorney.
(General discussion ensued.)
The Board finished their work on the lighting ordinance.
Mr. Kil stated he would have the ordinance retyped to the Board’s specifications. Mr. Volk stated the Board would then review the ordinance before it was sent to their attorney for the first draft. Mr. Volk stated he would like to have the draft ordinance for the November study session.
(The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.)
A TRUE COPY
_____________________________________
Susan E. Wright, Recording Secretary
St. John Plan Commission
| Greg Volk | Steve Hastings | Attorney Tim Kuiper |
| Mike Ryan | Steve Kozel | Kenn Kraus |
| Tom Redar | Steve Kil | |
| Mike Forbes |
(The Pledge of Allegiance was said.)
Mr. Kraus stated he had submitted a letter on this issue in the past week. He stated that he had three comments, one, the plat dated September 5, 2012, was satisfactory for this two lot subdivision, two, there will be no public improvements associated with this site, and three, the developmental fee is $6,000.00, $1,500.00 for each lot for sewers, and $1,500.00 for each lot for water. Mr. Forbes asked if the developmental fee had been paid. Mr. Bisaga stated that he was not aware that this fee had to be paid at this time.
Mr. Kil pointed out that the developmental fee for the two lot subdivision is $900.00. He directed Mr. Bisaga to pay the $900.00 developmental fee. Mr. Kil stated that at the time Petitioner pulls a building permit he will be assessed a sewer and water fee. Mr. Kil pointed out that Petitioner would not be assessed a water fee because he will have a private well. Mr. Kil stated that in the event that Petitioner sells Lot 2, whoever purchases this lot will be assessed a water and sewer fee.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Kil stated that in the event Lot 2 is purchased the owner would be required to put in a sidewalk. Mr. Kil stated that a sidewalk on Lot 1 would have to be waived because it would be cost prohibitive to place a sidewalk across the ditch.
Mr. Forbes made a motion to grant final plat approval for Bisaga Woods, a two lot subdivision, waiving the sidewalk on Lot 1, and incorporating the finding of facts by reference and with the contingency that Mr. Bisaga submit the $900 developmental fee before the mylars are signed. Mr. Kozel seconded the motion.
Mr. Ryan requested a roll call vote. Mr. Kozel – aye. Mr. Forbes – aye. Mr. Redar – aye. Mr. Hastings – aye. Mr. Ryan – aye. The motion was unanimously carried by roll call vote (5/0).
JOHN STORK, HUNTER’S RUN AREA
Mr. Stork asked the Board for information on the location and time line for the proposed McDonalds. Mr. Forbes explained that it will be located by the Eenigenburg Water building will be torn down and replaced by the McDonalds. He stated by Sophie’s Bar will be torn down and the new Eenigenburg water will be built there.
Mr. Kil stated he could not give a date on the construction, but he thought it would be pretty quick.
Mr. Stork stated that the Town looks good.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Ryan stated that some spots on White Oak were not patched, specifically where the high tension wires cross White Oak. He asked about the speed bumps. Mr. Kil stated Walsh & Kelly will be in Town and they will make the needed repairs to the speed bumps. Mr. Kil stated he would look into the White Oak issue.
Mr. Ryan called for further public comment. There was no further public comment.
(The meeting was adjourned at 7:20 p.m.)
A TRUE COPY
_____________________________________
Susan E. Wright, Recording Secretary
St. John Plan Commission
| Greg Volk | Steve Hastings | Attorney Tim Kuiper |
| Mike Ryan | Steve Kozel | Kenn Kraus |
| Tom Redar | Steve Kil | |
| Mike Forbes |
Mr. Miller stated that the church was seeking an exemption from the dumpster enclosure for two reasons. The first reason, he explained, is because the dumpster is “ridiculously far away from the road.” Mr. Miller stated that the second reason for the request for an exemption is because enclosing the dumpster and having it match the building would be a “complete eyesore to put a wall up with a cage around it.”
Mr. Miller stated that a pad was just poured for the dumpster due to the garbage man destroying the pavement and to make it easier for the garbage man to get to the dumpster.
Mr. Miller stated that the dumpster is 400 feet off of the road. He informed the Board that if one drives past the church at the posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour, with no cars in the parking lot, you only glimpse the dumpster for less than four seconds. He stated with cars in the parking lot, which is usually four to five days a week, the dumpster can’t be seen at all.
Mr. Miller stated that the church is looking for an exemption because he feels that the dumpster enclosure would be an eyesore. He stated that a dumpster enclosure would make it more difficult for the garbage man too. He also reiterated that the dumpster is over 400 feet off of the road and not very visible.
Mr. Volk stated he is familiar with the church because he lives on Mallard. Mr. Miller stated they tried to place the concrete pad out of view of any of the houses.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Volk commented that the ordinance is not only for aesthetics but for containment of overflowing garbage. Mr. Volk noted that the professional building next to Welch’s Stop & Shop has erected a PVC fence with two gates; he stated that this PVC fence looks very nice. Mr. Kozel asked about the view from the back of the houses. Mr. Miller stated that the building extends 24’ beyond the dumpster.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes stated that aesthetics and containment are equally important. He stated that he did not think it would be too great of a burden to erect a PVC fence. Mr. Miller stated from reading the ordinance, he was not aware that the church had the option of erecting a PVC fence for the dumpster enclosure. Mr. Kil indicated that a white or tan PVC fencing enclosure would be appropriate.
Mr. Volk stated that he believes that the church should comply and put up a fence for the dumpster enclosure. Mr. Miller asked how the fence would be anchored into the ground.
(General discussion ensued.)
Mr. Forbes made a motion to grant a waiver on material requirements for Community Baptist Church, 8561 West 93rd Avenue, to allow for a PVC enclosure to be constructed around the dumpster, at a minimum of six feet high, in tan or white color. Mr. Kozel seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried by voice vote (4/0).
Mr. Kil stated that Attorney Kuiper took all of the suggestions and comments submitted by the Board and constructed an ordinance and tailored it to meet the Board’s specifications and the Town’s zoning ordinance.
Attorney Kuiper stated that he took out ten or twelve definitions that were not used in the rest of the text of the ordinance and were just surplus. He stated that he changed some words to comply with Indiana state law. He stated he has added everything that the Board wanted in the ordinance in a way that it would work.
Mr. Volk stated that he would like to review Attorney Kuiper’s draft ordinance and compare it to their notes. He wanted to ensure that it was complete.
The Board reviewed the proposed ordinance in its entirety. Mr. Volk started at “Section 2.1,” which was eliminated. He stated that “Section 4 of 2.2” they considered deleting.
Mr. Forbes asked about Section C1, Gross Emissions of Light.” He asked Attorney Kuiper why the ordinance was addressing outdoor athletic fields in commercial and industrial. Mr. Forbes noted that Section C, C1, Chapter 14, Page 2, contained an exemption for outdoor lighting in athletic fields in the commercial/industrial. He asked Attorney Kuiper why an athletic field would be included in the commercial/industrial zone.
(General discussion ensued.)
Section C4, Light Trespass was discussed. Mr. Kil stated that the word “recreational” should be eliminated.
The lighting table was discussed. Playing field lighting was discussed. Automobile dealership lighting was discussed. Lighting levels were discussed.
The Board discussed the definitions for lighting. The definition of “nit” was discussed. C2A was discussed. Mr. Redar pointed out a discrepancy under “Flag Lighting.” The wording was to be changed in this paragraph.
G3, Page 6, was discussed. Property used for Governmental and Public Purposes was reviewed. The start and end time for games and lighting was discussed. Central Standard Time (local time) would be observed.
The Board finished their review of the document. The Board directed Attorney Kuiper to make the noted corrections. The proposed ordinance was tentatively set for public hearing on February 6, 2013.
(The meeting was adjourned at 8:26 p.m.)
A TRUE COPY
_____________________________________
Susan E. Wright, Recording Secretary
St. John Plan Commission
