 |
PORTER COUNTY PLAN COMMISSION
Regular Meeting M I N U T E S The regular meeting of the Porter County Plan Commission was held on March 12, 2008 at 6:30 p.m. in the Porter County Administrative Center, 155 Indiana Avenue, Suite 205, Valparaiso, Indiana. Those members present were Kevin Breitzke, Richard Burns, Tim Cole, Robert Detert, Todd Hutson, Elizabeth Marshall, Herb Read, Rita Stevenson and Commissioner Robert Harper, President. Staff members present were Robert W. Thompson Jr., Attorney Scott McClure, Raymond S. Joseph Jr. and Patricia S. Gibson. At this time, Commissioner Harper informed the audience that Case 08-P-1, Arcadia Subdivision, has been continued to a future date. The neighbors will be notified when a new date has been set. Mr. Breitzke moved to waive the reading of the February 13, 2008 minutes and approve them as received in the mail. Mr. Cole seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous voice vote. Old Business: Case 08-DP-2. Petition of James Walker, 478 Ashford Lane, Valparaiso, Indiana seeking developmental review for a manufacturing and assembly of small electric parts and warehouse space in Lot 4, Archer Industrial Park, to be located at 413 E. Archer Way, in Washington Township. (Property is zoned I-2, General Industry.) Donald Bengel stated I am an engineer and surveyor here in Porter County and I am with Jim Walker who is the owner of the project and Mr. Reisinger who is going to be the contractor on this project. This is lot 4 in Archer Industrial Park, which the final plat was approved at the end of last year. The proposal is to put a building that will house a light industrial use. There will be a phase one and a phase two. We are here to get both phases approved at one time. The front part of this building will be office space. The second part is for assembly and the third part will be storage. We will be planting 83 shrubs and 15 trees going on this site. Most of will be in the front. A big part of this parcel is a detention pond easement and regulated drain easement and that won’t be touched. We have a preliminary design on the septic system. This is commercial and a mound and it will be approved down State. We will have a swale along the west line to provide drainage that goes to the back and then a swale down to a twenty-foot drainage and utility easement. That will carry the water down to the pond. The whole site slopes very nicely toward the Hutton Ditch. There was some concern at the site review meeting about the well. The well has to go where it is. We want the well close to the building and it has to be 100-feet from the property line. Along the road it has to be at least 40-feet back. It will be protected. Mr. Burns asked what size are the trees. Mr. Bengel stated whatever the ordinance requires that will be the size. Mr. Joseph stated the ordinance does state that diameter base thickness is required. Mr. Burns asked can we extend that to the dumpster box. Mr. Bengel stated we would be able to spread it out there. That would be no problem. Mr. Detert stated I have nothing. Mr. Hutson asked is the fifteen spaces for the employees. Mr. Bengel stated there is only two employees right now. We figured for a maximum of ten employees with the expansion plus three visitors that would be thirteen spaces and we are putting in fifteen. Mr. Hutson asked is this a situation where you will be bringing in larger trucks with parts and so forth. Jim Walker stated no it will be UPS or postal. Mr. Hutson is there a particular reason why you are enclosing the dumpster with a six foot solid wood fence. Are you going to landscape around that solid wood fence? Mr. Bengel stated that will be asphalt around there. Mr. Hutson asked is the well just utilized for employees or is that actually utilized for manufacturing. Mr. Bengel stated that is for potable water. Mrs. Stevenson stated I have no questions. Mr. Breitzke stated the landscaping should be specified with some specific limits. Did we address this adequately? Mr. Burns stated no and I do have additional questions. If you are going to spread the trees out I would like to see additional trees. If you spread them out, it is going to get pretty thin. Mr. Bengel stated we are going to abide by the ordinance and that tells you how many you have to have. Mr. Breitzke stated we need to be talking a minimum caliber diameter and height of the trees so we are not just putting sticks in the ground. Mr. Bengel stated we will follow the ordinance and we will give it to a landscaper who will plant them accordingly. At this time, Mr. Joseph read from the UDO concerning the landscaping requirements, which is deciduous trees shall be at least one-inch (1”) caliber; evergreen trees shall be at least three (3) feet tall; shrubs shall be at least two-gallon container size or (18) inches tall from the adjacent ground level. Mr. Breitzke stated that is what I wanted read so everybody knows what the expectation is. Was there a spread between those trees there? Mr. Joseph stated no the ordinance states that it needs to be planted in a regular pattern. Commissioner Harper asked isn’t there a requirement as to how many feet. Mr. Joseph stated no, not in a development plan. Commissioner Harper asked Mr. Bengel then how would you decide how many the ordinance requires then. Mr. Bengel stated we show the trees and if you look at the front of the building we have the trees covering the whole front. Mr. Joseph stated that there is a ratio per acre of required trees. Mr. Breitzke stated the other thing that I have brought up before is the issue of the pond height and the outlet for the perimeter drain for the pond. I want to remind you first you need to come to my office for to get an hold harm list from my office for the outlet into the pond. Secondly, your outlet is below the 100-year storage of that pond. I’ll talk to the Health Department again and you may need to move the thing around a little bit. I think it can still be designed but there is going to have to be some minor alterations. Mrs. Marshall stated there seems to be a difference between the State Health Board and the Porter County Health Board. Mr. Bengel stated we worked that out. Mrs. Marshall asked what is it. Mr. Bengel stated it is going to be a mound system. That was a big difference. Mrs. Marshall asked do you have something from the State Board of Health. Mr. Bengel stated yes I do. I have a letter. Mrs. Marshall asked where is it. Mr. Bengel asked Kevin what is the difference. Mr. Breitzke stated it is the depth of the perimeter drain. Also, a mound system was preferred. At this time, Mr. Bengel handed Mrs. Marshall a copy of the letter from the State Board of Health. Mr. Bengel stated that was the second time around when the State looked at it. Mrs. Marshall stated you need to get this to the staff. What is the height of the pond and do you have any figures on that? Mr. Bengel stated the plans shows what the outlet is. The construction plans show 748.1. The perimeter drain is at 749.44. Mrs. Marshall asked is that an all weather road in front of this property? Mr. Bengel stated I am not sure. Mrs. Marshall asked how many trucks do you have coming to this property? Mr. Walker stated typically UPS once a day. Mrs. Marshall asked do you have any semis. Mr. Walker stated we have a semi come in once every six weeks. Mr. Read asked I too have been trying to follow through on this previous discussion between the County Board of Health and the potential State requirements. Do I understand that from what Mr. Breitzke brought up that there is still something with regards to the low point of the discharge drain outlet elevation with regard to the potential height of the receiving body of water. Is that still something that needs work on? Mr. Breitzke stated just a little bit. 751.4 is actually the outlet. They need to bring that up a little bit. Otherwise, the perimeter drain gets submerged. Mr. Read stated it says on the drawing that the pond outlet is 748.1. Mr. Breitzke asked is that the number you have at the creek side because there is a 60-foot pipe coming out of the pond. Mr. Bengel stated I got this off of Eric’s plans. Mr. Breitzke stated there is a 60-foot pipe and they put some slope and when we did I think we ended up putting the standpipe just a little bit lower. They didn’t use much grade so I had them put extra holes on the bottom to drain the pond better. Mr. Bengel stated I think this elevation is at the standpipe. Mr. Breitzke stated the good thing is that the perimeter drain around the mound system will be above that 100-year level so that will be a very positive thing. Mr. Read asked is that the change that was discussed between the original submittal. Mr. Bengel stated correct. The last time we went to DAC the Health Department was satisfied. Mrs. Marshall asked are you going to have both a mound system and a perimeter system here. Mr. Bengel stated the subsurface drainage system around the septic has nothing to do with your type. That is all clean water that is in that perimeter drain. Mr. Read asked is what I am understanding is that what we are having is a sanitary waste into this system. Is there any processed water here? Mr. Bengel stated no. Mr. Read asked are you saying that the detention pond is of sufficient capacity that when this whole subdivision is built out it will handle the surface water? Mr. Bengel stated that is how it was supposed to be designed for 75% coverage of the entire site. Our coverage is 33%. Mr. Read stated another thing that the county brought up is the fact that the soil borings where up toward the front where it was a different type of soil then where you show it on the plan. Would you please address that? Mr. Bengel stated we had new borings. For the subdivision the borings were taken in the front of the lots. It didn’t work very well for the development plan so that had new borings taken in the back. Mr. Read asked is that the borings labeled no. 4, no. 4a and 4e and so forth. Mr. Bengel stated correct. Mr. Read stated on going to your paved area it shows a drain from the parking area to the east and a pipe. Would you address what that is draining? Mr. Bengel stated that is a small loading dock and that pipe will just drain that loading dock. That will just be rain water. Mr. Read asked is there any kind of pre-treatment off the paved area? Mr. Bengel stated no. Mr. Read stated you also show a 20-foot utility and drainage easement. Would you explain which utility and drainage you expect there and is it for. This would be towards Archer Way. Mr. Bengel stated that was put on there on the final plat, which was approved by the Plan Commission. I don’t know what drainage would go in there. It just typically says to include drainage in the purpose. We aren’t going to use it for any drainage because you have a good ditch out here between the road and the property line. Mr. Read asked is it going to be graded as a swale. Mr. Bengel stated it is a swale now. Mr. Read asked will the electrical service be over head or under ground. Mr. Bengel stated underground. Mr. Read asked will that go into that utility easement? Mr. Bengel stated that depends on NIPSCO. Mr. Cole stated I will reiterate my concern over the well which you said will be designed with proper protective barriers and all that especially from the runoff from the parking lot towards the well because the fill that they put down at those casings will sometimes allow water penetration. Mr. Bengel stated the well is going to be on the high side of the parking lot. Mr. Cole stated some kind of curbing is what I was getting at. You could put a little curbing around that well. Mr. Hutson stated as far as the landscaping with 13 trees and 38 shrubs and 50% of them will be evergreens. This is screening and so forth. What is the maintenance plan for this? Is there a long term maintenance plan? Mr. Bengel stated fertilizing twice a year. Mr. Hutson stated if the evergreens or trees die do you plan on replacing them. Mr. Walker stated with my wife I am sure they will be well maintained. Mr. Breitzke moved to approve Case 08-DP-2. Mr. Hutson seconded the motion, which carried on a unanimous roll call vote.
At this time, Commissioner Harper read the rules of conduct for a public hearing. Case 08-Z-2. Petition of Allen’s Square, Inc., 101 W. U.S. Hwy 6, Valparaiso, Indiana for a proposed amendment to the Master Plan to rezone a parcel of land from RR, Rural Residential to CH, High Intensity Commercial District for the expansion of trailer sales facility to be located on Hwy 6, approximately ¼ mile West of what would be CR 75 W. in Liberty Township. Chuck Lukmann stated I am an attorney with the law firm of Harris, Welsh and Lukmann, Chesterton, Indiana. I am representing Maro Allen family. With me tonight is Maro Allen Sr. and Maro Allen Sr. Rich Hudson is here as our engineer to assist in any technical questions that may arise. This property is located between CR 75 W. and CR 200 W. on Hwy 6. In 1986, the family petitioned for and received the rezoning of a ten acre parcel of land to what is now your CH designation. That ten acre parcel is this hatched area. Since then they have acquired two parcels one ten acre parcel and the other is a fifteen acre parcel. That is the subject property that we are here on tonight. When it was first rezoned it was there to accommodate the family’s trucking firm and also is in the name of a family held corporation, Allen’s Square Inc. This area that we are talking about is an area designated on your future Land Use map as an area where commercial expansion is supposed to be encouraged and where it should go. For the last 20 years the family has been on this site operating their business and the business has grown. They have also started a semi- truck trailer sales. This is a very low impact business and most of their sales are coming over the internet but they still have to have onsite storage in order to sell. I believe they average about two trailers per week. One thing I want to make real clear to you is that although all of this property is part of the twenty-five acres we are asking for your approval with a restriction that all the property north, which includes the woods and the pond that my clients own, be restricted so that no commercial structures can be placed on that property whatsoever. No commercial uses will be taken place on that property. On the west side we are requesting that you require a 75-foot buffer, which is far in excess of the requirements. The potential use is probably… Mr. Hudson stated fourteen acres. The part that Mr. Lukmann referred to as the open space or what I will call the open space, is about 11.3 acres out of the twenty-five. Plus the south fourteen. Maro Allen Jr. stated I am the owner of Allen’s Square, which is a family run business. We have expanded so much in the trucking business we don’t have the area for the trailers so we need to expand the facility for the storage of the trailers. Earlier this didn’t present a problem but with the trailer business expanding we became dealers for two trailers. Then the dealerships put out a program to where you had to maintain an “x” amount of stock program, which meant that you had to five or six of their trailers to maintain our dealership. Our intentions are to build a facility basically as a showroom for our stock that comes in. I want to get some of our stock inside of the facilities because we have had a theft problem. The trailer business is not a high impact business on the area. Our trailers are listed on a website, through a truck paper and different establishments in the trucking industry. Most of our business is done mainly over the telephone and e-mails over the internet. The 100 trailers he sells per year approximately 65% to 70% of those are delivered to the people from the factory. At this time, Mr. Allen presented to the Commission members a drawing of how the building will look and where it would be located on the property. Mr. Allen stated we don’t have many people coming in so we are not going to require much parking. Our building will have an office structure in the front and the back area will be for the trailers and materials like that. We will be putting in the trees according to the ordinance. Our drainage goes back to the retention areas. Mr. Lukmann stated the pond and the woods that you notice on there is something that the family is going to preserve. Their pond is stocked. Alan Hewitt stated I am here to represent the Liberty Land Owners. My address is P.O. Box 711, Chesterton, Indiana. He stated if you look at this picture this area here right now is zoned RR. There are several trailers and pieces of equipment on it and you have an ordinance that prohibits the outdoor storage of equipment and machinery. I would appreciate it if the county would send someone out there being that this is RR right now and to see if there is any equipment and machinery is there and if they are in violation. Mr. Hewitt’s concerns are that this zoning that they are asking for is not compatible with the surrounding property. At this time, Mr. Hewitt read from the UDO book. Valerie Drummond, 138 W. 850 N. Mrs. Drummond’s concerns are the noise issues. Timothy Howard, 120 W. U.S. Hwy 6. Mr. Howard is in favor of this petition. Concerning the noise issue, he gets more noise from the trucks and traffic going down Rt. 6 than the Allen’s going 5 mph through their yard. The Allen’s have been great neighbors and he has no complaints with the Allen’s. J.F. Schrader, 978 Meridian Rd. Mr. Schrader’s concern’s are that there are dozen’s of trailer’s there and they were to have only two or three. Also, there is a landfill there and the Allen’s filled in the whole bottom. He wanted to know if Porter County granted them permission to fill this in. He is concerned about the drainage and that they pay no assessment on the Swanson Lamport Ditch. Mr. Lukmann stated this is property on Hwy 6 and there is nothing rural about it up and down on both sides of Hwy 6. There is a lot of commercial activity. There is nothing incompatible with the surrounding area of what my client wants to do as far as the expansion of the family business. I will talk to my clients about the noise but I think the main noise comes from the highway. Mr. Hewitt did bring up an area that had some trailers. My clients have been getting those off and they shouldn’t be there. As far as whether Porter County gave permission to fill in the land, I have a stack of letters here and the first one is to Mr. Allen from the Porter County Highway Department stating that they will be delivering loads to Sterling Express that are non-toxic and non-hazardous. Maro Allen Sr. stated when I applied for the zoning I had eight or ten trucks and somebody asked me how many trucks I had. I told them eight or ten trucks but they are not there all the time. Since 1988 I have had the same number of trucks. I have had twenty-five. My trucks haul for manufacturers throughout northern Indiana and they usually leave on Sunday or Monday and then they come back one time during the week and they come home on the weekends. The number of trucks on my property normally does not exceed six or eight with the exception of trucks that I do not have drivers in. I did not realize where the boundaries were. When I was informed where the boundaries were, I went over and immediately moved all of the equipment within the zoned area. As far as noise abatement is concerned, I live across the street from the property and I live closer than any of you people live to it. I listen to U.S. Hwy 6 every day. I instruct my drivers implicitly just to idle out of the parking lot. I do not have a pressure washer on my property. I go to the truck stop to get my trucks washed. We try to be a good neighbor. One of the most important things that we are going to do is when you put up trees it stops noise. We want to put up enough trees to do an abatement so that the people in the Liberty area won’t have the noise. You will also notice that in our plan we didn’t go back where Liberty Home Owners Association is with any commercial. We set aside that whole area back there those fourteen acres so that our neighbors wouldn’t have to deal with that. We left that in wildlife habitat. Terry Smith, 75 W. Mr. Smith’s concern is the road on Maro Allen Jr.’s property that goes back. Is that road going to be used for anything else besides just going back and forth. Mr. Schrader stated this truck business shouldn’t be allowed. Don Tracy, 53 W. 50 N. Mr. Tracy’s concerns are drainage. Vernon Young, 83 W. U.S. Hwy 6. Mr. Vernon’s concerns are drainage. Mr. Lukmann stated I will have Mr. Allen speak on Mr. Young’s concerns. Mr. Allen Jr. stated I do have a walking path between my house and the office. I have no intention on bringing any semi-trucks down that road. In regards to the pipe, I never put in the culvert. That was an existing culvert when I purchased the property. The public hearing was then closed. Mr. Burns stated you said you filled in and raised the grade on that property. What was the grade? Mr. Allen Jr. stated this was all done back in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s. Mr. Allen Sr. stated I can address that. As far as the grade is concerned, I am the one who graded it. The grade that existed when we did a topographical the only thing that we did was take the same grade level that was existing in the farm field that was there before raised the land up and put the same grade to it that it was before or a little bit more of a grade so the water would have a tendency to go to the retention pond. What we have done was built this retention pond down there to take all the ground water that comes up from all our property and existing water that comes from all the property on the other side that goes into our retention pond, which is 24-feet deep. We have improved the stop of the water flow to our neighbors up above us because that whole area completely flooded. That’s all we did was improve the area and certainly did not do anything detrimental to it. Mr. Burns stated that was approved by the Army Corps of Engineers. Mr. Allen Sr. stated yes it was and we have all the paper work on it. Mr. Burns asked once the retention ponds fill up do they overflow into Damon Run. Mr. Allen Sr. stated yes they do. The outbound of the pond is exactly the level that the ground originally was. There is no increase or decrease and I put the pipe right exactly on top of what the existing land level was when it was there. There is no change in the existing level whatsoever. Mr. Burns asked on your new expansion area are you going to pave that ground. Mr. Allen Sr. stated a very small portion of it. Most of it is in grass. Mr. Burns stated that was a concern with more trucks. Mr. Allen Sr. stated we are not going to have more trucks. Mr. Burns asked will there be more residue like grease or oil off the trucks. Mr. Allen Sr. stated no. The only thing that we are going to do is sell trailers. Selling trailers is a very low impact business. Mr. Burns asked will there be any pressure washing there. Mr. Allen Jr. stated no. Mr. Burns asked what about the noise level. Mr. Allen Jr. stated I have an issue with a fork truck that I have and I am getting with the manufacturer for a new muffler system. Mr. Burns stated you did say that you would put more trees or buffers for the noise. Mr. Allen Jr. stated yes. We are planning on basically lining the trees all the way down the side and down the other side. I hadn’t placed them back in the area where we are doing the no commercial zone because I have a few of the neighbors over there that say that they like the view of the pond and the trees and things. Mr. Burns stated I would like to see trees to help with the noise level. Three foot trees won’t get it. They have to be taller trees. Mr. Detert stated I was probably the only one here that voted for this when it was before the Board in the 1980’s. It was provided to us in a manner that sounded like it would be very low impact and that hasn’t been the case. You have expanded the business. The neighborhood as far as I see is still pretty well residential. If I had known with the first petition that you would be coming back because you were expanding your business I don’t think I would’ve voted for it. I think the people in Liberty Township had spoken eloquently about it and is not conducive to what is now basically a residential subdivision. I am not in favor of this. Mr. Hutson asked what exactly is your business. Mr. Allen Jr. stated we sell new Fontaine’s and new Reitnouer’s. We on occasion take in trade-in’s and then sell those, which we might change the lights to make sure they are working properly. Mr. Hutson asked do you deliver the trailers. Mr. Allen Jr. stated about 65% to 70% of the trailers are delivered directly from the manufacturer. Mr. Hutson asked do you do any refueling on site. Mr. Allen Jr. stated no. Mr. Hutson asked could you come over to this drawing because I would like to ask you a few questions. At this time, Mr. Hutson and Mr. Allen Jr. had a discussion concerning what was on the drawing and what is on the site. Mrs. Stevenson asked could you put up a fence of some kind. Mr. Allen Jr. stated I have no problem with that at all. Actually, we were kind of shocked when the ordinance said we couldn’t put up a taller fence in front of the building. Mr. Allen Sr. stated the problem with a fence, we would love to put up a fence, the grade of the highway where the property is and the grade of the land, the land is 17-feet below the grade of the highway. If I put up a fence, I could put up an 8-foot berm and I am still only allowed to put up an 8-foot fence. Mrs. Stevenson stated you could still see it. Mr. Allen Sr. stated absolutely. I will say this, once we get a condition with the highway department on what we are going to do with U.S. Hwy 6 and the highway department comes along and comes to grade then we would like to come over there and follow up and put a berm in that would be compatible with the grade that the highway department puts in and then put up a fence. I would also like to say one other thing. I have one truck that I move trailers around with. It operates from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and it is a little noisy. I will address that issue and I do apologize to causing anybody any inconvenience at. Mrs. Stevenson asked could you put evergreens up in the front. Mr. Allen Sr. stated we are planning on doing that in the entire front except where there is a hole that is 21-feet deep and you can’t put any trees in that. Mr. Breitzke stated I was going to suggest that you run the trees along the fringe of that hole up in the higher part. You can continue around. Mr. Allen Sr. stated I cannot do that. This area in here has concrete in there. You could put all the trees you want in there and they won’t grow. Mr. Breitzke stated I would like to suggest that if it is rezoned that you go at a line diagonally from this point to the corner of the existing zoning or up somewhat like this. I really don’t want to see that incompatible zoning right up against this. Another thing to remember is that once this area is rezoned we have to be aware of changes in use because right now this seems to be a pretty benign use for this if he is just selling trailers. Looking at the minutes he was pretty consistent on what he told us. Are you doing any kind of service work? Mr. Allen Jr. stated we do some but we also have services done at the dealerships. Mr. Breitzke asked you don’t have a paint shop in house? Mr. Allen Jr. stated no. Mr. Breitzke asked what kind of service do you do to your trucks. Mr. Allen Jr. stated they grease the fittings, repair lights, they make sure that the equipment that the drivers have are up to code and they rotate the equipment in and out of the trailers. Mrs. Marshall stated with the zoning that you want in the new UDO it does say that this is not appropriate to a residential zone. I think that this is important. I think that if we have adopted a UDO and we have specifically outlined the fact that we don’t want this high intensity commercial industrial development next to a residential, I think there is a reason for it and I think we should pay more attention to it. I think Mr. Hewitt had a very valid point when he brought that up. If we approve this rezoning, then we have done something that we adopted in the UDO. I think that is not holding to what we have adopted. Concerning the drainage, you say that the drainage goes to two retention areas. However, at some point in time the drainage overflows because you can’t retain all of the water in those two drainage areas. We don’t have any calculations as to what goes into that drainage area nor do we know what is leaving there. So, I think you have failed in your petition to bring those facts forward. Let’s talk about trucks. You are only going to sell trailers and not the cabs. Is this correct? Mr. Allen Jr. stated that is correct. Mrs. Marshall stated the trailers are manufactured according to specs. Different company’s order different things like air rides etc. You are not going to have a display of trailers there because they don’t meet anybody’s specifications. Do they? Mr. Allen Sr. stated manufacturers have changed. I represent Fontaine Manufacturing. Fontaine Manufacturing now has six models of trailers. They build it this way and you buy it this way or you don’t get it. The vast amount of trailers that used to be available are no longer available. I only sell one particular style of trailers predominately. I only sell flatbed trailers. They have no motors, they have no hydraulic hoists, they have no mechanism other than they are just a flatbed trailer with tires and wheels on them. Therefore, I don’t want something that is high intensity maintenance and I don’t want to sell anything like that because I have to warrant something like that. So it is not my best interest to sell that kind of product. On the other side of the coin, manufacturers do not pay for inventory. Every piece of inventory that I buy I pay for. So it is in my best interest not to have too much. Mrs. Marshall stated one of the violations is that you have already been in the sell of trailers. Mr. Allen Sr. stated it is not a violation. I am zoned for what I am doing there. I was out of my existing zoning. I wasn’t in violation of selling trailers. Mrs. Marshall stated it says the expansion of trailer sales facility. Mr. Lukmann stated we want to put it on the adjacent property. Mrs. Marshall stated I think the neighbors do have a problem with the noise. I have received a number of complaints. The road that someone spoke about, is it a road that you can drive down from your house to your business. Mr. Allen Jr. stated you could take a vehicle down it but it is not like a county road or anything like that. It is mainly a walking path that we use. Mrs. Marshall stated the frontage that you have along Rt. 6, do you have a defined off-ramp that you can get these trucks off when they come down there. Mr. Allen Jr. stated there are decel lanes that were put in after the original zoning and it was all approved by the State and the engineers and put in by a qualified State approved contractor. Mrs. Marshall asked is that on both the north and south side of the road. Mr. Allen Jr. stated yes. Mrs. Marshall asked have you ever had an accident reported in front of your place. Mr. Allen Jr. stated none that involved our vehicles or anything. The only accident that I can remember actually took place this past summer when they had the road crews out working on the highway and there was an issue with one of the sign turners but nothing ever having to do with our vehicles entering or leaving the highway. There was another accident four years prior where a dump truck rolled over on the south side of the highway. There was a newspaper carrier going down the highway in the wrong direction in the fog and that driver had seen the lights and that actually put him up on the hill across the street from our facility. Mrs. Marshall stated you talk about keeping the new trailers indoors. Mr. Allen Jr. stated a certain amount of them. Mrs. Marshall asked what is the size of the new building. Mr. Allen Jr. stated approximately 80’ by 90’. Mrs. Marshall asked how many trailers can you get in an 80’ by 90’ building. Mr. Allen Jr. stated approximately 9 to 12 depending upon whether they are stacked or not stacked. Mrs. Marshall asked what size doors would you have. Mr. Allen Jr. stated either 12’ or 14’ doors. Mrs. Marshall asked what is the height of the building. Mr. Allen Jr. stated approximate height is going to be 28’ or 32’ depending upon the actual side wall. Mrs. Marshall stated the ordinance address’s the height of the building and the maximum height is 50’. Mr. Allen Jr. stated we are not planning on going that high at all. Mrs. Marshall asked is the violations resolved. Mr. Allen Jr. stated everything that was outside of the zoned area is inside of the zoned area except for some of the scrap material which we have been currently in the process of cleaning. Mrs. Marshall stated we have to know that this is resolved before we can act on any kind of rezoning. Mr. Allen Jr. stated on the back section there is a few more loads of scrap material to be hauled out, which I intend to have done very efficiently. Mrs. Marshall asked do you have lease trucks or do you own all the trucks. Mr. Allen Sr. stated I own the trucks. Mrs. Marshall stated this is not compatible with the UDO. Mr. Read stated you don’t have plans to show us and that bothers me. On the plus side, you have pledged to preserve the woods and the pond to the north. It is good to see that you have some buffer to your neighbors. There is one problem with all of that and that is that some of that is in the request for rezoning. All of it, the woods and the pond? Mr. Lukmann stated we were advised by staff to include the entire property. My first thought was not to include the part that we want to preserve and have as a buffer. They have no problem, if the Board were to approve it, of taking that out. Mr. Read stated once an area is zoned for something zoning lasts for a long time. Once the area is rezoned and if it is included in the rezoning who knows what will happen to it in the future. Once it has this high intensity commercial, there is a whole list of uses that can go in there. Also, if your business is as good as it might be, you might want to pave more of your land. Then that brings up the water situation. When I look at the zoning map, there is a lot of rural residential and residential around it. Some of the commercial zoning there have been grandfathered in or done back in the 1960’s and before the present UDO. In addition to that, this Board has decided to conduct a corridor study. It might be that the corridor study would recommend commercial and maybe right where you are sitting but we don’t know at this point. Mr. Cole stated on one of my maps the woods up there is a wetland, a USGS wetland. There is a wetland to the east of it and there are other wetlands to the east and the southeast many of which are very sensitive wetlands. Let’s not call it a wildlife area, let’s call it a wetland. In that regard, I have a very hard time rezoning all of this property to high intensity commercial with that wetland in there. You do have loaded trucks on site from time to time. That was one of my questions and that was answered. Mr. Allen Jr. stated they are usually structural steel loads. Mr. Cole stated naturally when you improve this site to what you want you are going to want signs, lighting and of course some paving. When I consider a rezoning, I would like to see the plans before hand. I don’t want to permanently rezone something without having a good fair idea of what is going on. There are no drainage plans. You didn’t go to any County Engineers for the retention pond design. No permits were issued for some of the drainage changes. No permits were issued for…that has been regarded. That is not back to original grade. That is fill. The watershed off this area has not been provided to us and I find that very troubling. We don’t know what is there. I find this very troubling. Did you used to wash trucks there?
Mr. Allen Jr. stated in the past there was limited washing and that was about five or six years ago. Mr. Allen Jr. stated no. Mr. Allen Sr. stated I want to address the woods issue. The woods are higher starting from the level of the lake and extends out between eight and ten feet up. The entire woods are on a hill. The land surrounding that knoll, is not our property. Mr. Allen Jr. stated I own part of it and the Underwood’s have it in a three section trust. The north section is owned by the folks that own the house in the woods. Mr. Allen Sr. stated there are no wetlands in those woods whatsoever. Mr. Allen Jr. stated we have looked at the delineation basically on the big map. Coming through this here is distinguished as the wetland area. This is the unregulated ditch and this is higher than all of it all through here. This was built by Mr. Underwood with Army Corps involved in it. All of this in here is wetlands but a lot of it is not as wet as it used to be because of the water being retained here. Also, when they moved into here they ran a ditch which you can see here and actually drains a lot of this and makes it flow through the ditch. This area all up in here and over in here is wetlands. That is why I don’t want to do any of this. On the side of the zoning it might have been my misunderstanding when I made some contact and things the way I understood it was I was to zone the whole piece of property but then notate that we were going to deem this open space as long as the zoning exists and that there be no commercial there. We were going to petition for that but then we believed that we should have done the whole property so when they look at the zoning versus the parcel description it was contiguous. However, it needs to be stated to preserve that I have no problem in doing that. Mr. Cole stated I apologize if I was wrong about the wetland delineation. Are you going to have signs and lights? Mr. Allen Jr. stated I don’t want any signs. I plan on front lighting for the structure. I plan on side lighting for the parking area, which was the small parking area on the side. The parking area will have parking for eight to ten cars. The trucks will be parking at the truck facility if they do come to pick up a trailer. Mr. Allen Sr. stated because I have a vehicle dealers license the State of Indiana I have to have one sign some place that identifies that I have a trailer sales business, the hours of service that I have from and to. That particular sign right now is in the front of one of my buildings. Mr. Cole stated traffic is always a problem but I drive through there quite a bit and I will have to be honest I have never really had a problem with the traffic past your place. I think I did mention paving a little bit. Paving is something that is a bother to me. It is impervious and it is usually asphalt and I can understand in your circumstances it is the most likely substance that you would probably use. I like adventures into more pervious styles of paving. Consider maybe some vegetative swales throughout the parking lot to take care of some of the runoff. There are a couple other things. The Corridor Plan, I would really like to wait until a Corridor Study has been done or if we do get a consultant that they start on this area first because let’s face it that area of U.S. Hwy 6 is an eyesore. Not necessarily you but several of the other business’ really need to do some housekeeping. I also need to point out that we did turn down a cars sales lot to the west of you and that in years past there was also a restrictive zoning on the property next to you. I will correct you Mr. Lukman this is rural. I do understand that Liberty Township would like to keep it rural, at least that is what I have heard. So, maybe some of this zoning may be mute, at this point. If I were on the Plan Commission at that time some of the approved rezonings to commercial would not have been in my favor. Let me point out that I would like to see DLZ do a study on this before any rezoning that would make this a permanent use. I really think that we need that drainage study. In light of that, realizing that from the beginning practically, according to these minutes tractor sales, trailer sales, was permitted in a C-4 at that time but when you go through these minutes and if you were in the audience at that time, as I think I was for one of the hearings, there was a condition of trust implied that this would be a man coming out of bankruptcy who wants to preserve his business, has a fleet of trucks and wants to maintain a certain number of trucks, and it does say trucks. Not necessarily just trailers. They did not intend to have seven or eight trucks on this property at all times. Only one or two of these trucks would be housed there. That is a condition of trust. It doesn’t say that we are going to bring in fifty trailers and sell them. It doesn’t say that we are going to fill in our land. It doesn’t say we are going to expand and not get a permit to move the trailer sales onto actually rural residentially zoned property. With that one condition, with the condition that the UDO essentially pretty much strongly says that this is non-compliant with the overall plan for Liberty Township I cannot support this rezoning. Commissioner Harper stated I don’t blame the petitioners for a thing that happened in this meeting in 1986. This meeting in 1986 was a complete and total failure of getting the job done the way we should get the job done. Let me tell you why, because they sat here and talked in 1986 about all these things but a motion was made to zone it commercial. End of story. Now they are telling us that when Mr. Wagner said that they do not intend to have over seven or eight trucks on this property. They are telling us that cannot be enforced by that Plan Commission and we probably can’t because we did not do our job. So what are we doing today, members of the Plan Commission? What are we doing talking about all this stuff and looking at these pictures. We don’t have anything in writing here. We are just rezoning this property commercial. I want to talk about this economic development argument that this is important for economic development. If somebody drives down Highway 6 in that area the way it looks today that wants to put in a nice subdivision or something watch them go the other way. They are not going to do it in that area. If we keep it up that highway is going to look like an industrial highway in Whiting. If that is what we want, why are we even going and asking for this corridor study. Are we going to do something about this or are we going to piece meal and continue to do this. I would have thought if they were coming in here they would have had a landscape plan with trees three or four deep along the highway. I would have thought that they would have come in and said here is what the lighting is going to be. Mr. Detert moved to forward Case 08-Z-2 to the County Commissioners with an unfavorable recommendation. Mr. Cole seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Breitzke stated we have a common practice of doing rezoning with written commitments. Commissioner Harper asked do we have any here tonight. Mr. Breitzke stated we have none here tonight and that is a good point that we all have to be aware of. Another thing is the extension on these boundaries. We are not here to negotiate for the amount of land. Motion carried on the following ballot vote:
Breitzke - Yes Burns - Yes Cole - Yes This case will be heard on April 15, 2008 by the County Commissioners. Case 08-M-1. Petition of the Porter County Plan Commission, 155 Indiana Ave., Valparaiso for an amendment to Ordinance No. 07-05, Porter County Unified Development Ordinance, Chapter 7, Section 7.28 (SM-01) Storm Water Standards; General. Also, Chapter 12, Section 12.02; Defined Words. At this time, Mr. Thompson explained the amendments to the ordinance. No one spoke in favor of this petition. No one spoke in opposition to this petition. The public hearing was then closed. Mr. Breitzke moved to forward Case 08-M-1 to the County Commissioners with a favorable recommendation. Mr. Cole seconded the motion, which carried on the following ballot vote:
Breitzke - Yes Burns - Yes Cole - Yes
No one spoke in favor of this motion. No one spoke in opposition to this petition.
Mr. Breitzke moved to approve the Storm Water Design Manual with the amendments suggested by DLZ. Mr. Detert seconded the motion, which carried on the following ballot vote:
Breitzke - Yes Burns - Yes Cole - Yes At this time, a committee was formed to include Rick Burns, Ray Joseph and Todd Hutson to look into a tree ordinance, also, to address cutting trees down on property. There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 9:35 p.m.
PORTER COUNTY
Attest: Robert W. Thompson Jr. AICP, Executive Director/County Planner |
 |
Please enter a search term to begin your search. |
March 12, 2008