- So it's now 530. I'd like to call the Monroe County Plan Commission meeting of February 17th,
- 2026 to order. And go ahead and start with Director Jelen and the roll call, please. Sure. David Bush?
- Here. Margaret Clements? Here. Tron Enri-Randolph? Scott Ferris? Here.
- Rudy fields here. David Henry. Jeff Morris here. Julie Thomas. Joe Van Deventer. And Stephen Bishop
- here. OK, so we have. Five voting members in person and one non voting member in person and a quorum.
- OK, next up is introduction of evidence and
- Go ahead and introduce, please. I'd like to introduce the following items into the evidence. The Monroe
- County Development Ordinance as adopted and amended. The Monroe County Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision
- Control Ordinance as adopted and amended. The Monroe County Comprehensive Plan as adopted and amended.
- The Monroe County Plan Commission Rules and Procedure as adopted and amended. And the cases that were
- legally advertised and scheduled for a hearing on tonight's agenda. Move approval. Second.
- It's been moved and seconded to approve the introduction of evidence. A vote yes is a vote to approve.
- Margaret Clements? Yes. Scott Ferris? Yes. Rudy Fields? Yes. Jeff Morse? Yes. David Bush? Yes. Motion
- carries five to zero. I'd like to move approval of the agenda as advertised. Second.
- It's been moved and seconded to approve the agenda as advertised with no changes. A vote yes is a vote
- to approve. Scott Farris. Yes. Rudy Fields. Yes. Jeff Morris. Yes. David Bush. Yes. Mario Clements.
- Yes. Motion carries five to zero. If nobody has any objections, I'd like to move approval of the minutes
- from December 18th, 2025 and January 20th, 2026. Second.
- It's been moved and seconded to approve both sets of minutes, December 18th, 2025 and January 20th,
- 2026. A vote yes is a vote to approve both sets of minutes. Rudy Fields? Yes. Jeff Morris? Yes.
- David Bush? Yes. Mark Clements? Yes. Scott Ferris? Yes. Motion is approved five to zero. That takes
- us to administrative business. Do you have an update on the CDO prioritization?
- Yes, I did want to update the group that we were able to pass two text amendments by the county commissioners
- on Thursday, February 12th. One of those items was the sliding scale option. And then the other item
- was related to some staff edits, including allowing an allowance for eco development if there is
- proposal on flat ground and it's for accessory structures. So we were able to pass both of those on
- February 12th. So we move on to unfinished business and appears there is none. So let's go ahead and
- move into new business. For new business, we're going to have three petitions. One is 3521st South Rogers
- Street rezoned from a PUD to residential. The second one is Highlines
- Highlands PUD Outline Plan Amendment to Partial E. The third one is the Point PUD Outline Plan for the
- Eagle Bay garages and all three, if I'm correct, are requesting a waiver of the final hearings. So over
- to you, Drew. Thank you. So this is REZ-25-7. It's the 3521 South Roger Street Rezone from PUD to RES.
- It is one parcel.
- that measures 1.01 acres in section 17 of Perry Township, and it is at 3521 South Rogers Street.
- All right. So this petition requests to rezone the 1.01 acres of this property from PUD Summersby to
- Residential 1 or RES. The goal of the rezone is to establish an appropriate zoning district for the
- subject property in response to correcting a zoning map error.
- According to the current zoning map, the property is zoned PUD Summersbee. Citing the Summersbee PUD
- ordinance and subsequent subdivision plat indicates that the subject property is not part of the Summersbee
- PUD or the Summersbee subdivision. This was recognized by staff when the property owner came in to ask
- questions about developing the property. And when we pulled up the property on the screen in the office,
- we recognize that it looked a little funny that it was zoned PUD when it was not part of the Summersbee
- subdivision. So then we went into details and research to figure out how that happened. So this property,
- as I stated, is 1.01 acres. It is approximately 500 feet from Bachelor Middle School. Its zoning,
- as I said, is PUD. The surrounding zoning districts are High Development Residential, or HD,
- And it is also adjacent to a former railroad property, which is the Bloomington Rail Trail. And then
- further east to that is the city of Bloomington jurisdiction. You will see in the packet there are several
- exhibits, including the Summersbee subdivision plot, as well as the original ordinance from 1992, both
- of which indicate that this property should not have been zoned PUD. And we are unsure why that happened, but it is
- before you this evening so that we can correct it and get it appropriately zoned to the right zoning
- district. Property does have sewer that services it. There's actually a sewer line that cuts through
- the property. Interestingly enough, the property owner came into the office wanting to expand the residential
- use of the property, including originally in their first iterations of plans for the property were to develop
- additional duplexes or paired patio homes on the property and the extension of city sewer services were
- denied by the City of Bloomington utilities. So the property owner kind of was halted by that aspect
- even though there are services on the property currently being serviced. And it is the property is also
- located in the Clear Creek Critical Watershed and the comprehensive plan has it designated as mixed
- residential. So
- No matter how the zoning changes on the property, further development of the site that increases residential
- density would first need sewer extension services. So staff is understanding that anything that the
- property owners wanting to do on the property will first need that extension from CBU. That's not to
- say that the residential district
- offers multiple different residential style uses, and we'll get into that. On the screen now, we have
- the location map. This darker green area to the east is the city of Bloomington jurisdiction. And then
- you can see on the zoning map here, everything that's colored is the county's jurisdiction, and the
- non-colored areas is the city of Bloomington. You can see that the gray area is PUD, and the subject
- property is outlined in red.
- Now on the screen, we have the site conditions map. You can see the sewer service line in green cut
- through the property. And there is an existing two-family dwelling on the property that uses those services
- currently. It is all under 25% slope, so there's no concerns for slope here. And as I said, you can
- see the Bloomington Rail Trail immediately to the east. There is a driveway that comes off the property
- that is accessed right from South Rogers Street.
- Now on the screen is a slide that talks about House Bill 1058. This is something that's ongoing and
- has not been fully decided at the state level. However, it is a pertinent piece of information to incorporate
- into this presentation because it could allow the property owner to voluntarily annex into the City
- of Bloomington's jurisdiction. The House Bill 1058's digest reads providing that
- provides the annexation territory that is divided by railroad tracks satisfies contiguity requirements
- if the territory on at least one side of the railroad tracks is contiguous to the municipality.
- So essentially allowing a property to voluntarily annex if they are adjacent to a railroad and then
- that railroad is adjacent to the city's jurisdiction. All right, so now on the screen we have some
- photographs of the property. These two on the screen now are from Google Street View. These are taken
- in 2023. You can see the driveway there coming off of South Rogers Street and the parking area for the
- current dwelling. Now on the screen, our photos were taken more recently. You can see the property marker
- sign on the property, as well as the existing residence and a few cars parked there as well. And then
- here's some more photographs from across the street, which is South Rogers.
- Let's pause for a second. Please note that Commissioner Thomas has joined the meeting. All right.
- Moving on, we have on the screen now, ordinance 92-43. This was the original ordinance that established
- the Summersbee PUD. And in its description here, this legal description, it is evidence that it does
- not incorporate the subject property that's before you this evening.
- Additionally, we have the Summersbee subdivision plot here on the screen now. The subject property under
- consideration this evening is directly to the south. And as you can see, it is not part of the Summersbee
- subdivision, which created all of these lots to the north. And then here also is another piece of evidence
- from the city of Bloomington's planning department that shows the Summersbee PUD, as well as the subject
- property immediately to the south.
- within a region that was known as RM 15 under the former fringe, two mile fringe zoning ordinance agreement.
- So you can see it clearly was not part of the Summersbee PUD here as well. Now on the screen we have
- the details for the zoning
- district for the RES or residential one. On the left we have all the primary uses conditional uses and
- accessory uses and then on the right we have the dimensional standards for that particular zoning district.
- Although the property is surrounded by high development residential it was through this board as well
- as the board of commissioners that a determination or a decision to
- to rezone the property to residential was made. That happened at the most recent admin meeting of the
- plan commission, which was held earlier this month. It was voted that the district should be rezoned
- from the PUD to residential one, citing various reasons, including minimum lot size for this district
- includes one acre. And as you can see on the left, under primary uses, there are a number of different
- residential uses available for the property.
- All right, now on the screen we have a letter of support. This comes from the property owner themselves.
- This letter of support was initially written during a phase of this petition where the recommendation
- from staff was to rezone it to high development residential, which matches the surrounding district
- or surrounding properties, excuse me.
- And you can see that they are referencing the same pieces of information that staff was able to uncover
- with respect to not actually being part of the PUD. It was erroneously zoned that way. And they were
- originally, the property owner was originally in support of the high development residential district,
- which was a little bit more in line of their development goals. As a reminder as well,
- any further development of the property that increases that residential density that sewer connection
- services needs to happen first. So it is an interest of the property owner to possibly voluntarily annex
- if House Bill 1058 were to happen. However, there's still a lot of question marks regarding that as
- well as even if they were to voluntarily annex if the city would agree to extend sewer services for
- further development of the property.
- All right, that brings me to staff's recommendation. Staff recommends forwarding a positive recommendation
- to the Board of Commissioners regarding the rezone request, citing its compatibility with the Monroe
- County Comprehensive Plan subject to Highway and Stormwater Program reports. I will now take any questions.
- Any questions from any members of the Plant Commission? We'll start on my left, on my right. Okay, Mr. Bishop.
- If the house bill does come to fruition, does that create kind of a slippery slope if they did decide
- to voluntarily annex into the city that other pieces now being continually touched by that property,
- would that also be able to annex themselves in? I'm not sure if that, you know, it depends on how house
- bill 1058 is worded. I'm not sure if you can extend the
- continuity requirement through the railroad allowance of that House bill. So I'm not sure I would defer
- to legal or otherwise, yeah. Yeah, I don't know the answer to that. If there's no other comments, let's
- go ahead and go to the petitioner.
- or the representative, if you'd approach to the podium, sign in, state your name, and you have 15 minutes
- to comment. Well, interestingly enough, because this was a staff-originated petition, the plan commission
- is the applicant. Therefore, you all are the applicant of this petition. The property owner may be online
- and may have
- comments during the public comment period. But again, they included that letter that originally was
- in support of the High Development Residential District. So apparently we don't have any comments from
- the Planning Commission or commissioners on this topic. So let's go ahead and go to the public. And
- if you're online, please raise your hand. And if you're present in the room, just go ahead and up to
- podium, sign in and you have three minutes for comment.
- seeing anyone online either. Alrighty looks like we're not going to have any public comments so let's
- go ahead and consider a discussion with members of the Plan Commission. We'll again start on my right
- this time and see if you have any comments.
- I do want to add one correction. I guess I should add negative comments. Are there any negative comments
- either online or present in the room? No negative comments. Okay, now we go to the planning commission
- and we'll start on my right this time if you have comments. Okay, how about a motion and a second?
- For case REZ-25-7, I move that we forward a positive recommendation to the Board of Commissioners regarding
- the rezone request from PUD to RES, citing its compatibility with the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan
- and subject to Highway and Stormwater program reports. And I also recommend a waiver of final hearing.
- Second. Okay, we have a, go ahead.
- It's been moved and seconded to send a positive recommendation to the County Commissioners for REZ-25-7,
- and also to grant the waiver of final hearing. A vote yes is a vote to send a positive recommendation
- and waive the final hearing. Jeff Morris? Yes. Julie Thomas? Yes. David Bush? Yes. Margaret Clements?
- Yes. Scott Ferris? Yes.
- Rudy Fields? Yes. David Henry? Oh, sorry, David Henry's not here. Then the motion carries six to zero.
- All right. That brings us to our next new business, which is P.U.O. 23.5, which is the Highlands P.U.D.
- Outline Plan Amendment to Partial E. And Sean, you're the presenter.
- So to reiterate, this is the Highlands PUD outline plan amendment specifically to parcel E. So this
- petition involves specifically West Rangeview Circle. So the request is to amend the ordinance to revise
- the inner road loop classification within the Highlands parcel E, also known as Link's Edge subdivision.
- with the purpose to change it from public to a private road. So changing the road classification from
- public to private would mean the responsibility for maintaining the roadway would be that of a private
- entity, so i.e. the developer or an HOA. Upon inspection of the roadway, County Highway noted several
- deficiencies, those ranging from
- The proposed buildings being built at a higher elevation than what the plans called for. The cross slope
- for the sidewalks is greater than 2% slope. That would be significant because that is not ADA compliant.
- The mailboxes that were installed blocked the site distance. Parking stripes were painted incorrectly,
- and then there were noted sidewalk cracking.
- Aside from those items, the development has otherwise been completed, and to our knowledge, the homes
- have received certificate of occupancy, so they are or can be occupied. So to resolve many of these
- issues, especially in regards to slope, would require deconstruction potentially of the driveways or
- the entire structures themselves.
- On the screen are the location and site conditions maps. So this is located in Perry Township just right
- off of South Rockport Road, about a half a mile south from the intersection of Tap Road, Country Club
- Road, and South Rockport Road. Site condition maps, otherwise nothing necessarily out of the ordinary
- from a planning perspective. On the screen are the zoning and comprehensive plan zoning maps.
- Those are also in the packet just there for reference. So a little background on this particular parcel.
- It was originally approved by the City of Bloomington and has since been transferred to the county's
- jurisdiction. In 2018, the Plan Commission did conduct a series of meetings discussing the preference
- of having West Rangeview Court be public
- A lot of those discussions, which was also the developer's original intent, but a lot of those discussions
- were based on concerns of transferring the responsibility for maintaining the roadway onto the homeowners,
- whether that be an HOA or similar. The entire development currently is owned by the developer and the
- units, again, are available for occupancy. As of January 2026,
- The petitioner has received that COO for all buildings in the development. The stormwater program and
- highway department otherwise do not have further requests for the developer at this time. But the petitioner
- is continuously working with the highway department with regards to acceptance of South Wiccan Street,
- which is the roadway adjacent to West Range View Circle.
- And on the screen, I have the approved phasing map. So I noted from my site visits that a lot of the
- concerns with regards to slope, with regards to parking, are located in phase two, which is on the northern
- part you see here on the map.
- This development was split into those three phases. Phase one did receive a final LUC, whereas phases
- two and three were provided conditional LUC. I left descriptions for what each of those LUCs entailed.
- I'll just go through them briefly. The petitioner was able to complete final landscaping, provide as-builts
- for the detention pond, also provide final stabilization
- safety fencing around the detention basin. That was in August of 2022. And that LUC was conditional
- upon completing the roadways and getting the improvements accepted into the inventory, which is what
- they're here now for, because there's been some difficulty getting those accepted. So they are hoping
- to change that from public to private. For LUC 23-13, which is phase two,
- that LUC was conditional upon completing the roadways and getting the improvements completed into the
- inventory. And then phase one, the final LUC was granted. However, upon review, by the time the petitioner
- got to phase three, it was noted that the detention basin in phase one, which is nearest to phase three,
- required an as-built. And upon further review, the developer worked with staff to submit new as-builts
- and comply with
- the required material changes. I provided a brief timeline for this development. I did note that there
- were errors in the staff report, so I just want to correct those here. So the Planning Commission did
- give a positive recommendation seven to one on October 18th, 2018, and it was approved by the County
- Commissioners on December 5th, 2018.
- And the final plat was recorded February 1st, 2021. So I just want to make sure that was corrected.
- On September 25th, 2023, the petitioner filed for the outline plan amendment to make Rangeview private.
- So this is that same petition before you. However, the petitioner withdrew that request on December
- 4th for reasons of their own.
- And then in November of 2025, the petitioner reactivated the request and this petition was reviewed
- at the Ordnance Review Committee on December 8th, 2025. So the ORC did make some comments for the developer.
- They did request the developer review the inspection list provided by the county and determine if there
- were improvements they could make to Rangeview Circle.
- County staff also met with the developer and at the time the developer was not interested in making
- any changes to Rangeview Circle because he would prefer that the road be changed from public to private
- and the developer would maintain it in perpetuity. Planning staff did delay the Plan Commission hearing
- in anticipation that the developer would make progress on Rangeview Circle.
- specifically voluntary improvements and make progress on getting wiccans accepted into the county inventory.
- And then to date, the petitioner should be working with the highway department to get wiccans accepted.
- The timeline or the status for that is needed from the developer or the petitioner's representative
- as that is currently ongoing.
- are photos that were taken after the packet was published. So they are just some updated photos.
- From 2023, not too much has changed from when I last went out there and took photos. So I'll just leave
- them on the screen in a brief moment.
- in the following images I took just to help portray some of the issues, some of the issues that were
- noted in the packet with regards to steep slope, incorrect parking lines, which are noted here. They
- are perpendicular. They should be parallel according to the approved plans.
- I did note the developer is required to maintain landscaping in perpetuity. It looks like there were
- some plantings that did receive damage possibly from either a storm or from the very recent snowstorm
- that we had. Also took a picture of the mailboxes and just some of the conditions of the pavement. Most
- of the pavement does not look like the picture on the upper left-hand side, but those are just
- some instances that would be of concern if the highway department were to take that in, those would
- need to be repaired. So that does lead me to staff's recommendation. So I did prepare staff's recommendation
- for positive recommendation, but in the event that the planning commission were to deny this request,
- I also put in some staff comments for a negative recommendation. So I'll go through those. So staff's
- recommendation,
- is to forward a positive recommendation to the county commissioners due to the physical constraints
- of the site and based on highway department and stormwater reports with the following four conditions.
- The first being that the petitioner follow through with the application and hearing for acceptance into
- the right of way for South Wiccans Drive, which will require fixing any known deficiencies. Two, any
- missing trees shall be installed. Three,
- move the mailboxes out of the right-of-way, and four, amend the parking striping from perpendicular
- to parallel to match the approved plans. Should the plan commission send a negative recommendation to
- the county commissioners, the following next steps should be required. So we have two. The first being
- that the petitioner is required to post a new letter of credit.
- or cashier's check in the amount required to meet county standards for all public improvements, that
- being range view, circle, sidewalks, curb and gutter, et cetera. And two, that the petitioner must submit
- to planning staff their timeline for completing all public improvements and the timeline for requesting
- their acceptance into the county road inventory and to assess the 10% annual inflation.
- So in review of Rangeview Circle deficiencies, highway staff believes that the elevation of the as-built
- for the townhomes on the north side of the development, which is phase two, were built too high, resulting
- in sidewalk cross slopes exceeding the 2% maximum limit. Therefore, staff does not see a pathway for
- the developer to meet the requirements for acceptance without major redesign or potential reconstruction
- of this development.
- And I will take any questions. All right. So questions from the planning commission go to my left. Mr.
- Morris. I just want to clarify that I'm thinking about this correctly. So the same person owns all of
- these individual units currently, right? Yeah. But they're all deeded as individual parcels. So the
- developer could turn around and sell these to dozens of different individuals in theory.
- Okay. Yes. Thank you. Also my left on my right. Commissioner Thomas. Um, yes. So, um, the mailboxes
- are not, they're not impeding view, but they are in the right of way. Is that correct? It's, it's not
- a safety issue. It's
- The issue is the obstruction in the right of way. OK. It's not a track. I had thought initially that
- it was an issue of obstructed view. And when I went there, I was like, it doesn't seem to me. Yes,
- my mistake. But I couldn't tell. Yes, you're right. You're right. It's OK. I just want to make sure
- I wasn't missing something, because that does happen a lot. OK. Now, when, and this may be a question
- I need to ask Bobby LaRue in building.
- But when you approve the occupancy, the certificate of occupancy is issued, it doesn't matter if the
- sidewalks don't meet ADA requirements because that's not part of the building that you're inspecting.
- Is that okay? That's true for Bobby, but for a land use certificate, I think it would be different.
- Okay, yeah.
- And I really appreciate the point that Mr. Morris raised because they're rented now, but if these are
- later sold, there's nothing requiring that an HOA be created. Because if they're rented, there isn't
- really an HOA. There's a leasing company that manages plowing and all of this.
- And this is a great question for Mr. Schilling. How does then an HOA get created if only one unit with
- multiple apartments in it or a few get sold to private owners? How do we ensure an HOA is created as
- the county? Or is that just none of our business? I don't think that's the county's business once they
- They get that far. OK, OK, thank you so much. Alright, I just have. Some follow up questions go back
- to page 20 actually there right now. When you state the recommendation of positive recommendations,
- you list four elements there. OK, my question is, have you discussed those four elements with the petitioner?
- And if you did, what was the outcome of that discussion?
- Sure. I think under the slide that Sean presented after the ORC meeting, meeting with the developer,
- we pulled up the staff report. There was a bit of back and forth about the mailboxes or any omissions.
- And I don't think that's kind of why Sean was saying he wanted a status update on the Wiccans acceptance.
- So I don't know that there's been any progress other than them saying the mailboxes were USPS's choice
- to locate there.
- have worked with USPS to locate mailboxes, other places, so that could be something that could be a
- question for the petitioner. And as far as missing trees, when this petition came about, Sean recently
- did a site visit, so we want to make sure we assess now that it's been a few years any missing trees
- that are there or are not there. And then the parking striping, that was part of the comments about,
- you know, voluntary improvements and
- I think the consensus from the developer was, it'll be private, you don't have to worry about that.
- Okay, thank you. Okay, next up is the petitioner or petitioner's representative. 15 minutes, please
- sign in and state your name. And if tech services will start the timer, that would be appreciated.
- Are you ready for me? Daniel Butler, Binding and Fanning Associates. Do I need to swear myself in or?
- The BZA. Okay. Just wanted to check. Before I start talking, I get interrupted. Thanks. With me tonight
- is Tom Wanneger representing ownership. So if there's any questions for him, feel free to ask. This
- was Wickens and Rangeview. Some of you were here when this was originally approved.
- years ago I was and so I represented this project and the design on Rangeview and Wickens at the time
- was designed to county standards, meaning that road widths, parking, sidewalks, all those types of things
- were the intention of them being per county standards so that they had the ability to go private or public.
- There was discussion at that time about Rangeview in particular being private or public. We
- didn't necessarily mind. Either way, whatever was the best was looked upon as the positive from the
- county's point of view at that time. But we are asking now for Rangeview to be private and Wickens to
- remain public. This would allow for full responsibility of the developer for Rangeview Circle.
- This would be such things as snow removal, cleaning, et cetera. So that would take it off the county's
- hands in that perspective. There are pros and cons. I won't go back through everything that was discussed
- at that time about, you know, Rangeview being public or private. There was discussion in those original
- meetings about that piece of it. Since then, Biden Fanio has performed to date
- as built on Wickens. Those, we didn't find many of any, you know, deficiencies at this time on Wickens.
- So, I was told to inform you that the decision to go private on Wickens or on Rangeview wasn't necessarily
- because of deficiencies found, it was more to
- allow them to control the ongoing maintenance of Rangeview Circle. I'm not aware that any of the conditions
- that are recommended by staff are a problem. Perhaps the ownership can also answer any questions or
- give any further discussion on that. But if there's any more questions, I'm here to answer along with
- ownership.
- Does the owner have any plans to create an HOA? If he's willing to talk, I'll have to ask him to come
- forward. Please sign in and state your name.
- I believe there's an HOA in place. Speak up because we can hardly hear what you just said. I believe
- there's an HOA in place. Greg Lauer established it for me. Greg Lauer is a local attorney. Sorry? Greg
- Lauer is a local attorney.
- So this is a bit of a unique situation with each of the parcels being owned by the same company. So
- is there money paid into HOA fees on a regular basis? No, because I control it all. If it divided up,
- then you would start having fees. OK, thank you. I know there's several water detention facilities on the
- project. And if there is not an HOA in place to maintain those, how and if the properties are eventually
- going to be sold off, how will that be funded and how will maintenance of the detention facilities be
- accomplished? I believe there is an HOA in place, so if it got divided up,
- then they'd start paying fees and to take care of the maintenance of it. Right now, I would take care
- of the maintenance of it. I guess my concern is if you reach a point where there is failure of one of
- the detention basins and the HOA has not been funded yet and you have
- or at least not funded to the point where it would cover the costs of repairing or maintaining it, and
- you have sold the properties, then it seems like there's a shortfall there. That's my concern. That's
- why I asked. Mr. Thomas? Yeah, so I'm not sure I understand
- The contention that the reason this roadway will remain in private hands rather than entering the county
- inventory is just a personal choice versus the fact that buildings were built at a higher elevation
- and the slope on the sidewalks doesn't meet ADA requirements. It just seems
- It seems to me that what we're being asked to do is to okay something after the fact because the development
- doesn't meet county standards. I just want to maintain it myself. I think I can do a better job maintaining it.
- have to do the sidewalks and have to do the driveways on snow removal. I might as well do the main road
- too. This causes a lot of problems. And it's nobody's fault, but when a plow truck pushes, then it clogs
- off somebody's driveway. And so if I'm in control of all of it, then I can take care of all. But how
- is it that you all didn't come back to the planning department when you were building
- to say we're going to a higher elevation than our plans indicated. Was that just? What they're talking
- about, to be honest, but but one was put higher or not. It was an old quarry and there is solid rock
- there, so there's probably places. Solid rock. Can someone from staff address the elevation issue?
- Sure. So typically when we ask for as built, it's at the time of acceptance into the inventory because
- they've never prompted the actual request. We've just gone out and done our inspections as we normally
- do. So when we first received this application was in 2023, it was withdrawn. We don't understand quite
- why. And now it's reactivated.
- But under the 2023 petition, we did go out and see all the deficiencies. And of course, during the land
- use certificate process, we identified that none of the sidewalks met ADA. At that time, we had a performance
- guarantee for the sidewalks. We've notified the petitioner that those would be needing to be removed
- and replaced.
- and they should be aware of the deficiencies and the differences from that standpoint. Thank you. I
- have a serious problem with noncompliance. I see a lot of noncompliance in what's been going on since
- 2018. I went out there and drove your property
- driveways and a slope of those driveways, I do not know how a mother with children could pull into that
- driveway and open those doors and let those kids out, or an elderly person. This doesn't make any sense
- to me based upon what I saw. The slope is bad. Elevation's another issue. When I drove through this,
- and this is right after the snow removal or attempted snow removal of the areas,
- Those cars were parked so close together on the left and the right-hand side of the road and the ones
- who are diagonal. I don't know how, even if it wasn't a county inventory, I do not know how they would
- get a plow through there to plow that street. Now, I may have heard you wrong, but maybe you can provide
- some clarification.
- If you take, if this happens and it goes private and you're now responsible for it, does that include
- in repairing and improving the driveways, the sidewalks, the mailboxes, the parking stripes, all the
- things have been brought up here? Is that something you plan on doing? All right, I see this as a systemic
- issue with compliance.
- And it's been known. It has not been corrected. It's been addressed by staff. I'm going to have a hard
- time supporting this. Anything else you'd like to add? Or your petitioner's representative? Do you have
- an update on wickets being accepted to the inventory?
- Like I mentioned, we've given the Planning and the Highway Department some as-bills on Wiccans to try
- to get to that point to allow for Wiccans to be accepted into the inventory. Again, that would come
- up with any deficiencies that might be on Wiccans. I know we've been talking a little bit about deficiencies
- on Rangeview, so we've been doing as-bill information on that to try to progress towards that.
- I believe at that time, if there's anything found between us and the highway department, that would
- create a separate list, if anything. I'm not aware of anything from the as built on that. What about
- the mailboxes? Move the mailboxes, but that was where the post office told us to put the mailboxes.
- So you're willing, amenable.
- Again, to reiterate, if there was the four conditions that were listed for the positive recommendation
- from staff, I don't believe that any of those are an issue for us to comply with as a condition of approval.
- We hear concerns coming from you, and those would be concerns either way, and private or public, and
- that we're asking for this to be
- turn, not necessarily that those deficiencies would be fixed necessarily either way. We see it as a
- separate issue and needs to be addressed one way or another in some fashion, and we understand your
- concern. Right, anything else? Okay, now we turn to public comments.
- And you have anybody online or anybody in the audience would like to come up and make a comment? You
- have three minutes. I don't see anybody online and I don't see anybody coming up to the podium. That
- brings up negative comments. Is there anybody online or in the audience who would like to come up and
- provide negative comments? Just pause for a second. Councilperson Henry has entered the chamber.
- It looks like we don't have any negative comments. That brings it back to the plan commission on whether
- we want to entertain a motion. Oh, I'm sorry, Commissioner Thomas. It's okay. I was just wondering if
- I could put Lisa Ridge on the spot and ask her to offer her thoughts on this.
- Thank you for being here. Please sign in and state your name. Lisa Ridge, Highway Director. The only
- thing I could probably add about the Wiccan Street, I do believe they met with the developer on December
- 15th, 2025. The deficiencies that we recognized were noted, and then the acceptance came through to
- try and get it accepted
- with none of those deficiencies addressed. I know moving the mailboxes, non-permitted driveways, I believe
- there's a sidewalk that goes outside of the right-of-way because it was built behind an electrical box.
- So some of those things have never been addressed. So that's just what I know off the top of my head
- at the moment. As far as the other piece, it's a problem.
- It wasn't built to the way it was presented to be built when it was approved. And would the county highway
- want it at this point? No. It's not good for our plow trucks. It wasn't built. The slopes, we can't
- go in and afford to fix those issues. So I think it should have been built the way it was intended to
- be built. Questions for Ms. Ridgeway, she's up there, left.
- point where we. Because I was here. I think when this project was first approved and I I stated at the
- time and we worked hard at the time to prevent the establishment of homeowners Association and their
- responsibility to maintain the infrastructure and I we've been through a difficult winter with a lot
- of heavy snow and we have a lot of
- private roads where the individuals are responsible for the snow removal and it created quite a burden
- on the homeowners. We also have had storm water failure where homeowners associations are responsible
- for maintenance of complex drainage systems. So for this to not be accepted into the
- public inventory and into the highway inventory is a problem for me because if I recall correctly, that
- was something that we worked hard to ascertain from the beginning. And the reason is for overall
- affordability of people living in those neighborhoods because it's our role in part to protect the investment
- of their treasure and the property that they purchase
- whoever is purchasing it. So I am saddened to see those steep slopes on the driveways that worries me.
- I'm from a big family and I'm the oldest girl, so I imagine babies rolling down in their strollers.
- I just can't stop myself from those instincts that, you know, if a mother's and her father in the garage
- and turns away to get a bag out of the
- out of the trunk that, you know, that some terrible things could happen and we've tried to avoid this
- with our due diligence from the beginning. So I want to state that I'm disappointed. I'm just disappointed
- that this has come to this and that the project hasn't been built as our county worked hard and the
- plan commission worked hard to ascertain that it would be built
- for on behalf of the community, which is our role. I want to state that. Yeah, I think just two weeks
- ago we had an extensive conversation about snow removal on private roads. And I think we were talking
- about how we get into these situations where we have roads in neighborhoods that aren't getting plowed.
- And I think we've got a perfect example right in front of us tonight of how these situations form.
- And so I'd be very hesitant to vote in favour of this. Yes, I'd like to comment as well. I would like
- to acknowledge and agree with what you just stated, because I know there was a high profile discussion
- about snow removal
- private versus public. And unfortunately, I think a lot of people that thought they were getting county
- services did not because, you know, they found out the hard way that they were on a private road. And
- I think that is often unfair to the homebuyers because they don't know that it's always
- advertised up front that way to them before they make the purchase. They go into it in good faith and
- they end up buying a piece of property and find out they're not getting what they anticipated. I'm also
- concerned that all these properties are currently being rented and held by one owner or holding company,
- and that if they're going to be sold off
- I don't know that there's any way that I could be comfortable believing that the snow removal and the
- other services that are being advertised to be provided in perpetuity will actually be provided. So
- I also am going to have trouble supporting this. Thank you.
- Thank you, Colonel Farris. Just, and again, I understand I'm coming in halfway through this discussion,
- but from what I just heard from the dais and the commentary, I just go back to the recommendations of
- the staff. So is, this is a positive recommendation, right? But the commentary I'm hearing from the
- desk is about things that are not one through four. So I see the right-of-way, I see the missing trees,
- I see the mailbox right-of-way, I see the parking striping, but we're
- a lot of commentary about the grade and snow removal. If it's already been answered, I apologize if
- it's been brought up, but is there a fifth piece here that just didn't make into the positive recommendation?
- Is that the redlining? Okay. Okay. All right, do we have a motion? I'd like to just say that
- Waiver of final hearing is not automatic. And I think this should be, I guess, heard again at our next
- month's meeting. And so my motion is no motion for P.U.O.-23-5. And hopefully Mr. Whittaker, Mr. Butler
- can work with staff and see what can be done and if any of these compliance issues can be better addressed.
- I don't know how my colleagues feel. Second. Was that a motion? Was that a motion? My motion is no motion.
- I think that it can automatically just go to the next
- Agenda item, but let me for the groups and the developer applicants Edification, let me go over some
- of the things that if continued you would all hope to see them come back with So I think that there's
- a request to still work with staff to do some of the voluntary Improvements at this point to West range
- view circle as we had requested prior Okay, and then
- We were just checking at our desk. We did not see the HOA details, so we can come back with is there
- an HOA in place? Does it detail funds going into the HOA bank if these were to be sold to give you more
- information? And then it sounds like we need more updates on the progress of wiccans being put into
- the inventory as we had suggested that that should be.
- hopefully approved and in the inventory before the county commissioners makes a vote on the private
- versus public nature of range use circle. So at least part of the development would be public and accepted
- at that point. Is there anything else before I call the roll? I am left. Anybody on the right? All right.
- And we can lastly, I don't know how we could
- We will attempt, but in the red line text, we're saying to post a new letter of credit. Honestly, we
- will have to work with the petitioner's representative to come up with a number of what that could even
- look like because of the elevation issues and some redesign ideas. So as of right now, the motion on
- the table is not to waive the final hearing. And this would go to the March 4th, 2026
- or sorry, that's the admin date. It would be March 17th, 2026, regular plan commission meeting. Margaret
- Clements? Yes. Ferris? Yes. Rudy Fields? Yes. David Henry? Yes. Jeff Morris? Yes. Julie Thomas? Yes.
- David Bush?
- Okay, motion does carry seven to zero to bring this back to the March 17th plan commission meeting.
- All right. That brings us to our third item on new business, which is P P U O 25 four, which is the
- point P U D outline plan for Eagle Bay garages. And there is also a waiver or a final hearing and Daniel,
- I think you're up over there.
- Thank you. So the request is to amend the Eagle Bay portion of the point plan due to development to
- include self-storage as a permitted use. The purpose of this is to establish a series of storage garages
- on the subject property. More specifically, the petitioner is proposing to remove the existing tennis
- court and basketball court on the property and replace them with a series of self-storage units that
- will then be rented out by members of the Eagle Bay portion of the point.
- Per the written statement of character, Exhibit 6 in the packet, there will be 36 storage units proposed,
- 22 of the storage units will be 12 feet by 26 feet, and the remaining 14 units will be 8 by 8 feet.
- However, self-storage is not included in the list of permitted uses for this PUD, hence this amendment
- is being requested by the petitioner. The petitioner's representative requests that the use be defined as
- private, non-commercial storage limited to the personal belongings of the individual unit's owner. So
- for some backgrounds, the point planned unit development was originally created in 1973. The Eagle Bay
- portion in particular was created in 1991, consisting largely of single-family residences and condominiums.
- 1991, sorry, I think I was at 1971 by mistake.
- The portion where the development that is being amended by this petition is separate from the area where
- Eagle Bay condominiums have been built is further east. So the area to be amended at self-storage was
- approved in 1992. However, the Eagle Bay condominiums phase two were plotted in 1988 and developed in 1998.
- The single-family development north of the common area subject to this amendment was never recorded
- as a development plan either. It does appear that the retracement survey and other recorded documents
- reference the common area as an exemption to the overall approved area as shown as the exhibit 8 of
- the packet. So to create the subdivision lots as shown in exhibit 8 would require a replatting or a
- new development plan.
- However, the use would still be permitted under the outline plan and the development plan. And this
- is the subdivision in question. The subject property that we are hearing tonight is outlined in yellow.
- And so the petitioner is requesting to amend the existing plan to unit development ordinance 232 by
- adding the list of self-storage
- the use of self-storage list uses. The area would serve the Eagle Bay to condominiums phase two, but
- it's actually part of another area phase of the Eagle Bay that was not fully developed. But the common
- area was purchased and is currently owned by the Eagle Bay Homeowners Association. The amendment as
- stated before will remove the existing tennis and basketball courts on the property. The county development
- ordinance has a stiff
- has a definition of self-storage, but the petitioner has stated in the written character that the county
- development ordinance does not have a definition for self-storage, but the petitioner has stated in
- the written statement of character in exhibit six that the storage will be non-commercial and will be
- limited to storing the residents' belongings. The petitioner further states that only the owners of
- the Eagle Bay condos will be eligible to utilize self-storage buildings. Furthermore, the Monroe County
- Drainage Board did review this plan back in May,
- The presented preliminary plan included filtration and use of existing swales, but did not include any
- detention because a waiver was granted. Preliminary plan was approved four to zero with one
- member abstaining. A detailed plan is expected to be brought to the drainage board for a full review
- upon submission of the site plan application. And here is their site plan in question, along with some
- rough drawings of the proposed storage units themselves.
- So there were some questions from the administrative meeting that have been presented to the petitioner,
- which the petitioner has addressed. The first question is, will the garages have lighting? If yes, what
- lighting standard will they meet in terms of photometric max? The petitioner responded, there will be
- a light next to each garage door and they will be specified to meet CDO 815-1, which is outdoor lighting
- regulations.
- The second question was, will the units be sublet to owners outside of Eagle Bay Phase 2? The petitioner
- responded that the units will be sold to Eagle Bay 1 owners first, and then they will be optioned to
- Eagle Bay 2 owners. If there are any units remaining, they will be optioned to owners at Eagle Point.
- Third question was, could they better define self-storage? Can RVs go in there?
- The petitioner responded, the content of the units will be at the owner's discretion or whatever fits
- inside the unit. There will be no exterior storage. Next question was, are the garages going
- to be temperature controlled? The petitioner responded, the units will be temperature controlled only
- at the owner's discretion. Each unit will be metered separately.
- A question after that was, there was a concern of a zero-foot setback by Commissioner Thomas on the
- east side. We know that the current impervious goes to the east lot line, but we noted to the petitioner
- that it would be best to be prepared to answer that. The petitioner acknowledged this point.
- The next was more of a staff question. The rezone is for the entirety of that parcel, but the garages
- will only go on the concrete pad. There may be a movement to see if only the concrete pad could be eligible
- for the garage or self-storage use. The petitioner once again acknowledged this point. And the final
- question was, the outline plan switches terminology between garage and self-storage. Could there be
- more consistency for the sake of clarity?
- And the petitioner responded that yes, they will consider the uses to be self-storage. And once again,
- the petitioner defined self-storage via email as privates, non-commercial storage, limited to the personal
- belongings of individual unit owners. And I do have copies of that email to hand out to the commission.
- All right, are there any comments from the planning commission? Go on my left.
- Sorry, may I make the staff recommendation first? Sorry. I thought you was done, you paused. I didn't
- see your slide, sorry. Staff recommends forwarding a positive recommendation to the County Commissioners
- for the planned units outline plan amendment request subject to the Monroe County Highway Department
- and stormwater program manager reports with the following conditions. One,
- The petitioner update the written statement of character with the definition of self-storage, and two,
- specify that development will comply with Chapter 815 lighting regulations as well in the written statement
- of character. And I will take any questions. Now comments from the Planning Commission on my left. Yes,
- go ahead. Separate electric meters for every shed.
- Yes, each unit will be metered separately per the petitioner's email. Okay, so you mentioned the site
- plan hasn't gone to Drainage Board yet. A preliminary version has gone to Drainage Board is my understanding and was
- approved and given a waiver. However, I think that once the full development plan is created and really
- made in depth, then the Drainage Board will take another look to for final approval. That would be good.
- And I would ask next, just for clarification,
- What happens if this gets a positive recommendation, the P.U.O. changes, the full plan goes to the drainage
- board and the drainage board says no? I'm uncertain. That might be a better question for stormwater.
- But I do believe that it would hold up this plan. Or at the very least, it would cause some change,
- alterations to plan to be made. Thank you.
- So it says non-commercial use of the storage facilities. Is there any limitation as to what can be stored
- in there in terms of, you know, caustic materials or hazardous materials, things like that? I assume
- it would go along with the HOA, you know, allowances and whatnot, or is that a separate issue altogether?
- So when they're proposing the building for a building permit, they will have to disclose
- the basically the type of storage that they will have in there and that will determine, you know, fire
- protection standards. Also, I know our stormwater division when there are developments or garages located
- near sinkholes or near lakes, they can ask for certain things such as like double containers for like
- paints and things like that so that if there is a spill unattended, it at least doesn't leak out and
- go immediately into the nearby watershed.
- And is the ongoing monitoring of that, is that incumbent upon the HOA itself then? It would be, well,
- I mean, if it's part of the outline plan and we saw a violation, we could do it as part of enforcement
- if there's an actual violation. But in terms of regular communication and making sure people follow
- the rules, that would be on the HOA. Thanks.
- So I just have one question and it's kind of a follow up to Mr. Field's question about there being separate
- meters on the garages. And it's for my own edification. I know that the city uses these individually
- powered, solar powered lithium, I don't know, meters. Do we require those in the county or do we use
- those in the county? Because I've heard reports the fire concerns related to those.
- As far as a lighting, we're just regulating if they're putting in lighting that it meets dark sky compliance.
- Is that your question? Oh, it has to do with the meters. Oh, with the meters. Yeah. How are the meters?
- Is there automatic self-reporting? Are they powered to some kind of solar battery that then reports
- to a utility, for example? Or do we have the
- normal old fashioned kind in the county, you know, where a reader come out and checks it. I think that
- that depends on the utility company, but I'm not sure that there's anything in the building code that
- requires smart metering. Yeah, that's the word I was looking for smart metering because on garage facilities,
- I think the smart metering could be more problematic than, um, you know, especially in a kind of sensitive
- zone with a lot of trees and
- you know, the fourth. That was my question. Thank you. All right, let's go ahead and with the petitioner,
- petitioner's representative, 15 minutes. Please sign in and state your name. My name is Bill Rigger.
- I'm with Wetzel Rigger Cooper James.
- And with me tonight is Skip Pelton. Skip Pelton is a resident of Eagle Bay 1, and he also serves on
- their HOA board. Essentially, I have nothing to add to Daniel's presentation, but I can try to answer
- some questions that you've asked.
- As far as electrical power goes, it's my understanding that Duke Energy provides power to the point.
- And we would design it, and we haven't gone to design yet because we wanted to get permission to do
- this first. The 12 by 26 units would be metered individually with Duke Energy type meters. The 8 by
- 8 units would be metered in two clumps of seven. So you'd end up metering the smaller units collectively.
- Smart meters? No, the standard Duke or RMC type meters you'd have at home. Right, so you're welcome.
- And then as far as stormwater goes, I was the member that couldn't vote. But anyways, we would go back
- to the drainage board, and they wanted to come back to see what we were going to propose once we had
- the topographic information to design with.
- And due to the proximity of the lake, we felt no detention was required because it goes into the storm
- system and is right into the lake and regulated by the Corps of Engineers. However, stormwater quality,
- we had proposed to do some rain garden-type treatment in the ditch line in front and then bring it around
- the side of the building or through the rest of the drainage way that heads toward the east.
- collection system through the boulevard and onto the lake. Let's see what other questions there may
- have been. But I'm here to answer any questions. And then Skip can help me with any of the ideas that
- the homeowners association has for this structure. So let's go ahead and go to public comment.
- In the room or online? Go ahead and sign in. Virtual hand if you're online. And state your name if you
- would please. You have three minutes. My name is Kevin Ault. I am a resident of Eagle Bay 1, where this
- proposed development is being sought. I think a couple of things should be brought to the board's attention.
- First, the area to where they want to convert the basketball court
- and a tennis court into self storage is right next to a pool, to the community pool. Significant numbers
- of people and children are at this pool during the summer. There's also a shared driveway with another
- building that is right next to the pool. That is not owned by Eagle Bay One. It's a private individual
- that typically often rents it out for Airbnb. So the traffic in this area already
- Many times, it's hard to park during the summer. So I don't know, and I've not seen anything anywhere
- where the effect of the increased traffic by a storage unit and garages has been even thought about.
- Secondly, the topography of this area, where the pool, this basketball court, and the tennis court are,
- sit at the top of the hill. The condominiums for Eagle Bay 1 are at the bottom of the hill.
- So I find it very difficult to believe that people in Eagle Bay 1, I know I'm not, but I don't know
- about the others, are going to purchase a garage to park our cars at the top of the hill and then walk
- down the hill and back up the hill. It's a task to do it in the summer. In the winter, next to impossible.
- So that fact,
- that these are going to be garages for people to park their cars, their first car. If it's a secondary
- car, then it's not that impetuous, it's not that imperative that you have a garage there. If
- it's self-storage, then what alternatives are available for self-storage? Well, Eagle Bay, one, is part
- of what's called the point, the PSA. The PSA owns the golf courts, they own the
- the clubhouse and things like that. They also own 5.4 acres across Point Road that is currently being
- used for boat storage. They have two buildings there. If this, as they have alluded to, first is offered
- for Eagle Bay 1 residents, offered for Eagle Bay 2, and then anyone in the Point. So conceivably, anyone
- in the Point could purchase
- these units. A better use, a more effective use would be to look at the point, the 5.4 acres that's
- currently already zoned that doesn't require traffic counts and would not require a new road or new
- entrance into where the pool and the other individuals, the people who are coming and going are. So
- the use of this property
- Not to say it's in Indiana and tearing of a basketball court is somewhat sacrilegious, but be that as
- it may. The better use for this, it's perfect for a community garden. It's fenced, it's next to where
- the people live, galvanized steel tubs. Sorry to interrupt, but your three minutes are up. I'm sorry?
- I can't hear you. You said, I'm sorry, but your three minutes are up. OK, thank you then. All right.
- I also got this out of order. That was a negative comment, I assume. So do we have any positive comments
- out there that either online or in the room? Looks like none. So I think that the petitioner can respond
- now to those comments. You have five minutes. I don't see it. It disappeared again. It was Megan or Nellis.
- And so I don't know. Megan, are you still going to raise your hand because you want to comment in favor
- of something? I don't see any hand raised at all. All right, so five minutes from the petitioner to
- respond to that negative comment. A response, I mean, you'd skip to help me here, but it's my understanding that
- It's born by the interest of the homeowners association to have additional storage units for
- their belongings, whatever they may be. And I wouldn't think it would add much more traffic if cars
- are already down there just to come up and get their equipment or belongings. So I'm not quite sure
- what the topography issue would be and in fact the traffic.
- And I don't know about it turning into a community garden that would have to be up to the homeowners
- Association. And then that is a private home. I guess that's rented out at times. There's a shared driveway.
- The pool belongs to Eagle Bay one. So they still have access to the pool down that driveway because
- they're evident. There's an easement for access.
- So I don't know what the impact would be other than potentially, depending upon which way the sun goes,
- casting some shadows perhaps on the pool deck. So that would be my response. I don't know, Skip, if
- you have anything to add to that, but those are my thoughts in response.
- and close out the public comments and come back to the planned commission. We'll go to the
- right. Commissioner Thomas. I actually have a question for the representative from the homeowners
- association, if you wouldn't mind coming up. I have a comment online. Why don't you go ahead and take
- that. Yeah, Megan. Okay, go ahead. State your name. Good evening, members of the commission. My name
- is Megan Ornelas.
- and my husband and I own a unit in Eagle Bay 2, and I'm here to speak to our concerns regarding this
- proposal. An easement agreement exists between Eagle Bay 1 and Eagle Bay 2. The proposed construction
- would take place on property covered in this easement agreement. The easement agreement obligates Eagle
- Bay 2 to pay a share of operating and maintenance costs for this recreational area.
- Costs include electricity, repairs and maintenance, taxes and assessments, insurance, and other expenses
- related to the shared property. In exchange for our share of the cost, Eagle Bay 2 is entitled to the
- use of the easement and recreational area. Eagle Bay 2 has not seen any proposed changes
- to the current easement agreement. This needs to be completed prior to the project moving forward to
- clarify financial responsibility and the use of the proposed recreational area. As it stands now, Eagle
- Bay 2 could be asked to pay operation and maintenance costs of this project but have no access or enjoyment
- of the use of it, the garages and the units being constructed.
- In addition, we could be asked to pay for unintended damages caused to this recreational area during
- construction. Finally, the deeds for Eagle Bay 2 residents show a percentage ownership in the property
- being discussed. So I believe a real estate attorney needs to weigh in on who actually owns this property.
- Given these concerns, residents of Eagle Bay 2 cannot support this project until the agreement is modified
- to ensure we are not financially supporting any costs. We would also like to have clear guidance from
- a real estate attorney as to the ownership of the property. The documents I've mentioned tonight, our
- HOA president is able to provide to the commission. Thank you.
- All right, so it looks like we need to have the petitioner respond to that one as well. And either skip.
- Is there anyone else? I saw a hand raised in the audience. Do we want to make sure there's no other
- comments in the audience before the final rebuttal? Are there any other comments out in the audience?
- We're going back and forth, back and forth evidently, so. All right, so skip or Bill, can you respond
- to that, please?
- I'd like to defer to Skip on that one, because I haven't researched these easements or deeds. These
- are records, so. Yeah. Members, my name is Skip Helton. I'm on the board of ECO Bay one. Some of the
- questions that were asked
- It is my understanding, and Bill has, you guys have in front of you, the ownership of Eagle Bay 1, the
- property lines of Eagle Bay 1. It is my understanding that all of that property that is shown is belonged
- to by Eagle Bay 1. Eagle Bay 2 pays us for the use of our pool. They pay us a percentage.
- maintenance fees on our pool and for maintenance fees on the basketball court and tennis courts. We
- will when this if this project is built, we will. The project will have its own HOA just for the garages
- itself, so it will not come into come into. Contact with the existing HOA of Eagle Bay 1 or Eagle Bay
- 2. It'll be its own HOA itself.
- Is that all the questions or is there something else? Yeah, OK, so. Just for clarity, the homeowners
- Association that you belong to is only Eagle Bay one. Yes ma'am. Is so there's a separate homeowners
- Association for Eagle Bay 2 and a separate homeowners Association for the point the Eagle Bay. Point
- the point right? Yes, OK.
- So the point is like the whole thing, and then we're little subdivisions put inside of the point. Right.
- Eagle point. That was the third section. Correct. That's it. OK, thank you. Yeah, because I always refer
- to this as the point. Correct. We're little subdivisions in the point. Right. So I'm concerned because
- of what was expressed about this being in an easement that's supposed to be a shared easement, which
- is not how you depict it, but it's how this commenter depicted it. And I'm concerned about that because
- we don't want to get in the middle of anything you all are doing. So I would like to propose to my colleagues
- here on this commission that we bring this back in March. But I would like some clarity on that question of,
- who can actually make decisions about this property, whether it's as what you say versus there's some
- sort of easement. You have the legal paperwork in front of you that shows what's owned by Eagle Bay
- One though. That is all owned by Eagle Bay One, even the pool. But what is this easement that was mentioned?
- The easement that they're talking about is a driveway that goes back to this, see where the house is
- separated out separately in there?
- The bigger unit, you see the orange, to the right of the orange, there's a separate parcel there, okay?
- There's a, I'm gonna call it a huge duplex that they lease out. It's owned by a separate owner, okay?
- There's a driveway that goes back there that is a shared easement for them to park at and for us to
- park at for our pool. But get this straight, the entrance to this storage unit project is not coming
- down that easement.
- It is off of point and sell drive. It's not even going anybody that goes into the garage units will
- not be going down that driveway. OK, but it's not a separate really. Yeah, it still isn't clear to me
- based on what the public commenter offered. Because I don't know how they would be responsible for paying
- maintenance on a shared drive. OK, they use they use Eagle Bay
- uses our pool, okay? Eagle Bay is one pool, okay? So there's a driveway to get to that pool. So we split
- the maintenance fees up. I can't remember the percentages. Let's say Eagle Bay one, just for instance,
- pays 60% into a pool every quarter, and Eagle Bay two pays 40% into a pool every quarter. It stores
- up money for maintenance for the pool area
- and for the basketball and tennis court area. Okay, so that might be why there's a sense of shared ownership
- or at least shared decision-making power in this property because it does include not just the pool,
- but the tennis court and basketball court. But not on ownership though. Right, it's a shared easement
- with some sort of a financial obligation relating to maintenance. Correct, and if these garages are done,
- It's going to have its own HOA, so it will it will. It will reduce yeah. Um, Eagle Bay's two twos payout
- and Eagle Bay ones payout. It'll take that section off, right? There'll be no more money put in for
- the tennis court or basketball court, right? The people that will own the garages and in storage facilities
- now will have their own HOA that they will pay into. OK, one of the questions.
- that was posed, and I don't know if I posed or someone else did, but it's a good question. So someone
- else probably posed it at the admin meeting was, will the units be sublet? And what we got for an answer
- was the order of preference for who gets access. It was brought up at the beginning, and this gentleman
- brought it up over here. Our first thought was we were going to sell and lease out, and we have decided
- we are not leasing out.
- They will be when they're brought up for sale, they will be sold first of all to Eagle Bay one owners.
- Any remaining ones will be sold to Eagle Bay two owners. Any remaining ones from that will be sold to
- anybody in the point. OK, so that doesn't answer the question of sublet, because if I purchase a storage
- area, you can you can do what you want. That's the concern. Yes, right. Well, and we will have our HOA
- will make up rules. We'll have our own HOA rules.
- when those are made up for that HOA, that's taken out of there. No sublet in. Okay. And I think that
- fits into one of my other concerns, which is what are the rules for what you can store there? If this
- were somewhere else, I would be so much less concerned, but it is at the top of the hill that drains
- into the lake. And we have to be so careful. I'm concerned
- not just about noxious combustible materials. I'm concerned about storing a couple of jet skis that
- leak. And where does that going to go? And so my concerns are first regarding the easement issue. And
- I would just, it would be great to have some clarity on that. The second relates to subletting. What
- are the rules? And the third relates also to the rules
- What can you actually store in there? Because this is a compact area where we could ostensibly have
- gasoline, oil, coolant, all kinds of things that end up in the lake because it's aggregated in one spot.
- And again, if this weren't at the lake, it probably wouldn't matter much.
- Although we do need to still talk about our rules regarding RV storage and motorcycle storage and auto
- storage. But it's just the proximity to the lake that's concerning. Anything in the point is they all
- drain into the lake. Oh, absolutely. Oh, we're well aware. We're well aware. So I think I would personally
- rather see some of the rules and guidelines and subletting and all of that. And I would like to see
- some clarification on the easement before I'm comfortable on voting on this particular item.
- That's me. My colleagues may differ. Thank you. I appreciate your information. All righty. Do we have
- any other comments? Yes. Mr. Bush. Mr. Chair.
- unfamiliar with the residences at the point. The only place I've been allowed on is at the golf course,
- so I've not driven through, so okay. I thought you weren't allowed there anymore. Ever since that last
- time I hit the guy. No, seriously, Mr. Bishop brought up a really good point, I believe, regarding things
- that are being stored. Is there any, will you have,
- limits in place as to... If I were a resident and I were a painter, and I needed a place to store all
- my paints and thinners and all my equipment, would that be an allowable use in this storage area, or
- is that something that you would restrict? We could restrict all combustibles. No combustibles being
- stored. Which is curious as to...
- I could see this boat storage or just a storage or I don't know somebody's. Our storage on these areas
- are very limited. I mean, we have closets that we have. We can't put anything in, you know, it's with
- no garage space. I mean, I'm going to retire one day and I would like to move down to the lake. This
- is not my permanent residence, but I like to move down there. But I'm a, I've been a contractor for
- 40 some years. I need my tools.
- You know, I just just sure that's why I'm thinking of this project. Well, that question being answered,
- I think I would also like to see maybe a little more clarity as to what the intended uses are versus
- what you would restrict. OK, thank you. Alright, to properly close out all of the public comment.
- I'd like to make sure that we have addressed all those folks who are in. We have somebody in the back.
- If I assume you're in favor, you're against. OK, well, you have three minutes. Please sign in and state
- your name. Yeah, I'm Pam Rogers, the president of Eagle Bay to. I want to pass out. This is mainly what
- I'm up here for. I'm going to pass out a copy of the easement agreement.
- between our villages. It's dated in 1996. It's really old. We weren't even built yet, but it does explain
- expansion of the area and our privilege to use the pool in the tennis court areas. Make sure staff gets
- one of these so that it can be included.
- I also wanna mention today, I spent a little time in the deed office and the accessor's office. I pulled
- my deed, my personal deed, and it actually shows that I have some type of ownership to this parcel of
- property. They couldn't really explain it, but every homeowner for Eagle Bay 2 is tied to this parcel
- of property. That's really. Thank you. Thank you.
- I guess we need to give you five minutes to rebut if you'd like. So either you or Bill or Skip, if you'd
- like to respond. I think I understand that there's a couple of questions here and I think that I will
- let's take it under advisement. We will go ahead and take a look at these couple of items that we're
- talking about concerning ownership and what could be stored in here. I think those are the two main
- things, correct?
- Ownership of the existing property and then what can and cannot be stored in these storage facilities.
- Letting OK. Which is part of the rules. Yes, thank you. OK. The other you have anything else to add.
- We're done unless you got something else to add.
- OK, is there any other public public comment for against or otherwise? Alright, let's close out the
- public comment now and now let's go to the Planning Commission for their comments. Anybody on my left?
- Yes, Sir. Well, you know one of. Mr. Rigerts points about discharge. You know, yeah, we're gonna get
- rid of that stormwater goes right in the lake. If we have a fire out there in those storage lockers
- and I don't believe there's any way that anybody is ever going
- effectively regulate what people put in those storage lockers over time. You get a fire out there, and
- you start dumping fluid on water on this thing, and that's going right in our water supply. That's where
- Monroe County, at least, where I get my drinking water. And I don't see that this thing seems to make
- a ton of sense to me in the fact that whatever is there, if there's a fire, and you've got 20
- however many units of storage with electricity on board, the chances for a fire are pretty significant.
- And I just think that it would be a real terrible situation for the fire department to start dumping
- fluid on a fire that's running right straight in Lake Monroe. That's my point. Thank you. Anybody on
- the right? Go ahead, Mr. Bishop.
- What is the proximity of the proposed development to any sort of fire suppression equipment such as
- a hydrant? Okay, and so if one of these other houses caught fire right next to the lake and they had
- to spray it down with water and everything, all of the contents and whatnot would be washed into the
- lake as well, right? So is it safe to assume that the
- the same level of concern would be surrounding any of these houses burning down as would one of these
- facilities, because right now, ostensibly, you're securing all of this hazardous materials in your homes.
- Yes, anything around in the point, if you wash it down, it's going to end up in the lake, yes. So we're
- not creating anything new, we're just moving it to where it's not in your homes directly.
- Correct. Okay. As far as storage facilities go, everything around the lake is proximal to the water
- itself by nature because it's on the lake and people do boating and water activities. So the current
- storage facilities, are there similar concerns about environmental issues regarding the storage of boats
- and whatnot? There's other garages and storage facilities in Eagle Point, okay. I've never heard any
- concerns before. Nobody's brought it up to me.
- It wouldn't have to be specific to your development either. It would be just in the general facility
- around the lake where there are storage for boats, jet skis, and things like that. Are there outsized
- environmental concerns applied to them that are also being applied to you? If I'm asking the question
- correctly, not that I know of.
- Okay, it seems very similar that you're wanting to store the same type of stuff that's being stored
- out in the open, maybe covered by a tarp next to the lake already, and you're wanting to put it under
- roof. Yes, yes. Okay, thank you.
- Henry. Thank you. Mr. Bishop had a lot of what I was going to ask there. I know that this agreement
- was just put before us, but I think this might be a question you can answer. So in this escrow, it mentions,
- owns a swimming pool and tennis court recreational facility. You have a basketball court as well, right?
- Where the tennis court is at, there's a basketball court connected with it. It's all in one big Finston
- area. Yeah.
- that was presented to us just moments ago. It doesn't mention a basketball court. So in the evolution
- of the recreational space, was there ever a discussion between the two HOAs about the development inclusion
- of modification to put a basketball court with the tennis court? Or was that from the- Basketball court
- is in with the tennis court right now. Were they designed, was that a modification or were they ported
- or created the same way? I've been down there for 18 years and it's been like that. That's fair. The
- reason why I'm asking is if there was a modification to the property at some point,
- between the signing of this agreement and where we are now. I was just trying to figure out how you
- would have navigated that process before with the shared asset. I've only been there for 18 years. I
- don't know what happened prior to. That's it. Thank you. All right. Anybody else on the right over here?
- All right. Before we go to a motion, Jack, I think it'd be very helpful. There's a laundry list of things
- we'd like to get answers to.
- Can we get agreement on what that laundry list is? Yes. It sounds like number one concern is that ownership
- of the area to be asked for garages to be placed.
- items entered into the record regarding easements and contribution of HOA funds by Eagle Bay one and
- Eagle Bay two for this area. So I think we're looking to provide a copy of this introduction of evidence
- to the petitioner and their representative and have them respond and also
- You know, I don't know if they want to provide us with edits to how they will amend this easement agreement
- and share it with Eagle Bay counterpart to see if that's amenable to them or if that assizes their concern.
- And then there was concern about what will be stored in the garages and also if the units will be sublet
- upon purchase by somebody in the point.
- We don't technically have to make a motion, but just for clarity, I'd like to make a no motion.
- on PUO-25-4, meaning that it's going to come back to our March 17th meeting of the plan commission.
- And this pertains to the point PUD outline plan for Eagle Bay garages. Does everyone agree with that
- or does somebody want to make another kind of motion? Go ahead and second it. I'll second. It's been
- moved and seconded to not
- grant a waiver of final hearing for PUO-25-4 to give the petitioner and their representative time to
- come back to the plan commission with answers to the questions mentioned by staff. A vote yes is a vote
- to send this to the March 17th, 2026 plan commission. Jeff Morris? Yes. Julie Thomas? Yes. David Bush?
- Yes. Margaret Clements?
- Scott Ferris. Yes. Rudy Fields. Yes. David Henry. Yes. Okay. Motion carries seven to zero. All right.
- Now we move to public comments for items not on the agenda. Okay. Is there anybody online or in person
- here who would like to take and comment? You have up to three minutes. I don't see any hands on the
- screen and I don't see anybody coming forward.
- So that moves us to staff reports. And so we have planning and attorney. So Jackie. I just have one
- announcement, which is the, we had discussed at our administrative meeting, the county maintained road
- inventory map. We have gotten that to be published. We made some edits based on your comments, added
- state roads. So we're hoping to put that on the website in an easily viewable spot.
- so that if another snowstorm occurs, we can point people if offices are closed to do some individual
- research and then have a bit more information about before they even purchase a property, whether they're
- on a county maintained road. So that is enough. Mr. Shaleen.
- Oh, and I also have one other. OK, I'm sorry. Which is we have a new planner with us, Ray Brown. He
- started with us on Monday. Ray is joining from Louisville, Kentucky. So he's worked for two different
- jurisdictions in southern Indiana as a planner. So we're very lucky to have somebody that already speaks
- the language. And he's doing great his first week. Welcome to the game.
- Okay, now Mr. Schilling. Report. Motion to adjourn. Thank you all.