Plymouth

Water Street Townhomes Ribbon Cutting

by

We had the ribbon cutting for Water Street Town homes (WST) last Friday, May 15th. Julie Heise and Heather Martis did a great job with balloons, snacks and drinks for the event. There was a good turnout with members of the City Council, Redevelopment Commission and other officials there. The Mayor manned the big scissors to cut the ribbon and said a few words. Everything was positive! (Press Release here.)

All projects present challenges, but ones like these with multiple funding sources and their associated requirements are each unique. This one also involved multiple property owners, both public and private.

Above and beyond the general goals of providing work for our employees and not losing money, there are a myriad of other goals for a project like this. A few of these include: Downtown Revitalization, Work Force Housing, fulfilling comp plan goals and generally contributing to the health of downtown Plymouth. We participated in the two Marshall County housing studies, the Plymouth Comprehensive Plan committee and the Plymouth Zoning Review committee as we worked up to this. We’re still helping with the Zoning Review and have also joined the board of the Marshall County Community Development Corporation. All this to say we understand the issues.

We are pleased when we are able to do a project like this and also provide jobs for local subcontractors. A few of the local subcontractors for this project were: Langfeldt Excavating, Hundt Concrete, Banner Electric, MLE Roofing, Artizan Flooring, ARC Security, Rogers Landscaping and Quality Drywall. Scheduling has become the biggest issue with projects such as these, and having local access to local offices makes this easier. (Easier, not easy…)

Almost all municipalities are welcoming to developers at the elected official level during initial conversations, but it’s the follow-through that makes a difference. Nearly across the board, the various City of Plymouth departments understood the goals and attempted to make things easier to achieve them. This is not always the case. Water Street Townhomes had a sister project in Culver, Spirit Townhomes, that was also included in the Regional READI application, but after initial municipal interest, support evaporated. (A missed opportunity…) I would recommend talking to the City of Plymouth and Mayor Listenberger, if you’re considering a new development in Marshall County.

Water Street Townhomes is an example of urban renew at it’s best. It took two older homes and an underutilized parking lot on the back side of the main downtown street and created new commercial space (already filled), new housing that’s walkable to downtown merchants, entertainment, restaurants and the park, and took a poorly laid out parking lot which paid no taxes and turned it into a tax-paying development… while still adding 18 parking spaces and better stormwater control to the space. The parking lot was paved before returning it to the city. The adjacent alley was improved and new street lights were installed. Hopefully the project is an example of what can be done with public/private cooperation.

The internet trolls have been out in force, complaining that WST is not affordable housing (it was never advertised to be in an affordable housing program), it’s built in a flood plain (it’s not), it takes away public parking (it does not), it displaced existing residents (the existing houses were purchased privately at the seller’s asking prices), it’s ugly (Sorry… there’s no accounting for taste), it’s gentrification (okay, but maybe that’s the point?) and my favorite, for which I don’t even have a pithy retort, “We don’t want no new people”. It’s clear they know more than we do <sarcasm>, so there’s no point in addressing them. It’s still disheartening, when you’re trying to do something positive.

We’re still having some website issues. There were some pictures to include here, but they won’t upload. They may get added in a future update.

Innovate Indiana Series

by
Suzanne Jaworowski

Easterday Construction is a member of the Indiana Chamber of Commerce. As such, I was offered the opportunity to share their table at two Innovate Indiana presentations in South Bend. Both featured Suzanne Jaworowski, Indiana Secretary of Energy and Natural Resources, as the key note speaker. The presentation was moderated by Gerry Dick of Inside Indiana Business, so it presented a pro-growth vision for Indiana. This series was one of several done in various regions of Indiana.

There were a few others from Marshall County present, though I only recognized people from Plymouth and Culver. One of them spoke in the morning round-table session and made the comment that they were afraid that our County is becoming the County of “No”. It was a bit disheartening to hear a titter go around the room followed by one of the people from downstate responding something to the effect of, “Oh, we know that well!” Ugh! Not what you want to hear.

That rolled into Ms. Jaworowski’s follow-up comments. These were the key take-aways for me:

  1. Energy production is a priority of the current presidential administration and Indiana wants to step up to this challenge.
    • Indiana is promoting an “all of the above” position on energy. We still have coal-fired plants, but most of them have been upgraded and while not environmentally perfect, they are not the dirty coal plants of yesteryear. We also have productive gas-fired plants that perform well. We are expanding solar and wind energy production and looking into nuclear power. None of these are THE solution, but they can all be complimentary.
  2. Data Centers are critical to the growing AI industry and another priority of the current presidential administration. The President has specifically called out Indiana as a State primed for data center construction.
    • Indiana is a prime location for data centers due to our position within the country and our access to the electrical grid. We also have generally good internet infrastructure. The power solutions listed above add to the attractiveness of our State.
    • Indiana has taken a position requiring data centers to provide projections of their ultimate electrical needs and requires them to provide 80% of the upgrades necessary to provide for those needs. Most utility companies are taking this a step further and requiring them to provide 100% of the upgrades before any power is turned on. Locally, in the case of AEP, they require the data centers to pay the ultimate use bill from day one, before they have ramped up to that need, in order for AEP to guarantee that capacity down the road.
    • Ms. Jaworowski indicated that this should lead to rate reductions for current rate-payers in Counties with data centers. An advantage our County of No will not have.

There was a round table discussion at lunch that talked about the need to be forward thinking and support businesses that support the communities. The role of the Regional Development Authority (RDA) was discussed. The RDA has made great strides, but is still far from the goals it has set for itself.

Absent from these meetings were elected officials from Marshall County. Elected officials from our other regional partner counties where there, which puts us at a disadvantage. Marshall County often seems to be treated like the redheaded step child. The failure of our elected officials to participate won’t help that.

Post Frame Housing

by
Traditional Pole Barn with vertical steel siding and steel roofing. Image from CMT Components

A few years back, there was an effort to ban post frame (also known as timber frame) housing in Plymouth. A similar ban has been floated a few times in Culver and resurfaced at the August Plan Commission meeting. In both cases, the rational has been that the style doesn’t fit the community. As near as I can discern, (and I could be missing something) it doesn’t have much to do with the post frame construction, but more about the look of vertical metal siding, since these homes can be indiscernible from homes built using standard framing.

Post frame construction is most often associated with the “Shade & Shelter” functionality of Pole Buildings. Where post frame barns are designed to protect farm equipment, post frame homes are generally better insulated, stronger structurally, sealed tightly and have a different aesthetic. It’s just a different framing technique that has recently had a resurgence in popularity.

Post Frame Construction showing below grade piers, posts, girts & purlins Image from Roper Buildings

The main difference in this style of construction is the use of posts (poles) to provide the frost protection and uplift protection in lieu of the footings and frost walls used in standard construction. They are nearly always slab-on-grade (SOG) for the first floor. (Many standard construction homes are SOG as well, but standard homes could also have crawl spaces or basements.) Standard construction will use 2×4 or 2×6 studs at 16″ or 24″ on center to form the shell. Post frame buildings have posts spaces as much as 8′ on center with horizontal 2x4s girts to support the siding. Standard construction will have trusses or rafters at 24″ on center, where post frame buildings space out the trusses to bear on the posts and then use 2×4 purlins to support the roofing materials.

For a pole building, the big advantages are the ease and speed of construction. The construction is very forgiving. It is generally a big box to provide the most cubic feet of storage with the minimum of effort. They tend to leak and creak over time, but provide the basic shelter function needed. For a post frame home, there are a lot of enhancements:

  1. In standard home construction, the frost wall is insulated, in our area, down to 3′ below grade. In post frame home construction, insulation is added under the slab extending 3′ – 6′ from the perimeter to provide a similar thermal break.
  2. In standard home construction, there is continuous sheathing, generally OSB or plywood spanning the studs and providing the exterior diaphragm framing stiffness. In post frame home construction, this is provided by the wall girts which also support the vertical metal siding. Sheathing would still need to be added if a horizontal finish such as traditional siding or a brick veneer is used.
  3. In standard home construction, interior wall finishes such as drywall or wood paneling can be applied directly to the studs. In post frame home construction, it will be necessary to add interior girts to provide support for the interior finishes.
  4. In standard home construction, the wall depth is based on the stud depth, so in general there is a cavity of 5-1/2″, if 2×6 framing is used. Each stud is a thermal transfer point as there is no insulation between the interior and exterior at stud locations. In post frame home construction, the exterior wall thickness is determined by the post thickness (6″ or 8″) plus the 2×4 girt thickness on the interior and exterior, giving a wall cavity of 8-1/2″ or 10-1/2″. Unlike studs that create a thermal transfer from top to bottom, post frame construction reduces the transfer points to just the locations where the girts bypass the posts. This allows for super insulation, more than doubling standard exterior wall R values.
  5. In standard home construction, the roof framing is generally webbed trusses with OSB or plywood decking to tie things together and provide a substrate for shingles. In post frame home construction, either the trusses need to be moved closer together (generally requiring a collar beam) to allow sheathing on the trusses or the sheathing is installed over the purlins.
  6. In standard home construction, interior walls are often load-bearing. In post frame home construction, interior walls are non-bearing, allowing doors without headers, allowing standard slab thicknesses and often, greater stud spacing.

While some of these homes embrace the barndominium style, such as the one to the right that even includes a simulation of a silo, they often are hard to distinguish from their neighbors. It’s not the framing that determines the exterior aesthetic, and in many cases you wouldn’t know the framing style if you didn’t see it under construction. Three of the apartment buildings at The Paddocks have a definite barn aesthetic, yet they were stick-built.

Stating that the style doesn’t fit the community seems a particularly curious thing to say about a home in Culver. Culver has a myriad of building styles ranging from traditional to bungalows to A-frames to geodesic domes. Culver has exterior finishes ranging from siding to painted concrete block to limestone to fieldstone. The siding breaks down to various styles including vertical, horizontal and diagonal. We have buildings with vinyl, steel, aluminum and wood siding. Culver is allowing new construction to expand in size to the point that they encourage replatting/combining of small lots to accommodate the larger construction.

Some communities establish aesthetic requirements. Culver doesn’t have these. As it stands, they’re zoning decisions are based mostly on safety. Post frame verses traditional framing is more of an issue for building codes and as of this time it is allowed. Many would object to the use of vibrant colored residential standing seam roofs as not fitting the traditional aesthetic, but nothing has been said about banning those. Personally, I’m fine with the diversity. Culver shouldn’t stoop to the level of a group of Karens. A flock of Karens is known as an HOA. Culver shouldn’t go there. (Neither should Plymouth…)

Berger Audiology 10 Year Anniversary

by

Hard to believe it’s been 10 years since Becky decided that she could provide better service to her patients on her own than through her previous employer. At that time, her employer began dictating maximum 20 minute appointments, not understanding that a hearing test takes an hour. That was the straw that broke the camel’s back. She is not able to spend the time she needs to with her patients. It’s not nearly as lucrative, but she’s pleased to be able to provide better care.

Jamie Fleury did a nice article on Dr. Becky’s Berger Audiology 10 year Anniversary Open House last Thursday. Somewhere around 34 attended. She is planning a second event for Physicians and professional colleagues next month.

City of Plymouth, IN-Mayor’s Office was represented by Mayor Robert Listenberger and City Attorney Jeff Houin. Future Marshall County Sherriff, Les McFarland, was there as well as Matt Hovermale from the Plymouth Chamber. Seven nuns from the The Poor Handmaids of Jesus Christ also attended. Naomi Peacock won the award for the youngest attendee. We won’t disclose who was the oldest! Becky was pleased with the turnout! Thanks to all that attended. 😎👍

Housing Density Answers from the Past

by

This is an interesting video with examples of multifamily housing on small lots (3 Flats) as seen in Chicago, Boston and San Francisco. It discusses some of the benefits as well as some of the drawbacks to this type of construction. It also briefly discusses some of the zoning barriers that were put in place to prevent this kind of construction.

It’s interesting that both Culver and Plymouth are looking into how to increase housing density right now, but are facing some pushback on the zoning changes that would be necessary to make this viable. Both communities seem to have active CAVE societies. I’m pretty sure every community has it’s own chapter. Years ago Erik Freeman and I proclaimed Culver’s unofficial motto to be, “Change is Bad; Even if it is Change for the Better”. Cast that as counterpoint to the underlying drumbeat for affordable housing.

Along with the basic zoning barriers, there are are other social and regulatory barriers that would increase challenges. Three story apartment construction would likely force the installation of fire sprinklers. Accessibility might need to be addressed due to the “walk-up” configuration with half a flight or more of stairs. Fire resistant construction between buildings would conflict with escape window requirements for bedrooms. All of these things would make the units safer and universally accessible, but would also drive up the cost. Meanwhile the three examples discussed are still in use in their respective cities; sometimes revered due to their place in the city’s history.

Greater density, even with the cost-increasing challenges listed above, does reduce costs of infrastructure, another big factor in housing affordability. Fewer linear feet of infrastructure is needed per dwelling unit. When this is done for infill properties, it makes better use of infrastructure, including roads, water lines and sewer lines. The one caveat to that is it may well increase impervious surface, further taxing storm water systems, though that is not a given. (They don’t have to be built cheek to jowl as was done historically, particularly in an infill situation.)

Reinventing the wheel can result in some improvements, but also can create some difficulties that were solved in the past. Looking back on what worked, may be part of our solution to the housing shortage problem as we move forward.