Whew! There’s a lot going on there! Very little of it good… To orient you, if you’re not local, this is the curve north of Lake Latonka, where S.R. 17 begins to run east towards Plymouth and Sycamore Road continues north towards S.R. 30.
So I don’t bury the lead, the initial reason for writing this was a John Oliver style, “Why is this Still a thing?” rant. I came around this corner from the East the other morning on the way to work, in the dark, to find a school bus stopped to pick up kids from the house on the inside of the curve on the SE corner of this intersection. It wasn’t very visible to me until I was almost on it and it would have been worse for someone coming from the South. The best case for this is this time of year when it’s dark and the bus’s flashing lights are reflecting off of everything. At twilight, the danger doubles down.
This property just recently changed hands. I know things get grandfathered in. I know it’s cold out and kids don’t want to walk far, so the closest point to the house is the preference. But there is a significant piece of property here with an alternate driveway. Barring getting rid of this dangerous driveway, can’t the school bus pick up at the alternate driveway off the curve?
This intersection has always been dangerous. The memorial at the northwest corner of the intersection commemorates the 5 fire fighters that gave their lives at that intersection in 1982. The truck they were in took the corner too quickly and went into the swamp on the west side of the road. This was the worst single-event loss of life for a single fire fighting unit prior to the 9/11 terror attack. The permanent stone memorial included lighted flags and was dedicated in 2014 It replaced 5 wooden crosses on a utility pole near the crash site. It is somewhat fitting that this memorial is quite striking, yet somewhat eerie when lit up at night.
It will be interesting to see how long the West High Corner moniker remains in use since the referenced school is gone. The Northeast corner of the intersection was home to the West High School, named for West Township. Many people were sad to see the school go away this past year. I have to agree that it was frustrating that it couldn’t be repurposed, but location is everything and is often the case with structures like that, its highest and best use was as a school. I could not find documentation, but my recollection is that the school corporation sold it at auction for $1,500 in 2005. From there, the buyer stripped most of the things of value from the building. It became a door and trim shop after that. The Covid pandemic ended that. Most recently it was purchased by Jackson Salvage, which made it go away… except for the slabs and foundations. All that remains is a memorial with a bell and well along Sycamore Road to commemorate the school’s previous glory.
The property on the southeast corner referenced at the beginning of this post was the former location of the original West Township Trustee’s home; a log cabin that was just recently relocated south to Memorial Forest. The picture to the right shows the cabin during reconstruction as new roof framing was placed. The recently formed Marshall County Parks and Recreation Department tried to have it relocated onto the West High site, but there weren’t sufficient funds to make the deal possible.
As attested to by the lost fire brigade, the West High Corner is to be respected. The two exits/entrances onto S.R. 17 from Sycamore Road are also treacherous. From experience, the southernmost connection is the most dangerous and least respected as I often see cars exit or come onto S.R. 17 without stopping. West bound cars cannot see that intersection until they’re into the curve, so if they are taking it quickly, there’s often near misses. In icy winter conditions, this is even worse.
In the mid-1990’s, the Culver Chamber of Commerce petitioned the Marshall County Commissioners to improve Sycamore Road to give Culver more direct access to S.R. 30. For a time, this was a collaborative effort between the Town of Culver, Ancilla College (now Marian College), Culver Academies and Swan Lake Resort. One option for this was to attempt a trade-off with INDOT, changing Sycamore Road into the north end of S.R. 17 and the east/west portion from West High to Plymouth would have become a county road again. This would have had many benefits including an intersection fix at West High, an improved route to S.R. 30 from Culver, fewer driveway accesses, and an easy aerial railroad crossing. At the time, Marshall County had already broached INDOT through MACOG about the Pine Road extension. And also at that time, Plymouth didn’t want to give up the benefits of INDOT maintenance on the main street through the City. (Plymouth is having second thoughts now as their Complete Streets Committee wrestles with the pedestrian issues associated with this.) With the completion of the Pine Road extension to S.R. 17, this initiative is unlikely to be considered. Some of the property that was vacant has been developed, further hindering this right-of-way acquisition.
I don’t see a good solution to this intersection in the near future. At a minimum, I would still like to see something done to eliminate the school bus stop in the middle of a State Highway curve. This intersection doesn’t need another memorial…
One of the things that continually comes up in response to the controversy regarding The Dunes, is the State requirement that municipalities provide utility service to annexed properties within 3 years. The parcels The Dunes is being built on, plus the next parcel south were annexed into Culver around 13 years ago. This was done when Culver Garden Court was being built. The Town is remiss in providing water and sewer to these properties. Granted, they hadn’t asked for services before and as I understand it, the south property doesn’t particularly want services, but it is an obligation the Town accepted in their annexation plan which included a fiscal plan on how to pay for the utility extensions.
The initial impetus for this annexation was to bring Culver Garden Court into Town and provide utility service to support the project. As often happens, politics entered into this. The then Clerk treasurer had just moved to the southernmost property. So the annexation was expanded to include that parcel, else she would have had to resign her position as she would no longer be a resident. Doubling down on this, Culver has annexed the property on the south side of the Masonic Cemetery and that property owner HAS requested utility service. As I understand it, Culver has sufficient utility capacity for this extension, though it will use a significant portion of the capacity reserve.
I have no issue with any of the above. But the conversations regarding the municipal obligations do cause me some concern. If those are truly an issue, there is another ticking timebomb for Culver…
As with most of us, my life is now divided into prepandemic and post-pandemic, so I’m going to forego the research on the timeline beyond that as I talk about the property owned by Culver Investment Corp outlined in cyan and yellow on the adjacent map. (Also known locally as ‘The Beste Property’.) Prepandemic, Culver was presented with a plan for a PUD development at the Northwest corner of Town. This would take in most of the unannexed area within S.R. 17 and S.R. 10. Along with that area (72 acres), the PUD included 14.6 acres of land on the north side of S.R. 10. The majority of this land was to be residential, a continuing Town priority, with the parcel north of S.R. 10 slated to be a gas station/convenience store (area in cyan on the adjacent map). As part of that negotiation with the developer, Culver had sufficient utility capacity, but the developer would be responsible for extending utilities to serve the property. Overall, this was a positive for Culver. I didn’t have any issues with the project, though I did have a few issues with it holding up Sand Hill Farm Apartments and with the treatment of existing business, Good to Go. The property was annexed and a Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezoning was approved.
The project stalled shortly after that. No doubt the pandemic was a factor, but I suspect there were other issues as well. The Plan Commission gave the developer several extensions, but in the end, the PUD was rescinded this year (’23) and the land was rezoned back to S-1, Suburban Residential, as it was prior to the PUD. Shortly after the PUD was rescinded and the rezoning was completed, the property went on the market.
This brings me to my concern: The properties were never combined and are listed for sale individually. Culver Investment Corp is not doing any development of these properties, so the development agreement with that corporation is null and void. If the 6.7 acre parcel at the north east corner of S.R. 17 and S.R. 10 sells and is developed, Culver must run utilities to that parcel per State annexation requirements. (Culver would be unable to deny a permit for a house on that property per current zoning.) It would appear the nearest utilities at 4/10ths of a mile away… as the crow flies… There are no easement provisions to get utilities to this property. Right-of-way access would require INDOT cooperation, which can be tedious at best and require nearly a mile of utility extensions without even considering the need for a water loop.
I have not seen or heard anything about this in public meetings, but this seems to be a potentially large budget item. One potential solution, would be to de-annex the property, but I would suggest that’s not best for Culver either. Having control of that area is important. That was discussed extensively with the Comprehensive Plan Committee. (There was also extensive discussion about increasing our extra territorial boundary.) Getting together a new fiscal plan for the area would seem to be another important step. Culver can’t be completely distracted by the growth on the south side of town and ignore this 86 acre area on the north. That could come back to bite us.
Edit 4-3-24 – This past weekend, I was contacted by a Culver Town Council member regarding this post. The Town Council and their attorney believe my conclusions here are in error. They’re determination is that the development agreement with Culver Investment Corp. is still in force and Culver Investment Corp. is in default. The Council has signed and recorded a resolution affirming their rights of enforcement. I’m pleased that they are looking into this and are pursuing remedies. As attorneys are fond of saying, “Time is of the Essence.” I sincerely hope their interpretation proves to be correct.
Starting with a disclaimer on this. I’m not taking sides on any of the “I’m with Esmie” debacle, because I don’t know the facts of the matter. That said, I work with three other libraries and I’m friends with 4 other librarians. I thought some of their comments were worth sharing:
I’m probably writing this a bit late. I don’t know the current status of the Library Director search, but my impression is it will be a challenge to fill the position. I’m not throwing shade on anyone involved, just noting that the eyes of the library world are on us, and in not the best light.
At the December meeting of the Culver Redevelopment Commission (CRC), Linda Yoder, Executive Director for the Marshall County Community Foundation (MCCF), made a presentation on One Marshall County. One Marshall County is the new umbrella organization that Marshall County Economic Development Corp (MCEDC) has spearheaded. Linda and I serve on the collaborative council discussing this new initiative and Linda had volunteered to make the presentation of the need for One Marshall County before the CRC. This also included a request for funding.
There were a few math errors in the presentation, but one of these jumped out at me was during the discussion of Stellar and the investment that Marshall County Crossroads brought to local communities. The numbers quite clearly did not include the investment from tax credits provided by IHCDA. The Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) provided by IHCDA amounted to the biggest single project investment from any of the State agencies involved in Stellar. In all, through the tax credits and loans, Plymouth and LaPaz shared $14 million dollars of investment in their communities with Riverside Commons. That investment didn’t show up in the presentation numbers. This is no shade on Linda! She didn’t prepare the numbers…
This isn’t the first time for this. Culver received approximately $10 million in tax credits and loans for The Paddocks, but that number rarely shows up in their Stellar discussions. These would be huge contributors to the ROI discussion, since local investment in these projects was largely limited to in-kind waivers and some inhouse work. (Culver contributed nothing to The Paddocks project. Plymouth gave waivers on improvements to surrounding alleys. LaPaz waived sewer tap fees and secured matching INDOT funding to improve the street serving the project.)
I think there are a couple of reasons for this lack of acknowledgment: 1) The Stellar Committees don’t really understand the program and 2) Unlike many of the project which were directly municipal projects, i.e. parks, trails, etc., that required more active involvement, the LIHTC portion of Stellar is directly administered by the project developer, so there isn’t a pass-through of dollars. The LIHTC award creates a private project. Where there was some shifting of dollars amongst the other municipal projects within the Stellar awards, that was not an option with LIHTC.
Despite the success of The Paddocks in Culver’s Stellar Community program, Marshall County didn’t even include a LIHTC request in their first application for Stellar Region. I had lobbied for its inclusion and felt that the group slighted IHCDA by not accepting their offer. I lobbied a little harder in their second attempt and Riverside Commons was included in that application, which was successful. This was probably not the only reason, but I firmly believe it contributed to the success of the second application.
There have been some complaints about The Paddocks, but The Paddocks has met or exceeded all of the metrics set forth for it. The same can be said for Sand Hill Farm Apartments, the precursor project that made Culver Stellar and The Paddocks possible. It’s too soon to document that for Riverside Commons, which has different goals, but I have no reason to believe the results will be different. As far as community acknowledgement, the LaPaz and Plymouth councils have done a great job of recognizing Riverside Commons. They each have a Stellar agenda item on their council agendas and request updates for each meeting. Culver did not include The Paddocks in their Stellar reports to the council.
I think it’s a missed opportunity when the LIHTC investment is not celebrated and included in the ROI… But then, I’m obviously biased!
Traffic Calming…
January 19, 2024
Kevin Berger
Commentary, Culver, READI
Community, Culver, government, The Dunes, Trends
It’s interesting that the small town of Culver is having heated conversations regarding traffic calming measures, but that was part of the discussion at the Redevelopment Commission meeting last Monday, 1/15/24. There was actually an impressive turnout for an evening with temperatures in the single digits.
I already expressed some concerns about the connections between The Dunes and the rest of Culver here. Since that time, Culver has asked MACOG to fill a portion of the Urban Planner roll I suggested. MACOG is working on a traffic study to predict the impact of The Dunes. Town Manager, Kevin Danti, shared some of those results during the Redevelopment Commission meeting. The main thrust of this was that additional work need to be completed and probably would not be completed until this Summer when they would collect actual busy season data. Note: The plan to the right is old. There is a new one hanging on the wall in the Town Hall meeting room, which is probably out of date too, but closer to the final plan. The one to the right is close enough for representative purposes.
Most of the public comments were a rehashing of concerns expressed before. An interesting bit that caught my attention was the diametrically opposed conversation about the relatively new, pedestrian friendly, traffic calming islands on Main Street and Jefferson Street. Some audience members first expressed concern about additional traffic in the downtown causing safety issues, but then followed that up with complaints that the new traffic calming islands made it difficult for trucks with trailers to traverse these areas. Which is it, folks? Do you want to discourage the heavy traffic in the downtown and make pedestrian crossings safer for shoppers in the business district or do you want to change things to encourage truck and trailer traffic along these routes?
Cities and Towns around the world are looking at ways to make their streets more pedestrian friendly. This makes a lot of sense in business districts. Narrower lanes slow traffic. Corner islands reduce the distance pedestrians have to traverse. Both of these things serve to discourage unnecessary traffic in these areas. All of this fits with the trails that Culver has been adding. If residents are concerned about traffic downtown, don’t they want things that discourage it?
While I’m old enough to remember when Culver had two stoplights, I’m not old enough to remember when they were needed. I don’t remember when or why they were removed, but as a kid, I remember a stoplight at the corner of Main Street and Jefferson Street and a second one at the corner of Ohio Street and Jefferson Street. Now, I don’t remember the last time I’ve been behind more than one car at either of those intersection. We could always bring those back to slow things down…
The other thing that caught my attention is that while the committee working on this project recognizes the issues at the intersection of South Main Street and Davis Street, the idea of a roundabout has been taken off the table because the street department doesn’t like roundabouts. Really? I am not convinced that it is the best way to go, but it should remain a consideration until a better option comes forward. After all, it was in the 2014 Comp Plan. (I put the link in, hoping that the Town website will be fixed soon.) I am not saying that the street department’s input should be ignored, but I don’t think they should have that kind of veto power.
While Kevin Danti did a fine job of relaying the information at the meeting, I hope there is the opportunity for MACOG to present their ideas to the public directly. As with many things, there is unlikely to be 100% acceptance and agreement, but I’m pleased the effort is being made.
2 comments