Attendees at The Midas Center Reception (Left to Right: Bob Wagner, Brent Martin, Kevin Berger and Marcy EckoffWagner
Congratulations to Andrea Cook and The Midas Center on their move to their new location at 200 North Michigan Street in Plymouth. I attended their Reception on December 17th and it was interesting to see their progress and the various people, some of them old friends, that are involved and were there to help them.
I initially connected to Andrea through her position on the Culver Redevelopment Commission. She has become quite active in the Culver and Plymouth Communities through her business at The Midas Center as well as her two community promotion sites, iHEARTplymouth and iHEARTculver. I have consulted with Andrea and her husband Phil on the status of the historic building they have purchased and we are working with them on a restoration project at the site.
The Marshall County Council chose to increase the Innkeeper’s Tax from 3 to 5 percent. [Pilot News Article] I’ve had a disagreement with this tax since it first went into effect over a decade ago.
My first issue is the same as Dr. Watson’s. (See his letter to the editor here.) It is taxation without representation. It was originally passed “because we could” rather than because there was a need. Now it appears that it has been raised using the same rational. From the Pilot News Article: “Woolfington [Convention and Visitors Bureau Executive Director] pointed out that Marshall County was one of just a handful of counties in the state of Indiana that has held the tax at 3 percent. Adjacent counties have raised their tax to the 5 percent level and St. Joseph County is at 6 percent.” Mr. Woolfington then goes on to talk about our loss of a major hotel chain. Somehow I doubt that this was because they suffered a decline in business because they weren’t charging enough! How is raising our tax rate to match surrounding counties going to attract people to stay here?
My second issue with this has always been the Marshall County Visitor’s Guide. Despite the Innkeeper’s Tax, the first thing the newly formed Visitor’s and Convention Bureau did was to start shaking down local businesses and Chambers of Commerce for ads in their new visitor’s guide. Currently more than that 10% of the Culver Chamber of Commerce’s annual budget goes toward an ad in this guide. I was on the Culver Chamber Board when this went into effect and I voted against that budget item and the passing of the budget including that item until I left the board and I continued to vote against it as a Chamber member for several years after. (I now generally skip that meeting as my meal doesn’t sit well after that vote…) I considered it then and now a phenomenal waste of precious dollars…dollars requested by a tax funded entity of a volunteer organization. Dollars which wouldn’t need them if MCCVB was effective in it’s mission!
H.B. 1182, legislation defining Complete Streets for Indiana streets and highways, passed the Indiana House but didn’t make it through the Senate earlier this year. This Bill followed a national trend to look at streets in a more holistic fashion, taking into account pedestrians, bicycles and public transportation, rather than just the minimalist approach of expediting the transit of cars from point A to point B. The Complete Streets ideal also looks at issues concerning stormwater control and optimizaton of pavement.
Culver recently received a grant for renovations to Main Street as it runs through the downtown business district. My understanding is that plans are underway to facilitate these improvements. I spoke to Town Manager, Michael Doss, and he did not believe that the Complete Streets standards would apply. (That was shortly after the grant was obtained and now his remarks appear sage-like as the legislation failed to move forward.) Some of the proposed standards may be of value though and hopefully will be considered by the designer. Improvements that make the downtown business district more pedestrian and cyclist friendly should be helpful. We also have a continuing stormwater issue in Culver that could be improved by changes to impervious surfaces in the downtown. Corrections to the existing stormwater system as well as other infrastructure should be considered as part of this project. It would be prudent to make sure that we’re not tearing up the new street in a couple of years to correct underlying problems.
Culver does not have a lot of new road construction planned, so opportunities to employ this type of design is limited. Now that the review of the the Culver Zoning Ordinance is coming to a close, it might be time to revisit the Subdivision Ordinance. That document has not been updated in decades. The Culver Comprehensive Plan is also past due for a review. Some of the new research and trends should be considered for implementation in our planning documents. Even without updates to these planning documents, there is the potential for doing this type of design through PUD’s under the current ordinance – something I would hope to accomplish with Sand Hill Farm.
Zoning Lot – A tract or parcel of land designated by its owner or developer as a tract to be used, developed or built upon as a unit under single ownership or control. A zoning lot may or may not coincide with a lot of record.
In any district in which single-family dwellings are permitted, a single-family dwelling and customary accessory buildings may be erected on any single lot which has been recorded in the Marshall County Recorder’s Office prior to April 12 1983; provided, such lot is in separate ownership; and provided, such lot is not less than 5,000 square feet in area and 50 feet in width at the established building location and is served by both municipal sewer and water; and further provided, there is compliance with all other regulations contained in this ordinance and any other applicable ordinances, regulations, and/or codes of the Town of Culver. This section shall apply only to single-family dwellings. [Emphasis Added]
The property lines and setbacks highlighted in green become the governing requirements. The lot line and setbacks between the adjacent lots are no longer considered. This benefits the property owner allowing the entire property to be considered one lot without replatting or variances. The property owner may build across the intermediate setback lines and property lines. (Illustrations 3 & 4) They may have an accessory building (or a garage, a pool, a driveway, a parking area, etc.) on the adjacent lot. (Illustration 5) They also may consider the two lots as one for the purposes of calculating impervious surface. This provision in the ordinance has been used to the advantage of property owners for at least the past 27 years. Arguable, that does not make it right, but removing the provision will affect a large number of existing properties.
I am looking at the following issues:
A comment was made regarding these options suggesting that they are “cheating” the ordinance. If anything, the “cheat” is the Zoning Lot provision as it now exists. It allows a property owner greater latitude in the use of the property without going through the lengthy and costly requirements of replatting the property as one parcel. But this cheat is a benefit to property owners that I would hate to take away.
With a little internet research I found that similar language appears in other Zoning Ordinances in our area:
Lot – A contiguous area of land separated from other areas of land by separate description for purpose of sale, lease, transfer of ownership or separate use. It may be a single parcel separately described or a combination of such parcels when adjacent to one another and used as one (1) lot.
Parent Tract: A lot of record as recorded (location, size, shape, etc) on the effective date of this Ordinance; or a lot as defined by its last conditional transfer of ownership by recorded contract transacted before the effective date of this Ordinance. Multiple lots that are contiguous and owned by one (1) person, persons in partnership, or a company and/or corporation(s) shall be considered one (1) Parent Tract for the purpose of calculating the amount of exempted splits allowed, yet each lot of record, as recorded by its own separate legal description prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, shall maintain its ability to be sold individually as a lot, but only as it corresponds to the said recorded legal description prior to the effective date of this Ordinance. Easements shall not constitute a separation of two (2) or more pieces of land owned by one (1) person, persons in partnership, or a company and/or corporation(s). A lot of record with an existing public road that splits it shall be considered two (2) parent tracts.
Marshall County Zoning Ordinance pg 294 (identical to Plymouth’s):
Lot – A contiguous area of land separated from other areas of land by separate description for purpose of sale, lease, transfer of ownership or separate use. It may be a single parcel separately described or a combination of such parcels when adjacent to one another and used as one (1) lot.
No resolution was obtained and it was determined to continue to wait for the Town Council’s direction. It was further discussed that there are many provisions that have been corrected in the ordinance revision that are going unaddressed while the portion in question is currently in effect under the current ordinance.
Thursday morning wasn’t exactly a pretty day for setting up the setting up the film reel for the Lake Maxinkuckee Film Fest. Dave Epley and Will Pearson of Easterday Construction put the display together in the rain in order to make sure it was there in time to be decorated for the start of the festival on Friday evening. Hot Pink for 2010! Unfortunately due to the high winds Friday evening, the Reel spent the Friday night on it’s back. It’s just a little too top heavy for 30mph wind gusts.
Easterday Construction Co., Inc. was named as a Sponsoring Business for the Festival. Becky and I were named to the Actor’s Guild as Patrons. We attended the Gala opening on Friday night and enjoyed good food and company. There were cocktails before the showing of the film “Best Man in Grass Creek” at the Uptown Cinema. Following the movie there was a catered dinner under a tent adjacent to the theater. Richard Ford brought three students from the Jacob School of Music at Indiana University, singers Laura Gibson and Nathan Brown and pianist Ilya Friedberg, to perform.
Good luck to the Festival Committee. Judging from Friday evening it should be a fun event, which benefits a good cause. Easterday Construction Co., Inc. is happy to help with this event.