Monroe County Plan Commission Meeting

MONROE COUNTY PLAN COMMISSION

MEETING

October 18, 2011 6:00 pm

Monroe County Justice Building Courtroom 213 301 N. College Ave, Bloomington, Indiana,

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 1 of 167 October 18, 2011 Agenda Plan Commission Work Session 5:30 p.m. – 7:30 p.m. October 6, 2011

501 N. Morton St., North Showers Building, Suite 106A

Please take notice that the Monroe County Plan Commission will conduct a work session on Thursday, October 6th at 5:30 PM in the Suite 100 B, North Showers Building, 501 N. Morton Street, Bloomington, Indiana. The work session agenda includes a discussion of the following agenda items for the regularly scheduled Tuesday, October 18, 2011 Plan Commission meeting:

NEW BUSINESS:

1. 1108-REZ-06 Withrow Rezone. Located at 2259 W. Bolin Lane, Perry Township, Section 30. Zoned Agricultural/Rural Reserve with Business/Industrial Overlay (BIO), request to remove BIO.

2. 1108-REZ-07 Beaty/Dowdy Rezone. Located at 5553 W State Road 48, Van Buren Township, Section 2. Zoned PUD, request to rezone to Estate Residential.

3. 1108-REZ-08 Gunther Rezone. Located at 8355 W. Elwren Rd, Van Buren Township, Section 20. Zoned Suburban Residential, request to rezone to Agricultural/Rural Reserve.

4. 1108-SMN-14 Baker / Olsson Minor Subdivision & Utility Underground Requirement Waiver. 2 lots on 9.8 acres. Located at 5688 W. Woodland Road in Bean Blossom Township, Section 22. Zoned AG/RR.

5. 1108-SMN-15 Cecil Deckard Minor Subdivision & Utility Underground Requirement Waiver. 2 lots on 12.3 acres. Located at 2200 S. Knightridge Road in Perry Township, Section 12. Zoned RE 2.5 and ECO Area 3.

6. 1109-SFP-13 Lakewood Subdivision Final Plat Amendment #3 and Request to delete zoning lot language on deed. 4 lots on 1.17 acres. Located on W. Lakewood Drive, addressed as 8536 N. Blue Heron Drive in Benton North Township, Section 35. Zoned SR.

7. 1107-ZOA-01 Chapter 830, Landscaping, proposed text amendments. Public request.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 2 of 167 October 18, 2011 MONROE COUNTY PLAN COMMISSION OCTOBER 18, 2011 PLANNER Katie Waldman CASE NUMBER 1108-REZ-06 PETITIONER Jason Withrow and George Hutton ADDRESS 2255/2259 W. Bolin Lane REQUEST Rezone Agricultural/Rural Reserve (AG/RR) with Business and Industrial Overlay (BIO) to only AG/RR (remove BIO) ACRES 15 acres ± ZONE AG/RR with BIO TOWNSHIP Perry SECTION 30 PLATS 8 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment

EXHIBITS 1. Petitioner’s letter 2. Rezone Site Plan 3. Administrative subdivision which created the petition lot

PETITIONER’S REQUEST The petitioner is seeking to rezone the subject parcel from Agricultural/Rural Reserve (AG/RR) with Business and Industrial Overlay (BIO) to only AG/RR, removing the BIO. If the BIO is removed, the petitioner intends to file for a subdivision of the property.

RECOMMENDATION Deny the rezone request based on the findings of fact, subject to the Highway and Drainage Engineers’ reports. Should the Plan Commission choose to forward the petition to the County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval, the following conditions are recommended: 1. Remove the mobile home/bandstand structure from within the sinkhole within 90 days of petition action by the County Commissioners. 2. File for cluster subdivision approval in order to bring the site into compliance with the zoning ordinance (two homes on one lot), within 90 days of petition action by the county commissioners, or remove one home from the property within the same time frame.

SUMMARY The petition area is comprised of one 15 acre parcel created via an administrative subdivision in 2002, which was allowed pursuant to a design standards variance approval in 2001 (0109-VAR- 10). In the BIO, no administrative subdivisions are typically permitted, only cluster subdivisions. Also in 2001, Mark Freeman (former owner of this property) petitioned to rezone this property with other acreage totaling approximately 275 acres to remove the BIO. This petition was denied by the County Commissioners.

The petition was discussed by the Plan Review Committee at their September 15th meeting, and members of the committee brought up the following concerns: the feasibility of the site as an industrial site, the location and effect of the pending I-69 project, site access, and karst features. Committee members opined that there is no reason not to remove the BIO, and that other large potential industrial tracts are nearby, and since the area was designated as Employment, lots have been subdivided as residential, weakening the potential use of the area for employment purposes.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 3 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 4 of 167 October 18, 2011 ZONING and ADJACENT USES The property is zoned Agricultural/Rural Reserve with Business and Industrial Overlay. All of the adjacent properties are zoned the same, a small parcel of Institutional/Public zoned property to the west which appears to be vacant, and smaller residential lots zoned Estate Residential or Suburban Residential with BIO east and west of the site. Properties in the immediate area are used for residential and agricultural purposes.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 5 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 6 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 7 of 167 October 18, 2011 SITE CONDITIONS The entire site is in an area of high karst density, with slopes for the site falling gradually in all directions from the high point/ridge along the northwest edge of the property. Access is provided to Bolin Lane via a gravel drive with two access points. The gravel drive is in need of repair, with erosion creating foot-deep gulleys for a large portion of the drive. There is a mobile home on the northern part of the property, which is the location where a mobile home has been located since the 1970s. The Assessor’s Property Card dates the mobile home currently there to 1997. In 2002, an ILP (02-RM-058) and a building permit were issued to build a manufactured home on the property as well. It is unknown whether the property owner was told to remove the other home at the time. Having two homes on one lot constitutes an illegal use of the property. There is a large sinkhole in the middle of the property, into which an old mobile home was placed. It has been hollowed out and is occasionally used as a bandstand for concerts with seating inside the sinkhole. There are numerous agricultural structures, in various states of disrepair – none are currently in use for agricultural purposes. One steel grain bin contains a recording studio for the tenant of the northern home.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 8 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 9 of 167 October 18, 2011

Facing south from north side of Bolin Lane, western driveway

Facing west, mobile home on northern part of property

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 10 of 167 October 18, 2011

Facing southeast, old mobile home/bandstand in sinkhole, old silos behind, building to right has been converted into a recording studio

Facing southeast toward Rolling Glen subdivision from middle part of site

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 11 of 167 October 18, 2011

Facing northeast toward Rolling Glen subdivision from middle part of site

Dilapidated farm structure just east of silos. Standing water under planks in foreground.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 12 of 167 October 18, 2011

2002 Manufactured home on southern portion of site, facing west

Facing west from southern portion of site

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 13 of 167 October 18, 2011

Facing northwest from southern portion of site

Facing northwest from southern home, silos and farm structures not in use

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 14 of 167 October 18, 2011

Facing northeast from middle of site, driveways out to Bolin Lane

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISCUSSION The petition site is located in an Employment Area of the Comprehensive Plan, which states the following: Employment As shown on the Plan Map (Figure 2, page 33), approximately 11,300 acres of land are designated for employment uses, generally along SR 37 in Perry Township, in the northeast corner of Van Buren Township and in southeast Richland Township, west of SR 37. The employment areas shown on the Plan map are on large parcels of relatively flat land with few environmental constraints which will have superior access upon implementation of the recommendations in the Monroe County Thoroughfare Plan. These areas are served by roadways with high traffic-carrying capacity matched by visual exposure from the highway. They are particularly good locations for employment uses which require immediate, high- volume transportation access, visibility, large, flat sites and utilities. These areas should provide internal circulation roads as part of their site layout.

Industrial Manufacturers and Wholesale Businesses This category is intended for economic uses that result in increased jobs and tax base to the County, including industries, offices, trucking and distribution/warehouses that are not generally compatible with residential uses typically found in suburban and urban areas. Five criteria guide the location of large tract industrial uses: transportation access, sanitary sewer, water supply, lack of incompatible existing land use and topography. An area of approximately 1,000 acres around Dillman Road and SR 37 is recommended as an excellent location for employment uses. Prime roadway access in this area provides great connections to business centers throughout and beyond the region. The construction of I-69

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 15 of 167 October 18, 2011 proximate to this location would enhance it for large-tract industrial uses. Other opportunities for employment-related uses, such as light industrial operations, small-scale shops, home occupations and cottage industries, may be appropriate outside these areas as well. Perhaps such uses should be considered to be eligible as accessory uses in primary residential land use areas. Rural Communities should have areas designated for small-scale shops and light industrial uses that are compatible with residential areas.

Tourism With attractions such as Indiana University, with its athletic and cultural events, and the natural beauty of rural areas, Monroe County has a tourism industry that provides a significant economic benefit. However, the tourism industry has room for expansion. The new Limestone Country Trail and other proposed trail programs should be supported. The reclaiming of an abandoned quarry as a public park would also expand tourism opportunities. While the Plan recognizes that some carefully controlled expansion of tourism is possible and desirable, it also recognizes that Monroe Reservoir and Lake Lemon can become overdeveloped and overused, causing a decline in the recreational quality. When tourism-related development occurs, the natural beauty of the area should be maintained or enhanced through proper design, landscaping and buffering. Local, State and federal agencies should work together to promote the responsible development of additional recreational alternatives in this area, taking into consideration the developments' impacts on the surroundings and existing tourism resources.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 16 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 17 of 167 October 18, 2011 FINDINGS-OF-FACT:

831-3 Standards for Amendments:

In preparing and considering proposals to amend the text or maps of this Zoning Ordinance, the Plan Commission and the Board of County Commissioners shall pay reasonable regard to:

(A) The Comprehensive Plan;

Findings: The subject property falls entirely within the Employment land use area of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan states the following with regard to the Employment land use category:

As shown on the Plan Map, approximately 11,300 acres of land are designated for employment uses, generally along SR 37 in Perry Township, in the northeast corner of Van Buren Township and in southeast Richland Township, west of SR 37. The employment areas shown on the Plan map are on large parcels of relatively flat land with few environmental constraints which will have superior access upon implementation of the recommendations in the Monroe County Thoroughfare Plan. These areas are served by roadways with high traffic-carrying capacity matched by visual exposure from the highway. They are particularly good locations for employment uses which require immediate, high-volume transportation access, visibility, large, flat sites and utilities. These areas should provide internal circulation roads as part of their site layout.

A subset of the Employment land use category is Industrial Manufacturers and Wholesale Businesses, which encompasses about 1,000 acres around Dillman Road and SR 37.

This category (Industrial Manufacturers and Wholesale Businesses) is intended for economic uses that result in increased jobs and tax base to the County, including industries, offices, trucking and distribution/warehouses that are not generally compatible with residential uses typically found in suburban and urban areas. Five criteria guide the location of large tract industrial uses: transportation access, sanitary sewer, water supply, lack of incompatible existing land use and topography.

An area of approximately 1,000 acres around Dillman Road and SR 37 is recommended as an excellent location for employment uses. Prime roadway access in this area provides great connections to business centers throughout and beyond the region. The construction of I-69 proximate to this location would enhance it for large-tract industrial uses. Other opportunities for employment-related uses, such as light industrial operations, small-scale shops, home occupations and cottage industries, may be appropriate outside these areas as well. Perhaps such uses should be considered to be eligible as accessory uses in primary residential land use areas. Rural Communities should have areas designated for small-scale shops and light industrial uses that are compatible with residential areas.

The salient issue is whether or not removing the BI Overlay effectuates the goal of using lands designated as Employment on the Comprehensive Land Use map for such purposes; staff contends it does not. In fact, staff believes that any change proposed that does not move the area toward

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 18 of 167 October 18, 2011 employment as a land use is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Furthermore, Chapter 827 (BI Overlay) specifically aims to channel development of BI Overlay lands to business and/or industrial uses. For example, Section 1 of that chapter states:

“The purpose of the Business and Industrial (BI) Overlay District is to retain the potential for business and industrial development in areas identified on the Comprehensive Land Use Plan as best suited for such uses...The permitted uses are limited to those allowed in the Light Industrial and Heavy Industrial districts. The Agriculture/Rural Reserve designation will remain in place until a developer files a rezone petition for a Light Industrial or Heavy Industrial designation with the preliminary plat of a project. The County will administer the rezone process and make the necessary map changes. The rezone is required prior to final plat approval.”

From this excerpt, it is clear that the BI Overlay is intended to preserve the possibility of business and/or industrial development on these lands. Furthermore, while the Overlay explicitly aims to ensure the provision of land for business and/or industrial uses, it does not preclude residential development: Chapter 827 specifically provides for the residential development of lands subject to the BI Overlay through “clustering.” Hence, removing the BI Overlay is unnecessary and would frustrate achievement of the county’s land use goals as prescribed in the Comprehensive Plan

(B) Current conditions and the character of current structures and uses in each district;

Findings: The parcel currently contains residential, agricultural, and accessory structures. The proposed rezone would allow the petitioner to develop the site in a way that is not inconsistent with the surrounding area, despite the fact that the rezone is inconsistent with the long range goals of the County. The existence of two residential subdivisions nearby (Rolling Glen and Farmer’s Field) does not represent an incongruity because each was initiated before the adoption of the BI Overlay.

Findings: As determined by county residents and formalized in the Comprehensive Plan, the most desirable use is employment. The current zoning, however, permits residential development, albeit through “clustering” (Chapter 826). In addition, the site is not flat and not without environmental constraints, making it less than ideal for industrial development.

(D) The conservation of property values throughout the jurisdiction; and

Findings: Staff currently has no formal mechanism for evaluating the impact that development decisions have on real estate values. Further residential development of the petition site could, however, undermine future industrial and/or business development of adjacent properties as it increases potential for conflicting land uses;

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 19 of 167 October 18, 2011 site proximity to the Mineral Extraction zone has similar implications (i.e., the idea of “coming to the nuisance”).

(E) Responsible development and growth.

Findings: Staff believes the rezone does not meet this standard. The County established the Overlay to preserve the industrial or business development potential of land in the county that was deemed to be good for employment uses. Removing the BI Overlay from the petition site is irresponsible in the sense that it 1) runs counter to the county’s long range goals as formalized in the Plan 2) could undermine the potential for the subject property to be rezoned for business/industrial purposes and 3) invites conflict between new residential uses on this property and adjacent lands that might be developed for employment uses. The existence of Robinson Industrial Park .5 mile away attests to the area’s future potential.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 20 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT 1: Petitioner letter

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 21 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT 2: REZONE SITE PLAN

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 22 of 167 October 18, 2011 Exhibit 3: Administrative subdivision creating the petition lot

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 23 of 167 October 18, 2011 MONROE COUNTY PLAN COMMISSION OCTOBER 18, 2011 PLANNER Katie Waldman CASE NUMBER 1108-REZ-07 PETITIONER W. C. Dowdy (Deceased), Branda Beaty (estate representative) ADDRESS 5553 West State Road 48 REQUEST Rezone from PUD (RE1) to ER ACRES: 1.66± ZONE: PUD TOWNSHIP: Van Buren SECTION: 2 PLAT: 29

GROWTH POLICIES PLAN DESIGNATION: Landbank COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION IN VICINITY: Employment

EXHIBITS 1. Site Plan 2. Outline plan for Wiley Farm

RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval based on the Findings of Fact and subject to the County Highway and Drainage Engineers’ reports.

PETITIONER’S REQUEST The petitioner is seeking to rezone a 1.66 acre lot located at 5553 W. SR 48 from Planned Unit Development (PUD) to Estate Residential. The petitioner operated an automobile detailing business on the property with a small used car sales business (classified as Automotive/Boat Repair Shop and Automotive Sales). These were the only permitted uses of the PUD.

In 2009, the petitioner requested to rezone the property to General Business; this petition was not approved. Subsequently, the petitioner requested the rezone to PUD, and this petition was granted. A Development Plan was filed, but never completed or approved.

The petition was discussed at the September 15, 2011 Plan Review Committee, which gave the opinion that the Growth Policies Plan (GPP) must allow low density residential, and that the petition brings the zoning back closer to compliance with the GPP.

ADJACENT USES/ZONING The site is zoned PUD. Adjacent properties are zoned PUD and RE1. On the north side of W. SR 48, all properties between Knapp and Hartstrait are zoned RE1 for a width of approximately 500 feet along SR 48, and are mainly single-family residential uses. Beyond the 500 foot width, the zoning changes to IL, Light Industrial. One property zoned RE1, approximately 1200 feet west, houses an electrical contractor business. Another property zoned RE1, approximately 800 feet east on the south side of SR 48, contains a pre-existing, nonconforming auto sales business. Directly adjacent to the east, west, and south, the petition property is surrounded by the Fieldstone PUD, which is undeveloped and permits residential, commercial, and institutional uses according to the approved outline plan. To the south and east of this property, single family detached or institutional uses are permitted. To the west (across Fieldstone Blvd.) a limited neighborhood business park is the use permitted by the PUD. The closest parcel of land currently zoned GB is approximately 4100 feet west of the site, on the northeast corner of Oard Road and SR 48, and is occupied by JW Electronics. The closest parcels of land currently zoned Commercial Arterial (former fringe) are approximately 800 feet east of the site, at the intersection of Daniels and State Road 48, and include Pain Real Estate, Storage Express self- storage, and Ivy Tech Community College.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 24 of 167 October 18, 2011 SITE CONDITIONS The site currently features one, two-story single family residential structure which has been used as an office, and which appears to be in use as a residence currently, one small shed, and a 2,300 square foot metal garage. The deed states that the property is approximately 2.0 acres, but subsequent purchase of right-of-way by the Indiana Department of Transportation has resulted in the reduction of the parcel to approximately 1.66 acres. The garage was presented as a residential accessory structure in the building permit application (April, 2008), and a Certificate of Occupancy has not yet been obtained for it although the business is operating out of it. The garage met setbacks as required under Chapter 833 of the Zoning Ordinance for the RE1 zoning district. It is accessed via a circular, gravel driveway off of W. SR 48. The garage and shed would not meet the required 35’ rear yard setback under the proposed Estate Residential zoning, and would become legal, Pre-existing, Nonconforming structures if the rezone petition is approved. There are two or three old, collapsed buildings on the lot adjacent to this one, on its east side. The home was recently remodeled (2009) and has siding that matches the garage. There are some old trees on the south portion of the lot. The west side of the property is fairly flat, open and grassy. There is a row of evergreen trees planted along the western property line. The back of the property slopes gently downward, but does show evidence of erosion. The site does not contain any natural springs or karst features and it is not located in a floodplain.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 25 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 26 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 27 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 28 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 29 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 30 of 167 October 18, 2011

Frontage on SR 48, facing east

Frontage on SR 48, facing north

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 31 of 167 October 18, 2011

Frontage on SR 48, facing northwest

On north edge of property, facing southwest, toward potential future commercial area (beyond most of the trees)

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 32 of 167 October 18, 2011

On the north edge of the property, facing south

View to northwest from southeast corner of parking area

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 33 of 167 October 18, 2011

Dilapidated structure along east property line

View to the south from southeast corner of property

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 34 of 167 October 18, 2011

View along south property line from southeast corner of property

Garage structure, and second accessory structure on the left

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 35 of 167 October 18, 2011

View facing north of west portion of property

View facing south along west portion of property

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 36 of 167 October 18, 2011

View facing west of western portion of property

GROWTH POLICIES PLAN AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISCUSSION The petition site is located in a Landbank Area of the Growth Policies Plan. The Monroe County Comprehensive Plan also affects this property because the property was in the former two mile fringe and the petitioner wishes to designate it Planned Unit Development (PUD). The Comprehensive Plan indicates areas of Employment near the petition site.

SPECIFIC CATEGORIES OF LAND USE AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Growth Policies Plan Landbank Areas

Special overlay area depicting land not to be committed to major new development in the foreseeable future. Any development considerations should await contiguous development and urban services. This area should be periodically reexamined over the next decade to determine whether development in the area is warranted based upon the nature of evolving development patterns. Until such a determination of eventual land use is made, low-intensity land use must be permitted.

Comprehensive Plan Employment

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 37 of 167 October 18, 2011 FINDINGS OF FACT - REZONE 831-3 Standards for Amendments In preparing and considering proposals to amend the text or maps of the Zoning Ordinance, the Plan Commission and the Board of County Commissioners shall pay reasonable regard to:

(A) The Growth Policies Plan Findings  The Growth Policies Plan designates the subject property as Landbank;  Landbank areas are not recommended for uses other than low-intensity development until such time as urban services are provided and contiguous development has occurred;  The site fronts on a recently-improved five lane highway;  The site has a septic system;  Development contiguous to and within the Landbank area has occurred;  The petition seeks to have the site zoned ER, which has a one-acre minimum lot size.

(B) Current conditions and the character of current structures and uses in each district; Findings  The site contains a single family dwelling structure and two accessory structures which meet setbacks for the current zoning, but the accessory structures do not meet the rear yard setback requirement of 35 feet for the ER zoning district proposed;  The site slopes moderately in the rear and derives access from West State Road 48, a principal arterial;  The site is zoned PUD with underlying RE1 zoning;  Uses in the area are residential, commercial, and institutional;  Adjacent zoning is PUD and RE1;  The site has a septic system.

(C) The most desirable use for which the land in each district is adapted; Findings  The site is zoned PUD with underlying RE1 zoning;  Adjacent zoning is RE1 and PUD;  Uses in the area are residential, commercial, and institutional;  The General Business zoning being sought is “primarily intended to meet the needs for heavy retail business uses. General business uses should be placed into cohesive groupings rather than on individual properties along highways in order to take advantage of major thoroughfares for traffic dissemination. Access control should be emphasized. The purposes of the GB District are: to encourage the development of groups of nonresidential uses that share common highway access and/or provide interior cross- access in order to allow traffic from one business to have access to another without having to enter the highway; to discourage single family residential uses; to protect environmentally sensitive areas, such as floodplain, karst and steep slopes; and to maintain the character of the surrounding neighborhood. Some uses are conditionally permitted. The conditions placed on these uses are to insure their compatibility with the adjacent residential uses”;  The site has frontage on West State Road 48;  The Growth Policies Plan designates the subject property as Landbank.

(D) The conservation of property values throughout the jurisdiction; and Findings  Uses in the area are residential, commercial, and institutional;  Adjacent uses are single-family residential, commercial, and potentially additional single- Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 38 of 167 October 18, 2011 family residential or institutional;  The site contains a single family dwelling structure and two accessory structures.

(E) Responsible development and growth. Findings  The petitioner is seeking to rezone 1.66 acres;  Adjacent zoning is RE1 and PUD;  The area is residential, commercial, and institutional;  West State Road 48 is classified as a Principal Arterial;  The Growth Policies Plan designates the subject property as Landbank.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 39 of 167 October 18, 2011 Exhibit 1: Site Plan

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 40 of 167 October 18, 2011 Exhibit2: Outline plan for Wiley Farm Area L: Limited neighborhood business park Area B: Single family detached or Institutional

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 41 of 167 October 18, 2011 MONROE COUNTY PLAN COMMISSION OCTOBER 18, 2011 PLANNER Katie Waldman CASE NUMBER 1108-REZ-02 PETITIONER Robert and Bill Gunther ADDRESS 8355 W Elwren Rd REQUEST Rezone from Suburban Residential (SR) to Agriculture / Rural Reserve (AG/RR) ACRES 2 acres ± ZONE Suburban Residential (SR) TOWNSHIP Van Buren SECTION 20 PLATS 28 COMP PLAN DESIGNATION: Agriculture (ag)

EXHIBITS 1. Rezone Site Plan 2. Petitioner Rezone Request Statement

PETITIONER’S REQUEST The petitioner is seeking to rezone the parcel, as shown on Exhibit 1, from Suburban Residential (SR) to Agriculture / Rural Reserve (AG/RR). The petitioner intends to enlarge the property to a size over 2.5 acres via manipulation of the lot line between this parcel and the parcel surrounding it on 3 sides.

RECOMMENDATION Approve the rezone request based on the findings of fact, subject to the Highway & Drainage Engineers’ reports and to the following conditions:

1. Complete a subdivision petition to enlarge the site to at least 2.5 acres within 180 days of rezoning approval.

SUMMARY The petitioner is seeking to rezone this property as a result of wishing to expand the property by shifting the lot line between this lot and the one surrounding it. The lot surrounding is zoned AG/RR, and the petition site is zoned SR.

The petition was discussed at the September 15, 2001 Plan Review Committee meeting, and the committee members support bringing the petition site into conformance with the Comprehensive Plan by approving this petition.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 42 of 167 October 18, 2011

LOCATION MAP The petition area is close to the western county line, just north of state Road 45.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 43 of 167 October 18, 2011

ZONING and ADJACENT USES The property is zoned Suburban Residential, and is near several other small parcels also zoned SR, which are all surrounded by Agricultural/Rural Reserve zoning district. Properties in the area are used for residential and agricultural purposes.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 44 of 167 October 18, 2011

SITE CONDITIONS The site gradually slopes downward to the southwest, and contains a single-family residence, detached garage, and pool with pool shed, small basketball court, and a covered picnic structure. There appear to be neither karst features nor floodplain on site. Elwren Road is designated as a

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 45 of 167 October 18, 2011 local road on the Thoroughfare Plan, and the house has a U-shaped paved driveway for access onto it.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 46 of 167 October 18, 2011

Facing east along Elwren Rd

Facing northwest toward back of house

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 47 of 167 October 18, 2011

Facing southwest, pool and pool shed

Facing north, house in right background, detached garage in left background.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 48 of 167 October 18, 2011 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISCUSSION The petition site is located within one designation in the Comprehensive Plan and states the following for the designation:

Agriculture

Protecting the opportunity to farm has been identified as an important land use policy of this Plan. Much of the rural character of Monroe County is derived from agricultural activities. Areas in the northwestern and southwestern portions of the County are designated as priority agricultural use areas as shown on the Plan Map (Figure 2, page 33). These areas are fairly large expanses of relatively flat land and are presently very sparsely developed. In these areas, agricultural uses shall be given priority over residential uses. Residential uses in agricultural priority zones should have a minimum lot size of 5 acres. Most farmsteads meet this requirement, and non-farm residences would be non-intrusive at this density. Clustering may be workable under strict guidelines that assure agricultural priority, even for high-impact agricultural operations. In locations where residential development occurs with clustered units, the open space created by the density requirements could be made available for crops and grazing.

The proposed agricultural category designated in the Plan totals about 17,500 acres. In addition, farming on a small scale should be encouraged to continue in other areas of the County. However, in these other areas, agriculture uses should not be given preferential treatment over residential uses, but, rather, low intensity agriculture uses should be treated as a permitted uses in low-density residential zones. These areas should be identified by the use of an Agricultural Overlay provision to be added to the County zoning ordinance and mapped by recommendation of the Plan Commission upon application by individual property owners when the combining of residential uses and the proposed agricultural uses is considered to be compatible.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 49 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 50 of 167 October 18, 2011 FINDINGS OF FACT - REZONE

According to Section 831-3. Standards for Amendments of the Zoning Ordinance: In preparing and considering proposals to amend the text or maps of this Zoning Ordinance, the Plan Commission and the Board of County Commissioners shall pay reasonable regard to:

(A) The Comprehensive Plan;

Findings:  The Comprehensive Plan labels the petition site and surrounding area as Agriculture.

(B) Current conditions and the character of current structures and uses in each district;

Findings:  The area surrounding the petition site consists of low density residential uses and agricultural uses, including the Monroe County Saddle Club, just down Elwren Road to the east.

Findings:  The Comprehensive Plan labels the site as Agriculture

(D) The conservation of property values throughout the jurisdiction; and

Findings:  Land uses around the site are mostly single family residential and agricultural.  Property value tends to be subjective as it is difficult to anticipate adverse effects.

(E) Responsible development and growth.

Findings:  The Comprehensive Plan labels the site as Agriculture  Land uses around the subject site are mostly single family residential and agricultural.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 51 of 167 October 18, 2011

EXHIBIT 1: Petitioner Rezone Exhibit

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 52 of 167 October 18, 2011

EXHIBIT 2: Petitioner Rezone Statement / Cover Letter

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 53 of 167 October 18, 2011 MONROE COUNTY PLAN COMMISSION October 18, 2011

PLANNER Erin Shane, AICP CASE NUMBER 1108-SMN-14 / Baker – Olsson Minor Subdivision PETITIONER Corbin Baker, Juli Olsson, Charles & Melissa Baker (easement) ADDRESS 5688 W. Woodland Road REQUEST Preliminary Plat to subdivide 1 parcel into 2 lots & Utility underground placement requirement Waiver Request ZONING: Agriculture / Rural Reserve (AG/RR) ACRES: 9.81 TOWNSHIP: Bean Blossom Township SECTION(S): 22 PLAT(S): 9 CP DESIGNATION: Rural Residential (rures)

EXHIBITS 1. Preliminary Plat

RECOMMENDATION Staff gives a recommendation of approval to the Plan Commission subject to the following conditions:

1. Revise plans to show overhead lines to Lot 2. 2. All utilities serving Lot 1 shall be buried.

BACKGROUND The subject site contains one parcel improved with a mobil home and two sheds. The subject parcel of 9.81 acres was created via an Administrative A subdivision in 2001 (0102-SAD-10). Also in 2001, a 30’ easement was recorded that provided access across the subject site’s northwest corner to the parcel to the north. An existing driveway is located within this easement.

The property is zoned AG/RR, which requires a 2.5 acre minimum lot area. The petitioner is proposing to create two lots; each which meets exceeds the 2.5 acre minimum: Lot 1 will be 4.91 acres and Lot 2 will be 4.50 acres net, less dedicated ROW.

The proposed lots meet the minimum Bulk, Area, and Density specifications as required in Table 4-1 of Chapter 804. The petitioner has also provided the AG/RR setbacks on the plat.

Two karst features are identified on the plat, one carried over from the 2001 Admin A. The second karst feature is along the eastern property line, and both are protected by sinkhole conservancy areas, which are described on the plat.

The applicant is proposing to access each lot from the adjacent right of way (ROW) as follows: Lot 1 will derive access from Woodland Road via a 50’ easement on Lot 2, along the west

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 54 of 167 October 18, 2011 property line. The easement will necessitate a new driveway cut. Lot 2 will derive access from Woodland Road and will continue to use the existing driveway. The Highway Department is requiring that all vegetation surrounding these two new driveways be removed, so that 300’ site distances in each direction are achieved. As of September 12, 2011, Highway has confirmed that this vegetation has been removed.

As part of the subdivision process the property owner is obligated to convey land for the planned right-of-way width indicated on the Official Map or Thoroughfare Plan. Woodland Road is a major collector that requires a 35 foot dedication along the parcel frontage. The petitioner has provided this ROW dedication as noted on the preliminary plat.

The property is also served by overhead utility lines along Woodland Road. The proposed Lot 2 maintains an existing overhead line to the existing mobil home. The petitioner will have to secure a waiver from the Plan Commission, as they do not want to bury the overhead line as required by 856-41. Also, the new utilities in the 50’ access / utility easement serving Lot 1 will have to be buried.

The petitioner has also placed a tree preservation line near the existing stand of trees that will preserve the woods on the eastern part of the lots.

PLAT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Plat Committee unanimously recommended approval for the utility waiver, based on the existing improvements (mobil home) already served by the above ground utility line.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 55 of 167 October 18, 2011 LOCATION MAP The subject site is located on Woodland Road in Bean Blossom Township, north of Ellettsville.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 56 of 167 October 18, 2011 SITE CONDITIONS The petition site has relatively flat open land along the western property line which slopes down toward the east. The eastern portion of the lot is wooded. There are two karst features on the parcel, which have been protected under sinkhole conservancy areas 25’ from the rim of each feature. Lot 2 has frontage on Woodland Road, while Lot 1 will be served with a new 50’ access easement. The site is not located in an ECO area. The site is located in the Bean Blossom / Indian Creek watershed.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 57 of 167 October 18, 2011 ADJACENT USES / ZONING The subject site is zoned Agriculture / Rural Reserve (AG/RR). Surrounding property is also zoned AG/RR. Surrounding land uses are single family residential.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 58 of 167 October 18, 2011 INFRASTRUCTURE and ACCESS The petitioner has secured a new septic permit for Lot 1 and a repair permit for Lot 2. Driveway applications for a new and existing driveway off of Woodland Road were submitted for review to the Highway Department. The Highway Department required that all vegetation surrounding these two new driveways be removed. This work was completed and verified by the Highway Department on September 12th. The lots will be served by Bean Blossom / Patricksburg water. Overhead utilities run along Woodland Road. All lines to the lots must be buried, unless a waiver is secured by the petitioner.

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN This site is within the Rural Residential (rurres) Comprehensive Plan designation which states:

Rural Residential

This category includes remote areas, environmentally sensitive areas and areas adjacent to quarry operations where lower densities and a more rural character are most appropriate and desirable. Generally, these areas are characterized by active or potential mineral extraction operations within one-quarter mile, steep slopes, forest and/or agricultural land where roads and other public services are minimal or not available. This category includes approximately 66,700 acres of land that cover most of Indian Creek Township and portions of Van Buren, Richland, Bean Blossom, Washington and Benton Townships.

Rural Residential areas are recommended to have a very low density with a minimum lot size of four acres per dwelling unit. However, clustering may be an option in this category with the remaining open space resulting from the density requirement being set aside as permanent open space. The open space within the development can serve a variety of uses including recreational opportunities for local residents, limited agricultural uses in the proposed Agricultural Overlay District or buffering of an adjoining use. Adequate land should be required to support two independent septic fields per dwelling. Subdivisions in excess of 10 dwelling units are not recommended in these areas because public services or improvements are very limited. .

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 59 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 60 of 167 October 18, 2011 FINDINGS OF FACT - Subdivisions 850-3 PURPOSE OF REGULATIONS

(A) To protect and provide for the public health, safety, and general welfare of the County.

Findings  Lots 1 and 2 have been issued septic permits.  Driveway applications have been submitted for access off of Woodland Road and may be issued after vegetation is removed, and 300’ site lines are achieved.  The site contains 2 karst features, protected with described sinkhole conservancy areas (SCA’s).  The lots meet the bulk standards as required in the AG/RR zoning district.  A waiver is required to maintain existing overhead lines to the mobil home on Lot 2.  All utilities serving Lot 1 shall be buried.

(B) To guide the future development and renewal of the County in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and related policies, objectives and implementation programs.

Findings  The recommended Comprehensive Plan Land Use for the site is Rural Residential, where it is recommended to have a very low density with a minimum lot size of four acres per dwelling unit.  The petitioner is proposing to create 2 lots over 9.81 acres.  Lot 1 will be 4.91 acres.  Lot 2 will be 4.50 acres.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 61 of 167 October 18, 2011

(D) To protect the compatibility, character, economic stability and orderliness of all development through reasonable design standards.

(E) To guide public and private policy and action to ensure that adequate public and private facilities will be provided, in an efficient manner, in conjunction with new development, to promote an aesthetically pleasing and beneficial interrelationship between land uses, and to promote the conservation of natural resources (e.g., natural beauty, woodlands, open spaces, energy and areas subject to environmental constraints, both during and after development).

(F) To provide proper land boundary records, i.e.:

(1) to provide for the survey, documentation, and permanent monumentation of land boundaries and property;

Findings:  The petitioner has submitted a preliminary plat drawn by a registered surveyor.

(2) to provide for the identification of property; and,

Findings:

 The petitioner submitted a survey with correct references, to township, section, and range to locate parcel. Further, the petitioner has provided staff with a copy

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 62 of 167 October 18, 2011 the recorded deed of the petition site. (3) to provide public access to land boundary records.

Findings  The land boundary records are found at the Monroe County Recorder’s Office and, if approved, this petition will be recorded there as a plat. The plat must comply with Chapter 860 - Document Specifications to be recorded.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 63 of 167 October 18, 2011 FINDINGS OF FACT – WAIVER OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES

The petitioner is requesting a waiver from the Improvement, Reservation and Design Standards outlined in 856-41 (Utilities), which reads:

All utility lines, including but not limited to gas, sewer, electric power, telephone and CATV shall be located underground throughout the subdivision. Wherever existing lines are located above ground, except on public roads and rights-of-way, they shall be removed and placed underground. All utility lines and other facilities existing and proposed throughout the subdivision shall be shown on the preliminary plat. Underground service connections to the street property line of each platted lot shall be installed at the Subdivider's expense. At the discretion of the Commission, the requirement for service connections to each lot may be waived in the case of adjoining lots that are to be retained in single ownership and that are to be developed for the same primary use.

Section 850-12 of the Monroe County Subdivision Control Ordinance states: “The Commission may authorize and approve modifications from the requirements and standards of these regulations (including the waiver of standards or regulations) upon finding that:

1. Practical difficulties have been demonstrated:

Findings:  Approximately 100 feet of overhead utility lines are required to be located underground from the ROW to the mobil home on Lot 2.  The cost of burying the utilities is excessive for the property owner.  Many trees and vegetation would have to be removed to install the underground utility, eliminating some of the wooded area screening the site from the ROW.  The overhead utility lines could be placed in right-of-way separate from the proposed lots and comply with the Subdivision Ordinance.

2. The requested modifications would not, in any way, contravene the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan or the Official Map of the County;

Findings:  The Comprehensive Plan calls for utilities to be placed underground in all subdivisions, except on public roads and rights-of-way;  The existing overhead utility lines will be placed in an easement rather than a public right-of-way.

3. Granting the modification waiver would not be detrimental to the public safety, health, or welfare and would not adversely affect the delivery of governmental services (e.g. water, sewer, fire protection, etc.):

Findings:  Occupants of the petition site and sites served by the overhead utility lines will continue to be serviced regardless of the location of the lines above- or below ground.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 64 of 167 October 18, 2011 4. Granting the modifications would neither substantially alter the essential character of the neighborhood nor result in substantial injury to other nearby properties;

Findings:  Waiver approval would permit existing conditions to persist.  The proposed subdivision contains 2 lots;  Approval of the waiver would not substantially alter the essential character of the neighborhood.  Many trees and vegetation would have to be removed to install the underground utility, eliminating some of the wooded area screening the site from the ROW.

5. The conditions of the parcel that give rise to the practical difficulties are unique to the parcel and are not applicable generally to other nearby properties;

Findings:  The overhead utility lines could be placed in right-of-way separate from the proposed lots and comply with the Subdivision Ordinance.  The conditions of the parcel are unique to the parcel and are applicable to some of the adjacent properties.

6. Granting the requested modifications would not contravene the policies and purposes of these regulations;

Findings:  Waiver approval would contravene the policies and purposes of these regulations, if the policy was intended for small subdivisions affecting existing improved lots.

7. The requested modifications are necessary to ensure that substantial justice is done and represent the minimum modifications necessary to ensure that substantial justice is done;

Findings:  The improvement is required due to the proposed subdivision of the property.  Approximately 100 feet of overhead utility lines are required to be located underground from the ROW to the mobil home on Lot 2.  The cost of burying the utilities is excessive for the property owner.  Many trees and vegetation would have to be removed to install the underground utility, eliminating some of the wooded area screening the site from the ROW.  Occupants of the petition site and sites served by the overhead utility lines will continue to receive service regardless of the location of the lines above- or below- ground.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 65 of 167 October 18, 2011 8. The practical difficulties were not created by the Developer, Owner, Subdivider or Applicant; and,

Findings:  The improvement is required due to the proposed subdivision of the property.

9. The practical difficulties cannot be overcome through reasonable design alternatives;

Findings:  The overhead utility lines could be placed in a public right-of-way dedicated on the proposed subdivision plat. 

In approving modifications, the Commission may impose such conditions as will in its judgment substantially secure the objectives of these regulations.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 66 of 167 October 18, 2011 SITE PICTURES

Looking north at subject site from Woodland Road

Looking north at existing driveway to Lot 2 from Woodland Road

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 67 of 167 October 18, 2011

Looking west down Woodland Road

Looking east down Woodland Road

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 68 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT ONE: PRELIMINARY PLAT

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 69 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 70 of 167 October 18, 2011 MONROE COUNTY PLAN COMMISSION OCTOBER 18, 2011 CASE NUMBER: 1108-SMN-15 PLANNER: Jason Eakin PETITIONER(S): Cecil Deckard c/o Deckard L.S. REQUEST: 2 Lot Minor Subdivision and Utility underground placement requirement Waiver Request ADDRESS: 2200 S. Knightridge Rd ZONING: RE 2.5, ECO Area 3 ACRES: 12.3± TOWNSHIP: Perry SECTION(S): 12 PLAT(S): 15 GROWTH POLICIES PLAN DESIGNATION: Conservation Residential

EXHIBITS 1. Preliminary Plat 2. Petitioner Underground Utility Waiver Request

PETITIONER’S REQUEST The petitioner seeks preliminary plat approval to subdivide 12.3acres into 2 lots and requests a waiver to the Utility underground placement requirements of the Subdivision Control Ordinance.

RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the subdivision petition AND approval of the underground utility waiver request based on the findings of fact and the County Highway Engineer’s report and the County Drainage Engineer’s report.

BACKGROUND The petitioner is requesting to create two lots Lot 2 - 5.18 acres and Lot 1 - 7.12 acres. Each lot will have direct frontage on Knightridge Road (Local, 25’ R/W Dedication requirement. The site contains both steep slope areas and buildable area of 1 acre or more on each proposed lot. Current use of the property is single family residential with two homes on one existing lot of record creating a pre-existing, non-conforming status on the property. The subdivision would bring the site into compliance with the principal use density provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. Septic Inspections occurred on the property in 2011 indicating no problems, however, Septic Repair Permits will be required prior to final approval. The petitioner is requesting a waiver to the underground utility requirement and proposes to place the existing overhead electric line in an easement twenty (20) feet in width acknowledging that any relocation of the line will require burial at that time.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 71 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 72 of 167 October 18, 2011

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN This property lies within the Conservation Residential areas of the Growth Policies Plan. The Growth Policies Plan states the following with regard to this area:

Conservation Residential Areas

These are areas near to or within environmentally sensitive areas such as the Monroe Reservoir watershed, Griffy Lake watershed and in known areas of significant karst or cave subsurface drainage. In general, these areas are not recommended for development. Where development is permitted, these areas should be developed exclusively for large lot residential use with a lot size of at least 2.5 acres. Very low residential development densities are designed to protect and conserve lake and groundwater quality. It is notable also that some Conservation Residential areas coincide with areas which are heavily forested, and have rugged topography making development at urban densities difficult and potentially expensive. These areas generally do not have urban water and sewer services. Roadway access is limited with narrow, winding roadways. Development at urban densities would necessitate significant public investment in roadways, water and sewer services, and eventually other public facilities. Public services or improvements are not recommended for these areas. Development which occurs in lakes watersheds will require land sufficient to serve two distinct septic fields. Areas with cave or karst subsurface drainage should only be developed with sewers and under conditions which permit management of stormwater runoff.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 73 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 74 of 167 October 18, 2011

ADJACENT USES/ZONING The property is zoned Estate Residential 2.5 (RE 2.5) and Environmental Constraints Overlay, Area 3 (ECO, Area 3). The surrounding areas are also zoned RE 2.5 and are principally single family residential uses. To the west is a mix of wooded ravine and agricultural use also zoned RE 2.5.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 75 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXISTING CONDITIONS The overall petition site consists of a mix of open pasture area, wooded ravines, steep slopes leading to Lake Monroe. The entirety of the site drains north into Lake Monroe. Karst areas have also been indicated on the preliminary plat requiring the creation of Sinkhole Conservancy Areas. Floodplain maps appear on the digital Flood Insurance Rate Map, however, the petitioners’ plat indicates that Floodplain is not present.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 76 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 77 of 167 October 18, 2011 FINDINGS OF FACT –Subdivision 850-3 PURPOSE OF REGULATIONS (A) To protect and provide for the public health, safety, and general welfare of the County.

Findings • Septic Repair permits from a private installer / inspector have been submitted indicating working order and repair permits have been submitted to the county health department for review and approval; • There are no designated sinkhole conservancy areas on the petition site; • The site does not contain FEMA; • The petition site is located on South Knightridge Road, which is classified as a Local Road on the Monroe County Thoroughfare Plan; • Steep slope areas in excess of 18% have been designated for non-disturbance on a total of 8 acres or 65% of the overall 12.3 acres on the site. • An existing overhead electric line currently serving one of the two existing homes on the petition site and crossing each proposed lot is proposed to remain above ground and be placed into a twenty (20) foot right of way easement. • The proposed Lots 1 and 2 will retain existing points of access to South Knightridgee Road.

(B) To guide the future development and renewal of the County in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and related policies, objectives and implementation programs.

Findings • The recommended Land Use for the site is Conservation Residential; • The petitioner is proposing to create four (2) lots as follows: Lot 1 – 6.69 acres, Lot 2 -4.96 acres; • The proposed lots meet the minimum lot size for the Agriculture / Rural Reserve zoning designation. • The proposed lots meet the maximum residential density for Environmental Constraints Overlay Area 3. • Each proposed lot contains at least one acre of total contiguous land which is equal to or less than eighteen (18) percent slope. • Steep slope areas in excess of 18% have been designated for non-disturbance on a total of 8 acres or 65% of the overall 12.3 acres on the site. • The petition site is located on South Knightridge Road, which is classified as a Local Road on the Monroe County Thoroughfare Plan; • The proposed use is single family residential for each lot.

Findings • Sidewalks are not required for this petition site; • See findings under items (A) and (B) above;

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 78 of 167 October 18, 2011 • The proposed lots meet the minimum lot size for the Conservation Residential zoning designation. • The proposed lots meet the maximum residential density for Environmental Constraints Overlay Area 3. • Each proposed lot contains at least one acre of total contiguous land which is equal to or less than twelve (18) percent slope. • The proposed lots comply with the Height, Bulk, Area and Density provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.

(D) To protect the compatibility, character, economic stability and orderliness of all development through reasonable design standards.

Findings • See Findings under items (A), (B), and (C) above; • Properties to the west of the site is a large agricultural property owned by the Huntington Trust. Properties to the north include single family, and vacant property. The areas to the south are principally residential in nature as are adjoining properties to the east; • Residential density in the surrounding Knightridge Road area is approximately one home per 2.16 acres;

Findings • See findings under items (A) through (D) above; • An existing overhead electric line currently serving one of the two existing homes on the petition site and crossing each proposed lot is proposed to remain above ground and be placed into a twenty (20) foot right of way easement.

(F) To provide proper land boundary records, i.e.:

(1) to provide for the survey, documentation, and permanent monumentation of land boundaries and property; Findings • The petitioner has submitted a preliminary plat drawn by a registered surveyor.

(2) to provide for the identification of property; and, Findings • The petitioner submitted a survey with correct references, to township, section,

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 79 of 167 October 18, 2011 and range to locate parcel. Further, the petitioner has provided staff with a copy the recorded deed of the petition site.

(3) to provide public access to land boundary records. Findings The land boundary records are found at the Monroe County Recorder’s Office and, if approved, this petition will be recorded there as a plat. The plat must comply with Chapter 860 - Document Specifications to be recorded.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 80 of 167 October 18, 2011 FINDINGS OF FACT – WAIVER OF UNDERGROUNDING UTILITIES The petitioner is requesting a waiver from the Improvement, Reservation and Design Standards outlined in 856-41 (Utilities), which reads: All utility lines, including but not limited to gas, sewer, electric power, telephone and CATV shall be located underground throughout the subdivision. Wherever existing lines are located above ground, except on public roads and rights-of-way, they shall be removed and placed underground. All utility lines and other facilities existing and proposed throughout the subdivision shall be shown on the preliminary plat. Underground service connections to the street property line of each platted lot shall be installed at the Subdivider's expense. At the discretion of the Commission, the requirement for service connections to each lot may be waived in the case of adjoining lots that are to be retained in single ownership and that are to be developed for the same primary use. Section 850-12 of the Monroe County Subdivision Control Ordinance states: “The Commission may authorize and approve modifications from the requirements and standards of these regulations (including the waiver of standards or regulations) upon finding that:

1. Practical difficulties have been demonstrated:

Findings: ••• Approximately 500 +/- linear feet of overhead utility lines would be relocated underground in order to achieve compliance with the current standard; ••• Approximately 80 +/- linear feet of the existing overhead utility line easements are located within the 12% slope restriction area. ••• The petitioner has stated Duke Energy is unwilling to bury or relocate the line. Particularly, they are strongly opposed to burial of the line and will not permit it to be buried under the stream; ••• The overhead utility lines could be placed in right-of-way separate from the proposed lots and comply with the Subdivision Ordinance.

2. The requested modifications would not, in any way, contravene the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan or the Official Map of the County;

Findings: ••• The Subdivision Control Ordinance calls for utilities to be placed underground in all subdivisions, except on public roads and rights-of-way; ••• The existing overhead utility lines will be placed in a twenty (20) foot right of way easement rather than a public right-of-way. ••• The overhead utility lines could be placed in right-of-way separate from the proposed lots and comply with the Subdivision Ordinance. ••• The Subdivision Control Ordinance provides the following definitions related to easements and right of way:

852-2. Definitions

Easement. A right of use over designated portions of the property of another for a clearly specified purpose.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 81 of 167 October 18, 2011

Right-of-way. A strip of land (other than an easement) occupied or intended to be occupied by a street, pedestrian-way, crosswalk, railroad, electric transmission line, oil or gas pipeline, water main, sanitary or storm sewer main, special landscaping, drainage swale or for another special use. The usage of the term "right-of-way" for land platting and zoning purposes shall mean that every right-of-way hereafter established and shown on a final plat is to be separate and distinct from the lots or parcels adjoining such right-of-way and not included within the dimensions or areas of such lots or parcels. Rights-of-way intended for streets, crosswalks, water mains, sanitary sewers, storm drains, screening or special landscaping, or any other use involving maintenance by a public agency shall be dedicated to public use by the Subdivider on whose plat such right-of-way is established.

• The Subdivision Control Ordinance provides the following requirement for utility undergrounding:

Wherever existing lines are located above ground, except on public roads and rights-of-way, they shall be removed and placed underground.

The standard indicated above limits the options for utility lines serving adjoining properties to either be undergrounded or if to remain overhead be placed into a right of way in order to comply with the standard as written.

3. Granting the modifications waiver would not be detrimental to the public safety, health, or welfare and would not adversely affect the delivery of governmental services (e.g. water, sewer, fire protection, etc.):

Findings: °°° The undergrounding of electric lines does not have a relationship to the delivery of governmental services (e.g. water, fire protection, etc.) to facilitate the new building sites; °°° Occupants of the petition site and sites served by the overhead utility lines will continue to be serviced regardless of the location of the lines above- or below ground. °°° Advantages and disadvantages exist in undergrounding electric lines both of which involve safety hazards.

4. Granting the modifications would neither substantially alter the essential character of the neighborhood nor result in substantial injury to other nearby properties;

Findings: °°° Waiver approval would permit existing conditions to persist. °°° The proposed subdivision contains 2 lots; °°° Approval of the waiver would not substantially alter the essential character of the neighborhood. °°° Undergrounding the utility lines may generate construction costs and road work or boring for work across S. Knightridge Road as the main utility line is on the east side of

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 82 of 167 October 18, 2011 Knightridge Road, therefore, nearby properties may be temporarily affected by denying the waiver request. °°° The existing overhead utility lines within the right of way of Knightridge Road will remain as overhead lines and are not subject the these provisions as they are in a dedicated right of way.

5. The conditions of the parcel that give rise to the practical difficulties are unique to the parcel and are not applicable generally to other nearby properties;

Findings: °°° See findings under items 1-4 above; °°° The conditions of the parcel are unique to the parcel in that no new construction is proposed with this subdivision.

6. Granting the requested modifications would not contravene the policies and purposes of these regulations;

Findings: °°° See findings under #2 and #3 above.

7. The requested modifications are necessary to ensure that substantial justice is done and represent the minimum modifications necessary to ensure that substantial justice is done;

Findings: °°° The improvement is required due to the proposed subdivision of the property. °°° The Subdivision Control Ordinance calls for utilities to be placed underground in all subdivisions, except on public roads and rights-of-way; °°° The existing overhead utility lines will be placed in a twenty (20) foot right of way easement rather than a public right-of-way. °°° Occupants of the petition site and sites served by the overhead utility lines will continue to be serviced regardless of the location of the lines above- or below ground. °°° The overhead utility lines could be placed in right-of-way separate from the proposed lots and comply with the Subdivision Ordinance. °°° Undergrounding the utility lines may generate construction costs and road work or boring for work across S. Knightridge Road as the main utility line is on the east side of Knightridge Road, therefore, nearby properties may be temporarily affected by denying the waiver request. °°° The existing overhead utility lines within the right of way of Knightridge Road will remain as overhead lines and are not subject the these provisions as they are in a dedicated right of way. °°° The installation of utilities underground is consistent with the policies and purposes of all relevant regulations, but practical difficulties in construction in portions of the property have been identified.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 83 of 167 October 18, 2011 8. The practical difficulties were not created by the Developer, Owner, Subdivider or Applicant; and,

Findings: °°° (See findings under #1 & #7 above). °°° The subdivider acquired the property via property transfer in 1990 and are unlikely to have created the practical difficulties. °°° The practical difficulties regarding physical relocation of the utility lines were not created by the Developer, Owner, Subdivider or Applicant.

9. The practical difficulties cannot be overcome through reasonable design alternatives;

Findings: °°° The installation of utilities underground is consistent with the policies and purposes of all relevant regulations, but practical difficulties in construction in portions of the property have been identified. °°° Undergrounding the utility lines may generate construction costs and road work or boring for work across S. Knightridge Road as the main utility line is on the east side of Knightridge Road, therefore, nearby properties may be temporarily affected by denying the waiver request.

In approving modifications, the Commission may impose such conditions as will in its judgment substantially secure the objectives of these regulations.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 84 of 167 October 18, 2011 Exhibit 1: Preliminary Plat

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 85 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT 2

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 86 of 167 October 18, 2011 MONROE COUNTY PLAN COMMISSION October 18, 2011

PLANNER Erin Shane, AICP CASE NUMBER 1109-SFP-13 / Lakewood Subdivision Lots 25-29, Final Plat Amendment #3 PETITIONER Paul & Shelley Dietz, c/o Eric Deckard, Deckard Land Surveying ADDRESS 8536 N. Blue Heron Drive REQUEST Final plat amendment to convert five lots into four and eliminate the zoning lot language on their deed, which has resulted in lots 25 – 27 being used as one lot. ZONING: Suburban Residential (SR) ACRES: 2.04 acres total for 5 lots. TOWNSHIP: Benton North Township SECTION(S): 35 PLAT(S): Lakewood Subdivision CP DESIGNATION: Conservation Residential (cr)

EXHIBITS 1. Final Plat Amendment #5 2. Copy of ILP # 05-RA-154

RECOMMENDATION Staff gives a recommendation of approval to the Plan Commission subject to the following conditions:

1. Revise title to show Amendment 5 2. Deduct floodplain from lot acreage 3. Provide repair or new permits for all lots 4. Provide water company capacity letters for each lot

BACKGROUND The subject area contains five parcels, improved with a single family home on Lot 28 and a garage on Lots 25, 26 and 27. The single family home was constructed in 1950 according to the property record card and maintains a non-conforming front yard setback. The garage was constructed in 2005 per ILP # 05-RA-154, over the existing property lines on lots 25, 26 and 27. As a condition of the issuance of the ILP, the three lots were required to be combined as one zoning lot. The property owner added the restriction to their deed and the ILP was issued (see Exhibit 2). The zoning lot language deed restriction allowed the property owner to build over property lines of lots he owned, but it prohibited him from developing the lots individually.

The zoning lot language in the ordinance reads as follows:

804.2.B.(4) For adjoining lots under single ownership, setback requirements may be determined from the perimeter of the adjoining lots, ignoring interior lot lines, as shown in Table 4-2, provided that only one main structure and its accessory

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 87 of 167 October 18, 2011 structures shall be allowed within the perimeter of such adjoining lots and, the following notation is placed on the recorded deed to each such adjoining lot: "For planning and zoning purposes, the lot described herein shall be considered as part and parcel of the adjacent lot(s) owned by [insert owner's name] pursuant to a deed (or deeds) recorded at Deed Record [#s], page [#s], in the office of the Recorder of Monroe County, Indiana. The real estate described herein shall not be considered to be a separate parcel of real estate for land use, development, conveyance or transfer of ownership, without having first obtained the expressed approval of the Monroe County Plan Commission, Monroe County, Indiana, or any successor local governmental body having land use jurisdiction over the real estate. This restriction shall be a covenant running with the land.

The lots are in Lakewood Subdivision, which was platted in 1954. There are 57 lots in the subdivision. There have been four prior final plat amendments to this subdivision (0305-SVA- 08, 0309-SVA-22, 0408-SVA-21 and 0004-SVA-12.

At a date unknown, a 23’ section along the eastern property lines of existing Lots 25 and 26 was parceled off. Staff found a deed from 1993 where the parcels were conveyed to the property owners to the east, along with more lots to the east. The existing plat map for this Section 35 also shows this 23’ division.

The properties are zoned SR, which requires a 1 acre minimum lot area. The existing lots Maintain the following minimum lot areas: Lot 25 is .30 acres, Lot 26 is .55 acres, Lot 27 is .50 acres, Lot 28 is .50 acres and Lot 29 is .36 acres. The acreages for Lots 25 and 26 do not include the 23’ parcelization to the east. The existing lots combined are approximately .19 acres less than stated on the plat. Lots 25, 26 and 27 total 1.17 acres as one zoning lot, which conforms to the minimum lot area in the SR district.

The petitioner is proposing to maintain Lots 28 and 29 is their current form. Lot 28 is .36 acres and Lot 29 is .51 acres. The petitioner would like the Plan Commission to approve the removal of the zoning lot restriction that covers Lots 25, 26 and 27. If approved, the petitioner proposes to eliminate one of the lots and have two final lots as: Lot 25 A at .55 acres and Lot 26A at .62 acres.

All of the lots are pre-existing non-conforming in terms of lot area. The SR district has a caveat in Chapter 804, Table 4-1 that no minimum lot area variance is required if all other development standards are met.

If the garage was not constructed over property lines and if the zoning lot restriction was not in place, staff would be able to process this final plat amendment administratively since a removal or reconfiguration of an internal lot line of the subdivision is not a material deviation per 854-11- C-8.

Since one lot is being removed, at least one of the lots is coming closer into compliance, the lots are in a 57 year old platted subdivision and the garage (residential storage structure) meets the setbacks of the SR district with the new lot configuration, staff supports the request for final plat amendment.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 88 of 167 October 18, 2011 LOCATION MAP The subject site is located on Blue Heron Drive (platted as Lakewood Drive) in Benton North Township, off of Lake Lemon. According to a nearby neighbor, the fire department re-named the street from Lakewood to Blue Heron, as Lakewood is used in several other roads in the County. Staff still needs to confirm this and initiate correction of County records.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 89 of 167 October 18, 2011 SITE CONDITIONS The petition site has sloping land down to Lake Lemon on the north. The lots are wooded. All lots have frontage on Blue Heron Drive, with the exception of existing Lot 26. The site is not located in an ECO area. The site is located in the Bean Blossom Creek-Lake Lemon watershed and has floodplain covering small portions of each lot on the lake side. DNR defined the BFE as 633.6, FPG two feet above or 635.6. The existing improvements are above the FPG.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 90 of 167 October 18, 2011 ADJACENT USES / ZONING The subject site is zoned Suburban Residential (SR). Surrounding property is also zoned SR. Surrounding land uses are single family residential.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 91 of 167 October 18, 2011 INFRASTRUCTURE and ACCESS The petitioner has secured two new septic permits for Lots 26 and 27. Staff is requiring septic permits and water utility capacity for each lot as a condition of approval. Blue Heron is a private drive and not maintained by the County. According to County legal, ROW dedication is not required since there is no intensification in the subdivision –no new lots are generated.

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN This site is within the Conservation Residential (rurres) Comprehensive Plan designation which states:

Conservation Residential

This category recommends limitations on development within the environmentally sensitive watersheds of Monroe Reservoir, Lake Lemon and Lake Griffy. It is established to provide a residential option while protecting the lakes and the water supply resources of the County. There are approximately 9,000 acres of land in this category.

With the exception of The Pointe development on Monroe Reservoir, these sensitive areas generally do not have public water and sewer services. Access is limited by narrow, winding roadways. Development at higher densities would require a significant investment in roadways, water, sewer and other public services. Most of these areas are heavily forested and have rugged topography making development at higher densities difficult and potentially expensive and environmentally damaging.

In general, critical water supply watersheds and areas of steep topography are not encouraged for development. Where development occurs, it should be for large lot residential uses with a minimum lot size of five acres. In reviewing subdivision and site development proposals, the County Plan Commission should consider the following criteria:

 Public services or improvements are not recommended for these areas.

 Regulations should be adopted regarding erosion, drainage and vegetation management. .

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 92 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 93 of 167 October 18, 2011 FINDINGS OF FACT - Subdivisions 850-3 PURPOSE OF REGULATIONS

(A) To protect and provide for the public health, safety, and general welfare of the County.

Findings  Lots 26 and 27 have been issued septic permits.  Staff is requiring septic permits on all of the lots as a condition of approval  Staff is requiring a water capacity letter from the water utility for all of the lots as a condition of approval  Blue Heron / Lakewood Dr is a private road.  Road and may be issued after vegetation is removed, and 300’ site lines are achieved.  The existing lots are pre-existing non-conforming in terms of minimum lot area.  The Lakewood Subdivision was platted in 1957.  ROW dedication is not required since there is no intensification in the subdivision – no new lots are generated

(B) To guide the future development and renewal of the County in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and related policies, objectives and implementation programs.

Findings  The recommended Comprehensive Plan Land Use for the site is Conservation Residential.  The petitioner is proposing to create 4 lots over 2.2 acres.  Lot 25 A at .55 acres  Lot 26A at .62 acres.  Lot 28 is .36 acres  Lot 29 is .51 acres.  The petitioner would like the Plan Commission to approve the removal of the zoning lot restriction that covers Lots 25, 26 and 27.  Approval of the final plat and removal of the zoning lot language will result in four lots, where there are now five lots.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 94 of 167 October 18, 2011  The Lakewood Subdivision was platted in 1957.  All of the lots are pre-existing non-conforming in terms of lot area.  The SR district has a caveat in Chapter 804, Table 4-1 that no minimum lot area variance is required if all other development standards are met.  All future development will have to meet SR setback standards.  Approval of the final plat and removal of the zoning lot language will result in four lots, where there are now five lots.  The garage (residential storage structure) on 26A meets the setbacks of the SR district with the new lot configuration.

(D) To protect the compatibility, character, economic stability and orderliness of all development through reasonable design standards.

Findings  Lots 26 and 27 have been issued septic permits.  Staff is requiring septic permits on all of the lots as a condition of approval  Staff is requiring a water capacity letter from the water utility for all of the lots as a condition of approval  Blue Heron / Lakewood Dr is a private road.  The Lakewood Subdivision was platted in 1957.  All of the lots are pre-existing non-conforming in terms of lot area.  The SR district has a caveat in Chapter 804, Table 4-1 that no minimum lot area variance is required if all other development standards are met.  All future development will have to meet SR setback standards.  Approval of the final plat and removal of the zoning lot language will result in four lots, where there are now five lots.  The garage (residential storage structure) on 26A meets the setbacks of the SR district with the new lot configuration.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 95 of 167 October 18, 2011  The SR district has a caveat in Chapter 804, Table 4-1 that no minimum lot area variance is required if all other development standards are met.  All future development will have to meet SR setback standards.  Approval of the final plat and removal of the zoning lot language will result in four lots, where there are now five lots.  The garage (residential storage structure) on 26A meets the setbacks of the SR district with the new lot configuration.

(F) To provide proper land boundary records, i.e.:

(1) to provide for the survey, documentation, and permanent monumentation of land boundaries and property;

Findings:  The petitioner has submitted a preliminary plat drawn by a registered surveyor.

(2) to provide for the identification of property; and,

Findings:

 The petitioner submitted a survey with correct references, to township, section, and range to locate parcel. Further, the petitioner has provided staff with a copy the recorded deed of the petition site.

(3) to provide public access to land boundary records.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 96 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT ONE: PRELIMINARY PLAT

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 97 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT 2: ILP for Garage

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 98 of 167 October 18, 2011 MONROE COUNTY PLAN COMMISSION October 18, 2011

PLANNER Erin Shane, AICP CASE NUMBER 1107-ZOA-01 PETITIONER Steve Smith of Smith, Neubecker & Associates REQUEST: Revisions to Chapter 830 – Landscaping

EXHIBITS 1. Petitioner cover letter 2. Petitioner text amendments to Ch. 830 – ORIGINAL 3. Petitioner comments and explanations for text amendments. 4. Additional revisions from Petitioner received October 5, 2011 5. Review Comments by Amy Thompson, Extension Educator 6. Review Comments #2 by Amy Thompson, Extension Educator 7. Review Comments by Cathy Meyer, Extension Educator 8. Review Comments # 2 by Cathy Meyer, Extension Educator 9. City of Bloomington & Monroe County Landscape Code Comparison 10. Additional Bioretention Plant Materials Requested by Petitioner 11. Final comments from Petitioner, dated October 12, 2011 12. Staff recommendations, including content from petitioner’s original filing

BACKGROUND The Plan Commission recently approved a new fee schedule that went into effect on July 1, 2011. New categories were added to the fee schedule including an option for the public to request a zoning ordinance amendment for $1000.

The petitioner filed for this new category soon after the fees were passed. In consultation with area landscaping professionals, the petitioner has compiled several amendments to Chapter 830. Exhibit 2 shows the original revisions requested by the petitioner. The bulk of the petitioner’s request generally is to increase the planting area in specified areas in addition to reducing the amount of material in those same areas.

Staff met with the petitioner to discuss the amendments soon after filing and offered up strike outs and/or refinements to better align with the vision of the County. The petitioner was amenable to changes to their original request based on staff input, with a few exceptions.

Former staff member Heidi Russell Wagner brought forward landscape amendments last year and noted in her staff report (1009-ZOA-01) the following concerns:

“ Now that the new law has been in effect for two years, Staff has had the time to discuss the implications of the change with developers, owners, landscapers, and citizens. All agree that the change was of benefit, however express concerns regarding the density of species required. Native species take approximately 3 years to fully establish their root systems, and after three years, focus on spreading. The required 15 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns per 100ft² represent a design challenge and raises survivability concerns. …At this time, the

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 99 of 167 October 18, 2011 amendments are focused on density; however Staff recognizes that more amendments are needed. Due to current time constraints, it was determined that the following proposed alterations would satisfy the immediate short term concerns of stakeholders and Planning Staff. This recent filing addresses some of those lingering concerns consistently fielded by planning staff and landscape design professionals.

PRC INPUT

The PRC reviewed at their September 15, 2011 meeting and made several suggestions to staff and the applicant. They requested a comparison of the City of Bloomington’s and Monroe County’s landscaping requirements. Main categories from each are noted in Exhibit 7.

The PRC also requested input from Amy Thompson, Extension Educator and Cathy Meyer, Naturalist. Both supported the increase in spacing for street trees and the addition of native cultivars. Their exact response is noted in Exhibits 5 and 6.

The general recommendation at the August 11th meeting was favorable, although a formal vote was not taken. This case will go back to the PRC to get a formal recommendation on October 13, 2011.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 100 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 – Petitioner Cover Letter

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 101 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT 2: Petitioner Text Amendments – ORIGINAL

830-6 General landscaping requirements (K) Except as provided in 830-6(L) and 830-10(C)(6)below, all landscape areas shall be separated from vehicular use areas by reinforced concrete curbing. Unreinforced extruded curbing shall be prohibited. The width of curbing shall be excluded from the calculation of the minimum dimensions of all required landscape areas. (L) All landscaped areas at the front line of off street parking spaces shall be protected from encroachment or intrusion of vehicles through the use of wheel stops. Wheel stops shall have a minimum height of six inches above the finish surface of the parking area, be properly anchored and continuously maintained in good condition. Wheel stops shall not be placed in locations of intense pedestrian traffic. (N) Maximum number of one particular species can not constitute more than 20% 40% of the required D value or species count for each category. (R) If woodlands are located within a required landscape area, preservation may be applied toward the planting requirement.

830-7 Bufferyard Landscaping Requirements (A) The following bufferyard requirements are intended to physically separate and visually screen side and rear yards of adjacent land uses that are not fully compatible. (B) To determine the require size of the buffer, two the following variables are considered: the nature of the adjacent use, the size of the subject property, the zoning of the subject property and the adjoining property zoning and the amount of required vegetation. (1) Use table 30-1 to determine the buffer type required for the situation. The table assigns a minimum bufferyard to each potential development scenario. If the adjoining property has a mix of land uses, the highest intensity use determines the bufferyards required size. (2) After determining the bufferyard type, refer to table 30-2 which enumerates the physical design requirements of each bufferyard. At least 45% of the D value must be shade trees. (3) No buffer yard is required between properties that are zoned or used as commercial, industrial or agricultural. (4) Bufferyards are not required within platted subdivisions but may required on the perimeter depending on adjoining land uses and zoning. (5) Bufferyard requirements are based on the size of the subject parcel; 1. Parcels larger than five acres require the buffer yard width and D value in table 30-1. 2. Parcels between two acres and five acres require 50% of the bufferyard width and 50% of the bufferyard D value in table 30-1.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 102 of 167 October 18, 2011 3. Parcels less than two acres require 25% of the bufferyard width and 25% of the bufferyard D value in table 30-1. (C) If woodlands are located within the minimum landscaped yard, preservation may be applied toward the planting requirement. If existing woodlands are located in only part of the minimum landscaped yard, the D value requirement is proportionately reduced. (D) A six foot high opaque fence or wall may be located within the bufferyard reducing the required D value by 50%. (E) The bufferyard should incorporate bioretention where deemed appropriate by the Drainage Engineer; see 830-10 for specifications. Details to utilize bioretention can be coordinated with the County Drainage Engineer and the Administrator. Use of bioretention may reduce other storm water requirements on the site.

830-8 Parking Lot Landscaping Requirements (A) Landscaping Along the Right-of-Way

Figure 30-1 Parking Lot Landscaped Strip, Option 1 Provide a minimum ten foot wide mulched strip between a right of way and the parking lot, planted with a minimum of one tree and 10 shrubs/perennial/grasses/ferns for every 100 square feet 35 lineal feet of frontage, excluding driveway openings.

Figure 30-2 Parking Lot Landscape Strip, Option 2 Provide a berm at least 2.5 feet higher than the finished elevation of the parking lot. The berm shall have a minimum side slope of 2:2 and a minimum crown width of two feet. Live vegetation must cover the berm with a minimum of one tree and 10 shrubs/perennials /grasses/ferns for every 100 square feet 35 lineal feet of street frontage, excluding driveway openings. Provision of a berm shall decrease the shrub requirement by 50%.

(B) Perimeter Landscaping (2) One tree and 15 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns are required for every 100 350 square feet excluding access aisles (a minimum D value of 100 points per 100 350 square feet).

(C) Interior Landscaping (5) The minimum D value of each 130 square foot island shall equal 130 65 including one tree with the remainder of the D value a combination of shrubs/perennial/grasses/ferns. Each additional 10 square feet shall require 10 5 additional D Value points. Trees must have a clear trunk at least six feet above the finished grade to allow for visibility and vehicular circulation beneath the tree canopy. (6) Landscape strips between two facing parking aisles shall be a minimum of 5 feet wide. One tree and 10 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns are required for every 100 350 square feet.

830-9 Commercial and Industrial Streetscapes The following landscape strip requirements apply to all commercial and industrial zones

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 103 of 167 October 18, 2011 and all nonresidential uses within a residential zone for the area between a building and the Right of Way.

(A) Traditional Streetscape Options (site does not receive drainage)

Figure 30-6 Commercial and Industrial Landscaped Strip, Option 1 Provide a minimum 10 5 foot wide mulched strip between a right of way and the parking lot, planted with a minimum of one tree and 10 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns for every 100 square 35 lineal feet of street frontage, excluding driveway openings.

Figure 30-7 Commercial and Industrial Landscaped Strip, Option 2 Provide a landscaped strip a minimum of 10 5 feet wide and a maximum of 20 feet wide and an average of 15 10 feet strip adjacent to the public right of way, planted with a minimum of one shade tree and 10 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns for every 100 square 35 lineal feet of street frontage, excluding driveway openings.

830-10 Bioretention (B) Required Values Provide a minimum of one tree and 10 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns per 100 350 square feet of area. If the area is smaller than 100 350 square feet, adjust the species count accordingly.

830-13 Installation and Maintenance (B) Plants shall conform to the measurements specified below (1) Diameter measurements in inches shall be taken 4.5 feet 6” above grade at breast height (DBH) for sizes up to 4” caliper and 12” above grade for sizes above 4” caliper. Multi-stem or clump trees of equivalent size shall be allowed.

830-14 D Values (C) Perennials (Table 30-8, ferns (Table 30-10) and grasses (Table 30-9) are worth 5D points each. Woody shrubs are worth 8D points each.

830-15 Tables of Permitted Plant Materials (A) The following tables (Tables 30-5 through 30-11) list he permitted plant materials by botanic and common names. Cultivars of native species are allowed for all of the plant lists. A professional landscape architect/designer should be consulted for plant selection according to the site characteristics and drainage.

Juniper Juniper Species Picea Glauca

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 104 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT 3: Petitioner comments and explanations for text amendments.

Comments and explanations.

830-6(N) Diversity

The diversity requirement is much too great. One cannot use a single species of tree for example. Nor can you use 5 species of trees unless an equal number of each type is used. You must use at least 6 types of trees in order to have a chance at meeting this requirement and must keep strict tabulation of each tree placed as you design to be sure that you don’t exceed the maximum. Multiply this effort by the same required diversity for shrubs, perennials, grasses and ferns and you have a logistical nightmare. Keeping track of the number of plants placed along with sll other considerations in good landscape design, such as plant size, texture, seasonal color, soil, sun and water needs, all the aesthetic considerations, etc and it becomes a nearly impossible task, one that leads to rote, repetitive design in an attempt to keep track of it all. As it stands, this provision is actually a disincentive to using any particular category of plants. Why use ferns if one must use and keep track of 6 of them? Why use perennials or grasses? Often the best landscape designs are the most simple with a smaller palette of plants that work well together. What happens on a small site where there are less than 5 trees required? The provision can not be met. We suggest increasing it to at least 40%, should it be kept.

830-11 Bufferyard Landscaping Requirements

Our experience has been that the buffer yard has led to unreasonable buffer requirements on small lots and on parcels adjoining vacant land. The possibility of high intensity use on an adjoining parcel triggers the requirement for significant buffer to a vacant lot. It can also require buffers within a commercial or industrial subdivision. On a small lot the width of the buffer can use up a considerable amount of the lot. Take a 100’ x 100’ lot (10,000 sf) with 30’ buffers on three sides. 7,200 sf of the site is consumed by buffer. These changes are proposed to correct these problems and leave the buffer in place where it is needed.

830-12 General landscaping requirements

The landscape and storm water codes encourage sheet flow of storm water from paved areas to biofiltration features and to grassy side slopes. The requirement for curb is not consistent.

830-13 Installation and Maintenance

Measurements of nursery stock should be taken as specified by the American Standard for Nursery Stock, the standard in the industry.

830-14 Tables of Permitted Plant Materials

Cultivars are extremely valuable in terms of providing alternatives for plants that work better under specific site conditions. Cultivars are typically developed to improve upon certain

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 105 of 167 October 18, 2011 characteristics of the native for use under conditions where the native would not work well. For example, it might be smaller in size, columnar in shape, hardier in city conditions, more cold tolerant, have more attractive flowering, fruiting or fall color, etc.

Non invasive evergreens should be added to the list; such as junipers and picea glauca. Pica glauca is native to several Midwestern states and is not heavily feed on by deer. Evergreens are extremely valuable in providing year round interest and color as well as their screening capabilities.

Landscape Plantings Density

The remaining changes address the excessive density of plantings required by the code. The required planting density is too much for the individual plant to be able to survive and thrive. The streetscape and parking lot perimeter sections require a tree every 10 lineal feet along those features. These are trees that need substantially more space. Street trees for example are required at 40’ spacing. These changes reduce the linear landscaping requirements to about 1/3 of the current code. They reduce the parking lot landscape island planting requirements by 50%. The reduced requirement is still a substantial amount of landscape material but is more appropriate to what might be termed the maximum recommended planting density.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 106 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT 4: Additional revisions from Petitioner received October 5, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 107 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 108 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 109 of 167 October 18, 2011

Boxwood - Staff does not support per AT

Juniper - US Native only

Spruce - Staff does not support per AT

Spirea - Staff does not support per CM

Viburnum – US Native only

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 110 of 167 October 18, 2011 Magnolia - Staff does not support per CM

Spruce - Staff does not support per CM

Pear trees - Staff does not support per CM

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 111 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 112 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 113 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 114 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 115 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT 5: Review Comments by Amy Thompson, Extension Educator

From: Thompson, Amy F. [[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 9:19 AM To: Erin Shane Subject: RE: Landscaping Chapter - PC requests your input

My question – and I realize I should probably just know this – but what qualifies as a trees? Mature dogwoods on a 20 foot space would be nice. Mature sugar maple, etc. 35’ makes more sense. Are they all lumped together in the ordinance? That said 10 feet is too close even for small trees.

More trees now in some ways does make more sense because mortality is high initially and trees will also die over time . I believe we put in ordinance they had to be replaced if they died within 5 years they had to be replaced by the developer but even after 5 years mortality for trees in these types of situations is always high ( looking for real data on this from the Urban forestry specialist at PU)

I also don’t have a problem with cultivars – much more readily available for developers to use.

Amy

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 116 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT 6: Review Comments #2 by Amy Thompson, Extension Educator

From: Thompson, Amy F. [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 10:15 AM To: Erin Shane Subject: RE: Landscaping Chapter - PC requests your input - revised attachment

Well,

830-6- yes arborivate can get to 4-5 feet wide but that varies by variety. I would say 3’ is a more typical width for most of what landscapers use these days. (I realize this wasn’t something you asked about.

I’m Ok with the serviceberry varieiites – as long as we’re sticking with those native to the eastern US. I don’t even know if there are Asian species but lets avoid them. Things like A. Laevis, A. sanguinea. Would be OK.

Boxwood – I’d vote no, yes Its an Ok plant but lets stick with Indiana natives

I’m OK with hydrageas –

Ok with inkberry

OK with sweetspire – I’m surprised it wasn’t on our list already.

The juipers are widely used and do add variety to the landscape… stay with u.S. natives.

I’m not real familiar with spireas other than Japonica … I would avoid japonica it is considered invasive. http://www.naturehills.com/catalog/bushes_and_shrubs/spirea_shrubs.aspx perhaps cathy has more to say on this?

Is the thuja not already on this list.

Yes, to native virburnums.

I’m OK with the magnolias, As I said yesterday – no on the spruce, drive around town all kinds of diseased & dying (not well suited to our environment in the long run) spruce. No to callery pear. My understanding is that although Bradford may be the most “well-known bad guy” other callerys have also been found to be invasive. http://www.invasive.org/browse/subinfo.cfm?sub=10957

I asked Heidi to not include Ash on the list – and people should not be planting it. It is probably doomed….

Eastern hemlock is a nice addition to the landscape under the right conditions …however it does not tolerate hot, dry or windy well. White pine also is a challenge street tree wise- I’d agree with the mulberry – they make a mess, they break, they don’t have the best form.

All the elms can have problems with breakage (as can any tree) but before dutch elm disease they were widely used as street trees. There are varieties which are resistant to dutch elm.

I’m obviously in a super big hurry here…. I’m brining you a book and CD. Hopefully might be of some help to you and provide you some additional detail and support.

Amy

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 117 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT 7: Review Comments by Cathy Meyer, Extension Educator

Hi Erin,

A spacing of 10' would be too close for mature trees. I would not object to a spacing of 35' if trees are planted, but maybe retain existing trees if they have closer spacing. Maybe shrubs can be used in between.

Parking lot trees should be spaced and sized by the root sdpace available. A tree that will be large at maturity will not do well in a 5' diameter hole.

I don't have a problem with cultivars. They may be more suited to landscape use.

I can bring you some arborist books with recommendations for tree selection. You could also ask Lee Huss, the city forester.

Cathy Meyer Naturalist Monroe County Parks and Recreation 214 West Seventh Street, Suite 110 Bloomington, IN 47404 812-349-2805

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 118 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT 8: Review Comments #2 by Cathy Meyer, Extension Educator

From: Cathy Meyer Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 3:35 PM To: Erin Shane; Amy Thompson Subject: RE: Landscaping Chapter - PC requests your input - revised attachment

Sorry, I have the booklets on my desk and have not had time to take them to you. I agree with Amy on Colorado spruce (bagworms, drought killed many big ones) and callery pear (very invasive weak branching). Other comments: Dwarf spruce is prone to spider mites and disease issues, Spireas, yews, and boxwoods are not native and pretty boring. I dont know if Sweetbay Magnolia survives here. I haven't ever seen it. If it bloom ealry, like the saucer magniolia dn star magnolia, they are often hit by frost and the flowers turn brown. From the list, I have not seen hackberry bothered by disease. They get galls, which don't seem to hurt them, and the birds really like the fruit. Ash is probably best avoided because of the emerald ash borer. White pine and hemlock might do better as interior trees. Other Amelachier sp., like Allegheny, are fine. Red Mulberry, Willows, Lareg-toothed aspen, and virginia pine are unattractive and often break. Undesirable. no wild garlic Some typos - Pagoda Dogwood, Jack-in-the-Pulpit

Cathy

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 119 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT 9: COB & Monroe County Landscape Code Comparison

City of Bloomington Monroe County

20.05.052 LA-01.(a)(6) Distribution: Required 830-6-(O) Professional landscape design is landscaping shall be reasonably distributed encouraged to fulfill the landscaping throughout all open space areas. It is suggested requirements of this chapter. Required plantings that the required plantings be planted in clusters Distribution can be arranged according to design elements or irregular patterns, and that native grasses and site characteristics (i.e. wet soils, part and other native species be used for shade etc.). Informal and natural plant ornamentation in addition to the required arrangements are encouraged. plantings.

20.05.052 LA-01(b) Maintenance: Developers and their successors in interest shall be responsible for the regular maintenance of all landscaping elements in perpetuity. Failure to 830-3.A Landscaping for commercial and maintain all landscaping is a violation of this industrial applications must be maintained in Unified Development Ordinance subject to the perpetuity, unless limited or revoked by provisions of Chapter 20.10: Enforcement and legislation, by Plan Commission or Board Maintenance Penalties. Specifically: (1) All plant material shall of Zoning Appeals approval, or by other be maintained alive, healthy, and free from government action (e.g., condemnation of disease and pests. (2) All landscape structures site) that conflicts with the maintenance including, but not limited to, fences and walls requirement shall be repaired or replaced periodically to maintain a structura1ly sound and aesthetic condition.

20.05.052 LA-01(c)(2) Species Diversity: On sites that require an aggregate total of twenty (N) Maximum number of one particular species (20) or more new trees, any given species of can not constitute more than 20% of Diversity tree shall be limited to a maximum of thirty-three the required D value or species count for each percent (33%) of the total number of newly category. planted trees on site.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 120 of 167 October 18, 2011 830-13(B) Plants shall conform to the measurements specified below. 20.05.052 LA-01(c)(5) New Planting Sizes: The (1) Diameter measurements in inches shall be following nrinimum sizes shall apply to all taken 4.5 feet above grade at required plant material: breast height (DBH). (A) Deciduous Trees: All newly planted (2) Minimum size for trees shall be 1.5 inches in deciduous trees shall be at least two (2) inches New Plant Sizes diameter. in caliper. (3) Minimum size for shrubs shall be 3 gallon. (B) Evergreen Trees: All newly planted (4) Minimum size for perennials, grasses, ferns, evergreen trees shall be at least six (6) feet tall. and endangered shall be 1 (C) Shrubs: Shrubs shall be at least three-gallon gallon. If 1 gallon sizes are unavailable, 2 plugs container size or eighteen (18) inches tall. (minimum 2”X 3”) can be substituted for one, 1 gallon plant.

20.05.052 LA-01(c)(6)(B) Existing Vegetation: The Planning Department may permit the substitution of required landscaping with existing vegetation provided that the existing vegetation is similar in species and location as well as in 830-5(A) Trees and good health and quality. Vegetation preserved shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns already existing to meet the requirements of Section 20.05.044: on land subject to the EN-07 [Environmental Standards; Tree and provisions of this chapter shall be preserved Forest Preservation], may be substituted for wherever feasible. Criteria for judging required landscaping, provided it meets the the feasibility of retaining existing vegetation requirements of Subsection 20.05.052(c)(6). include: Qualified existing vegetation shall be credited (B) Existing trees within the Bufferyard that are towards required landscaping based on the preserved will contribute to the Existing Vegetation following values: required Density Value (D Value) at the rate of (i) Deciduous Trees: A credit of one (1) tree per 35D for every three inches of every four (4) inches in caliper of an existing caliper except on lots under one (1) acre, where qualified deciduous tree is earned. No single the maximum D value existing tree shall count towards more than five awarded shall be 100. Existing (5) trees/shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns within individual required trees. the perimeter parking lot or streetscape will be (ii) Evergreen Trees: A credit of one (1) tree per evaluated in the same manner as new every twelve (12) feet in height of an existing shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns based on the qualified evergreen tree is earned. No single species. existing tree shall count towards more than three (3) individual required trees. (iii) Shrubs: A credit of one (1) shrub per every one (1) existing qualified shrub is earned.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 121 of 167 October 18, 2011 830-9 Figure 30-6 Commercial and Industrial Landscaped Strip, Option 1 Provide a minimum 10 foot wide mulched strip between a right-of-way and the parking lot, planted with a minimum of one tree and 10 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns for every 100 square feet of street frontage, excluding 20.05.052 LA-01 (d) Street Trees: (1) Number: driveway openings.; Figure 30-7 Commercial A minimum of one (1) canopy tree shall be and Industrial Landscaped Strip, Option 2 planted per forty (40) feet of property that abuts Provide a landscape strip a minimum of 10 feet Street Trees / a public right-of-way.; (C) Proximity of Adjacent wide and maximum of 20 feet Streetscape Street Trees: The spacing between adjacent wide and an average width of 15 feet strip street trees shall be no less than adjacent to the public right-of-way, twenty (20) feet and no more than forty (40) planted with a minimum of one shade tree and feet. 10 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ ferns for every 100 square feet of street frontage, excluding driveway openings.; Figure 30-8 Commercial and Industrial Landscaped Strip, Option 3 Preserve a 25 foot wide strip of existing woodlands in lieu of the landscaping requirement.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 122 of 167 October 18, 2011 (2) Buffer Yard Types: Required buffer yards shall be installed according to the following standards: (A) Buffer Yard Type I: (i) A minimum setback of ten (10) feet shall be provided in addition to the setback otherwise required by this Ordinance. (ii) One (I) deciduous canopy tree shall be planted in the buffer yard for every thirty (30) feet of boundary between the subject and adjoining properties. (B) Buffer Yard Type 2: (i) A minimum setback of fifteen (IS) feet shall be provided in addition to the setback otherwise required by this Ordinance. (ii) One (I) deciduous canopy tree and two (2) evergreen trees shall be planted in the buffer yard for every twenty-five (25) feet of boundary between Buffer Yards SEE CHART the subject and adjoining properties. (C) Buffer Yard Type 3: (i) A minimum setback of twenty (20) feet shall be provided in addition to the setback otherwise required by this Ordinance. (ii) A row of deciduous canopy trees shall be planted parallel to the property line within the buffer yard with one (I) tree placed every twenty (20) feet along the boundary between the subject and adjoining properties. (iii) One (I) of the following shall also be provided: [aJ A six (6) foot tall opaque fence or brick/stone wall; [b J A five (5) foot tall undulating benn planted with shrubs; or [cJ A row of evergreen trees, comprised of one (1) tree placed every ten (10) feet along the property boundary. SEE CHART

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 123 of 167 October 18, 2011 20.05.053 LA-02(a) Parking Lot Perimeter Plantings: Parking lots shall be screened from streets and adjacent uses using a combination of plant materials, decorative fences, decorative walls, and/or earthen berms. Parking lots with four (4) or more spaces shall have the following perimeter planting: (1) Trees: (A) Number: Parking lot perimeter areas shall 830-8.B.(2) One tree and 15 contain one (1) tree per four (4) parking spaces. shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns are required for (B) Type: A minimum of seventy-five percent every (75%) of the required trees shall be large, 100 square feet excluding vehicular access canopy trees. aisles (a minimum D Value of 100 points Parking Lot Perimeter (C) Location: Trees shall be planted within ten per 100 square feet). (10) feet of the parking lot edge. (c) The applicant may preserve existing (2) Shrubs: woodlands at least 25 feet in (A) Number: Parking lot perimeter areas shall width in lieu of the above perimeter landscaping contain three (3) shrubs per one (1) parking requirements. space. (B) Type: A minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the shrubs shall be evergreen. (C) Location: Shrubs shall be planted within five (5) feet of the parking lot edge. (D) Height: Shrubs planted in parking lot perimeter areas shall be selected from species that grow to a minimum height offour (4) feet.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 124 of 167 October 18, 2011 830-8.C(4) Landscaped islands of at least 130 square feet of area shall be provided every 10spaces or less within a row of spaces for residential sites and every 15 spaces orless 20.05.053 LA-02(b) Landscape Bumpouts and within a row of spaces for commercial Islands:(1) Number: Parking lots with sixteen developments. Planting islands shouldbe evenly (16) or more parking spaces shall provide one spaced throughout the parking lot to consistently (1) landscape bumpout or island per every reduce the visualimpact of long rows of parked sixteen (16) parking spaces.(2) Minimum Area: cars. Islands shall be utilized where needed Each landscape bumpout or island shall be at tocontrol vehicular circulation and define major least three hundred and twenty-four (324) drives. Landscape strips betweentwo facing square feet in size.(3) Minimum Planting: Each parking aisles can also be used to meet the Parking Lot Islands landscape bumpout or island shall contain at interior plantingrequirement.(5) The minimum D least one (1) large canopy tree.(4) Curbing: Value of each 130 square foot island shall equal Parking lot bumpouts or islands shall be 130 includingone tree with the remainder of the surrounded by a concrete curb of at least four D Value a combination (4) inches in height.(5) Placement: Landscape ofshrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns. Each islands shall be installed to control vehicular additional 10 square feet shall require circulation and define major drives. Such islands 10additional D Value points. Trees must have a shall be placed at intervals of no more than clear trunk at least six feet abovethe finished sixteen (16) consecutive spaces. grade to allow for visibility and vehicular circulation beneath the treecanopy. See chart Table 30-3 Required Interior Planting Area of Parking Lots

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 125 of 167 October 18, 2011

City of Bloomington Buffer Chart

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 126 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT 10: Additional Bioretention Plant Materials Requested by Petitioner

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 127 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 128 of 167 October 18, 2011

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 129 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT 11: Final comments from Petitioner, dated October 12, 2011

830-6 General Landscape Requirements

(K) SNA does not agree with the curb requirements if sheet flow from a parking lot can be accomplished into a Bioretention area. The depth of the Bioretention area could be lower and the overflow elevation set such that storm water does not back up onto parking lot carrying mulch with it.

830-8 Parking Lot Landscaping Requirements.

(C) Interior Landscaping (4) Recommend increasing island size from 130 sf to 162 sf, the size of the parking stall. Larger islands are better for larger trees.

830-9 Commercial and Industrial Streetscapes

(A) Traditional Streetscape Options 1. Option 1 – Reads: “Provide a minimum 5 foot wide mulched strip”; PRC advised removing mulched strip and have groupings of plants be mulched. Should mulch strip be deleted? It was deleted from option 2 but not Option 1.

830-10 Bioretention areas

(D) Bioretention Sizing See curb comment under 830-6 (K)

830-15 Table of Permitted Plant Material

Shrubs SNA recommended We are in agreement with the shrubs that are added and rejected from the plant list, and agree with using native cultivars.

Trees SNA Recommended We are in agreement with the Spruce, Pear trees and Magnolia not being added to the plant list.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 130 of 167 October 18, 2011 EXHIBIT 12: Final staff recommendations, including content from petitioner’s latest suggestions

CHAPTER 830

ZONING ORDINANCE: LANDSCAPING

830-1. Purpose

The purpose of this chapter is to establish minimum standards for the provision, installation, and maintenance of landscape plantings in order to complement the natural environment and achieve a healthy, beautiful, and safe community. These regulations are intended to:

(A) Preserve Monroe County's existing natural vegetation and the incorporation of native plants, plant communities, and ecosystems into landscape design, where possible.

(B) Foster aesthetically pleasing development that will protect and preserve the appearance and character of the community and foster a sense of place.

(D) Improve environmental quality, habitat for wildlife, and watershed health by recognizing the numerous beneficial effects of landscaping upon the environment.

(E) Maintain and increase the value of land by requiring landscaping to be incorporated into development, thus becoming by itself a valuable capital asset.

(F) Provide direct and important physical and psychological benefits to human beings through the use of landscaping to reduce noise and glare, provide shade and cooling, and to break up the monotony and soften the harsher aspects of urban development.

(G) Eradicate or control certain exotic plant species that have become nuisances because of their tendency to damage public and private works, to have a negative effect upon public health, or to disrupt or destroy native ecosystems.

(H) Promote innovative and cost-conscious approaches to the design, installation, and maintenance of landscaping.

(I) Establish procedures and standards for the administration and enforcement of this Landscaping Ordinance.

830-2. Applicability

This Landscape Ordinance shall apply to all public, private, and institutional development, with the following exceptions:

(A) previously approved development;

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 131 of 167 October 18, 2011 (B) development of an individual single family detached residence or single duplex on a lot of record; and

(C) additions to nonresidential structures that are under 10 percent of the gross floor area or 5,000 square feet, whichever is less; and

In all other cases, whenever a site plan review is required by Chapter 815 of this Zoning Ordinance, all yard and parking areas shall be landscaped in accordance with the requirements of this chapter.

830-3. Enforcement

Wherever site plan review is required by this Zoning Ordinance, a landscape plan shall be a required part of such site plan. No permanent land use certificate or certificate of occupancy shall be issued without completion of all landscaping shown on the landscape plan required herein. Failure to implement the approved landscape plan, including preservation of existing features, or to maintain the landscaping shall be a violation of this Zoning Ordinance subject to the penalties outlined in Chapter 817.

(A) Landscaping for commercial and industrial applications must be maintained in perpetuity, unless limited or revoked by legislation, by Plan Commission or Board of Zoning Appeals approval, or by other government action (e.g., condemnation of site) that conflicts with the maintenance requirement.

(B) Residential landscaping must be maintained for 2 years.

830-4. Content of Landscape Plan

A landscape plan shall conform to the following requirements:

(A) A landscape plan is required for each lot within the proposed development. It is recommended that the landscape plan be prepared by a landscape architect, nurseryman, or other professional experienced in landscape design and the installation and care of plant materials. (B) All landscape plans submitted for approval as a component of a required site plan shall show the entire zoning lot to scale and shall contain the following information:

(1) the location and dimensions of all existing and proposed structures, parking lots and drives, roadways and right-of-way, sidewalks, bicycle paths, ground signs, refuse disposal areas, bicycle parking areas, freestanding electrical equipment, recreation facilities, utility lines and easements, freestanding structural features, and other landscape improvements, such as earth berms, walls, fences, screens, sculptures, fountains, street furniture, lights, and courts or paved areas;

(2) the name and address of the owner, developer, and plan preparer, the date the plan was prepared, scale, and north arrow;

(3) the location, quantity, size, Density Value (D Value), and name--both botanical and common--of all proposed planting materials;

(4) the location, size, and common name of existing trees and individual

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 132 of 167 October 18, 2011 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns, areas of dense trees or shrubs, and other natural features, indicating which are to be preserved and which are to be removed;

(5) the approximate location and generic identification of existing structures and plant materials within the yard of adjoining properties;

(6) existing and proposed grading of the site, including proposed berming, indicating contours at not more than two-foot intervals. The planning staff may waive this requirement for situations in which grading is negligible;

(7) specification of the type and boundaries of all proposed vegetative ground cover;

(8) design of fences and other significant accessory structures;

(9) the location of barriers to be placed at or beyond the drip line of any trees to be preserved, and the type of material to be used for the barrier;

(10) planting and installation details as necessary to ensure conformance with all required standards;

(11) details indicating specific grading measures or other protective devices where trees are to be preserved in areas of cut and fill; and,

(12) a tabulation clearly displaying the relevant statistical information necessary for the Plan Commission to evaluate compliance with the provisions of this ordinance.

(13) soil mix used for landscaped areas.

830-5. Preservation of Existing Features

(A) Trees and shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns already existing on land subject to the provisions of this chapter shall be preserved wherever feasible. Criteria for judging the feasibility of retaining existing vegetation include:

(1) the practicability of arranging site plan components around existing features. In general, plans for groups of structures should be designed so as to preserve tree masses, individual tree specimens, and small stands of trees or shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns;

(2) the condition of the vegetation with respect to continued vitality;

(3) the amount of healthy vegetation the area involved will support;

(4) the practical and economic possibility of designing the location and grades of proposed structures and paving to preserve existing vegetation; (5) the desirability or lack thereof of a particular tree or species by reason of its appearance; historic or ecological significance; botanical characteristics; and the function the vegetation would fulfill as a site plan component;

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 133 of 167 October 18, 2011 (6) the potential for interference with utility services or with passage or visibility along roads or walkways; and,

(7) the possibility of preserving the vegetation while meeting the development needs through pruning rather than removal.

(B) Existing trees within the Bufferyard that are preserved will contribute to the be 100. Existing trees/shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns within the perimeter parking lot or streetscape will be evaluated in the same manner as new shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns based on the species.

(C) Substantial barriers shall be specified on the Landscape Plan and shall be placed at or beyond the drip line of trees to be protected. These barriers shall remain in place during heavy construction on the site, and no vehicle, machinery, tools, chemicals, construction materials, or temporary soil deposits may be permitted within the barriers, nor may any notice or other object be nailed or stapled to protected trees.

(D) Where trees are to be preserved in areas of cut or fill, specific grading measures or other protective devices, such as tree wells, tree walls, or specialized fill and pavement designs shall be required and shall be fully detailed on the Landscape Plan.

830-6. General Landscaping Requirements

All land areas that are not covered with buildings and pavement or used for agricultural purposes shall be appropriately landscaped in accordance with the requirements of this Chapter. Landscaping shall be provided in the areas specified and of the minimum intensity, expressed in D Value, specified below.

(A) The tables of materials included in this chapter provide measures of landscaping intensity, expressed as Density Value (D Value) or number of species, as a means of establishing compliance with these regulations. When plant materials listed in the table are used, they will be assigned the D Value specified in section 830-14. The Administer may be petitioned to include Plant materials not listed. Once approved, plant materials not listed will be assigned a D Value based on height, spread, and/or crown at maturity, using the best available resources to determine mature characteristics. A landscape architect, nurseryman, or other professional experienced in the installation and care of plant materials should be consulted to ensure that the plants proposed are appropriate and will survive.

(B) Where front and rear yards overlap side yards, the yard shall be treated as part of the yard having the greater required D Value.

(C) The scale and nature of landscape materials shall be appropriate to the size of the structures and the available space. Materials shall be located to avoid interference with overhead and underground utilities and utility easements or vehicular or pedestrian movement and visibility. Growth characteristics should be considered.

(D) Plant material shall be selected to achieve an intended purpose such as pollution filtration, control storm water runoff, shading, screening, ornamentation, etc.

(E) Trees shall be planted to maintain a minimum five foot clearance between the tree trunk and structures, building overhangs, walls, fences, property lines, and

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 134 of 167 October 18, 2011 other trees.

(F) Plantings should be arranged to promote energy conservation according to LEED standards; e.g. use of tall deciduous trees on the south and west sides of buildings to provide shade from the summer sun and planting evergreens on the north of buildings to dissipate the effect of winter winds.

(G) All trash dumpsters, trash pads, loading areas consisting of two or more loading spaces, loading docks, and service and maintenance areas shall be screened from land in a residential zone and all adjacent public roads. Such screening may be achieved by using a six foot high, completely opaque fence or wall, a six foot high berm, or a six foot high evergreen screen planted nine feet on center in a double staggered row.

(H) Ground-mounted heating and cooling units for nonresidential structures shall be adequately screened so as not to be visible from streets and/or adjacent properties.

(I) Native wildflowers, grasses and other vegetative ground cover shall be used for all open space, including parking lot islands, except for:

(1) decorative mulch planting beds extending no more than 6 inches beyond the drip line of shrubbery and a 6 foot diameter surrounding trees, and (2) inert stabilization in areas subject to severe runoff, erosion, or ponding. Where stone or other inert materials are to be used for ground cover, they shall be specifically identified on the landscape plan. Any area not so designated shall be required to have grass or vegetative ground cover.

(J) All landscaping shall conform to the regulations established for visibility triangles to maintain safe sight distances and intersections and points of access as designated in section 804-4.

(K) Except as provided in 830-6 (L) and 830-10(C)(6) below, all landscape areas shall be separated from vehicular use areas by reinforced concrete curbing. Unreinforced extruded curbing shall be prohibited. The width of curbing shall be excluded from the calculation of the minimum dimensions of all required landscape areas. Landscaped areas that incorporate bioretention may not install curbs, unless required by the Administrator. Wheel stops are required between parking spaces and bioretention areas.

K. Staff concern: How prevent washout of mulch in bioretention

areas w/ out curbs?

Petitioner Comment: SNA does not agree with the curb requirements if sheet flow from a parking lot can be accomplished

into a Bioretention area. The depth of the Bioretention area could be lower and the overflow elevation set such that storm water does not back up onto parking lot carrying mulch with it.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 135 of 167 October 18, 2011

(L) All landscaped areas at the front line of off-street parking spaces shall be protected from encroachment or intrusion of vehicles through the use of wheel stops. Wheel stops shall have a minimum height of six inches above the finish surface of the parking area, be properly anchored and continuously maintained in good condition. Wheel stops shall not be placed in locations of anticipated intense pedestrian traffic.

L. Staff does not support.

(M) Minimum open space shall be as required by the Zoning Ordinance Height, Bulk, Area, and Density Provisions chapter.

(N) Maximum number of one particular species can not constitute more than 20 33% of the required D value or species count for each category.

(O) Professional landscape design is encouraged to fulfill the landscaping requirements of this chapter. Required plantings can be arranged according to design elements and site characteristics (i.e. wet soils, part shade etc.). Informal and natural plant arrangements are encouraged.

(P) Soils in landscaped areas must be a minimum 18 inch depth of a mix appropriate for the plantings and drainage conditions.

(Q) All traditionally landscaped areas must be mulched with hardwood at a depth appropriate to the plantings.

830-7. Bufferyard Landscaping Requirements

(A) The following bufferyard requirements are intended to physically separate and visually screen side and rear yards of adjacent land uses that are not fully compatible.

(A): Staff does not support. This is an issue better addressed in defining yards.

(B) To determine the required size of the buffer, two variables are considered: the nature of the adjacent use and the amount of required vegetation.

(1) Use Table 30-1 to determine the buffer type required for the situation. The table assigns a minimum bufferyard to each potential development scenario. If the adjoining property has a mix of land uses, the highest intensity of use determines the bufferyard's required size.

(2) After determining the bufferyard type, refer to Table 30-2 which enumerates the physical design requirements of each bufferyard. At least 45% of the D Value must be shade trees.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 136 of 167 October 18, 2011

(C) If woodlands are located within the minimum landscaped yard, preservation may be applied toward the planting requirement. If existing woodlands are located in only part of the minimum landscaped yard, the D Value requirement is proportionately reduced.

(D) A six foot high opaque fence or wall may be located within the bufferyard reducing the required D Value by 50 percent.

(E) The bufferyard should incorporate bioretention where deemed appropriate by the Drainage Engineer; see 830-10 for specifications. Details to utilize bioretention can be coordinated with the County Drainage Engineer and the Administrator. Use of bioretention may reduce other storm water requirements on the site.

Table 30-1 Minimum Required Bufferyard

ADJOINING USES

Single Two Multi Low Medium High Family Family Family Intensity Intensity Intensity Dwelling Dwelling Dwelling Use Use Use

Single Family Dwelling None A* B* B* C* D*

Two Family Dwelling A None A* B* C* D*

Multi

Family

Dwelling B A None A* B* D* P

R Low O Intensity P Use B B A None A* C* O S Medium E Intensity D Use C C B A None B*

U High S Intensity E Use D D D C B None * The maximum buffer that may be required.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 137 of 167 October 18, 2011

Table 30-2 Bufferyard Types

D Value Required Minimum per 100 Linear Feet Type Landscaped Yard of Property Line or Right-of-Way*

A 10 feet 150 105

B 10 20 feet 300 210

C 15 30 feet 450 315

D 20 40 feet 600 420 * Linear does not mean all plantings have to be arranged in a linear fashion, natural groupings are encouraged.

830-8. Parking Lot Landscaping Requirements

The following landscape requirements applied to parking lots are intended to provide natural filtration for storm water, screen parking areas from the street, prevent large expanses of unbroken paving, and provide shade to cool paved areas during the hot summer months. The requirements are established for three areas: along the public right-of-way, along the parking lot's perimeter, and in the lot's interior.

To provide filtration, landscaped areas for parking lots shall include bioretention facilities sized and constructed to temporarily store an amount of runoff referred to as the “water quality volume” or “first flush volume.” Water quality volume is the storage volume necessary to serve at least one-half inch of runoff over the drainage area to be served by the bioretention facility. See Section 830-10 for specifications. If the water quality volume requirement is satisfied by existing vegetation, the need for a new bioretention facility may be waived by the Director pursuant to Section 12. If the site only partially receives drainage, then only the area that receives the drainage need be designed with bioretention.

(A) Landscaping Along the Right-of-Way.

Landscape strips shield views of parked cars to passing motorists and pedestrians, and may establish coordination among architecturally diverse buildings. To provide flexible standards that reflect site constraints and opportunities, three options are available to meet the landscaped strip requirements.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 138 of 167 October 18, 2011

1. Parking Lot Landscaped Strip, Option 1 Provide a minimum ten-foot wide mulched strip between a right-of-way and the parking lot, planted with a minimum of one tree, 10 shrubs, and 10 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns for every 35 feet of lineal 100 square feet of street frontage, excluding driveway openings. Groupings of plant materials shall be mulched.

Figure 30-1 Parking Lot Landscaped Strip, Option 1

2. Parking Lot Landscaped Strip, Option 2 Provide a berm at least 2.5 feet higher than the finished elevation of the parking lot. The berm shall have a minimum side slope of 2:1 or 3:1 and a minimum crown width of two feet. Live vegetation must cover the berm with a minimum of one tree, 7 shrubs, and 8 10 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns for every 35 100 square feet of street frontage, excluding driveway openings. Groupings of plant materials shall be mulched.

Figure 30-2 Parking Lot Landscaped Strip, Option 2

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 139 of 167 October 18, 2011

3. Parking Lot Landscaping Strip, Option 3 Preserve a minimum 25 foot wide strip of existing woodlands in lieu of the landscaping requirement.

Figure 30-3 Parking Lot Landscaped Strip, Option 3

(B) Perimeter Landscaping.

Perimeter landscaping is required to treat storm water through improved filtration, sedimentation, and biological processes. In addition, perimeter landscaping defines parking areas and prevents two adjacent lots from becoming one large expanse of paving. The required perimeter landscaping between adjacent lots does not preclude the need to provide vehicular access between the lots.

(1) Figure 30-4 illustrates the required perimeter landscape strip. The landscape strip must be a minimum of 5 feet wide.

Figure 30-4 Parking Lot Perimeter

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 140 of 167 October 18, 2011

(2) One tree, 10 shrubs, and 10 15 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns are required for every 35 lineal feet around the parking lot area 100 square feet excluding vehicular access aisles.

(a) The applicant may preserve existing woodlands at least 25 feet in width in lieu of the above perimeter landscaping requirements.

Interior parking lot landscaping requirements are required for all parking. Figure 30-5 illustrates how to calculate the required interior lot planting. All areas within the lots perimeter are counted, including planting islands, curbed areas, corner lots, parking spaces, and all interior driveways and aisles. Only driveways and aisles with no parking spaces located on either side are excluded from the interior area calculation.

Figure 30-5 Parking Lot Interior Calculations

(1) In recognition that larger lots have greater visual and environmental impact than smaller lots, a sliding scale is used to determine the required amount of landscaping. The required landscaping is designated on Table 30-3.

Table 30-3 Required Interior Planting Area of Parking Lots

Percent of the Total Area Total Area of Parking Lot of Lot that Must be an Interior Planting Area

0 to 49,999 sq. ft. 5%

50,000 to 149,999 sq ft 8%

150,000 sq. ft. or larger 10%

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 141 of 167 October 18, 2011

(2) Landscaped areas outside the parking lot may not be used to meet the interior planting requirement.

(3) All rows of parking spaces shall be provided a terminal island of at least 162 130 square feet of area to protect parked vehicles, provide visibility, confine moving traffic to aisles and driveways, and provide space for landscaping.

(4) Landscaped islands of at least 162 130 square feet of area shall be provided every 10 spaces or less within a row of spaces for residential sites and every 15 spaces or less within a row of spaces for commercial developments. Planting islands should be evenly spaced throughout the parking lot to consistently reduce the visual impact of long rows of parked cars. Islands shall be utilized where needed to control vehicular circulation and define major drives. Landscape strips between two facing parking aisles can also be used to meet the interior planting requirement.

(5) The minimum D Value of each 162 130 square foot island shall equal 130 including one tree with the remainder of the D Value a combination of shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns. Each additional 10 square feet shall require 10 additional D Value points. Trees must have a clear trunk at least six feet above the finished grade to allow for visibility and vehicular circulation beneath the tree canopy.

(6) Landscape strips between two facing parking isles shall be a minimum of 5 feet wide. One tree, 10 shrubs, and 10 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns are required for every 35 lineal 100 square feet.

(7) To prevent cars from parking too close to trees or damaging shrubs, a curb or wheel stop must be provided. Planting islands parallel to parking spaces must be a minimum of five feet wide to allow car doors to swing open.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 142 of 167 October 18, 2011

830-9. Commercial and Industrial Streetscapes

The following landscape strip requirements apply to all commercial and industrial zones and all nonresidential uses within a residential zone. The strip must be located on the property, adjacent to the public right-of-way, and may not include paved surfaces, with the exception of driveway openings and pedestrian sidewalks or trails that cross the strip.

For all impervious areas that slope towards the streetscape, the associated landscaped area shall be designed as a bioretention area sufficiently sized and constructed to serve the water quality volume requirement of Section 8. Traditional options can only be used where drainage is not received (unless woodlands are being preserved). There are 3 traditional streetscape options available to meet the landscaped strip requirements.

(A) Traditional Streetscape Options (site does not receive drainage):

(1) Commercial and Industrial Landscaped Strip, Option 1 Provide a minimum 5 10 foot wide mulched strip between a right-of-way and the parking lot, planted with a minimum of one tree, 10 shrubs, and 10 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns for every 35 lineal 100 square feet of street frontage, excluding driveway openings.

Groupings of plant materials shall be mulched. Required streetscape landscaping shall be reasonably distributed throughout all open space areas. It is suggested that the required plantings be planted in clusters or irregular patterns.

Figure 30-6 Commercial and Industrial Landscaped Strip, Option 1

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 143 of 167 October 18, 2011

(1) Commercial and Industrial Landscaped Strip, Option 2 Provide a landscape strip a minimum of 5 10 feet wide and maximum of 20 feet wide and an average width of 10 15 feet strip adjacent to the public right-of-way, planted with a minimum of one shade tree, 10 shrubs, and 10 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ ferns for every 35 lineal 100 square feet of street frontage, excluding driveway openings.

Figure 30-7 Commercial and Industrial Landscaped Strip, Option 2

(2) Commercial and Industrial Landscaped Strip, Option 3 Preserve a 25 foot wide strip of existing woodlands in lieu of the landscaping requirement.

Figure 30-8 Commercial and Industrial Landscaped Strip, Option 3

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 144 of 167 October 18, 2011 830-10. Bioretention Design

Bioretention is a Low Impact Development (LID) strategy. LID goals focus on mimicking a site’s pre-development storm water run-off by using design techniques that infiltrate, filter, store, evaporate, and detain runoff close to the source. Bioretention design and associated landscaping combines drainage and landscaping on a site for the purposes of naturally cleaning storm water with native plants. Bioretention reduces non-point source pollution thereby contributing to a healthier watershed and cleaner drinking water. Details of the required bioretention design should be coordinated with the County Drainage Engineer and the Planning Administrator. The following manuals can be referenced for more information:

 Environmental Protection Agency, Document # EPA-841-B-00-005. (2000) Low Impact Development (LID) A Literature Review. Retrieved May 12, 2008 from http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/lid/lidlit.html.  Prince George’s County Maryland. (2005) Bioretention Design Specifications and Criteria. Retrieved May 12, 2008 from http://www.co.pg.md.us/Government/AgencyIndex/DER/ESD/Bioretention/biorete ntion.asp  Environmental Protection Agency, Publication Number EPA 841-F-07-006. (2007) Reducing Storm water Costs through Low Impact Development (LID) Strategies and Practices. Retrieved May 12, 2008 from http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/lid/costs07/  United States Navy. (2004) Design: Low Impact Development Manual. Retrieved May 12, 2008 from http://www.lowimpactdevelopment.org/publications.htm.  Prince George’s County Maryland, Department of Environmental Resources. (1999) Low-Impact Development Hydrologic Analysis. Retrieved May 12, 2008 from http://www.epa.gov/nps/lid/.

Bioretention design is required for each parking lot requirement (along the right-of-way, perimeter, and interior) and streetscape requirements where the site will receive drainage. Types, D values, general specifications and sizing examples are given below.

(A) Types of Bioretention

(1) Bioretention Cells (also known as Rain Garden) Bioretention cells consist of grass buffers, sand beds, a ponding area for excess runoff storage, organic layers, planting soil and vegetation. Their purpose is to provide a storage area, away from buildings and roadways, where storm water collects and filters into the soil. Bioretention areas have also been called rain gardens since they are landscaped with native plants and grasses, selected according to their moisture requirements and ability to tolerate pollutants. Annual maintenance of bioretention cells must be planned in order to replace mulching materials, remove accumulated silt, or revitalize soils as required.

(2) Vegetated Swales Vegetated Swales function as alternatives to curb and gutter systems, usually along residential streets or highways. They use native grasses and vegetation to reduce runoff velocity and allow filtration, while high volume flows are channeled away safely to a quantity management facility. Features like check dams may be incorporated to further reduce

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 145 of 167 October 18, 2011 water velocity and encourage filtration. Walkways are either separated from roadways by swales, or relocated to other areas. In areas where salts are commonly used for winter de-icing, careful attention must be paid to selecting plant species which are salt tolerant.

(3) Bioretention Filter Strips Bioretention filter strips are landscape features within parking lots or other areas that collect flow from large impervious surfaces. They direct water into vegetated quantity detention areas that capture pollutants and gradually discharge water over a period of time.

(B) Required Values Provide a minimum 1 tree and 10 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns per 200 100 square feet of area. If the area is smaller or larger than 200 100 square feet, adjust the species count proportionally. See Tables 30-11 through 30-14 for recommended bioretention planting materials.

(1) Filter strips or area (turf grass, gravel, or stone) shall be placed between impervious surface and bioretention area (see design examples). Purpose is to reduce run off velocity and filter particulates and trash.

(2) Ponding Area. Ponding depth during rain events must range from one to six inches to insure complete saturation of the underlying soil mix. Three inches well aged hardwood mulch, decorative stone, or a combination shall be used in all beds. Purpose is to provide storage of excess runoff and facilitates the settling of particulates and the evaporation of excess water.

(3) Overflow practices are required to prevent more than one inch of flooding in parking areas during rain events.

(4) Soil Amendments. Soil mix shall be 50 percent compost, 10% sand, to it has been stabilized. Purpose is for storm water storage and filtration, to absorb pollutants, and facilitate nutrient uptake by plants.

(5) Underdrain and Stone bed. Underdrains bedded in and covered with pea gravel shall be provided so that water does not pond on the surface of the bioretention filter area longer than 12 hours following the end of a rainfall event. All stone should be washed and open graded and provide at least 12 inches of capacity underneath the underdrain (e.g. the underdrain should not be placed at the bottom of the system).

(6) Edging and Wheel Stops. Landscaped areas that incorporate bioretention may not install curbs, unless required by the Administrator. Wheel stops are required between parking spaces and bioretention areas. All landscape areas incorporating bioretention shall be separated from vehicular use areas by either reinforced concrete curbing (with openings for drainage) or by wheel stops (with openings for drainage). Where concrete curbing is not used, reinforced concrete edge strips that are a minimum of 6 inches wide, 12 inches deep and flush with the parking lot surface are required.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 146 of 167 October 18, 2011 . (D) Bioretention Sizing Within the bioretention area, the water quality volume may be met by a combination of temporarily ponded water, the water absorbing capacity of the amended soil (20 percent of the dry soil volume), and the void volume of any stone that will be saturated (25 percent of the stone volume). There are two sizing options:

(1) To convert the one-half inch runoff requirement to the corresponding water quality volume requirement (in cubic feet), divide the area draining to the Bioretention filter area (in square feet) by 24.

. For example, one-half inch of water from a 1000 square foot parking area that drains to a Bioretention filter area corresponds to 41.7 cubic feet of water (1000/24=41.7). The bioretention area must therefore be able to contain 41.7 cubic feet of water, through a combination of water ponded on the surface, within the amended soil zone, and within an underlying crushed stone layer.

. Twenty percent of the soil volume can be counted as water volume, and twenty-five percent of the crushed stone volume can be counted towards the required water volume. For example, in 160 cubic feet of amended soil, 0.2 x 160 cubic feet = 32 cubic feet of water can be stored. In 15 cubic feet of crushed stone, 0.25 x 15 cubic feet = 3.75 cubic feet of water can be stored. A bioretention area with 160 cubic feet of amended soil underlain by 15 cubic feet of stone can therefore hold 32 cubic feet + 3.75 cubic feet = 35.75 cubic feet of water. For the 1000 square foot parking lot example, the amount of water required to be ponded on the surface of the bioretention area would be 47.1 cubic feet – 35.75 cubic feet = 11.35 cubic feet.” These required volumes can be provided in a bioretention area with 80 square feet of area if the amended soil depth is two feet, the underlying stone layer is two inches deep, and the depth of water ponded on the surface is one inch.”

(2) Size the Bioretention filter area to equal 10% of the area of impervious surface draining to it.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 147 of 167 October 18, 2011

(D) Examples of Bioretention used to fulfill the landscaping requirements

Figure 30-9 Parking Lot Landscaped Strip Bioretention for parking lot perimeter or between rows of parking spaces.

Figure 30-10 Parking Lot Interior and Island Plantings Bioretention filter strips for parking lot interiors

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 148 of 167 October 18, 2011

Figure 30-10 Parking Lot Interior and Island Plantings Bioretention filter strips for parking lot interiors

Figure 30-11 Bioretention Cell Bioretention cell for use in parking lots or along the streetscape

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 149 of 167 October 18, 2011

Figure 30-12 Vegetated Swale Vegetated swales for use along the streetscape or parking lot right-of-way, large site applications for large amounts of impervious surfaces.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 150 of 167 October 18, 2011

830-11. Residential Landscaping

All residential developments, shall meet the following requirements for minimum planting and buffering of rear yards from minor collector streets or higher road classifications.

(A) Trees in residential subdivisions are to be grouped together to simulate natural tree stands.

(B) Yards, setbacks, and other open space areas within residential developments shall be landscaped with live vegetation having a D Value of 800 per net acre of development site, but not less than 300 per development site. The minimum number of trees to be planted on each lot is a function of the lot size or number of dwellings. Table 30-4 specifies the minimum tree requirements.

Table 30-4 On-Site Residential Planting Requirements

Minimum

Number of Residential Type Notes Shade Trees

Single Family Dwelling Plant in yards, setbacks, and Developments 2 per lot open spaces.

Two Family Dwelling 2 per Total number of trees to be Developments dwelling located on lots and in common open space

2 per 1,600 Multifamily Dwelling sq. ft. or Plant in yards, setbacks, and Developments fraction of open spaces. green area

(D) When determining the amount of trees required for multifamily dwellings, the following features are not included in the landscape area calculation: lakes and other water features, required parking lot landscaping along a right-of-way, and interior parking lot landscape areas. Figure 30-11 illustrates this calculation.

(E) Trees fulfilling the perimeter bufferyard requirements may be counted toward the minimum planting requirements. Existing trees and woodlands may also fulfill part or all of the minimum planting requirements. The trees must exceed 2.5 inches in diameter and must be located on an individual lot within 75 feet of a dwelling unit. Existing trees that exceed 2.5 inches in diameter and that are located anywhere in the landscape area may fulfill the requirement for trees for multifamily dwellings. For any subdivision, existing trees larger than 2.5 inches in diameter located on an individual or common green may fulfill part of all or the

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 151 of 167 October 18, 2011 tree requirement for that site.

Figure 30-13 Multifamily Dwelling Landscape Area Calculations

(F) Where the rear of a two-family or multi-family dwelling unit faces a public street, The tract or lot must be screened with plant material at least five feet high. A fence, wall, or berm, in addition to plantings, may also be permitted subject to the approval of the Director.

(G) The rear yard and the lowest story of the rear outside wall of any single family dwelling must be screened from the view of any street classified as a collector or arterial. The buffer is required either on individual lots or as part of the common open space owned and maintained by a homeowners association. The required buffer area width and plants are as follows:

(1) Collector. A minimum of 35 feet wide with four deciduous trees, 15 evergreen trees, and 30 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns per 3,500 square feet of right-of-way (a minimum D Value of 850 points per 3,500 square feet).

(2) Arterial. A minimum of 50 feet wide with six deciduous trees, 18 evergreen trees, and 40 shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns per 5,000 square feet of right-of-way (a minimum D Value of 1000 points per 5,000 square feet).

(H) If existing woodlands are located entirely in the buffer area, preserving the trees may satisfy all plant requirements. If existing woodlands are partially located within the buffer area, the number of deciduous trees, evergreen trees, and shrubs/perennials/grasses/ferns may be proportionately reduced.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 152 of 167 October 18, 2011 830-12. Modifications

(A) The Director, in consultation with the County Draingage Engineer, may approve any landscape proposal s/he deems to be equivalent to the foregoing minimum requirements. Except as provided in 830-11 (B), no such approval shall have the effect of reducing the required setbacks or reducing required D Value for any particular setbacks, buffer, or parking area.

(B) Where compliance is required as a result of change in use or expansion of an existing building and compliance with this section will necessitate removal of existing pavement, the planning staff may approve a reduction of parking lot setbacks and other minimum planting areas provided that proposed plantings, screens, and other landscape features are the equivalent to the foregoing minimum requirements in terms of D Value.

(C ) Under conditions where a strict interpretation of requirements may be either physically impossible or create practical difficulties, an alternative compliance procedure may be used to maintain the spirit--rather than the letter--of the law. The proposed solution must equal or exceed existing requirements. Requests for use of alternative landscaping schemes are justified only when one or more of the following conditions apply:

(1) The sites involve space limitations or unusually shaped parcels;

(2) Topography, soil, vegetation, or other site conditions are such that full compliance is impossible or impractical;

(3) Due to a change of use of an existing site, the required bufferyard is larger than can be provided; and

(4) Safety considerations are involved.

The applicant must provide a justification statement that describes which of the requirements established by the Landscaping Ordinance will be met with modifications, which project conditions justify using alternatives, and how the proposed measures equal or exceed normal compliance. Planning staff will review the alternative compliance application and recommend approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval of the proposal to the planning director. The planning director will make the final decision. Appeals of the decision may be taken to the Board of Zoning Appeals.

(D) Occasionally, plant substitutions for species specified on approved landscape plans are required due to seasonal planting problems and a lack of plant availability. Minor revisions to planting plans can be approved in a simple over-the-counter process by the Administrator if there is no reduction in the quantity of plant material or no significant change in size or location of plant materials, and if the new plants are of the same general category and have the same general design characteristics as the materials being replaced. Proposed materials must also be compatible with the microclimate of the site to ensure healthy plant growth. If the plant substitutions do not fulfill these criteria, then changes to the approved plans must be resubmitted and reviewed for new approval.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 153 of 167 October 18, 2011 (E) Rain gardens are encouraged and can be substituted to meet some of the required landscaping elements. Details of the Rain Garden can be coordinated with the County Drainage Engineer and approved by the Administrator.

830-13. Installation and Maintenance

(A) Plant materials shall conform to the requirements described in the latest edition of the American Standard for Nursery Stock, which is published by the American Association of Nurserymen. Plants shall be nursery grown.

(B) Plants shall conform to the measurements specified below.

(1) Diameter measurements in inches shall be taken 6 inches 4.5 feet above grade at breast height (DBH). for sizes up to 4 inch caliper and 12 inches above grade for sizes above 4 inch caliper. Multi-stem or clump trees of equivalent size shall be allowed.

(2) Minimum size for trees shall be 2 1.5 inches in diameter.

(3) Evergreen trees shall be at least 6 feet in height at installation.

(3) Minimum size for shrubs shall be 3 gallon.

(5) Minimum size for perennials, grasses, ferns, and endangered shall be 1 gallon. If 1 gallon sizes are unavailable, 2 plugs (minimum 2”X 3”) can be substituted for one, 1 gallon plant.

(C) It is recommended that a professional horticulturalist//landscape architect/landscape designer should be consulted to determine the proper time to move and install plant material so that stress to the plant is minimized. Planting of deciduous material may be continued during the winter months provided there is no frost in the ground and frost-free topsoil planting mixtures are used.

(D) After cultivation, all plant materials shall be mulched with a two to three inch layer of shredded bark, peat moss, or another suitable material over the entire area of the bed or saucer.

(E) The owner of the premises shall be responsible for the maintenance, repair, and replacement of all landscaping materials on the premises.

(F) All landscape areas shall be kept free of refuse and debris. Fences, walls, and other barriers shall be maintained in good repair.

(G) It is the responsibility of each private property owner to remove any dead, diseased, or dangerous trees or shrubs, or parts thereof, which overhang or interfere with traffic control devices, public sidewalks, rights-of-way, or property owned by the County. The County shall have the authority to order the removal of any such trees or shrubs.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 154 of 167 October 18, 2011 830-14. D Values

(A) Trees (Tables 30-5 and 30-6) are worth 35 D points each

(B) Shrubs (Table 30-7) are worth 8 3 D points each

(D) Endangered species (Table 830-11) are worth 10 D points each

830-15. Tables of Permitted Plant Materials

(A) The following tables (Tables 30-5 through 30-11) list the permitted plant materials by botanic and common names. Cultivars of native species are allowed for all of the plant lists. A professional landscape architect/designer should be consulted for plant selection according to site characteristics and drainage.

(B) The types of trees proposed and used to fulfill the streetscape requirements or the landscaping along the right-of-way requirements must be listed in Table 30-5. Tree types proposed to meet all other requirements must be listed in either Table 30-5 or Table 30-6.

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 155 of 167 October 18, 2011 Table 30-5 Trees Suitable for Planting along Public Streets and Highways and in Locations Where Low Maintenance and Hardy Specimens are required. Trees can also be planted as a part of the Interior Landscape where appropriate.

Botanic Name Common Name Acer nigrum Black Maple Acer rubrum Red Maple Acer saccharum Sugar Maple Acer x freemanii Freeman Maple Aesculus hippocastanum Horse Chestnut Carpinus caroliniana American Hornbeam Celtis laevigata Sugarberry/Hackberry Celtis occidentalis Common Hackberry Cercis canadensis Eastern Redbud Crataegus phaenopyrum Washington Hawthorn Fraxinus americana White Ash Gingko biloba Gingko male only Gleditsia tricanthos v. inermis Honeylocust Ilex opaca American Holly Juniperus silicicola Southern Redcedar Juniperus virginiana Eastern Redcedar Liquidambar styraciflura Sweet Gum Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip Tree/Yellow-Poplar Magnolia acuminata Cucumber Tree Malus spp. Crabapple Nyssa sylvatica Blackgum/Black Tupelo Pinus strobus White Pine Platanus occidentalis Sycamore Quercus bicolor Swamp White Oak Quercus coccinea Scarlet Oak Quercus imbricaria Shingle Oak Quercus macrocarpa Bur Oak Quercus palustris Pin Oak Quercus phellos Willow Oak Quercus rubra Northern Red Oak Quercus shumardii Shumard Oak Sassafras albidum Sassafras Taxodium distichum Bald Cypress Tsuga canadensis Eastern Hemlock

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 156 of 167 October 18, 2011 Table 30-6 Trees Acceptable for Use within the Interior of a Site

Botanic Name Common Name Ohio buckeye/Horse Aesculus glabra chestnut Amelanchier arborea Downy serviceberry Asimina triloba Pawpaw Betula alleghaniensis Yellow birch Betula nigra River birch Carya alba (tomentosa) Mockernut hickory Carya cordiformis Bitternut/Swamp hickory Carya glabra Pignut hickory Carya illinoinensis Pecan Carya laciniosa Shellbark hickory Carya ovalis Red Hickory Carya ovata Shagbark hickory Cladrastis kentukea Yellowwood Cornus florida Flowering dogwood Crataegus crus-galli Cockspur hawthorn Crataegus mollis Downy hawthorn Crataegus punctata Dotted hawthorn Diospyros virginiana Persimmon Carolininana/American Fagus grandifolia beech Fraxinus americana White ash Gymnocladus dioica Kentucky coffee tree Hamamelis virginiana Witch hazel Juglans cinerea Butternut Juglans nigra Black walnut Malus ioensis v. ioensis Prairie crabapple Morus rubra Red Mulberry Ostrya virginiana Ironwood/Hophornbeam Pinus strobus White Pine Pinus virginiana Virginia Pine Populus deltoides Eastern cottonwood Populus grandidentata Large-toothed aspen Prunus americana Wild plum Prunus nigra Canada plum Prunus serotina Black cherry Pyrus coronaria Sweet crabapple Quercus alba White oak Quercus imbricaria Shingle oak Quercus macrocarpa Bur oak Quercus marilandica Blackjack oak Quercus michauxii Swamp Chestnut oak Chinkapin oak/Chestnut Quercus muhlenbergii oak

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 157 of 167 October 18, 2011 Quercus prinus Rock Chestnut oak Quercus stellata Post oak Quercus velutina Black oak Salix amygdaloides Peachleaf willow Salix nigra Black willow American Tilia americana Linden/Basswood Tsuga canadensis Eastern Hemlock Ulmus alata Winged elm Ulmus americana American elm Ulmus rubra Red elm/Slippery elm

Table 30-7 Shrubs

Botanic Name Common Name Alnus incana speckled alder, mountain alder Alnus serrulata smooth alder downy serviceberry, shadebush, Amelanchier arborea Juneberry Amelanchier laevis allegheny serviceberry Amelanchier sanguinea roundleaf serviceberry Amorpha canescens leadplant Amorpha fruticosa false indigo, Indigo bush Aronia melanocarpa black chokeberry Ceanothus americanus New Jersey tea, red root Cephalanthus occidentalis buttonbush Comptonia peregrina sweet fern pogoda dogwood, alternate-leaved Cornus alternifolia dogwood Cornus amomum ssp. obliqua swamp dogwood, silky dogwood Cornus drummondii rough-leaf dogwood Cornus racemosa gray dogwood Cornus sericea red-twig dogwood, red-osier dogwood Corylus americana American hazelnut or filbert Diervilla lonicera bush honeysuckle Dirca palustris leatherwood, ropebark Euonymus americana strawberry bush, brook euonymus Euonymus atropurpurea wahoo, burning bush Hex glabra Inkberry Hydrangea arborescens wild hydrangea Hydrangea quercifolia oakleaf hydrangea Hypericum hypericoides ssp. St. Andrew's cross hypericoides Hypericum prolificum shrubby St. John's wort Ilex verticillata winterberry, black alder Itea virginica Virginia Sweetspire Juniperus Common juniper, ground juniper, prostrate

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 158 of 167 October 18, 2011 juniper, US Native only Lindera benzoin spicebush Lonicera dioica limber or wild honeysuckle Myrica pensylvanica Northern Bayberry Physocarpus opulifolius ninebark Prunus virginiana chokecherry Rhamnus caroliniana Carolina buckthorn Rhus copallinum dwarf or winged sumac Rhus glabra smooth sumac Rhus typhina staghorn sumac Ribes cynosbati prickly gooseberry, dogberry Rosa carolina Carolina rose Rosa setigera Illinois or prairie rose Rubus idaeus ssp. strigosus red raspberry Rubus occidentalis black raspberry, thimbleberry Salix bebbiana Bebb willow, long-beaked willow Salix discolor pussy willow Sambucus canadensis elderberry, common elder Spiraea alba meadow sweet Spiraea tomentosa steeplebush, hardhack Staphylea trifolia bladdernut Symphoricarpos orbiculatus coralberry, Indian currant Thuja occidetalis American Arborvitae Vaccinium angustifolium low-bush blueberry Viburnum US native only Viburnum acerifolium maple leaf viburnum Viburnum lentago black haw, nannyberry Viburnum prunifolium black haw, nanny berry Viburnum rufidulum southern or rusty black haw

Table 30-8 Perennials

Botanic Name Common Name Acorus calamus sweet flag, calamus Actaea pachypoda white baneberry Allium canadense wild garlic Allium cernuum nodding onion Allium tricoccum wild leek Anemone canadensis Canada anemone, windflower Anemone cylindrica thimbleweed, candle anemone Anemone virginiana thimbleweed, tall anemone Apocynum androsaemifolium spreading dogbane Aquilegia canadensis columbine Arisaema triphyllum Back-in-the-pulpit, Indian turnip

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 159 of 167 October 18, 2011 Aruncus dioicus goat's beard Asarum canadense wild ginger Asclepias incarnata swamp milkweed Asclepias tuberosa butterfly weed Asclepias verticillata whorled milkweed Aster ericoides heath aster, white wreath aster Aster laevis smooth aster Aster pilosus frost aster Aster puniceus red-stem aster, swamp aster Astragalus canadensis milk vetch, Canada milk vetch Baptisia alba white false indigo Caltha palustris marsh marigold, cowslip Camassia scilloides wild hyacinth Campanula rotundifolia harebell Caulophyllum thalictroides blue cohosh Chelone glabra turtlehead Claytonia virginica narrow-leaved spring beauty Collinsonia canadensis stoneroot, citronella horsebalm Coreopsis lanceolata lance-leaved coreopsis Coreopsis palmata stiff coreopsis Coreopsis tripteris tall coreopsis Dalea candida white prairie clover Dalea purpurea purple prairie clover Delphinium tricorne dwarf larkspur Desmodium canadense Canada tick-trefoil, Canada tickclover Desmodium illinoense Illinois tick-trefoil, Illinois tickclover Dicentra cucullaria dutchman's breeches Dodecatheon meadia shooting star Echinacea purpurea purple coneflower Eryngium yuccifolium rattlesnake master, button snake-root Erythronium americanum eastern trout lily, yellow trout lily Eupatorium coelestinum mist flower Eupatorium fistulosum Joe-pye weed Eupatorium maculatum spotted Joe-pye weed Eupatorium perfoliatum boneset Eupatorium rugosum white snakeroot Eupatorium purpureum Joe-pye weed Euphorbia corollata flowering spurge Fragaria virginiana wild strawberry Galium triflorum sweet-scented bedstraw Gentiana andrewsii bottle gentian Gentiana saponaria closed gentian, soapwort gentian Geranium maculatum wild geranium, cranesbill Helenium autumnale common sneezeweed Helianthus pauciflorus ssp. pauciflorus stiff sunflower Helianthus divericatus woodland sunflower Heliopsis helianthoides ox-eye sunflower, false sunflower

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 160 of 167 October 18, 2011 Hepatica nobilis v. acuta sharp-lobed hepatica Heuchera americana v. hirsuticaulis alumroot Heuchera richardsonii alum root Hibiscus moscheutos swamp rose mallow, marshmallow hibiscus Hieracium gronovii hawkweed Houstonia caerulea bluets Hydrastis canadensis golden seal Hydrophyllum virginianum Virginia waterleaf Hypoxis hirsuta yellow star grass Iris cristata dwarf crested iris Iris virginica v. shrevei blue flag Lespedeza capitata roundheaded bush clover Liatris aspera rough blazing star, gayfeather Liatris cylindracea dwarf blazing star, gayfeather Liatris spicata marsh blazing star, gayfeather Liatris squarrosa blazing star Lilium michiganense Turk's cap lily, Michigan lily Linum virginianum woodland flax Lithospermum canescens hoary puccoon Lobelia cardinalis cardinal flower Lobelia siphilitica great blue lobelia Lupinus perennis wild lupine Lysimachia ciliata fringed loosestrife Maianthemum canadense wild lily-of-the-valley, Canada mayflower Mertensia virginica bluebells Mitchella repens partridge berry Monarda fistulosa wild bergamot, horsemint, beebalm Nuphar advena yellow pond lily, cow lily, spatter dock Osmorhiza claytonii sweet cicely, sweet jarvil Peltandra virginica arrow arum Penstemon digitalis beardtongue Penstemon hirsutus hairy beardtongue Potentilla fruticosa potentilla, shrubby cinquefoil Phlox divaricata blue phlox, sweet William Phlox paniculata summer phlox, perennial phlox Phlox pilosa prairie phlox, downy phlox Physostegia virginiana obedient plant, false dragonhead Podophyllum peltatum May apple Polemonium reptans Jacob's ladder, Greek valerian Polygonatum biflorum Solomon's seal white cinquefoil, prairie cinquefoil, tall Potentilla arguta cinquefoil Potentilla simplex common cinquefoil Pycnanthemum tenuifolium slender mountain mint Pycnanthemum virginianum mountain mint Ranunculus hispidus early buttercup, tufted buttercup Ratibida pinnata gray-headed coneflower, yellow coneflower

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 161 of 167 October 18, 2011 Rhexia virginica meadow beauty Rudbeckia laciniata cut-leaf coneflower Rudbeckia subtomentosa sweet black-eyed Susan Ruellia humilis wild petunia Salvia lyrata cancer weed, lyre-leaf sage Sanguinaria candensis bloodroot Sedum ternatum wild stonecrop Senecio aureus golden ragwort Smilacena racemosa false Solomon's seal, false spikenard Smilacena stellata starry Solomon's seal Silene stellata starry campion Silene virginica fire pink Silphium integrifolium rosinweed Silphium laciniatum compass plant Silphium perfoliatum cup plant Silphium terebinthinaceum prairie dock Sisyrinchium albidum narrow-leaved blue-eyed grass Solidago caesia blue-stemmed goldenrod, wreath goldenrod Solidago canadensis meadow goldenrod Solidago juncea early goldenrod, plume goldenrod Solidago nemoralis gray goldenrod, old-field goldenrod Solidago rigida stiff goldenrod Solidago rugosa rough-leaved goldenrod Solidago speciosa showy goldenrod Solidago ulmifolia elm-leaved goldenrod Stylophorum diphyllum celandine poppy Tephrosia virginiana goat's rue Thalictrum dasycarpum tall or purple meadow rue Thalictrum dioicum early meadow rue Thalictrum thalictroides rue anemone Tradescantia ohiensis Ohio spiderwort Tradescantia virginiana Virginia spiderwort, spider lily Uvularia grandiflora bellwort, merrybells Uvularia sessilifolia wildoats, merrybells Verbena hastata blue verbena, blue vervain Verbena stricta hoary vervain Vernonia fasciculata ironweed Veronicastrum virginicum Culver's root Viola pedata bird-foot violet Viola pubescens yellow violet Viola soraria common blue violet, meadow violet Zizia aurea golden alexander

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 162 of 167 October 18, 2011 Table 30-9 Grasses

Botanic Name Common Name Agrostis parennans ticklegrass, fly-away grass Andropogon gerardii big bluestem Andropogon virginicus broom sedge Bouteloua curtipendula sideoats grama Brachyelytrum erectum long-awned wood grass Bromus kalmii prairie brome, wild chess Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint grass Carex aquatilis water sedge Carex Jamesii grass sedge Carex pensylvanica Pennsylvania sedge Carex plantaginea plantain-leaved sedge Carex stipata awl-fruited sedge Carex stricta tussock sedge Carex utriculata beaked sedge Chasmanthium latifolium inland sea oats, wild oats, river oats, broad-leaf uniola Danthonia spicata poverty grass Eleocharis palustris creeping spikesedge, spike rush Elymus canadensis Canada wild rye Elymus hystrix v. hystrix bottlebrush grass Eragrostis spectabilis purple lovegrass, tumblegrass American mannagrass, tall mannagrass, reed Glyceria stricta meadowgrass Hierochloe odorata sweet grass Juncus effusus v. solutus soft rush Juncus interior inland rush Koeleria macrantha June grass Leersia oryzoides rice cut grass Panicum virgatum switchgrass Schizachyrium scoparium little bluestem Scirpus acutus hardstem bulrush Scirpus atrovirens dark green bulrush Scirpus cyperinus wool grass Scirpus validus great bulrush Sorghastrum nutans Indian grass Spartina pectinata prairie cordgrass, freshwater cordgrass Sporobolus asper dropseed Stipa spartea porcupine grass Typha latifolia cattail

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 163 of 167 October 18, 2011 Table 30-10 Ferns

Botanic Name Common Name Adiantum pedatum northern maidenhair fern Asplenium platyneuron ebony spleenwort Athyrium filix-femina lady fern Botrychium virginianum rattlesnake fern Cystopteris bulbifera bladder fern Cystopteris protrusa fragile fern shield fern, toothed wood fern, spinulose shield Dryopteris carthusiana fern Dryopteris cristata crested wood fern, buckler fern Dryopteris marginalia marginal wood fern Matteuccia struthiopteris ostrich fern Onoclea sensibilis sensitive fern, bead fern Osmunda cinnamomea cinnamon fern Osmunda claytoniana interrupted fern Osmunda regalis royal fern Phegopteris hexagonoptera broad beech fern Polystichum acrostichoides Christmas fern Thelypteris palustris marsh fern Thelypteris novaboracensis New York fern, tapering fern

Table 30-11 Endangered Species

Botanic Name Common Name Asclepias meadii Mead's milkweed Cirsium pitcheri Pitcher's thistle Running buffalo Trifolium stoloniferum clover

Table 30-11 Recommended Trees for Bioretention Areas

Botanic Name Common Name Acer Rubrum Red Maple Betula nigra River Birch Gleditsia tricanthos Honeylocust Gymnocladus dioica Kentucky Coffee Tree Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip Tree Nyssa sylvatica Black Tupelo Platanus occidenytalis Sycamore Quercus bicolor Swamp White Oak

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 164 of 167 October 18, 2011 Salex anygdaloides Peachleaf Willow Salex nigra Black Willow Taxodium distichum Bald Cypress

Table 30-12 Recommended Shrubs for Bioretention Areas

Botanic Name Common Name Cornus amomum Swamp Dogwood Cornus drummondii Rough-leaf Dogwood Cornus racemosa Gray Dogwood Cornus sericea Red twig dogwood Hydrangea arborescens Wild Hydrangea Hydrangea quercifolia Oakleaf Hydrangea Ilex glabra Inkberry Ilex verticillata Winterberry Itea virginica Virginia Sweetspire Salex bebbiana Bebb willow Salix discolor Pussy Willow Spieaea Alba Meadowsweet

Table 30-13 Recommended Perennials for Bioretention Areas

Botanic Name Common Name Anemone canadensis Canada anemone Anemone cylindrical Candle Thimbleweed Anemone Virginiana Tall Thimbleweed, Aquilegia canadensis columbine Asclepias incarnata Swamp milkweed Aster ericoides Heath Aster Aster laevis Smooth Aster Aster pilosus Frost Aster Aster puniceus Red Stem Aster Aster umbellatus Flat Top Aster Baptisia australis Wild Blue Indigo Baptisia bracteata Cream Wild Indigo Baptisia lacteal Wild White Indigo Bidens cernua Nodding Bur Marigold Caltha palustris Marsh Marigold Coreopsis lanceolata Lance –Leaved Coreopsis Coreopsis palmate Stiff Coreopsis

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 165 of 167 October 18, 2011 Desmodium illinoense Illinois Tick-Trefoil Desmodium illinoensis Illinois Sensitive Plant Dodecatheon meadia Shooting Star Echinacea pallida Purple Coneflower Echinacea purpurea Broad-Leaved Purple Coneflower Eupatorium maculatum Spotted Joe-pye weed Eupatorium perfoliatum boneset Filipendula rubra Queen of the Prairie Gentiana andrewsii Bottle Gentian Helenium autumnale Common Sneezeweed Hibiscus moscheutos Swamp Rose Mallow Hydrophyllum virginianum Virginia Waterleaf Iris virginica Blue Flag Liatris pycnostachya Prairie Blazing Star Liatris spicata Marsh Blazing Star Lobelis cardinalis Cardinal Flower Lobelis siphilitica Great Blue Lobelia Monarda fistulos Wild Bergamont Parthenium integnfolium Wild Quince Pycnanthemum virginianum Mountain Mint Ratibida pinnata Yellow Coneflower Rudbeckia hirta Black Eyed Susan Rudbeckia subtomemtosa Sweet Bland-Eyed Susan Rudbeckia triloba Brown-Eyed Susan Silene regia Royal Catchfly Silphium laciniatum Compass Plant Silphium perfoliatum Cup Plant Silphium terebinthinaceum Prairie Dock Solidago rigida Stiff Goldenrod Solidago speciosa Showy Goldenrod Tradescantia ohiensis Ohio Spiderwort Veronicastrum virginicum Culver’s Root Zizia aurea Golden Alexander

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 166 of 167 October 18, 2011 Table 30-14 Recommended Grasses for Bioretention Areas

Botanic Name Common Name Andropogon gerardii Big Blue Stem Bouteloua curtipendula Sideoats Grama Carex aquatilis Water sedge Carex frankii Bristly Cattail Sedge Carex lurida Bottlebrush Sedge Carex pensylvanica Grass Sedge Carex plantaginea Plantain-Leaved Sedge Carex Stipata Awl-Fruited Sedge Carex stricta Tussock sedge Elymus Canadensis Canada Wild Rye Elymus hystrix Bottlebrush Grass Glyceria stricts American mannagrass Juncus effuses soft Rush Juncus interior – Inland Rush Koeleria pyramidata June Grass Panicum virgatum Switch Grass Schizachyrium scoparium Little Blue Stem Scirpus acutus Hardstem Bulrush Scirpus Cyperinus Wool Grass Scirpus validus Great Bulrush Spartina pectinata Prairie Cordgrass

[end of chapter]

Plan Commission Meeting Packet Page 167 of 167 October 18, 2011