Shawnee Bluffs Lab Exercise
Background Material:
The Lake Monroe Reservoir is the primary source of drinking water for a large part of our region. Monroe County has enacted zoning restrictions around Lake Monroe in order to protect this reservoir from septic system contaminants. The zoning restrictions broadly involve a maximum housing density and restrictions on forest clearing in areas where the topographic slope exceeds a specific threshold.
In 2004, a group of developers proposed a rezoning (or variance from existing the county zoning plan) to allow for development of a parcel of land on the north side of Lake Monroe. From the Herald Times newspaper:
“The Shawnee Bluffs proposal is for 128 acres of wooded acreage on the old site of the Indiana University Alumni Association's Shawnee Bluffs summer campground, east of Ind. 446 and north of the lake.
The association sold the land to a Franklin company, Jarvis Enterprises, which revealed in May that it wants to develop about three dozen expensive estate lots and homes, served by a small on-site treatment plant. Since then, the plan has been expanded to filter the effluent through a created wetland into the lake.
Much of the land is in heavy slopes that exceed the limits for development in the lakeshed, so home sites are being clustered within the project.”
Guest Editorial Appearing in the Herald Times Newspaper:
Protection of water quality a priority in looking at development proposal
This guest column was written by Jess A. Gwinn, conservation chairman, Sassafras Audubon Society in Bloomington.
On July 20, the Monroe County Plan Commission held a regularly scheduled public meeting to discuss several proposals. By far the most contentious proposal with far reaching effects was that for the development of the former IU Alumni Association retreat known as Shawnee Bluffs. Sassafras Audubon has been fighting to protect this site specifically and Lake Monroe in general for over 30 years. When the IU Alumni Association proposed their retreat, we argued against it because of the large septic system required and the potential for failure. We lost; the retreat was developed; the septic system failed.
The current development calls for the use of a multi-tiered sewage treatment facility, which will dump the treated effluent directly into the lake. While these systems are to be commended for other rural sites, Lake Monroe is far too valuable a public resource to be compromised any further. The lake is the primary source of drinking water for most residents of Monroe County. For those officials who only see increased property tax revenues, what do they think a new drinking water supply for tens of thousands of people is going to cost? Lake Monroe has a finite life as a drinking water supply. This life has already been shortened by inappropriate development around the lake and within the watershed. Look no further than the "Lake Monroe Diagnostic and Feasibility Study" commissioned by the Monroe County Commissioners and dated March 1997, for a more detailed analysis of the problems facing the lake.
The more pressing problem that disturbed me at the July plan commission meeting, though, was the general lack of knowledge or concern about the specifics of the Monroe County zoning ordinance. As a land surveyor I can attest to the sometimes conflicting directions given by the ordinance. However, any development must comply with all of the standards contained within the ordinance, not just the most beneficial or least costly. *** The proposed development seems to have completely ignored Chapter 825 on the environmental constraints overlay zone. This chapter was specifically written to protect Lakes Monroe and Griffy, the two drinking water supplies for Monroe County. As stated in Chapter 825, section 4(A)(5) Area 1 Regulations: "Each dwelling unit shall have at least 1 acre of total contiguous land which is equal to or less than twelve percent slope." Area 1 refers to the area around the lake within 1,000 feet of the fee taking line (lake boundary). Most of the proposed development lies within zone 1. As stated in Chapter 825, section 4(B)(4) Area 2 Regulations: "Each dwelling unit shall have at least 1 acre of total contiguous land which is equal to or less than fifteen percent slope." Area 2 refers to the area around the lake between 1,000 feet and 2,500 feet of the fee taking line. *** The remainder of the proposed development is within this zone.
Chapter 804 contains the height, bulk and density provisions of the zoning ordinance which defines lot areas, widths, etc. for each zone. The proposed development is within zone FR, forest reserve. The minimum lot area is 5 acres. At face value, the proposed development at 128 acres should therefore be allowed 25 lots (128 divided by five). This is the point that was often debated at the July meeting. The developer proposes 33 lots on the site, and the ordinance seems to only allow 25. Missing from the debate was the requirement for all lots within Zone 1 to contain 1 acre of contiguous 12 percent or less slope. Even a cursory review of the development site topography reveals that there are only a few areas within Zone 1 that contain slopes under 12 percent and are over 1 acre in size. The same goes for Zone 2 and the areas under 15 percent. Parceling out these conforming areas into 1 acre allotments yields substantially less than 25 lots.
The developer is trying to obscure this fact by requesting a rezone to a PUD, Planned Unit Development. PUDs are planning tools that allow more design flexibility to meet the same goals of the underlying zone. They are not tools to circumvent the rules altogether. On an extremely vulnerable site adjacent to the city water source such as Shawnee Bluffs, the rules should be strictly enforced. Protecting our primary drinking water source as well as a valuable recreation resource is simply too important. Any design flaws and failures would be exponentially compounded by the severe topography and proximity to the lake with concomitant damages.
Lastly, the zoning ordinance is the law of the land. It was enacted and adopted by the county commissioners, which the current plan commission members are sworn to uphold. They may not agree with the ordinance, but it is the law they have to follow. We are not allowed to pick the laws we want to follow and the those we want to ignore; they all apply. If such were the case, anarchy would soon prevail. If the plan commission approves this project in anything resembling what was proposed at the July meeting, they will be breaking the law and should be held accountable.
For information on the Monroe County Zoning Ordinance see:
1) Monroe County Zoning Ordinance
2) Definitions (see entry for Lake Monroe Watershed)
3) Zoning Ordinance - Environmental Constraints Overlay (ECO) Zone:
Information you'll need:Parcels ID’s:
Jarvis Enterprises LLC (this is the area of the planned development)
Shawnee Bluffs LLC (an environmental conservation area near the planned development)
Spatial Data Sources (parcels, topography, boundaries): Indiana University Spatial Data portal
As you can find from the zoning ordinance documents, area within 1000 feet of the lake is within ECO Zone 1. The 1000ft line is measured from the lakeside boundary. Area from 1000-2500ft of the lake is within ECO zone 2.
SEE THIS DOCUMENT FOR LAB QUESTIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR GETTING THROUGH MOST OF THE LAB STEPS
