Edinburgh officials were met with dozens of concerned residents at a meeting to consider updates to the town’s zoning ordinance.
The Edinburgh Plan Commission voted to continue its hearing on a proposed new Unified Development Ordinance on Tuesday. The decision was met by applause from the crowd after multiple residents expressed concerns with UDO changes, including property maintenance standards and code enforcement tools.
The new UDO aims to update the current ordinance, which has become outdated, said Brian Stump with HWC Engineering, the firm the town hired to help them modernize the ordinance.
“There are parts of it that are keeping Edinburgh from having the type of development that it’s seeking, and it’s lacking protections against bad development and being able to say no to things that you may not want,” Stump said. “And one of the key elements is that it’s difficult to administer and enforce, you have conflicting requirements in the ordinance as well as some processes that can be a little burdensome.”
The town held steering committee meetings with stakeholders and town officials to learn about what should be included in the plan. The goal was to make sure the plan was updated and works well, Stump said.
About the ordinance
Among the changes, the proposed UDO provides standards for property maintenance, a design and review process for buildings near existing homes or downtown and lists other enforcement tactics the town can use as approved by state law.
The property maintenance portion of the UDO tackles problems Stump has seen when helping other communities.
“One of the things that I’ve dealt with being a public planner is sometimes you have these nuisances, something’s happening next door, it’s noisy or the property is not being maintained, how does that get addressed?” Stump said.
Specifically, the proposed UDO states that all land and exterior areas under a roof but not enclosed must be free from nusiances like garbage and debris; tarps or similar materials acting as screening, fencing or wall covering; abandoned vehicles; commercial appliances like freezers and refrigerators; objects or landscaping that interferes with sidewalks, streets, etc; dead, damaged or uncontrollable landscape growth; and walls or fences with missing blocks or boards.
All zoning districts must also adhere to standards addressing loud noise, “malodorous gas or obnoxious odor” emissions, air pollutant discharges, and producing heat or glare in excess or detrimental amounts, according to the ordinance.
The design and review process deals with building near existing homeowners or downtown. It is “to make sure that [the new building] is harmonious with what’s happening around it,” Stump said.
“We’ve all seen these buildings that look like they fell from the sky,” he said. “There was no attention paid to the neighbors or that context … Again, [the ordinance is] going for cohesiveness in the community.”
For enforcement, the proposed new UDO includes tools that the state of Indiana provides for local government enforcement, like issuing citations or stop work orders; entering onto a property and taking action to bring the property into compliance; and pursuing an administrative proceeding or civil action.
The administrator, or planning director, also has the right of entry at a reasonable time to inspect buildings or structures to determine compliance, the ordinance says.
Edinburgh Planning Director Julie Young clarified Tuesday that these are just enforcement options and she would be directed by the town’s legal department on how the processes would work.
There is a penalty schedule that spans from $50 to $2,000 depending on the violation. However, state law provides the maximum civil penalty as $2,500 for the first violation of the ordinance and $7,500 for a subsequent violation other than a parking regulation provision, the proposed UDO says.
‘I don’t need a HOA’
Resident Crystal Skirvin said she was “very concerned” about the new UDO. She feels the new ordinance was heavy on fines and consequences, and she didn’t like the town using the word “enforced” to refer to people’s property.
She was also against the property maintenance standards, which many residents believe will act as a homeowners’ association.
“I don’t need a HOA, Edinburgh does not need a HOA,” Skirvin said.
Stump said this is not like an HOA. An HOA is a legally bound group of homeowners who sign a contract and agree to keep their property to standards, while also paying into a fund that maintains common facilities such as drainage ponds or community buildings.
Skirvin also believes the improvements that residents would have to make if they were found in violation of the ordinance would be too expensive for some homeowners.
“Grandma Jain, who can hardly get somebody to mow her yard for $20, how is she going to upgrade her fence or how is she going to upgrade her shed or her doghouse, and then you’re going to fine her? How about we help her if those are the things you want to happen?” Skirvin said, which was met by applause from the crowd.
Resident Julie Smith said she doesn’t think the UDO updates will work in Edinburgh because many residents don’t have the money for improvements. Smith asked the plan commission why they think people should be able to tell homeowners what to do on their property, unless it is detrimental to life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness.
In rebuttal, Stump said that towns often deal with enforcement on a reactive basis, meaning a person calls something in. He said that town officials don’t have time to go out “hunting for things.”
Resident Greg Simpson opposed the threat of fines and people being able to come onto his property for inspections.
Other residents had questions about the ordinance, like whether an existing building would be grandfathered in from the previous ordinance, what the inspection process is like and what would be considered a violation of the ordinance.
Stump said that a majority of the UDO is focused on future developments, not existing ones. An existing property would be grandfathered in if its zoning is nonconforming, Stump said.
Other residents, like Doug Dillon, think more community involvement is necessary.
“I think it should be taken back to the town people to come together with you guys and [town] council to come up with it together,” Dillon said.
‘We’re going to be swallowed up’
Resident Christina Riley, who was part of the steering committee, believes the town needs the new UDO to flourish.
“I am fearful for our town that if we don’t do something to update it, we are going to be swallowed up by other towns,” she said, “and this gives us the opportunity to grow, to have a stake in what we need to do.”
The team developing the proposed ordinance listened to concerns and went beyond just trying to match what bigger cities do, Riley said.
“They stayed with what our town is, they understood that we love our town and what we do and how we all come together,” she said.
“But we’re outdated. We need to get [this] updated. We need to do things to make our town stand out and have those opportunities for growth.”
Edinburgh Economic Development Director SaraBeth Drybread also said she doesn’t want to see the town “swallowed up by cheapness and bad zoning.”
“Something that we’ve been looking at a lot is — standards are the civic pride and wanting the town to have standards that we can follow and adhere to that make this town better,” Drybread said.
“I know some people think that this is just a huge HOA that is happening on the town, and that’s not what this is.”
Copyright (©) 2025 Daily Journal (Franklin) eEdition