Plan Commission (PC)

ZIONSVILLE SPECIAL MEETING RESULTS ZIONSVILLE PLAN COMMISSION Tuesday November 16, 2021 7:00 PM (Local Time) THIS PUBLIC MEETING WAS CONDUCTED ONSITE AND ELECTRONICALLY AS ALLOWED BY VARIOUS EXECUTIVE ORDERS OF THE GOVERNOR OF INDIANA AND GOVERNOR HOLCOMB’S EXERCISE OF HIS POWERS UNDER INDIANA’S EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND DISASTER LAW, IND. CODE IC5-14-1.5-3.5, et seq. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE MEETING WAS PROVIDED IN THE ANNEX PUBLISHED WITH THIS NOTICE. The following items are scheduled for consideration: I. Pledge of Allegiance II. Attendance III. Continuance Requests None at this time IV. Continued Business Received a Favorable Recommendation to the Town Council 6 in Favor Town of 0 Opposed Zionsville: Draft 1 Recused 2021-29-CPA Airport Strategic Land Use Plan Petition to consider amendments to the Town of Zionsville Comprehensive Plan in order to consider incorporation of the Airport Strategic Land Use Plan Received a Favorable Recommendation to the Town Council 6 in Favor Town of 0 Opposed 2021-54-CPA Zionsville: Draft 1 Recused Gateway Study Petition to consider the incorporation of the Gateway Study as an amendment to the Town of Zionsville Comprehensive Plan Respectfully Submitted: Wayne DeLong, AICP, CPM Director of Community & Economic Development Town of Zionsville November 19, 2021 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 In Attendance: David Franz, Josh Fedor, Larry Jones, Chris Lake, Cindy Madrick, Sharon Walker, Mary Grabianowski Staff attending: Attorney Dan Taylor, Wayne DeLong. A quorum is present. All Pledge of Allegiance. Franz Wayne, would you please take roll? DeLong Certainly. Mr. Jones? Jones Present. DeLong Mrs. Madrick? Madrick Present. DeLong Mr. Lake? Lake Present. DeLong Mr. Franz? Franz Present. DeLong Mr. Fedor? Fedor Present. Franz Mrs. Walker? Walker Present. Franz I believe Mary Grabianowski was going to recuse herself from this matter as she owns property that would be within this plan. So, we’ll go ahead an proceed. So, the first item on the docket is #2021-29-CPA Town of Zionsville Draft Airport Strategic Land Use Plan, petition to consider amendments to the Town of Zionsville Comprehensive Plan in order to consider incorporation of the airport’s strategic land use plan. Proceed. Whitesell Good evening. My name’s Cory Whitesell with HWC Engineering. Since we were last in front of the Board, we have made a series of revisions to the plan as requested and um, so that document is in front of you. To just quickly summarize the changes that are incorporated in this document, um, first solar has been added as a compatible land use in most of the districts so that’s been incorporated into the plan as requested. Second, there has been some, there’s discussion about following land use, a couple policy things. Specifically, whether or not development should radiate from the Village or if an exception would be made in this situation with development starting at the airport and moving southward. Page 1 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 Um, based on the input received, that language that said you could start north and work your way south has been removed so it is all consistent with preexisting policy. No separation. No change from that in this. The other change that has been revised is the document previously made statements about encouraging sanitary sewer in the area. That language has been removed so that the sewer component of this is, um, acknowledging that there is not sewer in most of this district but does not take a position on where or how sewer should be extended or when. The other revision is that there has been a series of decisions made about properties on 200 North since the previous draft was sent around. This acknowledges that there have been some decisions to approve development at the location of the Cato property with the R3 zoning but does make the statement that that is not intended to be a, set a precedent for other approvals and that this plan is intended to be followed with that. This Board also asked us to add a residential compatibility map to demonstrate what areas residential development would be appropriate and which areas it would not. That has been added in this. That document is not just a simple series of circles as it does follow flight paths, um, follows runway protection zones and other features so that you can really have a true impact of which areas are appropriate and which areas are not. And, so, those are the main changes. The other thing that came up in some later conversations about this has been some discussion about development on tax-exempt property and whether or not this plan needed to take a very specific position on that. And, so, in the edits that you have in front of you, actually kind of presented a suggestion that any development that is, that would occur if it’s on airport property, maybe if that creates a situation where there would not be taxes from it that you look at payment in lieu of taxes or some other mechanism. However, since that was written and we distributed this draft, we found a little bit more information that seemed to have gotten a little bit lost in the extension of this, this project. And, that is that there is a previous agreement between the Hamilton County Airport Authority and the Town of Zionsville and that agreement already spells out the conditions for when tax-exempt properties and how it would be handled. So, what that document in short says is that if it is aviation-related development, it would continue to be tax-exempt but if it’s non aviation-related development, then that property would be, that portion of the property would be subject to taxes. So, that agreement exists dating back to 2016, I believe, and so we’ve, we recommend that that language be amended from what is in the draft that you have, I believe Wayne has circulated some potential language that just simplifies it and points out, that, “Hey, there is an existing document that spells this out for the tax-exempt issued” and that we just want to follow that and not try to create any new precedent or interpretation of that document. So, we appreciate the input that we’ve received and I would be happy to answer any questions that you do have about the amendments that are made here in this document. Franz All right, thank you. At this point in time, is there anybody in the public who would like to comment on this matter? Since there have been several, I guess there have been previous comments on this, if you do have comments, try to limit them to the specific changes in the plan itself or proposed changes in the plan. Page 2 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 So, does anybody have any comments, would like to speak? Online? For the record, Mary Grabianowski has showed up. Grabianowski I’m sorry. I had a 1st Grader in the house all day. Franz But you recused yourself from this matter. Grabianowski Yes, I did. You can worry about me a little later. Franz Did someone want to talk online? Czader Yes, I wanted to ask where can we, where can the public can view the changes on the impact which were just mentioned, were added to the planning? Franz Wayne, do you want to handle that? DeLong If I heard the question correctly, it was where can you view the impact? Franz I think the changes to the plan, correct? Czader Right. DeLong Certainly, it’s, it would be page 81 which was handed out this evening and then pages, page 104 would also be altered. Czader And that is available online? DeLong The document was handed out this evening and the edits are not available online. That is correct. Not. Franz But some of the edits are available online up to these? DeLong Correct. Up to these, correct. Czader Well, that would be helpful if this is available online because as I understood from that announcement we were only allowed to join online. So, I would appreciate if we can view all those changes online. Franz We’ve gone to public meetings, you know, in-person meetings with the ability to join online so it’s pretty clear in the meeting notice that it’s in person or online. DeLong If you would use the chat to provide your email address, we can email you this document during this meeting. Czader Okay, thank you. DeLong Certainly. Franz All right, thank you. I think there’s somebody, back, did you want to speak? Yeah. Page 3 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 Stark So just a point of clarification. Franz Please state your name and address. Stark My name is Michelle Stark. Address 11920 East 200 South. I live east of the airport runway, just north on 200. I’m in what they call the Employer Sites District and that’s what I wanted to talk about today. Are you informing us that we cannot talk about that and give a voice to that today? Franz Go ahead. Stark Okay. So, I’ve lived here for 15 years and um, I did participate in the Zoom call that happened about a year ago where they were to gather input for this plan. Um, I will tell you that communication was very poor so therefore participation was very low. We did participate, input was not incorporated specifically around this employer sites area. And, it seemed more of a check-the-box activity because the plan was already developed although they were informing us they were starting the process of developing the plan. I challenge the need to convert our property from agriculture to Employer Sites District. Currently, right now the homes right there are estate homes valued well over a million dollars and they actually utilize that agriculture rating and benefit from that being able to farm the land. Converting to an Employer Sites District would greatly decrease the value of that property as well as our, the quality of our way of life. This would make it almost impossible to enjoy every day having manufacturing or a distribution type facility right there beside you. Right now, there are farms, there are estates, there are working farms. It was told that this needs to be done to help with noise. I’m telling you right now safety, noise and traffic by converting this to employer site would make it much worse than what the impact is from the airport. We’ve recently had these discussions around some of the development in the area and it’s very similar with this. We have farm vehicles. We have cyclists. We have walkers. We have people riding horses on 200 South. And, this would put heavy truck, tractor and trailers on that road. It is Country Road 200 South. Next, I want to address the points in what was included in the plan on why we need these areas. First was manufacturing and distribution and that it’s limited in our areas of Zionsville. I’m a career person recently retired as a vice-president of a global manufacturing supply chain and logistics for a large multinational company. I can tell with significant credibility that manufacturing within a one- to two-hour drive of the airport is sufficient. You don’t need to be on the airport property to support that and biomedical is not an excuse to have the need for that. There’s plenty of open space in Creekside and there’s also plenty of open space in Whitestown. That’s where manufacturing belongs. It should be in areas that are more conducive to that environment. They talk about the need of convenient services. That’s already being addressed at 300 and along 421 right where it belongs and along 32. Solar. Solar. The new buzz word. The new hot word. Where do we put solar? It’s already had issues where it was proposed before. Now, it’s quick and simple. Let’s just dump it on the property near the airport. No. That’s not the right thing to do. The airport’s talked about glare and safety issues and solar should be on Page 4 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 areas that are less populated and have lower property values than what they’re suggesting in this area. In summary, the Employer Site District is absolutely not needed to fulfill manufacturing and distribution requirements nor does it provide significant competitive advantage to those manufacturers. Please, I urge you, protect our agricultural regions within Union Township, preserve Country Road 200 and leave the development along 32, 421 and 300 or 146. Thank you. Franz Thank you. McLaughlin Hi, Harry Mac McLlaughlin. 4952 Waterhaven Drive, Noblesville, Indiana. I’m a real estate broker. I’ve been an agent for 33 years in the business. I currently have the property listed which has a purchase agreement on it at 802 S. 1100 East. That would be the road that runs parallel to the airport on the west side of the airport. My seller did not receive any notice about the meeting. They do live out of town and asked me to attend tonight. Um, and pose a few comments and questions. According to page 10 of the most recent draft November 8 Airport Area Strategic Land Use Plan, there’s a drawing that shows that if you’re in Tier 1, prohibits all residential development. I’m not representing the buyer of the property. The buyer’s represented by another agent. He could not be here tonight but they are in the process of making application for a minor plat. It’s 39 acres. There’s a farmhouse, pole barn, three-car detached garage, an old cattle barn, blockhouse and some local folks here would know it as the Boffo property. Robin Boling is the owner. She inherited it and they are in the process of finishing up the estate. Again, we do have a purchase agreement on the property and it looks like it’s laying inside one of these red arrows that would say, ‘no development.’ So, the challenge is, that puts them in a pretty bad spot if they’re not allowed to proceed with that based on—it just seems like these plans keep getting revised and revised. So, I don’t know if this is something that’s being voted on tonight or if it’s just a further discussion update meeting. I didn’t find out about this until today. And, I don’t know if a representative from the Carr family is here to speak. So, I think that hit two minutes. Franz All right, thank you. Carr Bob Carr, 7113 Westhaven Circle, Zionsville, Indiana. Um, as he said, we’re looking to buy this property. It does lie inside that ‘no building’ area. We actually have had communication before. Um, really all we’re looking to do—we’re not looking to, you know, divide it up into a bunch of half acre lots. It’s going to be three larger areas, more as a family development thing. Um, our position is, this sale is pending based on what happens with this decision. Um, if there’s, if we can’t rezone it, if we can’t build on it, then we can’t move forward and it’s going to seriously hinder Ms. Boling’s ability to sell this property. So, that’s where we’re standing. Franz All right, thank you. Is there anybody else? Roebken Good evening. My name is Tim Roebken. I live at 240 South 1100 East. Thanks for the ability to make a few comments this evening. You know, the nature of the plan—I just saw the recent edition of Zionsville, Zionsville Current and they Page 5 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 talked about this project and this whole process. Quoting a little bit from that it says, “Preserve what is great about Zionsville. The semi-rural and farmland areas of Perry and Union Townships. Residents want to ensure that future generations can enjoy the diverse unique range of environments in Zionsville. Participants strongly desire to limit the encroachment of single-family residential development and industrial uses on agricultural land.” This proposal that is in front of the Commission, the three areas of the Village District, Employment District and the Mixed Use Campus Housing District all fall completely outside of that. This whole project with these three elements eliminates the whole idea of radial development. It sounds like that decision has already been made, that we can do top, um, leapfrogging development now in this area. Specifically, as it relates to my property, I live directly west of the operations of the airport, so the north end of 1100 and currently it’s zoned in this Village District Area and for me and people who live on 1100, the north end of 1100, now would be falling under this Village District. This is agricultural and residential property currently. I think it would be appropriate to extend this eco-ag and ag zone all the way to 32 to make sure that the people that are currently living in that area would enjoy the same kind of zoning. Thank you. Franz Thank you. Is there anybody else? McClure Roy McClure, 358 South 1100 East. I’m a neighbor of Tim’s. We’re in the same area. This really makes not a whole lot of sense considering you’d have a creek that runs right through the middle of it. What good is that going to be to make it any bigger? To put any buildings, anything, not to mention take a lot of the property like our property. I’ve worked a little hard to keep it, keep it up. But yet, it’s going to be taken away for maybe an acre’s worth of use because we can’t build on it because it’s a flood plain unless you change that. You have a big valley to go on the other side. You can’t use that. It makes no sense. That’s being farmed. Makes no sense to just wipe it all out. That’s my opinion. But, I do have a procedural question. About the Board. Franz About what? McClure About the Board here. This is an impartial Board, correct? Supposed to be impartial? Franz Yes. McClure Okay. Um, last month, Lennar thing, Ms. Grabianowski, she lives there, she’s recused herself on this one. So that’s that. That’s admirable. My question is, Ms. Walker, anything that comes up with housing and such as that, I want to know how you can be impartial vote? Franz Dan, you want to take that? Taylor You can just make your comment. You can’t cross examine the members. You can raise an issue. You can say what you have in your mind but, you know, you can raise your issue. You don’t have a right to question the commissioners. Page 6 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 McClure Considering the fact that anything with the housing development, I know for, I know you sold your property for Walker Farms. So, anything that came up with a housing addition, I don’t understand how you could be an impartial vote. Nothing personal. Just a procedural-legal matter here. If you were a jurist, you would probably not be elected to be on the jury because if, if you vote no, you did it, why are you voting against us? Because the Lennar, you were the only one on the panel that voted yes. When we was here for the vote for the—well, whatever you want to call it, the recommendation. Franz It was a rezone request which was given unfavorable recommendation. McClure Right. Yeah, you were the only one that voted opposite of that. Okay. Your words were different than the rest of it. I’m just saying, how, how is it that any housing you couldn’t, you know, well I vote no, then how could you vote no when you’ve done it and made substantial money off of it. You vote yes, well, yeah. To me, it’s a conflict of interest. Franz All right. You said that three times. Thanks. McClure Thank you. Franz Anybody else? Would you like to respond? Whitesell We certainly understand there’s a lot of decisions here and, you know, this is a long term-conversation about lands around where people live and we take all that very, very seriously. Um, I should point out that many of these conversations, I heard statements just as this is a, we’re rezoning it. This is a future land use map. This says that if land changes, this is the only thing it can be changed to which is very different than saying the only thing it can be used for is industrial. So, there’s nothing that forces people to change in this. Um, when we talk about the industrial uses, keep in mind, that your current land use plan that you have adopted does call for similar development in that area right now. So, that was part of the Boone County Comprehensive Plan that was adopted. So, the employer sites really is a reflection of that. It was there but it adds more clarification and explanation so it does not get interpreted as heavy industrial or distribution. It really tries to come in and define what is supposed to happen in there in a little bit more detail. Regarding some of the properties on 1100, anything that is real close to 1100 right now is within a Tier 2 which says that you should discourage residential. This takes a stronger position so that it’s very clear that is a real _______ (24:32) for additional housing. You know, there’s a fair number of people that live along 1100 and, you know, if you continue to allow that to turn one house into three consistently, you’re going to have a lot more conflicts with the land use around an airport in the future. So, these are decisions that you have to be very careful about and make consistently. What we would recommend is to keep that as a discourage residential in that area. The areas where it says prohibit are areas that are currently on airport land or areas that are in runway protection zones where FAA is strongly discouraging development based on what is happening. So, those areas that are in that second tier are ones where you should discourage it as much as you possibly can but you have the ability to make exceptions within the decisions that you are making. Page 7 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 So, I appreciate the chance to clarify. Franz All right, thank you. I don’t think we need a staff report on this or do you have any comments, Wayne, before we open it up to the rest of the Plan Commission? DeLong Certainly, the Plan Commission fully realizes that you have multiple months of time spent reviewing this topic. Certainly, time is not of the essence with this plan but certainly in the same breath as noted the current Comprehensive Plan for the area as mentioned just now by Cory provides direction. So, the effort here among other things is to update the Comprehensive Plan to provide additional clarity and opportunities as well as narrowness on different, on different topics. Certainly, the action that is ultimately the result of your, of your discussions is a recommendation to the Town Council for adoption or rejection of the amendment as it’s been proposed and that would occur at their next agenda placement which could be as early as December 6. Franz All right, thank you. At this point in time, I’ll open it up to anybody on the Commission. Lake Sure. So, I have a question related to airport-related property. In the agreement that we have, um, between Hamilton County Airport Authority and the Town, that is not a capitalized term, meaning it is not defined in the agreement. So, who is say what is airport-related and not? Does that fall to state statute which does define airport-related? Taylor I’ve just, I’ve just seen this today. So, I was not familiar with this. We’ll have to find that answer for you. Lake Okay. Taylor Yeah, I’m seeing it just like you are. Lake Yeah. I know, Larry did a little bit of homework and found the state statute does define airport, the term ‘airport-related’. But, in this, you know, this whatever, four- or five-page agreement, it states airport-related property but then does not define that. So, I’m just— Taylor It does refer to the statute 82214.5 or at least the statute in effect at that time and Section 5. Lake All right. So, that goes back to the state statute, then? Taylor Well, at least the definition at that time. So, we’ll confirm that for you and let you know but I mean, I just do not know. Lake And, I guess I have a question for maybe Wayne. Um, so I get the whole premise of leapfrog development. What I’m curious about is, you know, we use the term village in here. Are we referring to the village over here or are we referring to the village on here? When we say, must radiate out from the village, are we talking about the space that is called the village on here and that development must Page 8 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 radiate out or are we talking about the village here meaning that development must continue up 421 to reach the airport before this can even be enacted? DeLong I believe what’s intended and certainly the consultant can provide additional details, but I believe the intention to, is to lean into the concept of leapfrog development which is the premise of radiating out from the core of the community which is the Village, what we would also colloquially call downtown, intersection of Main and Sycamore. Lake I just think that can be a little confusing if we talk about an area on here called the Village District and then state that it must radiate out from the Village. I don’t know if there’s a way to clarify that. Whitesell The document does, whenever it talks about the airport village, it consistently calls it the airport village and anything related to the Village or downtown consistently refers to that downtown or, you know, your core Village District. Lake Okay, that works for me, thank you. Franz Relative to adjacent properties, you guys are modeling these things kind of off other, conceptually, these are based off of other, similar concepts that have been started to be developed across the United States, is that correct? So, the question that I have is as these things are developed, what is the Airport Authority doing? Are they trying to buy up the adjacent property or are they letting that be developed independently? I’m just trying to understand, what are their actions? Ward Good evening, Stephanie Ward with Mead & Hunt. As a general rule, it’s kind of a blend. In many cases, it’s a matter of taking a strategic plan like what we’ve proposed here and then translating that into, um, many of them recognize it into a zoning ordinance where they are putting some of the teeth if you will into managing those properties through that use. Um, other places, um, if there’s significant impact to those properties, then the airports are then looking at possible acquisition so that the property owners are compensated for that. If it’s a development area that’s, you know, considered to be undevelopable, um, and taking away any type of use, um. What we’re seeing as a general rule, it’s usually being upheld as atypical, if it moves into the zoning side of the house, that it’s often adhered to just like any other zoning where if there’s still usable value in the property that that’s considered to be acceptable. Franz Okay. Jones I guess one of the pieces I keep rolling back to is uses. Currently, the airport’s been small jets, you know, prop, individual plane service. Page 25 of the draft talks about how while the state considers this a regional airport, the FAA doesn’t on a national level. This is, this plan is the last step is sort of converting from being a state certified to, I guess, a national? Is that correct? Ward Well, there’s two def—there’s two different ways that the airport is actually classified. At the national level, the FAA recognizes it as certain classification and that’s where the national comes into play. So, in 2012, the FAA established a classification criteria for all general aviation airports that was intended to Page 9 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 acknowledge their different importance across the national range. There’s about 3300 airports that are part of the national system. The airport has actually transitioned since 2012 to where we are today, actually going from what was considered to be a regional airport to a national airport and a lot of that has to do with the based aircraft and the number of operations the airport experiences. So, we’re seen it transition. Then, there’s comparably to that, there’s a state classification system that comes out of the state’s system plan and that’s a separate classification. So, they kind of run in parallel. So, the FAA acknowledges it as a national airport and that’s what’s referenced and then the state acknowledges it at a separate level. Jones So, not having this federal approval to be a regional airport, does that prevent it from providing any services? Ward I’m not sure of your question. What--? Jones It goes back to, like I said, my core concern is that this airport is going to become a cargo hub for smaller prop, smaller planes. You do a little dig on the FedEx website, and it says that basically FedEx has a plan where they have 300 some odd planes that are being used to land at airports that will have a 60,000 pound maximum gross takeoff or landing weight which is as you read down through the minimal service levels, that’s kind of right where this airport is now. The question is, since it doesn’t have this plan in effect and it’s not being classified a federal or an FAA-recognized airport, is that is what is preventing it from a cargo hub to work out of here? Ward Well, I guess there’s a couple of limits there. So, the airport itself in taking federal funds and being what we call a federally obligated airport, basically does not have the right to preclude aircraft from coming in and out of the airport. What precludes different aircraft from coming in and out of the airport is the actual infrastructure at the airport. So, as an example, a large commercial passenger airplane can’t come in to the airport because it can’t physically land on that runway or the stability of the runway can’t support that aircraft. So, that keeps them from landing there. Your example of, of cargo aircraft, you know, certainly, smaller turbo prop or single-engine aircraft such as, you know, a lot of cargo comes from the larger aircraft and then down to the smaller feeders that we see which are smaller aircraft, could come in and out of the airport with the structural capacity that it has today. If that were to be the case and if they were interested in that, the airport would need to potentially afford them the opportunity if they’re based to accommodate them at the airfield. Part of the grant assurances that the airport agrees to when they take federal funds is that they will treat and provide fair competition for anybody coming on to the airfield so long as they have minimum standards that treats everybody equally. So, I don’t mean to sound like I’m not answering your question. Those types of activities could happen there. I think the type that you’re getting at something much larger and creating a cargo hub that’s servicing Amazon or FedEx or UPS, you know, the types of things that we see happening down at Indianapolis, are not what we would see happening here at Zionsville. Jones Yes, that’s my point is what I’m reading in this, the minimal research that I did, is that FedEx does have a group of planes that are designed to land at this size Page 10 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 airport and when we start reading through what is an aviation-related property or facility, they talk about air cargo operations. So my, my concern is, is that, you know, once again, we’re, we’re betwixt and between. Zionsville and Boone County doesn’t own the airport; Hamilton County does. Hamilton County earns revenues every time a plane lands or takes off. My core concern is that Zionsville, at four or five o’clock in the morning is going to start to get these, oh, there’s a Cessna Sky Courier that works or an ATR 72 and the Sky Courier does about three shipping containers, the ATR can do seven. That’s the 60,000-pound planes. So, it’s—so, as my question rolls back to, without this document in place is that a limiting factor for the airport to expand its services? And, what you’re saying is they could do that right now if they wanted to. Ward They could, correct. You know, the airport would need to identify a place to have them operate. You know, those types of things. But, FAA basically says, “If you’re capable and if the aircraft is capable of coming in and out of the airport, the airport needs to afford them the opportunity for that.” Jones Then really what it boils down to is not so much complaints against the airport, complaints against any third party vendor that would be operating at the site that without this in place, individuals have the right to complain and have a say in it? Ward I think even without the plan in place, I mean those same folks have the opportunity to do, to comment on it. Whitesell I think one of the things that we did work out as part of this, though, is there specifically is a statement in this right up front that we coordinated between both Hamilton County Airport Authority and what we’re presenting to you which is a statement that says, “We don’t intend to change the character of the aircraft coming in and out of there.” So, that is very clearly in the executive summary and it’s in other statements from there. Because I think that, yes, some of these things, you know, if you dig down into it, there’s a lot of theoreticals but this is predicated upon continuing airport service as it is not in changing the character of that service. I think as soon as there’s a change in character of the service that’s out there, it’s a whole different plan that you need to be looking at compared to what is in there right now. This is based on the type of operations they’re doing. If that needs to change then they need to get all the approvals necessary for that and bring that to you because this plan would no longer be valid for a changed condition like that. Lake They have the right, right now, say if UPS wanted some small distribution facility on the airport’s property, that’s between the airport and UPS, they could do that. They wouldn’t have to pay taxes on it because it’s an airport-related function. That could happen, correct? Today, without this plan in place? Whitesell I think with the airport, Bill you may be better able to answer than I can but my understanding of that agreement is that if it’s an aviation-related operation, it’s going to be different than, you know, a full distribution center. That’s a very different scenario. Lake Correct. I’m not talking like full distribution center. But, just some sort of like, UPS has a hangar, they run a few small planes a day out of there. I mean, they Page 11 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 can do that right now. They can build that building right now if they wanted to on airport property. Frye My name’s Bill Frye. I’m the president of the Airport Authority at 11329 East State Road 32. The hypothetical situation of someone like a UPS or someone coming in there. First of all, the only thing that would be exempt from taxes would be the physical hangar. Any loading facilities, storage facilities, anything like would be, would be taxable property to the county. Right now, there’s really, well in any foreseeable future, there’s no way that we could handle that kind of a facility at the airport. First of all, we don’t have sewer out there so you wouldn’t be able to expand the number of personnel out there without vast changes to the infrastructure which aren’t going to be there for quite some time until a sewer line comes down 32. But, like, like Cory said, the image, the issue is in terms of aircraft, no larger aircraft are going to be coming in. We don’t have load bearing capacity so you’re not going to see big cargo planes. As far as smaller, we might, we’ve never been approached for that. To say, I don’t know I can say we will never be approached for that but that’s something that’s not on our radar screen at all at this point. Lake Okay, thank you. Franz You’ve got a copy of the current land use plan and it’s on page 55, very difficult to read the legend. But, if I’m not mistaken, the area east of 1100 East and north of 200 South which is, you know, primarily a lot of the airport, that is mixed use and airport district on the north end of that, is that correct? Whitesell So, there is a—the Mixed Use District, there’s a Mixed Use Campus Housing District which is on the west end of— Franz I’m talking about the existing— Whitesell Oh, the existing. Lake Existing plan, page— Franz What’s the recommendation right now? Whitesell Right now shows that Mixed Use District in there right now. So, it’s got an underlying district and a hatched which is a Mixed Use District in there which includes, you know, similar types of uses as is being proposed. Franz It actually includes some of the property that’s—again, we’re not rezoning; it’s just a use, recommended use. So currently, you could, one could argue we’re just defining that mixed use a little bit more than what it currently is because I mean right now it’s mixed use. I mean, everybody’s, so it’s, so, all right. I’m just— Whitesell That is a fair definition of it. This is very much adding some clarity to that because it is a very open definition right now and it needed to be restrained a little bit because that is the feedback that we heard that people did not want to see big distribution centers out there, it’s not appropriate. Folks did not want to see heavy industrial out there. And, so what was defined as low-rise quality Page 12 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 architecture, generous setbacks, enclosed manufacturing, those are the types of uses that were described in this document to add some clarity to it. Then, you have a land use, a real boundary of that that is not there. It tightens that boundary up more than it is right now which tends to go a little bit further than we thought it needed to. Franz You talk about leapfrog development radiating out from Zionsville. You know, I’m trying to figure out in my mind when would this get developed? I mean, what, you know, there’s a lot of things that have to happen to get there. Lake I’ll be in Hoosier Village. Franz I might not be alive. Lake A ways to go. Fedor Everything on 32 lately coming from Westfield. I mean, there is development coming from that direction into this area. So, I guess that’s, I’m not for leapfrog development in any way but I can see where the pressure for development is coming. You see it. I live off 32. I see the traffic pretty much consistently. It is increasing almost on a weekly basis. It’s coming from Westfield, coming across to Lebanon, that whole area, there’s more traffic. It’s growing. It’s just growing up through there. Franz Any other questions, comments? Recommendation on how to proceed on this one? Lake Trying to find my pre-done motion. We’re essentially making a recommendation to Town Council. Franz I mean, the options are recommendation either favorable or unfavorable— Lake Correct. Franz Or, continue. Lake I’m just, we’re not voting to approve it, we’re voting to recommend or not recommend. Franz Right. Taylor You could also send it to the Town Council with no recommendation. Franz Right. Taylor So, you’re either giving a favorable, unfavorable or no recommendation. Franz Wayne, how long has this been in development? Is it a couple years now? DeLong I would say probably late 2018, somewhere in there contractually. Page 13 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 Fedor Early 2018. We found some notes this morning. Franz So, it’s three years. I mean, is this the extent of the public hearing or are there are public—there have been other public notices and public hearings on this? Grabianowski There was supposed to be a public hearing, I think last fall, at the airport and it got canceled. I think because so many people were planning on going, it scared the crap out of people. Just my thinking. DeLong That would not have been a public hearing. That would have required notice. That moved to a Zoom event given the circumstances that the world was experiencing at that time. As for this particular topic and the discussions here are as a result of a notice being published in the newspaper, social media, other items beyond the statutory requirements, yes. Franz And, what was the—I’m just curious, what was the attendance on those Zoom, on that Zoom call? Was it pretty heavily attended? DeLong I would, I don’t recall, 100, a little bit north of 100, I think is the amount of comments we had. But, as to a number of attendees, I don’t know. I don’t have that number offhand, but I would say probably around 100 just offhand. Let’s see if I have that. Whitesell We had over two hours of discussion on it online with pretty intense question and answer through the process and clarifications. There was also with this a separate meeting that was held specifically because there were so many questions on runway extension. There was a little bit of confusion. Is this a plan for the runway extension? So there was a separate, you know, open house Q&A session held with those questions about the airport’s long-range plans and then after that, there was the follow-up meeting that Wayne is discussing specifically about this land use plan but trying to put all those things in context to make sure we were talking about the same thing because there’s a lot of confusion between the two. Franz I’m just trying to understand exactly what opportunities people had to comment on this, so that’s really my question. Lake So, I move that Docket #2021-29-CPA Airport Strategic Land Use Plan receive a favorable recommendation to Town Council. Franz Is there a second? Call for a second again? So, it does die for lack of a second at this point. Um, it’s a question, I mean, is this something we want to continue again? Is there more, I’m just trying to understand, is there anything else these guys can provide that would add clarity to this? Lake I mean, it’s not zoning, not a zoning change. Franz Right. It’s not zoning. Lake It’s an explanation of what would be favorable in the area that is not all dissimilar and in some cases better given some of the residents’ concerns to what exists today. The employer sites definition is actually better than what is allowed Page 14 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 there today. And by better, I mean, less invasive to them. So, while there’s remonstrance against it, it’s remonstrance against something that is unknowingly better for them. Jones And, then the other issue, I guess, is without something in place we’re going to continue to get the complaints there’s the, is it the Quint Group that owns properties on either side of the airport? There’s the group both south and north that are wanting to subdivide their properties. Regardless of what we do, the airport exists and it’s going to continue to exist and it’s going to probably continue to get more and more use. And, it’s generally beneficial that we do make a statement as to what people should expect to be able to do with their properties north, south, east, west of the airport. And, the airport has existed long enough that nobody should really find this a surprise regardless of notice, regardless of whatever statements. So. Lake The thing that I hate is, if somebody wants to build a warehouse on the east side of the airport right now, and one of our litmus tests is, is this supported by the Comprehensive Plan? And, today it is. And, we’re going to have to vote in favor of it and everybody out there is going to hate us because we voted in favor of it but that’s what we’re inclined to do because of the way the Comprehensive Plan works. And, this Comprehensive Plan pulls that use back in the Employer Sites District to not be distribution warehousing, to be something that is, you know, it’s not saying that it has to be. It’s saying that if you want to do something in the Ag District that you’re already allowed to do, it needs to be less intensive than what the current plan today is. Jones Yeah. You want to make a motion again? Lake If I can. Jones Can he make it again or should I just second it? Franz You have to make the motion again because it died. Lake So, I move that Docket #2021-29-CPA Airport Strategic Land Use Plan receive a favorable recommendation to Town Council. Franz Is there a second? Jones Second. Franz There’s a second. Is there any further discussion? I mean, I personally think a plan is better than no plan. So. With that, Wayne, would you please take roll? DeLong Certainly. Mrs. Madrick? Madrick Aye. DeLong Mrs. Walker? Walker Aye. Page 15 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 DeLong Mr. Fedor? Fedor Aye. DeLong Mr. Franz? Franz Aye. DeLong Mr. Lake? Lake Aye. DeLong Mr. Jones? Jones Aye. Franz Motion carries. We’ll forward this to the Town Council with a favorable recommendation. Thank you. Next item on the docket. Lake I have to recuse myself from this one. Franz You’re taking off, too, right? Lake Yes, since there is nothing after this. Jones So, if you recuse yourself, you can go home early. We might need you to, you know, support the motion to adjourn. Franz All right. Next item on the docket is #2021-54-CPA Town of Zionsville Draft Gateway Study, petition to consider the incorporation of the Gateway Study as an amendment to the Town of Zionsville Comprehensive Plan. Let the record show that Chris Lake has recused himself from this matter and is no longer in attendance. So, petitioner, please? Weber Good evening. My name is Cara Weber with Delv Design. I have Jack Webb here with TKMA and we are the consultant team that developed the Zionsville Gateway Area Study also known as the ZGA study which we are going to talk about tonight. Um, you can see on the screen and this is a review of a continuance of last month’s meeting so I will go quickly through some of the presentation but just so we have graphics to talk about. Where is the ZGA? It is downtown. Um, currently it is underdeveloped and it has a lot of opinions and a lot of excitement around what it could be and what it should be. The goal of the Zionsville Gateway Area Study was to ensure that it would be an economically vibrant development, it would be whole community service and it would be an authentically Zionsville experience. It needs to feel like Zionsville. So, the goal of the study was to first understand what does the community want. It’s an incredibly important premise. And, then, secondarily, how can we provide it? What are, what is, um, math has been run through the development suggestions, the design tenets to actually provide a plan that could work and could be developed. So, I’ll stop here on this screen. This is the primary development Page 16 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 suggestion that the study is suggesting. This tonight, I think your discussion is to explore whether this should be recommended to be an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. What this study does is that it ensures that the voice of the community was heard. It de-risks future development efforts by creating and finding what it is that stakeholders would support. Um, the current zoning district, the VBD, would actually allow for all of this to be orange. So, you can see some of these parcels as we’re calling them, Areas B, Areas E that are residential, lower density, E public plaza along with some green space borders is actually a lower density than what the current zoning allows. So, this gives a voice to what would then de-risk future development. So, I will stop there and entertain any questions from the public. Franz In the presentation, this is scenario 2, correct? All right. Weber I would have to look that up. This was the primary development suggestion. I would have to look up what were, there were many, many within the document as you probably have seen. Franz All right. Is there any public comment on this matter? Lusk I’m Heather Lusk. I live at 285 W. Hawthorne Street. Sorry, Cara, I’m trying not to touch your laptop. I attended many of the gateway discussions. I reviewed this with a lot of people. They’ve done a great job of listening to folks. I’ve been very impressed with the process and appreciative that they have included as much of the community as they have. I will say I’m very in favor of the concept. A lot of people have mentioned concerns with the traffic flow and I’m not an expert. I’ve no idea if this traffic pattern would work or not although I’m not necessarily convinced that fixing traffic is necessarily even realistic. We have very old streets. When the folks from McKenna were in town to discuss zoning, we talked about traffic and one revelation I had was when they suggested that perhaps we need to just accept that traffic at certain hours will never move swiftly. Like if you’ve ever been to Old Town Alexandria, traffic just doesn’t move there during rush hour because Old Town, they can’t do anything to change it so you just accept it and live with it. But, that’s neither here nor there. Um, so, I did take a deeper look at it after last month’s meeting when it felt like we should be here addressing concerns or discussing concerns. I only have three little things. One is a concern that the green space will not be made a priority where it’s designed to buffer the area to the west and to the south. I feel that that is a very important part of this since green space was very important to the people who responded to the surveys so it’s more of a precaution. Please don’t let anybody who’s developing these lots or the properties that are abutting them destroy what currently exists. The green space is very important. Number two, I’m not sure I completely understand height in the plan because it’s noted that the height for each building at two or three stories is only occupied height and so it makes me a little nervous that somebody reading that would say, “Oh, well, we can just go up to five stores and have two stories of parking below and three stories of occupied floors up above.” So, I didn’t know how that fits into this or if that’s something that can be added as a requirement that it cannot be above 34 feet which is the current VBD requirement. Page 17 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 My final concern is very small but critical and that is that the small stretch of Sycamore Street between 2nd and 3rd not be used for any of the new traffic for any of these designs. On that curve where 3rd Street turns onto the one block stretch of Sycamore it is at best a glorified alley. Every time something is planned to be developed on this location, potential traffic in that exact spot is part of the issue. So, why not just remove it from the equation and if there are single- family homes on Lot B, why not have them back up to that Sycamore Street and their garages be to the south and that way, they can exit onto a new road, no issues at all or concerns and I think, I know everybody along that stretch will be much happier with that solution including my neighbor around the corner. That’s a big safety issue because they’re small kids who play in that alley. There are pets who walk in that alley. It’s just, uh, those are my three concerns. Green space, discouraging the use of 3rd and Sycamore and then height. I do agree to what you said a moment ago, Mr. Franz, a plan is better than no plan and I do appreciate that something is being discussed and including people in part of that discussion. Thank you very much. Franz Thank you. Is there anybody else who would like to comment? Sussman My name is Janet Sussman and I live at 210 W. 2nd Street which is the corner of 2nd and Pine. And, just across 1st Street from where I live is where the Farmer’s Market is now and it looks like there’s going to be a lot more development on that side plus more residents on my side of 1st Street and right now, I can sit on my porch and watch people going to the Farmer’s Market. Families with toddlers and strollers and so forth and there’s no crosswalk there. Sometimes, people are polite and will wait for them to cross and sometimes they have to wait for quite a while or make a dash. I would really like to see something like a stoplight for pedestrians as there is on Oak Street at 5th so that there could be some way of ensuring a safe crossing across 1st Street there without having to impede traffic all the time with a stop sign. So, that would be my comment. Franz All right, thank you. Is there anybody else who would like to comment? Anybody online? All right. Would you like to comment on any of the points that were raised? Weber I would just note that these are really great concerns raised and that there would be a lot of future public input for specific design elements that would fit into that and all of, I think, we would encourage a continuance of the very public process that happened during this study in order to continue to get that high fidelity of information throughout the entire design process. Franz Not a continuance of this plan. Weber I’m sorry. Poor choice of words. Thank you. DeLong Continuation of the dialogue. Weber Thank you. Page 18 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 Franz I don’t see how this is going to be accomplished without further discussion and further planning once this is in place. There is a lot still to be done. So. Wayne, as a representative of the Town, do you have any comments? DeLong Certainly, as indicated, I mean, this project has had many opportunities for public input be it virtual, in person, we’ve been working on this since July last year was the kickoff, October-ish was the initial public in-person events. Certainly, exactly what was said is what we would definitely encourage which is the perpetuation of the dialogue to use my own words with the next steps, assuming some action coming to the Town Council with a zoning ordinance discussion be it McKenna, if it’s an advance of McKenna’s work or with McKenna’s work and certainly other actions with Redevelopment Commission, Town Council related to the infrastructure and the conversation moving forward. Certainly, the RDC next week begins talking about a 2022 budget. This is just a good all around conversation. With the comments that have been made, definitely this is just a plan. I mean, this is not rezoning grounds. It’s making recommendations. As much as making recommendations, it’s also making recommendations on the green space that was mentioned. Certainly, if a project that’s adjacent such as The Parke has vested rights based upon their development plan, this does not reach across the boundary and change their vested rights, that project’s vested rights but certainly at the end of the day, this area looks to be the Zionsville Gateway Area and having made a positive impact all across the boundaries. Certainly, that height clarification would be beneficial, habitable for, occupiable for and just recently on Monday morning, the Town Council was discussing a crosswalk policy so very, very timely and can happen separately and even in advance of a project happening in this area if there’s a desire by individuals or the Town to commence with a sidewalk conversation or a crosswalk conversation in any portion of the community’s 8 square miles of Zionsville. But, in summary, staff is certainly supportive of the efforts and certainly is thankful to the input. I would be remiss certainly not to try to address some of the comments that you have received. Certainly, one particular focus has been, “What will that traffic study look like? When will that occur? How will we know what pieces and components of the extension of 1st Street? What does that look like? Will there be roundabouts? How does this functionality happen?” And, certainly, that next step would be to dust off the 2016 effort by A&F Engineering again focusing on future actions by the Plan Commission and Town Council to revisit that traffic study and start modeling it, working on those, that data and updating it based on the numbers. Um, I can also say that we’ve, you know, had conversations with the communities about how roundabouts function in downtown areas and I can say specifically Carmel, while we often talk about communities we don’t want to emulate, we do want to learn from their experiences and Carmel I think it’s on the front page of the IBJ illustrates their intersection of Rangeline and Main Street which will not have a roundabout where the PNC is going to be redeveloped. There’s going to be a nice small plaza with a clock and a space for some public gatherings but it is not a roundabout. The closest roundabout to their downtown is three blocks away. So, certainly traffic—roundabouts are wonderful traffic-moving, insurance-saving and loss- reducing implementation devices, traffic control devices but they sometimes are juxtaposed to downtown redevelopment. Page 19 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 Franz All right, thank you. Any members of the Plan Commission, comments? Grabianowski I just appreciate all the work that’s gone into this and the way that it was done with transparency and getting people involved and allowing for lots of public input. I appreciate that. Walker I think it’s a good place to start. I was really impressed with the kind of work that was in here and the different scenarios and it gives a basis to work from. So, I think it’s great. Franz I mean, what I would say is, we have many vested parties, interested parties in what happens down here. I mean, there’s so many people. They all have a voice. When something comes up, they all want to be heard. And, that has led to some pretty contentious events relative to development down here. The fact that we actually have everybody generally on board. I mean, nobody is going to say this is perfect but everybody now is saying, “Okay, we have a plan. It’s something we can live with.” And, I think it’s going to make, I mean, it’s going to invite development because now people know they’re going to be able to come to Zionsville, they’re going to be able to look at this and say, “Okay, we know what we can do, and how we can proceed” versus in the past, you know, they talked to people, “Yeah, yeah, we’ll support it” and then all of a sudden, it falls apart and there’s been a lot of investment. So, I think this has been money well spent. I commend you guys on the effort and the work and being inclusive with a lot of people. So, I really appreciate what you guys have done. Jones I guess the only piece I’d add would be the part—I guess I’ve always been fascinated that Zionsville exists because it’s just a pure real estate speculation piece. You know, William Zion and Elijah Cross got together. I got to believe William Zion offered Eagle Village the opportunity to have the railroad come through there and they said, “No, we’ve got this muddy trail called Michigan Road and we’re just fine with that.” So, they put it over here and Elijah took the land, divided it up into 80 lots and off went Zionsville and it did well enough that people physically moved their buildings from Eagle Village to Zionsville and Eagle Village went away. The point of all that is, as much as this plan is a good plan, it needs to be acted on and my concern is, um, the number 1 item that is amazing about it, I guess, or really interesting is how simple the act of moving Zionsville over to connect to 1st. You know, we’ve all struggled trying to figure out how that would work and the benefit of what they’ve put together is that, one, it gets the traffic heading the right direction through Town. The only other thing that’s ever really going to help the Town is to get the Cooper Road exchange finally through and that will finally get rid of the, the pass through traffic. Secondly, you know, the ability to create that E space, you know, there’s always been conversations about closing Main Street to make it some sort of pedestrian, you know, area. That fails every time it’s ever been done. And, what this plan allows is the street is still maintained as a public street but you now have this new area that can be used as a theater for events and whatever else is going up and down the street. But, my core concern is all about acting. Currently, you’ve got The Parke. They’ve got a plan. They’re moving forward for. I don’t know what position Glenn Hogue is in with what whey put together but they have done a substantial amount of work with the DNR to get things approved. And so, there’s Page 20 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 a point that exists right now that you could probably take those groups and get the kind of approvals you need to make this road change down. Um, the other piece that’s out there is that the Town owns parcel A and Buckingham owns parcel E and parcel E is so-so developable. Parcel A is immediately developable. So, there’s another opportunity out there to negotiate an arrangement that you can get parcels B, C, D and E and the road and the DNR part, all of that kind of put together in a package that could move through rather quickly. But, it just comes down to acting. The other thing that everybody needs to understand is that this is a plan. Set of guidelines. And, you know, when we talk about preserving green space and all that kind of stuff, embedded in all this activity is a whole lot of work to actually bring all these parcels up to be buildable which is going to cross back and forth through the green area, green spaces and everything people are trying to preserve. So, it’s a big endeavor. Surprisingly enough, it’s, it’s actually workable and there’s a lot of pieces in place now that could be acted on if the Town and Mayor and Council and everybody else is willing to act and that’s my core concern is, they need to pick a path and this time stick to it. And, between Plan Commission, BZA and everybody else, there’s a way to get this done and it could be huge benefit to the, to the Town. Franz Anybody else have any comments? Is there a motion on this matter? Grabianowski I move that we recommend this to the Town Council. Franz Favorable recommendation. Grabianowski Favorable recommendation to the Town Council. Franz Is there a— Walker Second. Franz There’s a second. Is there any further discussion? Wayne, would you please take roll? DeLong Certainly. Mrs. Walker? Walker Aye. DeLong Mr. Fedor? Fedor Aye. DeLong Mr. Franz? Franz Aye. DeLong Mr. Jones? Jones Aye. Page 21 of 22 Zionsville Plan Commission—Special Meeting November 16, 2021 DeLong Mrs. Madrick? Madrick Aye. DeLong Mrs. Grabianowski? Grabianowski Aye. Franz Motion carries 6-0. Thank you. Congratulations. Is there any other business? I feel like there’s something wrong. We didn’t continue something until the next meeting. Is there a motion to adjourn? Walker So moved. Franz All in favor? All Aye. Page 22 of 22