City of Bloomington, Indiana Plan Commission, 9 Nov 2020

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Bloomington Plan Commission, November 9, 2020

Description

meeting agenda: https://bloomington.in.gov/onboard/meetingFiles/download?meetingFile_id=7876

A

All right well, thank you all for coming. I will call to order this uh meeting of the city of.

A

Bloomington planning commission for november 9th 2020., um we have uh several items on the agenda.

A

This evening, um including one item on a consent, agenda and two petitions, why don't we begin by.

A

Calling the rule sorry, I forgot- I was going to be doing that tonight. Just a second.

B

I'm like wait a minute: okay, uh multitasking, yeah, kenzie present.

B

Sandberg, yes, saint john here cockrum here whistler here.

C

Copper here uh burrell here- oh I see hold on just a second.

B

Done seven, I think israel just joined just a second, so I can unmute him.

B

Is um we're doing roll um herrera here great? Thank you. Your reservation has ended.

C

All right, thank you, we're making it's like. We have it. Oh kate, okay! Thank you! So much sorry.

A

All right, so we do have uh eight playing commissioners here, which is a quorum.

A

So we will uh continue with our business, we'll uh we don't have any minutes to be approved.

A

Tonight so before we get into our regular business, we'll we'll start with some reports, uh resolutions.

A

And communications: do we have any reports from staff sure we just have one we wanted to? Let you.

B

Know, as is typical of the november meeting, we have our 2021 development review um committee.

B

Schedule uh completed, so we will send that to you this week. It's not something that uh you have to.

B

Approve, but it gives you the dates for our plan. Commission platt committee board of zoning appeals.

B

And hearing officer meetings for the next calendar year um that is helpful when you're.

B

Deciding which committees you're going to sign up for in january, which slots you'd like to fill.

B

um And uh we also it's nice for us to have extra eyes. If you see something that uh that.

B

Maybe we missed a date that should be changed or something like that. So we will send that to you.

B

um This week for your reference, and it will also go up on the website for the public as well.

B

And that's only uh oh sorry only only um housekeeping we had. We also have two.

B

Draft zoning map um meetings this week, uh one is tomorrow night at 5, 30.

B

And we will be discussing those areas in town that were formerly or our planning developments.

B

And we're proposing to be re-zoned to regular districts from the code and on thursday night.

B

At 5 30, um we will be discussing starting the discussion of the text, amendments that would.

B

Allow uh plexes in the primarily residential zoning districts, so just for anyone watching.

B

That's when those will be discussed and then there are two meetings the following week.

B

Plexus and r4 again on monday and uh then other smaller text, amendments corrections and type.

B

Types things like that on tuesday, and then we will be done with that portion of the public outreach.

B

But the website will stay, live and active um until this comes to plan commission in january.

B

That's all I have thanks brad all right, thank you, jackie, and I would just add to uh to the earlier.

A

Point about next year's calendar and appointments. If, uh if you see anything on that calendar, that.

A

Interferes with your current appointments, or you think that there's another um committee you'd like.

A

To serve on uh now would be a good time to start giving that some thoughts, so we don't show up.

A

At our january meeting and uh have to do uh last minute dragging people into those appointments, it.

A

Would be great if we could have a slate of candidates in advance of the january meeting.

A

uh This year, so um any other uh reports or communications from uh plan commissioners.

A

Okay, uh seeing none uh there's one petition that has been continued to our december 14th.

A

Meeting that is, pud 17-20, the mcdole business center llc at 300 west hillside drive, so that.

A

Is now set to be to have another hearing at the december meeting, but we will not be hearing that.

A

Tonight, on our consent agenda tonight we have just one item uh that is 0-21-20. uh The petitioner is.

A

Comcast the property 1600 fountain drive. um That's the request for a rezone of 78 for property from.

A

Residential medium lot to employment, uh we heard that uh at our at our last meeting, uh that's been.

A

Added to the consent agenda, uh because staff uh believes that that's either meeting the letter.

A

Of the the law or is otherwise non-controversial, is there um any commissioner that would like to.

A

See that particular item removed and receive another full hearing tonight, if so say so now,.

A

Okay, is there any public comment on the consent agenda.

A

Just to remind everyone who may have been here before or if you're here for the first time, if.

A

You'd like to make public comment at any point that we call for public comment the best way to.

A

Do that is to click on the participants button at the bottom of your screen and once you click that.

A

You you should see a button at the bottom of that participants panel. That says raise hand and if.

A

You raise your hand there. Then we will recognize you and give you five minutes to make comment on.

A

uh The the item at hand- I don't see any hands raised currently, but we'll give it just a minute.

A

For people who may be trying to figure that out.

A

And uh while we're doing that, perhaps uh jackie we could check in on the facebook feed, do we ever.

A

Get that uh we're looking at it there's actually a competing meeting happening right now that I.

B

Think, I guess, is a reschedule, I'm not sure um uh bicycle pedestrian safety. Commission is streaming.

B

So uh since ours airs on cats, we went ahead and let that keep going uh there and then we can share.

B

The recording, after sure, all right, well, I don't see any other hands raised if, for some reason, you.

A

Have trouble, with the virtual hand, raise the other thing you might do is turn your camera on and just.

A

Wave your actual hand and we'll we'll try to keep an eye out for that as well. But it.

A

Looks like there is no public comment, uh so we'll just come back to the commission.

A

uh For a motion uh on the consent agenda, a motion to approve the consent agenda; second,.

A

All right, we have a uh motion and a second uh jackie. Would you call the role on the consent.

A

Agenda, please sure saint john, yes, cockrum, yes, whistler! Yes, copper! Yes, burrell! Yes, herrera! Yes,.

C

Kenzie, yes, sandberg, yes, 8-0 all right, so the consent agenda passes eight zero.

A

uh We're moving on now to our uh petitions. We have two petitions tonight. Those are 0-23-20.

A

Bill c brown, revocable trust property at 31, west fullerton pike and the second is.

A

Spdp 2420 habitat for humanity at 700, west guy avenue, we'll start with zeo2320 again. This is.

A

3100 west fullerton pike, a request for rezone of 87 acres from pud to mixed use, corridor.

A

And the case manager for this petition is eric grulick, who, I believe is here to.

A

A

Eric are you with us? We have your screen, but I'm not hearing your voice. I apologize about that.

D

um So this is a petition for bill brown um for a property that he owns at 3100, west fullerton pike.

D

This property is about 87 acres in size and is actually located on pretty much the most.

D

Southern tip of the city boundary uh the corner at the northeast quarter of I-69 and fullerton pike.

D

So the petition site is zoned as a planned unit development. It was initially rezoned.

D

Back in the 1980s, the late 80s, there have been a couple of amendments and requests.

D

For some site plans and and development on this property, but nothing has happened on the site.

D

There was an approval that was done in 2015 um to allow for the property to have some topsoil.

D

Removed as part of the construction of I-69, um but otherwise, like I said, it's remained vacant.

D

And undeveloped, so the petitioner is here tonight to request to rezone the property from the planned.

D

Unit development, zoning that it is currently to the mixed use corridor. uh The mc zoning district.

D

So they have also requested a waiver from the required second hearing uh for this rezoning.

D

Petition um so real, just uh briefly as an overview for this area. um As I mentioned this.

D

Is owned a planned unit development? This is the far southernmost tip of our jurisdiction just to.

D

The north of this is the southern indiana medical park, uh both phase one and phase two um some plant.

D

Commissioners may remember there was a lot of discussion with southern indiana medical park and.

D

Road connectivity through there there is a road that is shown through here on the transportation.

D

Plan that would have to be constructed whenever something happens on this site.

D

But the petitioner has no immediate development plans, so there's no site plan approval. That is.

D

Coming forward with this, it's strictly a rezoning request in order to allow for some increased.

D

Marketability for the site, um so, as I mentioned in the properties undeveloped, you can see in this.

D

Aerial photograph here there's a mix of trees and open space on the site, so the defined tree.

D

Line that you can see on this aerial photograph reflects the approval that was given in 2015.

D

So that approval set aside all the trees, uh the riparian buffer uh on the site and.

D

So what you see is open space here is what was left after you took out those preservation.

D

Boundaries, um so the property, um as I mentioned, was a planned unit development. It was approved in.

D

1988 with the uh close to a what was a medic manufacturing park, zoning district at a time.

D

So you can see on the screen here, the useless that was associated with that.

D

um There was some limited retail that was allowed office. Space is.

D

Allowed um some distribution manufacturing production uh kind of a wide range of things.

D

And again this was done in the late 80s, so this was using the 1973 zoning code.

D

So again we have a lot of problems when we're trying to translate the uses that were in the.

D

Code at that time, with the uses that are on our list now, so this site has has sat.

D

Undeveloped- and this is on the areas or some of the areas of the planned unit- developments that.

D

We were looking to kind of remove uh and rezoned to a current zoning district uh again for a lot.

D

Of reasons I just mentioned with the useless here that was so old doesn't match our current.

D

Uses so it's really does need to be uh change and amended and staff was proposing to address that.

D

With our draft zoning map, um we had uh initially identified it as kind of a mixed use, medium skill.

D

Commercial property uh just kind of based on the useless, but as we've gone through the pud analysis.

D

We've really tried to match things more diligently with the comprehensive plan and be consistent with.

D

All of the pd's throughout the city, in terms of comp plan designation and proposed zoning.

D

So we were proposing to rezone this to the mixed use: employment district, we're also looking at.

D

Possibly amending the list of uses for the mixed use- employment district, as well as the employment.

D

District itself, uh maybe kind of sync those together, maybe add some additional ones. You.

D

Know, like I said, we've just started that process. um So there's there's still a lot of things.

D

That are in play that we're trying to figure out with the draft map with possible text amendments.

D

um So, as I mentioned, we were trying to be consistent in zoning of properties and following.

D

The comprehensive plan, uh the comprehensive plan has this site designated as employment.

D

Within that that area, it's highly encouraged, obviously to have a lot of high employment.

D

Uses professional business offices, flexible tenant, space, research and development, centers.

D

So certainly the the large size of this property and the closeness to.

D

I-69 makes this an ideal location for those employment uses um with the ease of access.

D

So we're not we're not sure really, if uh commercial uses and and high uses like that.

D

Are what we want to see here that are not in uh not not consistent with our comprehensive plan.

D

So we we did make a recommendation in the staff report and uh you know, as I've kind.

D

Of discussed here, we we want to make sure that we're being consistent with the comprehensive plan.

D

As well as other puds and as well still continue to evaluate, are useless and what is is and is.

D

Not allowed in each of these districts, um so at this time we are recommending that the petition.

D

Be denied, um based on the the lack of consistency with the comprehensive plan um and kind of where.

D

We are with our process of of uh still very an early initially uh reviewing the zoning districts.

D

And the standards that go along with that. um So with that I am happy to answer any questions.

A

All right, thank you. Eric is there a representative of the petitioner who would like to make a.

A

Presentation um eric zero, sorry mike I'm trying to unmute you. I assume it's mike carmen.

D

Yes, mike carmen is the petitioner's representative.

B

So yeah there you go okay, there we go all right. I thought I was raising my hand, but.

E

Maybe didn't do it right sorry, uh my name is mike carmen representing uh bill brown. The petitioner.

E

uh You know this pod was well. First of all, let me back up say in our petition. When filed, we.

E

Requested waiver of second meeting uh we're withdrawing that request for second meeting.

E

We would like to uh turn this into a little bit more of a discussion, feedback session and and.

E

We'll look at petition further and and be back next month. uh That's up to you! You have to make.

E

That decision, you have a staff recommendation to recommend denial and send it on to to the.

E

Council for final action, which is where it would go sooner or later, we'd, ask that you.

E

Not act on tonight and essentially announce to a continuous but uh to the next meeting and have a.

E

Chance to make a few comments now and look for some questions or feedback from you that we can.

E

Take a look at it between now and the next meeting, so this pud goes, as eric said, goes back to 1986.

E

You know the staff recommendation for the eme zone and touting the employment uses that are in there.

E

Well, understandable, the issue of I-69 and ease of access and being a place suitable for.

E

Employment-Based zoning has been true even when it was highway 37.. It was still at.

E

The time for highway 37 as divided highway was the most attractive access road. You had.

E

The fact that now I-69 doesn't doesn't really change anything it's 69 instead of 37.

E

But that issue of this site being zoned for looking for employment-based uses as a.

E

Good site for that has been true since 1986 and actually even before then, but uh and and there's.

E

Just eric's told you that nothing is happening with the site. Bill's been doing this for a number.

E

Of years he's been doing this for longer than than I think some members have probably been been alive.

E

But uh 36 years at this site and nothing has been able to do anything with it yet and then we're in.

E

The time where we're looking for some flexibility, uh the me zone does not provide the flexibility.

E

If you look at the table uses one reason, I'm looking for some feedback is: if you look at the.

E

Table of permitted uses in the me zone and compare with the mc zone, which is what we're requesting.

E

Almost everything that's permitted in the me zone is also permitted. Bmc is you're, losing.

E

Very little when farms was one, that's not permitted the mc zone that would be in the me.

E

And light manufacturing, but the light manufacturing. If you look at the pud uses.

E

That eric had uh flashed up there a few moments ago and there I know they're in your the uh packet.

E

In your staff report, those light manufacturing uses have been there available on this site for.

E

36 years and it is not generated, somebody willing to take a piece of and develop for that use yet.

E

uh Why we, why are we pushing now for the mc zone as opposed to just wait and let this.

E

Play out with the staff handling through maybe a more a bigger picture, looking a lot of puds.

E

There are a number of reasons, one of which is it's hard to market uncertainty.

E

uh There's that would like to eliminate that there has been some inquiry, some interest in a.

E

Use that is not far enough along not mature enough to really want to talk about it. Much.

E

But it would take a big chunk of this. That would need, as part of that use as I'm going to call it.

E

A training center or a safety regional training safety center, but that use would would depend.

E

Upon having close at hand in close proximity, a hotel and a restaurant which become problematic.

E

In the me zone a little bit more problematic in the enemy's own, very limited restaurant.

E

Seating use the limited size, but the very large use that might could take as much as 25 acres.

E

For a large center needs the assurance that that it would could co-develop with that a hotel and.

E

A restaurant because the the nature of the uh the center and then the traffic that they bring in.

E

So, there's that the uh fire pod amendment added to the list of permitted uses an assisted living.

E

Center, we don't want to lose that that's not a permitted use in the enemy zone. It is an mc zone.

E

So there are some things in the fc zone that we do not want to lose that going from the pod.

E

To any other zone is, is a at risk, as well as the emc zone adds some flexibility, and so one of the.

E

Reasons of looking for some feedback is, I don't know how much of a concern the issue of retail is.

E

Some retail in that area, I would hope, would not be a concern, but there's remains the possibility.

E

Of what's called a zoning commitment, uh it goes by a couple, different names where.

E

Certain permitted uses are otherwise excluded. I know staff is not overly enthralled with that.

E

Concept it's available under the law and is actually used frequently, and this has been used.

E

A number of times in some of the positions you've seen and that have gone on to the council.

E

But it's an opportunity to do what amounts to a deed restriction that says, among whatever.

E

Uses are permitted, the following will not be permitted uh if big box retail is a concern.

E

That that can actually be safely eliminated as a deed restriction, and this kind of a step is, as I.

E

Said is done frequently. It's been done in the city down to donald county, a number of times and the.

E

Statute on zoning actually specifies this as as a pos as a process as a possibility.

E

The I guess some of the other issues that we've talked about. I mean this is a large.

E

Track, as already said, we've looked and explored uh the concept of a split zone, a single lot that.

E

Has is divided at some point where you have two zones a lot. Maybe the south half is mc. The north.

E

Is me, I tell you that the staff is not supportive of that. It's not a legal problem. It's a staff.

E

Planning preference I mean, but frankly it's no different than if we do a two loss subdivision.

E

And not much different than if we do two loss subdivision drive divide the parcel from.

E

87 plus acres and two 40 acre parcels and look at one zone of one one zone on the other, 40 acres and.

E

And preserve some of the area for emmy use, if that's uh of strong desire for you, but that can.

E

Also be done onto simply a amended petition that calls for a split zoning on it uh designate a cert.

E

Part of our mc and certain part of our free meet, which is another reason for asking that.

E

What amounts to a conversation here, and I would I would like to have some questions and.

E

Some feedback for what are some of these issues that are important to you, as as the planning.

E

Commission, as I said, the emcee preserves almost every me use, but it certainly allows for some.

E

Other uses that gives us some flexibility, some which we think is going to be necessary for one.

E

Potential uh buyer and developer not certain, but it certainly is out there as an opportunity.

E

That we're still looking at and pursuing, but uh just generally some flexibility.

E

For vacant land, that's been dormant, dormant for a very long time and we it's time to make get some.

E

Movement out there, and so the mc zone, which we believe would certainly allow that. So those are.

E

Comments for now, but I'm going to do the request to the notice that we would like to withdraw the.

E

Request for a waiver second meeting and and look to have you uh continue this to the second next.

E

Meeting or next month for further discussion, that's all! Thank you all right. Thank you.

A

um At this time, we'll come back to the commission for questions. Are there any.

A

Questions for either staff or for the petitioner from uh commissioners. I see commissioner kinsey.

F

Eric or jackie, I don't know who can speak to the timeline for the proposed rezone. What what's.

F

What is the approximate schedule for that? I mean for the large for the map- amendment yes or the.

B

New map, I'm sorry in the text amendments. um The idea is that uh that will come to you in january.

B

Hopefully, uh second half of january- um and uh we will do special sessions um so as not to disrupt.

B

Regular business so sorry that you'll using us even more and uh that we expect for that to be.

B

Wrapping up, we hope before the end of february. So then it would go on to council in march and.

B

Be done before summer session, which susan can say when that is I'm not exactly sure. If that's always.

B

Set but the idea would be to do it in spring early summer, so within the next six seven months.

F

This should be resolved via the processes that have been established, correct. Okay, thanks.

A

Karen um uh thanks, uh mr carmen for that um presentation, appreciated that I'm curious.

G

um Jackie or eric um what you're thinking is about mr carmen's um willingness. His proposal to.

G

Hear from um staff and the planning commission on uses that um we could prohibit, I mean what do.

G

You think about that whole process. That's one question and the second question is.

G

Can you refresh our memory on why that that parcel is? um Is uh the emmy and not mc sure I can let.

B

Eric air can answer. The second part I think um I'll, just chime in at the beginning, um about.

B

The zoning commitment, so obviously, of course mr carmen is correct and that is uh allowed to record.

B

A zoning commitment that limits the use um you know rezone is discretionary and you can add those.

B

Restrictions, basically, what you're doing is adding. uh I mean it's a very smaller scale. Little tiny.

B

Pud restriction, because now we have to track that into the future. uh It's no longer just the zoning.

B

Designation that is listed um for the parcel. It has special restrictions that other parcels in the.

B

City with the same zoning designation do not, um I do think in the past. It has been accurate, uh as mr.

B

Harman said that that's something we've commonly done, I can say in the last few years we haven't.

B

Done that very much because of the uh tracking issue um we just established re-established all.

B

Of these zoning districts, so we would prefer that they be used in their. You know that that the whole.

B

Cloth of each, uh what is is what would be used. um We understand that some people may not think.

B

Some are entirely appropriate, so it will be up to you all and um council to decide. You can do.

B

That, uh just from an administration and kind of um fairness across the board for all properties, that.

B

Have a zoning designation, we kind of prefer to to shy away from that. If this property is, you know.

B

Unique enough that we think that's necessary. um Of course you can explore that, and I would also like.

B

To uh I'll throw it to eric in a second but to chime in on mr carmen's comment about not wanting.

B

To create split zone lots, yes, we do not want to create split zone, lots that that doesn't uh isn't.

B

Easy for our administration and as he mentioned, they could easily if they wanted to have lots with.

B

More than one zone do a subdivision first uh and create those and then zone them. uh However, they'd.

B

Like, instead of asking for the zoning first and then having the subdivision trail, if it works out.

B

um So uh yes, we do not prefer that and actually part of the zoning map update that we're.

B

Undergoing is getting rid of all of our existing split zone: lots because they create administration.

B

Problems for us and for the property owners um eric do you want to speak to the mc.

B

Issue um yeah, but I also wanted to just kind of point out that what is unique about this site and.

D

And certainly something to to keep in mind is a large size of it. It's 87 acres um and it's unique.

D

Location on the interstate, there aren't many properties or there aren't any other properties.

D

Vacant properties in bloomington this ideal location that really are well suited for business.

D

Part more industrial uses. This is not where we want uh commercial, high intensity, commercial uses.

D

You know it's not necessarily really where we want multi-family uses. um So when the site plan was.

D

Approved for this and uh the petition we gave and and so hopefully you can see this on the screen.

D

Now uh this is the overall grading plan, so what was was kind of envisioned for this property with.

D

The uh the sensitive environmental features was a set of uses that really gravitate more towards.

D

Taller buildings, um you know not one-story retail buildings, which is what you typically.

D

Find in the mc district but more taller buildings uh parking, keep things up along the street.

D

Maximize the the preservation on the site- that's uh that's necessary, so you know those are those.

D

Are other things to really kind of keep in mind, uh as in terms of what this should be zoned, you.

D

Know the mixed use: commercial district has big box retail medium retail. The vehicle uses car washes.

D

uh Truck stops, um you know, those are, those are not necessarily the things that are appropriate.

D

At this location, um so you know, as mike kind of pointed out, those are some of the the differences.

D

Between the mc and the me district, certainly it's something that we can also continue to discuss.

D

As we look at amending these districts, if there aren't other uses that might be appropriate.

D

So that that was some uh some of the reasoning behind that mc versus uh the me district.

D

And you know, obviously the the matching of the the comprehensive plan. um So you know there is.

D

A different designation within the comprehensive plan um for areas where we want commercial.

G

Okay, thank you. It's it's one thing to think about pre pre-pandemic.

G

Tall office buildings that are a bunch of office space and wanting that there.

G

um It's hard to think about that. Now I get the manufacturing, but it's hard to envision. Someone.

G

Developing a employment center with tall office buildings in this day and age, maybe for the near.

G

Future um so, but I appreciate all those um all that added information from both you and miss.

G

Ganlin, thanks and- and you know also just point out, if you just look right up the street here- southern.

D

Indiana medical park, it's a large professional office, medical complex just across the street, from.

D

That you've got hoosier energy and their corporate headquarters, which is an ideal location. You know.

D

These types of uses uh draw from a wide crowd, not just people in bloomington the people that live.

D

Along the I-69 corridor, so so the location here and the uniqueness of that is certainly.

D

Something that helps lend itself more towards keeping this as a an employment use, property.

A

Okay, are there other questions from commissioners? I see chris kadakra.

H

um Jackie and eric as an alternative to what mike carman suggested is the deed restrictions.

H

What are your thoughts of adding or amending the pud and adding uses? um That might be that we feel.

H

Might be appropriate or that might work well with the practitioner? Well so so that's one of.

D

The things that I briefly kind of mentioned that we are, we are trying to get away from. uh Are these.

D

Puds, especially peds that match current zoning districts, um you know one of the the problems that.

D

I mentioned with this pud was that it was approved under the 1973 zoning code and those lists of uses.

D

Are so very different than what we've got in the current code and how they're defined.

D

uh And it's just a nightmare to try to match up and a lot of those uses in the 73 code. Didn't even.

D

Have definitions you know they're, just very broad statements. That could be something completely.

D

Different now so we're really trying to get away from these. uh These, these vintage ancient puds.

D

um And rezoned these to current districts. um You know our current code now is a lot more up-to-date.

D

A lot of things have changed uh in the past 40 50 years, between 1973 and now. So um no, we certainly.

D

Don't want to perpetuate uh the ped, we would like to rezone it to something. That's on the books now.

A

All right other questions, um let's go to commissioner sandberg. Thank you. I know the.

I

Practitioner had mentioned a few things, they I'm sure they cannot be specific about. Maybe who has.

I

Approached them for possibly being in this development, should they be successful in.

I

In getting this change, could I ask them to just kind of give a general overview of what the intent.

I

Might be, I think I heard something about assisted living centers. Did I hear something about hotel.

I

Restaurant again, I know you can't be specific, but to the to the extent that you can be since.

I

You're asking us for some feedback. Could we get a better idea of what the what the plan may be sure.

E

Despite carmen, the assisted living was not intended to be a representation that we have.

E

Somebody looking to do that the pudd was amended some years ago to add assisted living as one of.

E

The permitted use of ud- we don't want to lose that the mc's the me zone does not include assisted.

E

Living as a permitted use the mc zone does so one of the issues of going to the mc zone would be to.

E

Preserve the assisted living as a possible use, because we do think that is actually one of the.

E

Very likely developments out there at some point it hasn't happened. Yet you look up at north park.

E

And what's going on there, the regional hospital, a a a since the assisted living retirement.

E

Center up there, it's you know, look this is being fairly comparable to that and I would think this.

E

Could easily be a target area for assisted living center? At some point, it's just not.

E

Happened yet so that was an idea of not wanting to lose that permitted use uh the.

E

What else do you so the uh the training center, so one of the the inquiries we've had, would be a very.

E

Large center, that, basically, is a you know, much detail. I've called a training center, a resource.

E

Center for for safety, training and handling of certain emergency functions- and it's not just.

E

Training, local police- that that's what I refer to as a regional center! That's why they need that.

E

They're looking to have a hotel closely uh associated with that within walking distance of.

E

That center, as opposed to people coming in, to attend the the courses and do the work and have to.

E

Drive some place to for lodging so look for an on-site hotel and restaurant that would be paired.

E

With that potential use, if it happens- and I would and it's not going to be fascinating- the time.

E

Frame rib talk, we've been told that if it happens, it could easily be two years. It's not a tomorrow.

E

Event, no, but in terms of getting set up to make sure that could happen so that should develop.

E

Yes, now would seem to be the time to do that. I know uh uh as kenzie had some questions too. I.

E

Wanted to make some further comments after years, but I I think we should probably go.

E

Back to brad to other people had comments. Some questions, I saw another hand raised a moment ago.

A

Yeah, let's go to the commissioner kinsey.

F

Thanks, I, I wondered about some of the improvements that have been made to this area since I-69 came.

F

Through and kind of, what's going on, I wonder if there is anything noteworthy about the.

F

um Advancements in terms of traffic flow and access, if it's safer, if you know I'm trying to.

F

Get an understanding of how much this whole area has changed um since the highway came through.

F

Eric is there an easy summary of that, or I don't know petitioner perhaps is made.

B

Yeah petitioner I'd take take your sense of that too.

E

Well, I guess I'll, try and answer it in part, because some of the.

E

uh Part of the I-69 has produced a roundabout there. That would be the entrance to this.

E

Property really coming off the roundabout so from a traffic flow, a conservative.

E

Traffic light or whatever it would be coming off of the the roundabout.

E

In terms of other improvements, uh it's underway, I mean the mc zone talks about quarter being.

E

A quarter aldrin pike now coming into town and connecting to south walnut or old 37. When you get.

E

Into finally into town is a work in progress. The county is, is handling most of that, but it is.

E

On its way to being uh developed as a quarter that stretch of fulton coming off of 69, uh uh I forget.

E

The distance, I believe the final plan for the county was for three lanes, so there'd be a left.

E

Turn stacking lane as part of that the original plans had to be in fort, I believe, a four-lane road.

E

And there's pushback by a local neighborhood about proximity to some of the houses already.

E

Built there and so they've narrowed it to a three lane with the center stacking lane for left, turns.

E

So that is underway in a work in progress to be a true quarter. Road coming from six nine into.

E

Oh in double 37 in the south part of town other than that, I'm not aware of any other changes or.

E

Development, so that I would repeat briefly the comment that and then I understand what everything.

E

About this being ideal, if I had 69, I just don't see how that's any different than it was ideal.

E

With 37., we just we put an I-69 on top of a state road, 37 designation and it's the same situation.

E

The principal highway connector quarter road at this site has been true for a.

E

Number of years, and that by itself is not gender generated, the interest in employment.

E

Based zoning and development- and I don't see that calling it I-69 changes that at all.

A

All right any other questions from commissioners.

G

Sorry, I said something before I put my hand up. I apologize.

G

um uh I just want to understand what the options are here from staff, so um we either.

G

uh Stick with emmy fully- and this is this is denied and it's a negative recommendation, and so.

G

Then what goes? There are the the conditions under the me which are the employment related or we go.

G

Completely the other way, that's the other option and and say it's okay to have it mc, in which case.

G

The petitioner can put whatever falls under the mc, including apparently uh like a truck stop or.

G

A car washer vehicle sales- what's written in your report here or we could do the hybrid.

G

We're allowed to do that, which is recommended. No wait, yes recommended, but there are certain things.

G

In there like, we don't want a truck, stop, I'm just going to say: let's say that we don't want.

G

A truck stop and we don't want this, but a hotel is okay and a restaurant's. Okay and employment.

G

Other employment is okay, but we don't want these. Other things are those the three options then.

G

um Yeah, so you so they're requesting a very specific thing right and you are either.

B

Recommending approval or denial of that request so they're requesting mc you are either recommending.

B

Yes, we think it should be mc or no. We do not think it should bmc and then, if you are recommending yes.

B

We think it should bmc, you can add conditions, including the uh zoning commitment that limits.

B

Use, okay, great! That's what I thought thank you yeah, um but I just want to point out.

D

The petitioner has withdrawn the request for a second hearing correct. So technically you know.

D

This would need to go to a second hearing or if you feel comfortable denying it now, then you know.

D

Either you would make a motion to recommend uh adoption of staffs proposed findings and the dot.

D

Send this to the common council with a negative recommendation, or you continue it the next month.

D

See what the petitioner revises you know based on any feedback you guys might give them.

B

Yeah, they don't have to recommend they don't have to recommend waiver of second hearing for you.

B

To waive a secondary, I'm not sure we can mike could weigh in on that, but uh but either way.

B

I I believe that by asking to wave it here at this hearing, you could still honor their original.

B

Request but I don't think we're in any hurry ourselves, uh I'm just just to clarify that.

B

Yeah, if you all want more time to think about it or consider have them submit, you know proposed.

B

uh More proposed information about some sort of um self-regulation, then yes, moving it on.

B

Would be appropriate? Sorry brad, that's all right! I I guess I want to just ask.

A

Eric to to just take the example that mr carmen gave us of of this.

A

Hypothetical training center, with an attached or or adjacent um hotel and and full-scale restaurant.

A

Is a two-part question one: do you see that as being um incompatible uh with with the area or.

A

With the uh comprehensive plan and if not, if not, how would you what would staff's preference be.

A

For accommodating something like that which is sort of somewhere in between the me and the mc.

D

Yep, um so the uh the the request you know to have some kind of a training facility. You know just.

D

Looking at this in in generalities could certainly be classified as either a building trade or school.

D

Which is a permitted use in the me district, or it could also be looked at as an office.

D

Which is also a permitted use in the me district as well. Hotels are listed as a conditional use.

D

uh In the me district, so that is still something that could be done on the site.

D

So the the things that the petitioner mentioned, or you just asked about, would all be.

D

Either permitted or allowed with a conditional use request.

A

But those would those would require that the uh the petitioner then receive.

A

Some additional approval in order to get that done it wouldn't be. They couldn't do that by right in.

A

The me district: um well, if it's over 30 000, you know if it hits one of the triggers for major.

D

Site plan approval, then it would just need to go to the plan commission for site plan approval.

A

Okay- and I guess follow-up question then, for mr carmen.

A

Is that a is that exceedingly uh burdensome.

A

Does that really limit the, I guess maybe just give us a sense of how does that really limit.

A

The marketability, then, if you've, got things that are conditional approval versus things that are.

A

You know permitted by right by itself the conditional approval versus a permitted use.

E

For the most part is generally not an obstacle, you can usually.

E

Whatever the conditions are that are inherent in, the conditional use, usually are reasonable or.

E

I'll go on, let's say, generally a reasonable site plan type issues and whether it's, how you do your.

E

Parking how you access and some other things, so those are all doable. That's not the problem. The.

E

Restaurant uses a little bit of problem, the yummy, the restaurant use and the mme is limited on size.

E

Much in fact, when you read the description of what the restaurant anticipated in the enemy zone uh to.

E

Me sounds like it's not much more than a fast food arrangement, it's very limited uh capacity and and.

E

So the restaurant would be an issue, but the issue of the emcee is not just the the hotel without.

E

Being conditionally used to the restaurant being the larger and more full-scale, also some other.

E

Flexibility, because employment type uses only have not generated any interest out there in.

E

36 years, 34 years, so that's and I don't know if it's an issue and I don't want to believe.

E

The point just you know that it's not the first time I've had a staff talk about the problem of.

E

Tracking conditions, like the zoning commitment, even though they are used a lot, I actually get.

E

That same comment in the in some county uh work for the of the same issue, they're concerned about.

E

Trying to attract them and losing track of it. All I can tell you is the it is, uh for the most part.

E

Self-Policing, I mean every subdivision anymore: has a booklet of covenants conditions, restrictions.

E

I mean property owners are getting used to to tracking that they're restricting uses on almost.

E

Everything is purchased anymore, but more than that is something like this never happens without major.

E

Financing without that which leads to title insurance and- and I I keep the time insurance.

E

License and for all the clothes we handle, I've never had a project of even coming close to in.

E

Size, what anything on here would be that the lender did not require a zoning endorsement to.

E

The title work for the loan policy, which means we had to track down what all the permitted uses were.

E

In that zone verify and ensure the zoning classification for that mentor before they'll.

E

Make the construction level so I mean the issue of losing track of these things is to me it's.

E

Just not an issue it sees in the records it's in the deeds and there are interesting parties.

E

Out there that track these things, because it means it's important to them, so that myself.

E

I would not or not agree is a concern but uh yeah, and I want to clarify also, I think I hope.

E

I didn't misspeak jackie, but we in our petition statement requested waiver second meeting so that.

E

Requires so I was asking this to withdraw that or notify that we are withdrawing that request.

E

uh uh To allow to go to the next meeting so yeah, so my understanding is, I could be wrong. That's why.

B

I was saying uh there's a time limit on that, so, for example, even just filing a petition if you're.

B

Then asking to continue it, that's what I was just thinking it was related to. So that's why I said.

B

I wasn't sure we could check with mike if they had issue. I don't think there will be an issue.

B

And um yes, of course, a zoning commitment goes with title: uh we don't have people's titles in.

B

The office when someone a property goes up for sale and interested parties are calling in and.

B

Requesting and asking about them- and we look up that it's a zoning district unless we are.

B

Also tracking it we would, we could be giving false information saying. Oh yes, it's zoned.

B

Mc here is the useless and people make decisions of based on the information they get from us. So.

B

We obviously try to make it as accurate as possible um and, of course, at some point it.

B

Would come out, but we would just prefer that it would be as clean as possible from the beginning.

A

All right, um thank you for that. I guess one. One uh final question for mr carmen. Obviously.

A

Your preference would be to see this move forward as.

A

Mc but given the option between um moving forward with a rezone to me,.

A

Now or uh having it stay with the pud until the new maps are adopted, what would be your preference.

E

Petitioner's preference would be to to have this continued to next month. Your next meeting.

E

Give us an opportunity to look at those issues, including uh what we could do with if we wanted.

E

uh We stayed with the mc requested mc zoning. uh What we can do to address from the concerns.

E

Primarily the the permitted uses to eliminate that and I'll look again at the issue of the.

E

uh Zone even the subdivision, the problem I have with the just planning for to do a two lap.

E

Subdivision now and designate you know, one half or whatever it is is emmy and one part of it is mc. If.

E

Something like that would fly is that guarantees a further subdivision have.

E

To go through it again when you get down to a specific user, because we can't configure.

E

Size and lock to at this point it would be a big, broad, brush approach of some major designation.

E

For the two different zones, if we would go that route, so there's a lot involved in that and so.

E

The issue is to find some more time to consider some of those things and and reaffirm exactly.

E

What we're looking for in the way of the zoning petition, and to do that at your next meeting.

A

Okay, um let's go to jillian looks like she's got one more question yeah. I do I'm sorry this.

F

Is probably the question I should have asked when I asked about the timeline for the rezone, because.

F

It makes me wonder what the process or likelihood of any considerations in the rezone process, that.

F

We're going to get underway in january is for something to be considered or for for.

F

Other parcels in this area to be reconsidered for its designation. If it's currently listed as an me.

F

um What what would be the condition under which we might consider a rezone for when we're approving.

F

These is there an option to do that, or is that not likely in the future meetings? So are you asking if.

D

um I mean in that scenario, would you be assuming that the petitioner's request would be denied and.

D

We would rezone it to me and then at some point in the future, they wanted to come back and rezone. It.

D

Yeah I mean it's the same process or the same kind of criteria. um You know that we.

D

Listed in staff report, you know review with the comprehensive plan. um You know that's.

D

That's obviously the first step, so somebody always has the right to come back and request a rezone.

D

Now that never goes away um and the criteria that they would be evaluated on are the.

D

You know six things uh that that I've listed there under the zoning map amendment uh in the.

D

Staff report, um you know the comprehensive plan, current conditions, most desirable use for the land.

D

Sensitive features, conservation of property value and responsible development and growth.

F

Okay, I guess I'm trying to understand what options there are to do this as.

F

Part of a broader consideration in january, you know the the the challenge that I think.

F

Well I'll just say: the challenge that I'm having here today is um that it would be nice to consider.

F

This, in you know the given all the work we did on the comprehensive plan to consider this in and the.

F

In the udo to really consider it in the rezone process, um along with other parcels, to see if.

F

Perhaps this deserves some reconsideration, um you know and- and I think that's the hard part here is.

F

You know where I understand we're trying to address a petitioner's concern now, but.

F

It would be nice to be to have something a little more grounded to make our decision.

F

On and I don't see that necessarily in the petitioner's request- which is why I think.

F

I'm hearing the petitioner indicate a willingness to go to a second hearing, um but I also don't.

F

I would like to more fully understand kind of what the options are for us to to reconsider any of.

F

That rezone, uh I think I let me take a crack at it whoa uh and see if this helps um and it might not.

B

So we'll uh so we are doing the larger rezone um and just any any property owner in town, including.

B

This property here can, at that time during that process, come to the public meetings for both.

B

You and council and say hey: I have a property. I think that the proposal is wrong and here's. Why.

B

And then um someone can take that up uh and make it a propose, an amendment. um I'm sorry not at.

B

Council council gets the map and they're a yay or nay, so it would be here at plan commission, where.

B

A property owner could say, um you know, could bring to your attention that they thought something was.

B

Wrong and why and that they wanted it to be a different zone, and that would be possible um so.

B

If this property owner or any property owner uh has a zone that they don't like or goes.

B

Through a zoning process that, then they change their mind about or something before, the larger.

B

Map goes through, then they could still appeal to you to amend uh what we propose and I mean.

B

They can appeal to us too, as well uh before um you know, when we put the the maps out, we have gotten.

B

Contact now, um obviously we're getting contact about a lot of larger issues, but we've also.

B

Gotten con, you know small contacts from property owners, one or two property owners uh who want.

B

Something changed and then have that discussion with them and you know decide one way or the other.

B

Does that answer the question? Thank you. That's. Okay. That's helpful. Yeah thanks.

A

Okay, any other questions from commissioners. Yes, my question is: what is the staff trying to avoid.

J

uh It that will be built in that area that you're trying to avoid.

J

uh I'm trying to give uh mr carmen some, you know some uh ideas to pursue for the next meeting, so.

D

Well, the the uses that we are avoiding would be those that would be low employment uses. um So.

D

The comprehensive plan encourages uses here that have high number of employees. You know that are.

D

Not promoting a one-story building uh that you know generates and then, like I said it kind of.

D

Really goes back to the location of this right on I-69, I know that it's not that much different.

D

Than 37, but there is more traffic on there. um You know access was specifically given right to.

D

This property, which makes it ideal for uses that have a lot of traffic coming and going.

D

So it's not really necessarily uses we're trying to avoid. I mean. Certainly, there are.

D

Uses we don't think that are appropriate here, that we don't want. um You know like the car washes and.

D

The truck stops and things like that, but you know what we do want is high employment, generating uses.

B

And I'll add to that sorry that uh it is.

B

Very much the same road, but but there are a lot of differences. It does have a higher.

B

A higher use it connects to much different places than it did before, and that will only as that.

B

As it as section six gets done as it moves on past indianapolis, I mean that's only going to.

B

Increase so some of the uses that eric mentions, like a truck, stop or other car maintenance uses.

B

That, maybe wouldn't necessarily be for be useful for those in the community could.

B

Be useful for those using the highway and some of those can only come in through mc.

A

It looks like uh mr robinson might want to have something to say there.

K

Thank you, uh commissioner whistler. uh This is scott robinson director of planning and.

K

Transportation, um I do want to provide maybe a little context for some background on this. You.

K

Know when staff was working on updating the comprehensive plan and the zoning ordinance.

K

We did coordinate with monroe county and other folks, along with the I-69 corridor,.

K

One group that we did coordinate with with was bloomington economic development corporation. The.

K

um They have consistently been concerned about the erosion of you know, uh lack of employment uses and.

K

Being encouraged with that and that's so that's one area, I want to be sensitive to and point that.

K

Point that out, I don't see them on the meeting tonight, but I do know that they have.

K

Reached out to us in interest to discuss that they've reviewed the draft map and raised initial.

K

Concerns about changing the employment to the mixed use, employment. So again, I just want to.

K

Raise that as a uh point of input that I have received received at this point in time, so I.

K

Just want to offer that up for discussion thanks. Thank you, scott. Any other questions.

A

All right, if there are no other questions from commissioners, uh we can go to public comment.

A

So once again, if you'd like to make public comment on um on this petition, zo.

A

23-20, um please click on the participants, tab and click on the raise hand, button.

A

And we will give you five minutes to make comments.

A

I'm not seeing any. I have a couple of chat questions, but I'm going to go ahead and say I know.

B

We do that format for the udl meetings and also for um I think council does that as well, but.

B

Dave, if you want to go ahead, I can unmute you and then you can go ahead and ask your questions.

B

At plan commission we, they usually us, hear directly from the petitioner.

B

I mean from the public when there are a lot of people just to go back.

A

Sorry, were we yeah, maybe he's not there he's I had someone send a chat question hold on. Can you hear.

L

Me, oh yep, oh there we go. Yes, I'm sorry! I I have to reconfigure things so that uh I can talk as.

L

Opposed to just record hang on sorry, I appreciate your patience, one second sure, whenever you're.

A

Ready, please just go ahead and state your name for the record and then you'll have five minutes.

L

This is dave askins with the b square beacon, um just two questions, and I understand that there's.

L

No obligation that the questions get answered, but I figured I would flip them out there just in case.

L

um Question one is: uh can someone confirm that, from a legal point of view, this could still go.

L

To the city council for consideration, even if the plan commission were eventually to recommend.

L

Denial and question two is in whatever shape. This goes to the city council. Would the city council.

L

Be able to, on its own initiative, add the kind of zoning commitment that mr carmen described.

L

Or would the city council have to live with the proposal in whatever condition it's been.

L

Recommended possibly for denial by the plan commission, so I think we're accustomed to.

L

Seeing the city council add reasonable conditions to a pud, so I'm wondering if uh zoning commitments.

L

Could be added by the city council at that stage in the same manner that reasonable.

L

Conditions are added to a pud. Those are the two questions. Thank you so much all right. Thank you.

A

uh Are there anyone any other members of the public would like to make comment uh on zeo23-20.

A

Jackie, do you see anyone else.

A

Okay, we'll come back to the commission, then, and I'll just go ahead and.

A

Kind of follow up on that question. I believe that, uh can you confirm jackie our our role right.

A

In in this particular uh matter is, is uh advisory. We're going to forward to the council with.

A

With a recommendation, but ultimately it is up to them. They don't have to follow our recommendation.

M

uh Correct uh if they want to reverse it, they have that authority chris. So if we were, if this body.

B

Recommends uh denial of something council can approve it. If we, you all recommend approval of.

B

Something uh they can deny it. The second question about whether and how uh how they can add conditio.

B

Whether or not they can add conditions is a little um uh we're a little unclear about that, because.

B

As um mr askins pointed out, most of the things that go to council in the past with conditions.

B

um Or that uh most of the things that go to council in the past related to rezones are puds.

B

um And they do have the power uh under state law to do the reasonable conditions, I'm not quite sure.

B

How that applies to re-zones um we're looking into it, but we can. If this were to be continued, we can.

B

Let you know next time, of course, typically what they've done with any reasonable conditions is.

D

Had the petitioner address those with a zoning commitment, otherwise that condition will kind.

D

Of get lost right, but reasonable conditions are specific to puds. So the question is, can you do.

B

Something similar on a rezone, only that's not a pud, and I'm not sure I didn't know eric. If you.

B

Might know the answer to that question as well mike is mr worker is the city attorney and he is.

B

Looking into it, um but we don't have it explicitly uh stated one way or the other in our rules.

N

Yeah michael rooker's city attorney just to address that question. It's not clear to me and I.

N

Apologize that I don't know the answer on the fly here, the udo is still in in our world a relatively.

N

New document, so uh so we do need a little bit of time to clarify how it works for a rezone request.

A

Okay, thank you. um We are back to the commission here and I think.

A

This would be the appropriate time for a motion. We have a few options here. We could follow the.

A

Staff's recommendation to go ahead and forward this with a negative recommendation.

A

Or we could certainly forward this to another hearing, as uh seems to be the petitioner's.

A

Preference at this point, but I think.

A

Either one of those would require emotion, so I would entertain emotion at this time.

O

The motion would be for both a proposals, uh commissioner, whistler or one by one.

A

uh No, I think we need one or the other we either need to. We neither either need to move this along.

A

To the council, with a recommendation we could, which could be positive or negative.

A

The staff's recommendation was that it'd be a negative recommendation or.

A

uh Alternatively, we could uh just continue this uh to our next meeting for uh another hearing.

O

So, just for clarification, if he goes right now to the council, would be.

O

Endorsing the negative you're saying we can we can, we can entertain emotion uh either way we could.

A

We could move to forward this with a positive recommendation. We could move to forward this.

A

With a negative recommendation, we could move to forward this with no recommendation uh or.

A

uh As the as I said, we could just uh just continue this into another hearing at our december meeting.

A

uh Without forwarding it to the council at this time, so I think I see commissioner sandberg would.

A

Like to make a motion, yes, um given the questions and given the petitioner's um uh preference here.

I

I would uh prefer that we move this toward the december meeting for a second hearing. I second.

G

That all right, so the motion is to forward this to a second hearing at the uh december meeting.

A

uh That's been seconded uh is there any final comment uh on that motion before we call the rule.

F

You know I I'm inclined to do that as well, because I it came at the request of the.

F

Petitioner, I guess I'm curious if we've provided sufficient um information or if the petitioner.

F

Expects to provide new information so that we don't have this identical conversation.

F

In december, so that would be the only thing I don't want to waste people's time.

F

But I hope that we present some new information either to the petitioner or that the petitioner.

F

Brings some new information forward if we're going to continue this.

F

But I think right now, I'm doing it under faith that the petitioner has made this request and it's.

F

Worth considering, I think we may also get some additional information from from staff and from.

A

Legal between now and and the next meeting there seems to be. uh You know some um desire to to find.

A

Compromise here and and we're not entirely sure what our options are and so hopefully we'll uh get.

A

A slightly clearer picture by by the next meeting as to what the best uh path forward is any other.

N

Comments from commissioners- yes, yes, uh israel go ahead. So if, if there is a, you know, a question that.

O

We would like to send to the petitioner, so it would be through you a jacqueline or what.

O

Was the channel for summer questions regarding the next meeting sure um uh through eric okay.

A

Okay, any additional questions or final comments.

A

All right, uh so the motion again is to forward to a second hearing at our december meeting.

A

uh Jackie, would you please call the sure cockrum, yes, whistler.

A

Yes, copper, yes, corral! Yes, herrera! Yes, kinsey jeff, sandberg, yes, st john, yes, 8-0.

B

Thank you, okay, um so be that is forwarded to the december meeting.

A

um Bear with me one moment, while I get my.

A

uh Agenda in order here.

A

All right, we are ready to uh move on to our second petition of the evening. This is.

A

Spdp-24-20 habitat for humanity is the petitioner. The property is uh located at 700 west guy avenue.

A

This is a request for final plan and primary plot approval to allow 69, single-family lots and seven.

A

Common area, lots and uh eric grulick is the uh case manager for this one as well. So we'll kick.

A

It back over to him, take it away eric. uh Thank you very much chris. uh So this is, as you mentioned,.

D

Requesting habitat for humanity, um this is for the property that they just recently received.

D

Rezoning for uh on the kind of on the southwest side of town, just off of south rogers street.

D

uh This 12-acre property lies at the end of cherokee drive and chambers and duncan and guy.

D

With the stub of bernard drive, just to the south of this so surrounding properties to the east,.

D

And the south are single-family residential um to the north. You have land within the thompson.

D

Planned unit development and just to the west of this, you have the rca community park.

D

So the petitioner is kind of following up on their rezoning approval that expanded.

D

The thompson pd to include this site, so they are requesting final plan approval for the.

D

69 single family lots and 7 common area lots as well as approval of their primary plaque.

D

So, as I mentioned, this was an expansion of the thompson pud. So you can see the overall.

D

Pud and then this uh property outlined uh is in the southeast corner of that thompson. Pud was.

D

Expanded to allow for habitat to redevelop this property with these single-family lots.

D

um The site is undeveloped. uh You can see some of the adjacent uh uses uh single family to the.

D

South and east, and then the vacant lane to the north. um Just to the north of this is the duke.

D

Energy easement, which I mentioned previously in last, hearings uh that extends from rogers.

D

Street to the east to wema road, uh the parks department is going to be installing a multi-use.

D

Path through this corridor, uh the petitioners will be making a contribution to that project as well.

D

So this received approval to allow for single family and detaching a family uh predominantly.

D

These are single-family lots. This is very similar to a lot of the other habitat projects.

D

That focus on affordable housing. uh The lot sizes range from 3 500 to 3 300 square feet.

D

These are all owner occupied houses. There will be public street extensions of all of these stubbed.

D

Streets to the east of this that I mentioned they'd, be extending through the site as well.

D

As connecting to bernard drive to the south, with a road stub to the north as well, just.

D

To provide any possible connectivity as land of the north might uh develop in the future.

D

So nothing has changed um really from the site plan that the planning commission is seeing here.

D

Today versus what was approved just a few months ago, as I mentioned, all of the internal roads are.

D

Public you've got a single family housing coming off of all of those streets, frontage on all of.

D

The streets, uh 57 percent of these lots are ali served kind of following the traditional.

D

Subdivision layout, which places an emphasis on alley loaded lots. So the petitioners have shown.

D

That there would be public streets along the front with on-street parking spaces, as well as.

D

There would be parking spaces off of the alleys just behind the structures, um so there is a.

D

Proposed phasing uh that the petitioner is showing here, you can see that kind of the blue line that.

D

Runs down the center, so phase one would be the eastern half phase. 2 would be the southern half.

D

There were also specific cross sections that were shown with this. That generally follow what.

D

Is approved with the transportation plan, there was a deviation that the plane commission did approve.

D

um For the streets that will not have on-street parking, so a 40-foot right-of-way was approved for.

D

That uh those streets uh and those like those like I said those would be the streets that do not have.

D

On-Street parallel spaces, so, as I mentioned, nothing's really changing with this petition.

D

It meets all of these setbacks that were approved with this pud amendment and the district ordinance.

D

That was approved, there was a reduction for the rear yard, setback reduction for the lot width and.

D

Lot size that was approved as well as a deviation for the minimum number of lots served by an alley.

D

So the petitioner did submit several elevations for the buildings within here kind of showing.

D

A mix of front porches and styles: these are the lots that are along that interior trail.

D

There's an interior multi-use trail that connects to the rca park.

D

Just to the west of this and stubs throughout the development um there will be sidewalks constructed.

D

Along all of the internal streets, um so again some of those elevations of the single family.

D

Residences petitioners have shown a variety of porch types that I kind of mentioned in.

D

In france to uh give us some diversity for the housing types within this development.

D

um So with that uh staff is recommending approval of the final plan and the primary plat.

D

With the five conditions that are listed on staff report and I'm happy to answer any questions.

A

All right is there a representative of the petitioner who would like to make a presentation.

A

I think I see a hand waving there.

P

Okay, can you hear me yes, go ahead? Okay, great, my name is nathan ferreira. I'm the director.

P

Of land, development and production for habitat, for humanity of monroe county and thanks for.

P

Having us tonight eric thanks for the thorough overview I'll just touch on a few more things.

P

And then happy to answer questions the mission of habitat for humanity is to illuminate, eliminate.

P

Poverty, housing by building decent, affordable homes in partnership with qualifying families.

P

Our vision is a world where everyone has a decent place to live, founded locally in 1988.

P

We've housed nearly 800 people, more than half of them are children and we are wrapping up.

P

Our 211th home right now, low-income families qualify on three basic criteria: uh the need for.

P

Housing ability to pay willingness to partner and each adult in the family contributes 250 hours of.

P

Volunteering called sweat, equity and participates in homeownership classes. Osage place will be.

P

Habitat's third bloomington neighborhood as city land suitable for residential becomes more scarce.

P

There's a growing need for affordable housing and proximity to jobs and services. Our comprehensive.

P

Plan and the recent housing study both call for increased density on undeveloped land. This 12 and.

P

A half acres where osage will be built will allow for 69 units. These homes will be built out over.

P

The next seven to eight years, we plan to begin phase one infrastructure next spring and be begin.

P

Building our first houses by september of 2021 and just a quick correction phase. One is the western.

P

Half the first 30 houses and phase two would be the remaining houses. The eastern part of the.

P

Neighborhood we have an agreement with the city to keep half of the houses affordable for 30 years.

P

When a habitat homeowner decides to sell their home back, habitat has the first right.

P

Of refusal to buy back that house for the life of the loan and house, another low-income family.

P

The 30-year affordability period means that we will ensure that low-income households, own.

P

The home for that period, regardless of how many times we have to buy back that house.

P

To make that happen, osage will create road connectivity to the thompson property to the north.

P

One of the largest undeveloped remaining tracks of land in the city and it'll provide incredible.

P

Access to the residents, it's within proximity to jobs, good services, several city, amenities,.

P

Eric mentioned the multi-use trail connecting to rca park. um We've also had an agreement with.

P

The parks department to contribute 40 000 to the construction of the trail to the north.

P

um The east-west trail that will connect the neighborhood to switchyard to the east and.

P

Eventually extend beyond rca park to the west, um with osage community habitat will begin building.

P

To a higher energy standard that what we currently build, zero energy homes means that homes will be.

P

Energy star certified uh part of the air plus program and wired for solar installation, so that.

P

Homeowners when they decide um to potentially take that step, everything is ready for them to go solar.

P

So we believe osage place, belie checks, all the boxes for a new neighborhood in our community.

P

It's affordable density, energy efficiency and connectivity, so we're excited to get started.

P

And we're happy to answer any questions.

A

All right, thank you. Are there any questions from commissioners either for.

A

Staff or for the petitioner.

A

uh All right, there's one uh let's go to julian all right. I appreciate the mention of energy.

F

Efficiency, can you be a little bit more specific about what the um anything new from the last time.

F

That we heard this petition or more specific, um uh it's it's the same standard that we discussed.

P

Last time, essentially, zero, zero energy. That certification means that, when a family decides to.

P

Have on on-site energy production, they should be able to generate as much energy as they're, using.

P

That's what zero energy means, um so the energy energy star standard for us primarily means.

P

Building a really tight envelope for the house, so that energy is retained and then the the air.

P

Plus program as well so really, the the newest part for us will be wiring the homes for solar.

P

And our home is that the local solar for all program that that serves low-income families.

P

To help get them solar that they would be able to step right into that program.

F

Thank you sure, excellent, all right. Thank you. Any other questions.

A

Going once going twice all right, we will then go to public comment.

A

If, uh if you were here to give public comments, uh please click on that participants. Tab.

A

Click on the raise hand button, and we will unmute you and recognize you to give your public comment.

A

um If, uh at that time, when you are recognized just state your name for.

A

The record and you'll have up to five minutes to give your comment.

A

I haven't seen any.

J

Oh there we have it. I do see a uh an actual hand being raised there, not a virtual hand.

B

You should be, uh we should be able to hear you chad. Okay, can you hear me? We got you.

Q

All right, uh my name is chad, roeder, I'm a resident of the adjacent susie street uh evergreen village.

Q

Property- and we completely support the uh you- know the green lighting, this project, it seems.

Q

Like a real uh benefit to the community, but our primary concern is with uh stormwater runoff.

Q

We've had some some issues in the past, with uh with some flooding in our neighborhood and uh the.

Q

City has it has in the past, maybe ten years ago, uh contributed to the uh to the expansion of the.

Q

Creek that runs adjacent to our neighborhood, which receives a lot of stormwater runoff. So I just want.

Q

To put that out there as a matter of public record, that that's our primary concern with this project.

Q

We have met with uh the city uh utilities department, we're in an ongoing dialogue and we're.

Q

Also, looking at grants available uh for mitigating stormwater runoff in our neighborhood and our sort.

Q

Of responsibility as a as a neighborhood uh to to uh meet those challenges. But I think that.

Q

uh In general, uh beyond the habitat, the osage project, uh this, this is going to be an ongoing.

Q

uh Issue that needs to be addressed uh one way or another over over the coming.

Q

Years and I hope that uh that this project in particular will help uh trigger that. uh That.

Q

Dialogue moving forward and that's pretty much all I have to say thank you- are there any other.

B

Yeah we have sharon, has a question, I think or comment sharon. Are you there I am, can. Can you hear.

R

Me, yes, okay, I'm also a resident in the evergreen community, that's adjacent to the habitat community.

R

And from what I understand, the habitat community is planning on um dispensing their storm water.

R

Into a detention pond that we in the evergreen community are responsible to maintain and.

R

It has problems um that need to be addressed that are very expensive and that's why we're looking.

R

Into grants, but we are concerned that from what I understand from bloomington utilities,.

R

That the habitat community is planning on releasing water into that detention. Pond.

R

That all that already has issues. So I would like to ask um if the planning, the the people who are.

R

Involved with habitat here today are aware of the flooding issues in the evergreen community.

R

And if they're, taking that into consideration, thank you.

I

A

Are there any other public comments.

A

If not we'll uh we'll come back to the commission and I'll.

A

Just go ahead and post the first question: uh if, if uh staff might just.

A

Offer up a little more context on the uh the drainage plan there on on. I guess specifically.

A

If, if, if there is storm water draining from this uh proposed development to.

A

The evergreen area, and if so, what the plans are to mitigate that.

D

uh Sure I can, I can briefly speak to that and the petitioner can step in with anything I'm missing.

D

um So there are two common area uh or three common area locks on this petition that will be handling.

D

Stormwater, so the utilities department will be reviewing this as part of their grading permit one.

D

Of the requirements that they have is that their post development, runoff rate cannot exceed their.

D

Pre-Development runoff rate, um so they have to capture and mitigate all of the stormwater runoff.

D

On the site and control that before it leaves the property, so the petitioners will be meeting that.

D

Requirement and the utilities department will be reviewing it, so this project should not result.

D

uh In any increase of storm water flow rates, leaving this site from its current conditions.

A

Thank you um anything. The petitioner would like to add to that.

P

uh No thanks all right. Thank you. um Are there any other.

A

uh Questions or comments from commissioners or uh or a motion motion.

A

Yeah, um as just as a reminder, the the staff recommendation was that so sorry brad can. I.

B

I'm sorry to interrupt. I got a message from someone who's having trouble raising their.

B

Hand, oh okay, I'm going to see if they want to unmute just a second.

B

All donna are you there, yes, jacqueline. Thank you so very much. You're welcome.

S

uh This is aldona reid and um I'm so sorry, uh not technologically savvy. As far as raising my hand.

S

Even though you gave great instructions at the beginning, we have the exact same concern that the.

S

Other two folks mentioned we're very supportive of the osage place and looking forward to seeing more.

S

Homes being built behind us, but we also have had uh flooding issues uh coming off of that property.

S

Even without any development there so again just wanted to go on record saying that also is.

S

Our concern because we are much lower than those fed property, otherwise habitat you're, amazing and.

S

Thank you for doing all the great things you do for our community. Thank you. Thank you. Okay,.

A

um I believe now we are back to the commission and I see uh christopher.

A

Did you sandberg a question or I just have a comment before we go to a motion? um I do.

I

Appreciate um all the public who are reminding us of the evergreen problems, because I can recall.

I

That it was just shortly after that development was built. They had ongoing problems with flooding.

I

And so if they are continuing to have those problems which I'm you know hearing now for.

I

The first time in a while thinking about the evergreen uh development, I would absolutely.

I

Hope that we can do more than just break even here that we make sure that nothing from this.

I

Project does in any way contribute to what what may be going on there, or maybe even do some things.

I

That that that might ameliorate that um I just recall how devastating that was to see the photos.

I

Of what was going on and again um that was that was some time ago. So thank you for bringing.

I

That to our attention, that's all I wanted to say. Thank you. uh I see. uh Let's go to commissioner mri.

M

Yes- and I just kind of I just want a little clarification, I'm.

M

Reviewing this, I guess it was stated that they that there's going to be oxide viral retention.

M

um Is that actually part of the plan that they are going to utilize on bioretention off-site.

D

um No they're they're, not utilizing um you know this site is, is located upstream uh of the.

D

Evergreen, so the water you know, will flow in that direction but, like I said they will be required to.

D

Capture all of what happens, what falls on this property and ensure that the runoff rate doesn't.

D

Exceed um what the current rate is to exacerbate any problems downstream? Okay, and that's what I.

M

Thought- and I just wanted to kind of address that point that was made um and clarify it. Thank you.

A

All right, thank you any other.

A

Questions or emotion as a reminder, the the staff recommendation was to uh approve the final plan.

A

And primary plat with five conditions um I'll go ahead and read those uh now just to be sure that.

A

Everyone understands the number one is approved, her terms and conditions of uh plant commission.

A

Case pud 10-20 number two is that the interior, sidewalks and tree plots for the streets shown.

A

With 60, feet of right-of-way must be widened to be consistent with the transportation plan.

A

And plan commission approval with the final plat number three is that all common area lots must.

A

Be listed as common area lots and identified as not buildable lots of record number four.

A

That the final details regarding the details of the off-site multi-use path along the north end.

A

Of the property must be resolved with the parks department prior to issuance of a grading permit.

A

And number five that all easements must be listed and defined on the final plat.

A

So that is the staff recommendation. Do we have a motion.

A

uh Commissioner kinsey yes I'll motion to approve the final plan and the primary plat with the.

F

Five conditions that you just uh specified: uh spdp 2420 habitat for humanity. Second, all right.

A

Okay, we've got a motion in a second any final comments before we call the roll.

A

All right um looks like we're ready for the roll call, jackie, great whistler, yes, copper, yes, burrell.

C

Yes, herrera, yes, kinsey, yes, sandberg, yes, saint john, yes and cockrum. Yes, it's 8-0 all right that.

A

Motion passes eight zero, and uh that is our final petition for the evening and uh thank you for all.

A

All for being with us, we are adjourned, we'll see you in december. So much thanks. Everybody.

T