Advisory Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Good evening

and welcome to the town of Avon Advisory Plan Commission. meeting. If you are interested in having a copy of the agenda, they are available on the tables to the right of the audience. We will be conducting business as outlined on the agenda. From time to time, the board may deviate from the agenda, and as president of this body, I will inform those in attendance of any deviations. This meeting is being recorded for the public record. Because of this, we request that personal conversations are kept to a minimum and that all cell phones are set to vibrate. Any phone calls shall be taken outside of the chambers. If you are interested in commenting during the public hearing portion of the commission's deliberations, please sign up on the sheets located on the tables to the right of the audience. When your name is called, please step forward to the podium and state your name and address for the record. Please address your comments to the board and not to staff or to the petitioner. Your comments should relate directly to the case at hand. During the conduct of the public hearing portion of the commission's deliberations, the petitioner will have 10 minutes to represent their case to the commission. Reministrators will have 10 minutes total to present objections to the petition. Persons in support of the petition other than the petitioner will have 10 minutes to to present support for the petition. And finally, the petitioner will close the public hearing portion of the presentation with a five five minute rebuttal period. I hope you all wrote that down. Once the public hearing is closed, no additional testimony will be heard unless it is solicited by members of the commission during the question and answer phase of the commission's deliberations. Subdivision plat and development plan petitions are ministerial requests,

meaning that if the proposal meets the requirements set forth in the town's development ordinances, the plan commission must approve the request. In the interest of transparency, state law requires that the plan commission hold a public hearing even if the development proposal must be approved. Responses to public question comments and questions may be given once the public hearing portion is closed. We understand there may be several persons who wish to speak tonight. In order to keep the meeting running in a timely fashion, we would request that you not repeat previous comments. Thank you for your assistance in facilitating a respectful, fair, and timely meeting. Again, welcome to our meeting. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Excuse me. Okay. Roll call.

Greg Zusen present. Paul Genenberger here. Katherine Ransburg here. Dave Kaufman here. Bill Reed here. Andrew Rockebrand here. Jennifer Spencer.

Jennifer Spencer is absent. And we do have a quorum. We now move on to the approval of the meeting minutes from February. Has everybody had an opportunity to read the meeting minutes? Are there any questions, suggestions for changes, edits, font requests? No. In that case, I'll entertain a motion to approve the meeting minutes. I'll approve the meeting minutes from February as presented. Do we have a second? Second. Having heard a motion and a second, all in favor say I. I.

Those opposed. Motion carries. Meeting minutes are approved. We now move on to the public comment portion of the of tonight's hearing. This is the time at which any of you present can come forward and speak about things that are not on tonight's agenda. If it's on tonight's agenda, then just wait till we get to that portion. But if you want to talk about something else, uh you're more than welcome to come up and this is the time for you to be heard by this commission. Is there anybody who has signed up to be heard during the public comment portion of the hearing? Is anybody signed up? We're gonna find out. We don't typically put out a signup sheet just for general public comment. We do have several people signed up for our one case on the agenda.

Okay. Is there anybody here tonight who just off the top of their head would like to comment about something else that's going on in our wonderful town? Good or bad? You're no. Okay. The public comment portion of our hearing is closed. Have there been any requests for continuences or agenda modifications? There have not.

Okay. We are now going to move on to the only item that is on agendas on the agenda tonight. It's old business for DPR 2518 Walmart Market. Thank you, President Ransburg, members of the commission. Let's get this going. Well, I can't speak without the screen working. So, can you make it move?

Got it.

Oh, great. How far did we go? Is that just one page? Oh, there we go. Great. Um, DPR 2518 Walmart Market Avon Avenue. As you may recall, those of you that were present last month, this case was heard. It's a request for approval of a approximately 50,000 square foot retail building that would be occupied by a grocery store, also with a uh drive-through pharmacy, um service parking, and other related improvements. There were three waiver requests, one of design standards and two of development standards that were um both heard and voted on and adjudicated by the commission last month. So um I will remind you of those in just a minute, but all we will have left to talk about today is the development plan review. site is located at the northeast corner of Avon Avenue and County Road 150 or Way, also bound by public street, Governor's Row to the north. Um, it is zone C2 and is surrounded predominantly by single family dwellings. Um, but there are also some town houses to the east and then uh as well as an office building near the southeast corner and then a fire station under construction and a child care business to the north across Governor's Row. The site is located here at the corner of Avon Avenue and 150. Just for your bearings, US 36 is up here to the north. There's the CSX railroad tracks high school over here and then the V Village village of Turner Trace neighborhood. That's just a closer look. So again, Avon Avenue on the west, 150 oral way on the south, Governor's Row on the north, and then the village at Turner Trace to

the east. Here's the existing office building um which kind of is notched out of the subject site here. That's the existing child care business and that's the fire station under construction. Then you have single family dwellings wrapping around on basically three sides and then town houses here right along Governor's Row. That's uh looking north at the site from County Road 150 or Oral Way to the right, you see the existing driveway which serves the office building um and will also serve uh this site as well. That's looking east from basically the same point across that driveway uh east along 150. That's the existing office building. This picture faces south across Governor's Row. This is the empty site here. You see the single family dwellings in the background across 150 or Way from a similar vantage point looking southeast. These are the town houses. Well, right up here are the town houses that front Governor's Row and then single family homes to the south there. Then this is looking west from the site right along Avon Avenue. This is the area where a new driveway was originally proposed via waiver request. That's looking back at the site facing east across Avon Avenue. And then from that same vantage point, just looking south towards the existing roundabout at 150 or Way. And then finally looking north back towards the intersection with Governor's Row. And you see the fire station under construction there. site was reszoned to C2 back in 1997 shortly after the incorporation of the

town. It was platted in 2009 and this portion has remained unimproved all that time. It is lot two in the governor's railroad extension at Turner Trace subdivision. There were commitments from 19 199 the excuse me the 1997 resoning of the site which were modified in 2022. uh we have reviewed those and believe that this development would not contradict any of those restrictions. Um as I mentioned, you heard this case in February and the petitioner requested a continuence of the development plan review portion of this after the waiver requests were voted on. So here's the three waiver requests. Sorry. Um the first one which we called waiver A although I've got it here as a numeric. Um this was the request for the new full access driveway onto Avon Avenue. The commission denied that last month. And then there was a waiver to allow for excessive average parking lot lighting level which the petitioner withdrew. And then finally, what we called waiver C was to allow a little bit of excessive light spillage into the abuing rightway um mostly in the area of a driveway intersection which staff supported and you approved that in February. So what we have pending is the development plan review to provide for construction of the grocery store and related improvements. This was the site plan that you saw last month. Um, there aren't going to be a lot of changes when I show you the revised one as far as the internal aspects of the site. The major changes you will see is that this driveway is no longer here and you will see improvements that are requested by staff to this intersection and to governor's row. That's the landscape plan from last

month. You won't see major changes to that. So this is the revised site plan that was submitted after your February hearing. So again, you can see the proposed driveway on Avon Avenue has been removed since that waiver request was denied. And per staff's requested condition one. Um, you can see that this is showing the intent to construct a roundabout here at the intersection of Avon Avenue and Governor's Row as staff in conjunction with our Department of Public Works and our um consulting traffic engineer believe that that would be a necessary improvement to accommodate the additional traffic that would be generated by the site. And then additionally, this section of Governor's Row uh from Avon Avenue over to the first driveway here would be widened to be a four-lane crosssection as opposed to the two-lane section that currently exists. That's the revised landscape plan. Um there are no changes of note there other than what's shown as necessary to accommodate the uh roundabout improvement at the intersection there. Again, these are the proposed building elevations that you saw last month that we believe do meet the architectural standards of the UDO. This is the um this is just an excerpt from the traffic study that the petitioner submitted indicating or justifying what the need is for improvements at the intersection of Avon Avenue and Governor's Row due to the fact that traffic attempting to go west on Governor's Row and proceed through the intersection that that traffic would go from uh level service C today and at the time the store would open if not for this development to a level of service F which is unacceptable.

So hence the need for the improvements that staff has requested. Um as I mentioned last month, there were some deficiencies in the landscape plan that have been addressed prior to you even seeing this last month. There were architectural items that needed to be addressed. Those were also addressed prior to your hearing last month. Um and um under the scenario that meets the town's access standards, which is to not have a driveway, a new driveway onto Avon Avenue, then there would be a degradation of level of service on Governor's Row, which um requires the improvements that we are requesting in our condition number one. And these are these are the improvements that we are requesting. They're the same as you saw last month with the exception of letter B, which when we brought this to you last month, we were requesting that Governor's Row be widened from two lanes to four lanes from Avon Avenue all the way to the eastern driveway into this site. After further discussion with the town's Department of Public Works, um we determined it would be more appropriate not to necessarily have four lanes between the two driveways, but that there would still be a need to reconstruct uh Governor's Road between those two driveways to be able to accommodate the occasional tragic that we anticipate would use that eastern driveway. So, but if the petitioner were to volunteer to close that driveway, then we would not need additional improvements west of the or east of the the western driveway. Just kind of backing up to the site plan to try to make more sense of that. So, this is the area where we need four lanes. This is the area where we had also asked for

four lanes, but determined that we wouldn't really necessarily need four lanes, but if trucks come in and out of here, the geometry of this intersection with this median here would not properly accommodate that, and they would have to drive over that. Now, we don't want truck traffic coming out of here, preference would be that this be closed, but because it's an existing intersection, um, we can't mandate that that be closed. But so we ask that this either be improved to accommodate truck traffic safely out of this driveway or that that that wouldn't be necessary if the petitioner voluntarily closed this. Um it's my understanding based on an email from the petitioner and and verbal comment today that they're going to close this. So there won't be any need for further improvements here. the other the recommendation for the other improvements, the roundabout, the installation of speed humps on Governor's Row and on Turner Place South to um calm the additional traffic that might go from this site through the neighborhood to the east. That remains the same as well as the right turn lane onto or the right turn lane from 150 or oral way into the site. And um and I'm kind of skipping ahead, but the petitioners indicated that they're they're in agreement with all of those improvements and in fact with all the conditions that we're requesting tonight. Um it was also recently brought to our attention that the site plan proposes a fence around the southern drainage pond which would not meet the UDO. Going back to the site plan that is in this location out here where there's a drainage pond. The UDO does not allow any fences in a commercial district within a front yard. So that fence is not going to be required. So, we've

added a sixth condition that the that a revised site plan that meets the fencing standards or restrictions of the UDO be submitted before a permit is issued. So, as I mentioned, the the revised site plan that you saw, it includes the roundabout at Avon Avenue and Governor's Row, which would be subject to final approval by the Department of Public Works. And I I want you to also know that what you see on the screen is not necessarily exactly how that's going to be designed and built. There's additional engineering that will have to occur and that will all be at the discretion of the Department of Public Works to accept the design that they think um is most appropriate. Um but they've also shown the four-lane cross-section um on the western portion of Governor's Row, the right turn lane from 150 oral Way into the site. Um, and they've also indicated that they will do the installation of the speed hubs, which the location of which would be again uh a final determination made by public works. And they've also just recently indicated they will voluntarily close that eastern driveway on Governor's Row, which would satisfy the the other portion of our request. So, we believe that these six conditions would be required in order to meet the UDO's provisions for development plan review. And these are um specifically what is in your staff report. Whoops. with the exception of number six which I talked about u which is a revised site plan shall be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit indicating compliance with the fencing standards restrictions of the UDO unless

a variance is sought and granted by the board of zoning appeals and so we would recommend approval uh subject to those six conditions and I'd be happy to answer any questions the commission may have so Paul could you go back to the conditions please, cuz I have a question on this. Um, and help me find these conditions in staff report that we're looking at because I I'm trying to find these. But on number six, so this would be on uh pages three and four under the u got it the row of additional comments for March 23rd.

Okay, thank you. I found um on number six the way that's worded there because you know we always reference staff report um conditions in any motions. I to me it's maybe it's me just reading it's hard to understand that if it's in compliance with the fencing standard restriction of the UDO is that no fences in the front yard or if fenc is required around a drainage pond. Um that's that they're not that no fences are allowed in the front in any front yard of a commercial district. So are it is a recommendation that there be a fence around the drainage pond?

No, not the one that's in front of the building. They can put they So they have a a a drainage pond behind the building as well. Is that drainage pond going to be a dry pond or a wet pond?

Um I'm not sure. We don't we we have a consultant that reviews the storm water drainage requirements for us. So, we don't look too closely at that. Um, but this pond in the back, it also has a fence proposed around it, but that is permitted by ordinance. The restriction is that no fence is is allowed in any yard. So, that would be a required yard or an established yard or I'm sorry, any front yard. So, that would be a required yard or an established yard basically between the building and the street. Okay. So we don't So this fence around this pond out front would not be allowed.

Okay. So we don't know if it's a wet pond or a dry pond. I'll ask the petitioner that. And right now that we're staff's recommending a condition that says a fence is not allowed. Okay. Go back to that though. it says it's not allowed and then you give them the caveat unless they go to the BZA to get it right. I mean, so you're telling them we're not going to do it, but you have an option that if you want to unless the variance is sought and granted by the board of zoning appeals and

and I'll come back to this. I think we got a a safety issue that we need to discuss about that, but that's I want to ask the petitioner if it's dry or wet pond. So, I do have a another question on commitments because I did look up the commitments from 2022 and I think we talked about this a little bit, but it it stated that there's no liquor stores would be a commitment. Correct. So, what constitutes a liquor store? If I have a business that sells liquor and hardware, is that a liquor store? Uh I believe it would be a liquor store if that's the predominant um activity that they're engaged in.

Is it? So how do you determine predominance? Because the reason we had this discussion back in 22 was the concern about having a liquor store that close to the high school. So if a grocery store sells liquor, is it just because it only occupies 10% of the space? Therefore, it's not a liquor store. Yeah. You can buy liquor, beer, wine, spirits.

Yeah. Our interpretation is that a liquor store would be a an establishment that is primarily engaged in that activity and that a grocery store that has liquor or alcohol items as a small percentage of their um display and sales, which you know I it presuming that they would um lay this out like a typical grocery store in Indiana that happens to sell alcohol. um in an aisle out of, you know, 10 aisles of a grocery store, we would look at that as uh a grocery store that sells alcohol, but we would not consider that a liquor store unless it was the predominant activity.

So Kroger could continue functioning if they were not allowed to sell alcohol. Total Wine could not. Correct. Which would be a shame. So the intent doesn't follow the words. I mean the commitment was very specific and with the intent there was not to have alcohol sales that close to the high school.

Yeah. I wasn't here in 2022. I so I can't speak to the intent but if the intent had been to prohibit alcohol sales then it should have been worded to say alcohol sales shall be prohibited. Okay. I think uh if I recall, we've had more than one attempt to develop this property which has been zoned commercial from the inception. Um but that had to do with a um a strip mall type of situation where there might be a restaurant and there was concern about was it going to be a sports bar, was it going to be a Denny's familyfriendly kind of place. So,

right. And the commitments are a liquor store, not a any restaurant that would have alcohol sales. That would be permitted. Right. Right. Are there any further questions for staff?

No. Okay. Petitioner may come forward. Evening commissioners Misha Ben attorney's offices of Indianapolis. It's good to see you again. Um, let me just introduce the team that we have here today. Eric H, he's with Walmart. Eric Trippy, he's with traffic engineer on behalf of Walmart. And we got Matt Landro who's with Walmart Engineering who's the civil engineer. I think I'll be fairly brief here probably. I will do the best I can. The main point I think we wanted to make as Paul summarized where we are with the site plan revisions and commitments very well is that we heard you. We heard we heard the audience um the folks that were here they were concerned about that Avon Avenue access drive. They were concerned about traffic. So Walmart went back, studied the situation very carefully, and we're here tonight with a site plan that accommodates all of the staff comments, DPW's comments, um, and eliminates that access. Um, we've also heard from the Turner Trace folks about that eastern most access point. So, as Paul said, we are confirming here tonight that we're going to remove that um that from the request. And so, the site plan would not include that eastern most Avon Avenue access. And that's one thing clear from the beginning was important. And so, we're pleased to be able to do that. We're hoping that what we're presenting to you tonight is a show that we're

trying to accommodate all of the feedback. um that we've heard. So, just to summarize quickly, uh as Paul indicates, Walmart has agreed to each of the six commitments and that they are significant um most significantly is that roundabout um at Avon Avenue and Governor's Row. uh widening Governor's Road to that westernmost uh access the speed humps um dedicated right turn at westbound county road 50 south amend the photometric plan to comply with the ordinance um to answer your question commissioner about the uh detention ponds they're dry dry detention ponds Matt Landro the engineer can probably offer you more detail on that if um if so shoot. So yes, we were notified about an hour and a half ago I think um about the excuse def the fence issue with um front yard detention fund. So um that will not be part of the part of the request. The point is that we intend to comply in all respects with the ordinance and with the conditions that staff has indicated are required and I think as you had indicated at the outset in certain your introduction. This process is a development plan approval and the process is ministerial in nature. So our position is that given those circumstances, we comply with the ordinance agree that the staff conditions um the legal requirements that the development plan um be approved. I wanted to address quickly just I know

there's been some comments about um the commitments and I think we landed on the right interpretation which we discussed earlier along with staff which is that this is not a liquor store but in any case that's a private agreement that wouldn't interfere with the approval of development plan uh regardless um under the law. I wanted to give just a couple minutes to Eric uh Trippy to um speak. We received some comments about the traffic study and um the timing of that. I think just he's done some work since the last hearing um to kind of respond to some of the comments that he and I thought um might take a few minutes to address.

Yeah. Again, thank you, Eric Trippy, PhD track engineer. Um, you know, we we did realize there were some concerns about the time periods we analyzed. And again, we had met with the town ahead of time and established the criteria for the traffic study. And afterwards, we we heard some of the um concerns about school. And we did have some traffic counts that uh captured the times before the AM and before the PMP that captures the school traffic and we were able to we our traffic using cameras. So we're able to capture go back and observe. So we did observe uh the school traffic times on oral way and on um and from what we were what we've observed during the time periods there's this very short time period starting at about you know 20 after 3 uh lasting to like 3:39 where there's you know some queuing that occurs on way um but it's handled nicely by the roundabout and it lasts for such a brief brief time period. Um we also looked at the Indiana Department of Transportation has traffic count stations in the area. So we did look up what did to do a comparison of traffic volumes between the peak hours we looked at and the peak hours of the school time. And if we compare the hours, the school time ended up having about 29 more cars than what the peak hours that we looked at. So it's kind of a negligible difference in peak hours.

So I think the analysis that we did captures the peaks as as well as we can. Um so I guess I just wanted to sum up just in case you're still have some concerns about schools. Thank you. Uh thank you. With that, we're happy to answer any questions approval of the development plan subject to six conditions.

Okay. We now move on to the um is there anybody who has signed up uh to speak in support of this project other than the petitioner? We have one fire chief Danny Brock who is signed up with an X through the line that separates for and against. We also have his name. Yeah. Um the other three we have signed up for were all um speaking on behalf of the petitioner and then we have four signed up to speak again. So what's your pleasure Danny? most time.

Okay, let's go ahead and hear from the remrsators then first. So you you want to hear from those against first and then hear from him? Well, let's let's hear let's hear from from Okay. Is it green? Oh, well, if it's green, it'll be better.

No, it's green. All right. So, I've heard some safety concerns. I heard Total Wine and then I listened to Walmart come up and they said, "Hold my beer. We're ready to go." So, they've met the requirements. So, you know, I appreciate that, guys. Um concerns. Um and again, it's not for or against, right? We support the community. We support the growth. We support the citizens and the businesses within it. Uh whenever we came before the commission, just a little background, there were a number of things that were non-negotiable when we built station 145. that's right there in the area. And those non-negotiable non-negotiables were uh impervious surface um landscaping requirements and direction to travel in and out of the station. And outside of that, there were some neighbors granted that we appreciate. And from the outset, we knew that building a fire station on the property would be challenging. Uh with that, we uh we went out to try to be good neighbors. And we worked with the Rollston. We worked with Miss Eagle directly across the street to to rest all of their their anxieties and things things like that. So now as a neighbor of the commercial property coming up, we have a few of those as well and it's only during the construction time. Outside of that, the operation of the business, we have no opinion for or against on that. Um, with the new development for Walmart, we recognize the convenience and economic value. Uh, we know that our personnel will shop there often uh because it's right next door. So you won't see the rigs in the in the shopping mall. they'll just walk over, I'm sure. Um, but there's significant concerns to address and one of the primary ones is the operational concern. The proposed roundabout and road widening directly impacts our ability to respond to emergencies uh by restricting our path down a main thoroughfare and the ingress and egress to the station. Those things are going to have to change and they may go against what was required by this board. Uh it'll reroute traffic and our apparatus through neighborhoods to the north off of 100 south reach turner

trace uh our station's entrances and the traffic and that traffic creates an additional hazard to the citizens uh and it adds time as and obstacles to our responders. Uh not to mention having to travel north and then go east or west just to head south if they have to close down for the roundabout. it's going to create issues heading south, which is exactly why we put that station there, especially getting into the high school. Um, these changes also secondarily undermine the requirements that we were obligated to meet. The propo the proposed improvements encroach on the detention area directly where the roundabout cuts off that corner is right where the detention area is put for our construction that we're working on now. Uh, it also reduces the required permeable surface which we pushed right to the edge. So whenever we add more concrete and take away the grassy areas, we're going to be in violation of that. Now with the new construction that's approved and also it's eliminating required landscaping that the taxpayers have already funded as part of the bond and we're putting that landscaping in in order to get our CFO. And then whenever we do the road widening, we're going to rip a very small portion of that landscaping right out in the form of trees and bushes right there by our parking area just to the south of. Okay. So, in the plans, it also notes that the approximate location additional rideway to be acquired from the Washington Township Henderson County Building Corporation. Um, I don't know if that comes from the town, from you guys, from Walmart. There's a lot of ignorance I have on how this works. Uh, in order to acquire that, the building corporation is Miss Hornman and and Mr. Elmore. Right now, the third person hasn't been replaced. I don't control them. They operate independently. But if they say no, what happens? Or is that even an option for them? I don't know. And I just want to bring that up because that was on the plans there on Governor's Row where there's a paragraph up there that stated that. Don't know how that process works. I know they haven't been contacted and I was in touch with the uh trustee and

asked him to reach out to the town to clarify some things based on the plan submitted. So those things are a little bit concerning and we're just simply asking for consideration of these plans and communicate. Um I did read some of the plans that have been put out but not until some of the the concerns were brought to our attention. I wasn't out uh having talked to the town, having anybody from here reach out. Uh there are some concerns operationally that we would like to address and and keep in mind as we move forward, especially with southbound travel in that area and the wear and tear of the speed bumps and and roundabouts put on apparatus. I mean, we're talking about a a million to$2 million investment with reducing budgets and property tax that we want to make sure we are cognizant of for the taxpayers because right now some of the things that we're doing to meet our CFO are going to be eliminated after it's already paid for by you guys. Um, so just considerations and I know the southbound travel lanes and those kinds of considerations I guess come from a different board. So I wanted to first come up and talk about those, but I don't want to don't want to waste your time with some of that now. But again, I want you guys to hear that uh driving fire apparatus through neighborhoods to get from point A to point B and rerouting travel. Uh it's not ideal. It's um it's a hazard and an obstacle for us. That's why we try to stay on the main thorough affairs unless we're called to the neighborhoods. But using that as a primary um path of travel is concerning to us even though we use due regard things happen. So I just want to put that out in space.

Thank you. Excuse me. I got one point just to clarify. You're saying that if there's a roundabout that goes in there, Governor's Road, you won't be able to go southbound out of the during the construction. During the construction? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. During the construction. Now, once it's all complete, it's a mute point. Now, we're back back in business. This is all during the the construction phases and those take time. We've experienced that for a year. So, all right. Thank you. We have Chris Thornberry.

Chris Thornberry, 1303 Brighton Place. I've got a lot of material to cover and only two minutes to do so. So, I'm going to refer just read from my notes here to get it all stay on point. I'm here tonight as a resident of the village at Turn of Trace as well as the president of the homeowners association. Unfortunately, Clayton Giddis and Jeremy Giddens were unable to attend tonight's meeting. So, I'm speaking on behalf of them as well. I addressed this commission on February 23rd and spoke specifically regarding traffic and safety and our preference for direct access on Avon Avenue. I provided a packet which includes some additional context for the proposed development, including an approximate overlay of the proposed project with some aerial photography. I've also provided some additional information in the form of some drone photography that it shows the proposed area that may be helpful during your deliberation and discussion. As noted in the packet, I met with Ryan Canon, the town manager on September 29th to discuss existing concerns regarding traffic and safety on Turner Trace Place North, as well as parking on Governor's Row. My concerns were brought up at the next town council work session, but no additional input or updates have been received since then. What I'm saying is that traffic and safety is already a problem in our neighborhood. The additional proposed traffic calming measures indicate an expectation of increases of an increase increasing traffic volume which will only make an existing problem even worse. I'm not a traffic engineer, but I have some significant concerns regarding the current traffic study. One, it makes no mention of the fire station and the expected impacts of traffic that are there. Two, it does not provide any analysis on the impacts on Governor's Row or other existing collector or local streets. It does not provide any analysis of the proposed roundabout and the unique challenges of the spacing with the existing roundabout at 150 in Avon Avenue as well as the fire station exit on Avon Avenue 2030 ft from there. It was also mentioned about the peak hours of 7 to 5 or 7 to 8 and 4 to 5. You guys know the times that are there as well. I would like this I would like to ask this commission to either require an additional traffic study to fully

understand and analyze the impacts prior to providing any approvals whether those be conditional or otherwise to see that those to make sure that everything can be studied and fully understood or to deny the request. It's still our position that traffic should be limited as much as possible on Governor's Row and throughout our neighborhood. Thank you. Next we have Lori Rston. Lori Rston, 1311 South Avon Avenue, just uh north of the fire station. Um I do want to second what uh Chris said about my concerns relative to traffic. Um, I do think it makes sense to revisit the traffic studies saying what if you do put a roundabout there, especially it being close to the one that is further south. Um, I have personally observed more than once that the traffic northbound during the school busy times does back up past my driveway in front of the fire station. And so I am concerned about some kind of queuing or gridlock that you could see if there is a roundabout built at Governor's um row. Um I also uh want to kind of second uh what the fire chief Brock said about the the drainage because I know that if there is a drainage problem, it's going to come over on my property. And there was quite uh a lot of discussion as he mentioned about the need to have that permeable space and how that was very limited on that site due to its size and the requirements of the fire station being built. Um and I think doing some kind of a simulation there are some um recommendations for closely spaced

roundabouts. I don't know if these two actually meet that criteria, but you want to make sure that you don't see a backup from one into the other. And another thing that I have observed as well as um a person driving around is that there's off I have seen gridlock at that roundabout that is at 150 South and Van Jones Road. Um that that happens when the high school lets out. I've actually been stuck in that more than once till I learned not to go that way. So, the roundabouts are great, can be very great at keeping traffic flowing, but if you have a traffic signal in particular, which we do at 100 South and Avon Avenue, that can kind of mess things up because it does interrupt that continuous flow that you're really looking for uh with roundabout. That's all I have. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Miss Roslin. Who's our next Raleigh Rston?

Um, one thing I need to request. I talked to you about showing a short video. Paul says he needs your permission. It's 10-second video. Yes. Um, and this they approached me earlier on and I'm going to defer to council as to what is required here. I do remember us speaking briefly. At first I was like I don't remember that but then I I do remember us speaking briefly and it's just a short video showing the traffic how it backs up during school let out from the high school and how it backs up all the way into the roundabout and then back into the high school. Mr. Taylor, do we have any procedures?

It's your discretion. We have typically not allowed it for the we not allowed uh remmonstrators to make presentations only because nobody, you know, it's not shared in advance and nobody can prepare for it. But it is it's in your discretion. Well, I will defer to my board as to whether or not since since this is an unusual request um being made by a remministrator as opposed to petitioner does is there an objection strong objection or fine with it or

you said it's 10 seconds I don't know I don't have a issue with viewing it to get a better handle of what situation is, but I'd be okay with saying that. Great. I'm fine. Okay, we're we're I think Do we need a motion on that? No, it's the chair's discretion. Okay. After listening very closely to her fellow committee members, the chair uh is going to allow. So, Katherine, he needs to introduce himself and state his address. He didn't do that. I'm sorry. Yes, I'm sorry. Raleigh Rston, 1311 South Avon Avenue, right next to the fire station.

Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Um, do you have it on a Okay, she's got it. Okay, 10 seconds. All right. Not even that long. You might want to freeze it right at the end if you have it. If you're quick enough because I'm going to um dispute a little bit the traffic study. Does this count against me? Time wise, you've always We only have one item on the agenda. So, yeah. Oh, I had no idea we had that note in that Avon.

It's what? I I I can speak for a little bit while she's trying to load it, but during um 1981, I was actually part of a group that did traffic engineering for the West Lafayette, Indiana as our senior project. Um so I am a familiar with traffic studies and what they we did to all the traffic patterns for Walt Lafia as far as stop lights and streets and stuff back then.

Okay. I will say that the uh traffic it doesn't end at 3:39. I wish it did, but this is actually from at 3:49. There's a time stamp I gave it to Paul. And then if you could freeze it right there that backs up all the way to the high school during that time frame and this is at 3:49, past 339. The problem is the stoplight at 100 south when it clicks off and on there's like a minute to two minutes and the traffic just backs up and for at least an hour. It's an hour. It's definitely an FRO now um during that time period and I feel sorry for the uh fire department if they're trying to get out during that period of time. This is going to be a mess because there's no shoulders on the road and I don't know what this roundabout's going to do.

And this is looking east towards the high. I am looking south. Looking south. Okay. Back. Okay. Can you stay Can you stay in front of the microphone, please? Yes. Northbound traffic though. Yes. Okay. Okay. Gotcha. And at some point in time, there's going to have to be a fourlane road there. Um, and you're going to have to make a roundabout at 100, right? And we're This is only going to make it worse. Okay. Okay. Thank you very much. And I have one thing to show you on the plan. Can you show the plan as far as the U?

Yes. She's got it on her computer. Yeah. Can you show the You need to stand by the microphone, sir. That's okay. Okay. The roundabout itself um is actually being built on the fire station land, and I want to point that out. They do not have ownership of that land. They have do not I mean, you guys have to figure out whether or not they're going to be allowed to do it. But, um I just want to point that out there so you guys notice that. Okay. Thank you very much. Next,

uh, last person I believe we have signed up is Andrew Larkin. Hey, Andrew Larkin. Uh, I live in Turner Trace neighborhood. Been there since 2009. Um, I think without a doubt this project's going to diminish our quality of life and our safety in our neighborhood. Um, we really haven't heard a solution to the traffic going through our neighborhood. We've talked about speed bumps. Um I think for Walmart shoppers, it might go over those once a week. We're going to be go over them four, six, eight times a day. I think I don't think anyone in our neighborhood wants those. Um yeah, the safety of the children, safety of the schools, um the fire department issues. I just I just don't see a reason to have Walmart in here when there's a lot of other options, you know, for what we could have that'd be safer for everyone and wouldn't be such an impact on on traffic. Thank you.

Thank you. Has anybody else signed up? I believe that is everyone on the list. Do we have any more time? Is there anybody else present who would like to speak? We've got a couple minutes. Yes, sir. Please state your name and your address. Frank Ditto 7898 Dutch Court. I just have question. Where are the trucks going in from 150? Well, you don't need to answer that. We'll we'll ask that question for you. I'm sorry. That's okay. Address the board, please. Where are the trucks going in? We'll take that question. It's not a question and answer here. So, we'll take your question,

but we will ask that. Okay. And I'm going to ask one more question and you can take it. Is the 150 exit entrance to Walmart, has it been studied at all with the entrance exit to the subdivision just to the south that has about 2,000 houses? We can bring that up with the traffic engineer. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else? We can I think we have time for one more person if anybody would like to come speak. No. Going once, going twice. Okay. Uh would the uh petitioner like to remmonstrate?

Uh yeah, thank you. I I'll just try to briefly address some of the things that were said and I think uh most importantly and we take very seriously the chief's comments because those are extremely important and working through the construction challenges. I mean I think uh Mr. Trippy here can talk about how that's staged and and um trying to do the best that can be done to accommodate those construction uh challenges especially since it's the fire department is extremely important will require um coordination. Um yes, there's some of the roundabout which is shown on the fire department property and that will have to there'll be a determination separately um as to whether that's something that um can be taken by eminent domain or some other process but it's not part of this process. what we are showing is exactly what um the planning staff um and I think DPW and I I don't have the date in front of me but we've been working on this thing a long time and Mr. Moore um made it very clear of his concerns early on um regarding the traffic and I think those were reflected in the requirements of the traffic study which or the the staff report which we have now agreed to. I think the chief mentioned some concerns about drainage and impact on landscaping which is um just now being installed or is about to be installed. Um, again, that's um the drainage will have to go through a a a process um that all of the additional runoff from the roundabout will have to be accommodated by Walmart in some capacity um likely on uh on site. Um

I I um commend Mr. Larkin for videotaping the the um traffic and we know that there's there's cars that sometimes line up but the that I think it's important to understand that we have studied the traffic professionally. The city's engineers have studied the traffic professionally, have provided a um a detailed report, and we are accommodating um all of the comments that were made. Um with that, we're I know there's an an unanswered question. Um but with that, we're happy to answer whatever questions you still have. Well, there was a question um from Mr. Larkin about Oh, I'm sorry. From

Thank you. about um where Oh, truck traffic. Yes. Sorry, I I was lingering up there in the brain. From the south. Okay. Yeah. Off of Oral Avenue. Yes. Okay. Right. Right.

High school. We we need to limit this to what's there. Thank you, sir. Um what's so there the entrance on 150 which is basically what you're talking about. So can you tell us how you envision the trucks to come in come to the site? Yeah, that might be better answered by Yeah, go ahead. Yeah, state your name and address.

Matt Landro, uh 1600 mana drive in Chaffon, Pennsylvania. Uh so yes, the driveway as it exists currently is accommodated to handle vehicles of the size needed to uh to service this development and trucks are largely going to be coming from the north where you know 36 and some of the other major thorough repairs are coming south on Avon A utilizing the existing roundabout entering the site and then leaving in that same reverse direction. Okay. So they go through the new roundabout and down to 115 and which is oral way and then go 15. Now we've introduced truck traffic on the railway is for yeah for the for that first yeah along the site frontage. Yes, that's correct.

Okay. So trucks would be coming both from Dan Jones and Avon Avenue. Not not from Dan Jones. So only Avon Avenue. That's that's our I mean that that's that's what we've designed the site to accommodate. How does your site accommodation prevent trucks from taking Dan Jones onto Avon onto Oral Way? I can't control a a truck driver. I can just tell you how the site was Oh, wait there.

Oh, that's Thank you. Appreciate it. So, yes, the the site was designed for trucks to be able to come southbound on South Avon Avenue, utilize the roundabout, enter the site, you know, do their loading maneuver, and then exit going back south, making this right turn and leaving back this way. And yes, they would then have to utilize the uh the new roundabout that's proposed per, you know, staff's request. Sorry. I hope that answers your question. So, is there enough room for semis to turn around within the Walmart property to come back out the same way they came in?

Yes. Yes. And and we do have uh truck movement drawings that that show that that can be supplied if they uh if they have not made it. So now you're talking about if you're introducing heavy truck traffic onto Avon Avenue, which between 100 South and 150 and various other points along the way is two sh is two lanes with no shoulders. Please don't speak from the audience said that.

Yes, that is that is the intent. And actually our we had coordinated this with staff uh early on. I know I'm pointing at this the screen again if it's better over here further going to the the east on oral there's actually a weight limit so trucks are not supposed to be utilizing it further beyond this site frontage um so that's also something that we considered during the design of this is there a weight limit on Avon Avenue at that area I'm assuming not I don't know but that's a question that uh could probably be addressed by Steve Moore public works director he's here if you'd like to have him come forward and address that or any other questions. Yes, please. Mr. Moore,

maybe we could do it after the rebuttal's done. Oh. Oh, sorry. You're right. You're right. Thank you, Mr. Taylor. Do you need to finish your rebuttal? Sorry. We don't want to just to say that I I just want to reiterate that we've met the ordinance requirements. We've met all of the conditions that have been laid out by staff to accommodate the traffic. and and and we think that under those circumstances, you're required to approve the um development plan. Okay. Thank you. Do me one favor. Compare your roundabout that you're proposing to the existing roundabout at 150 South. How do they compare? They're tiny.

Yeah. Well, I think what we're just trying to do is just at this point, we didn't really design the roundabout. thought it was more just to see if one would fit in there. We we have a lot of engineering to do to show it how it will actually look in the end, but it's somewhat similar to the south the roundabout to the south, but it's going to be a single lane roundabout. It's going to be smaller than the one. Yes, it be smaller than

So, you're only looking at it for your property, for your project, not for the future growth of Avon and the roads that go north and south. Oh, we'll we'll see when we get into the design what size, you know, it needs to be, but we as of right now, it's a one lane each direction with a separate rate. Wait, before you go, did you when you did your uh when you put that proposed roundabout in there, did you modify the traffic study to accommodate that and recalculate all

weight times? We we just we followed the request of the town to uh put in a roundabout there. So we just tried to see how how one would fit with the uh criteria given to us. So there's been no traffic study taking the roundabout into consideration. Is that correct? Not by us. By anybody that you know of I guess that's Paul or Steve. Yes.

I guess I think it's important to we were reacting to the condition that the staff put on us presumably with input from DPW. So, um, that's why, you know, that's something that that they requested. Quite honestly, we were here before without a roundabout and thought that was a better accommodation, but we're here in agreement with what has been requested of us.

Correct. But circumstances and requirements have changed, which meaning that, you know, we wanted to put a roundabout in, which to me, and I'm not a traffic engineer person, so I could be totally wrong here. willing to admit it because I'm wrong a lot like IU should have been in the NCAA. I'm sorry, but um but you know once we said that there's a need we we're going once it became clear we're going to require a roundabout seems to me a new traffic study should have been ordered. I may be wrong but that's that's my point here. So is there anything else you'd like to say uh address as far as your demonstration? No. Or as part of your rebuttal? Yeah. No, I I I think we've made our point.

Thank you. Thank you. Question is probably a better question. Right. Right. So, we'll go ahead. Could you please step forward? Sure. Steve Moore, public works director. I will answer questions. take it. Could you talk about the the roundabout design that was brought up as far as like single lane versus double lane kind and design what we see is a proposed just for this.

Sure. What you're what you're seeing is just a template. Uh so uh we had our traffic engineer HWC Engineering uh try to help us figure out, you know, if we're going to have that development there, what would work best? And they came up with a roundabout would uh handle the traffic the best. So they did their simulations like you mentioned. Uh they they probably ran sim traffic as well after after the fact, but they they took the counts that they that were developed. They took this traffic study that was provided and they use that information and along with uh I think they had some INDOT counts as well and they just ran it through there and and they so from a a 5,000 ft uh look the roundabout is similar to that. There'll be different things. I mean, and and I I think I've I've thrown out the reason why DPW wants to be able to monitor and then approve the final design is because there are certain things like uh for the fire department, they need to be able to get through that roundabout if traffic is backed up. You know, that's not a normal condition, but it does happen. So, if it does happen, we have to prepare for it. So, we want like the uh the uh splitter islands to be mountable as long and there's already going to be a truck apron as you see. Uh so that uh traffic moves over and they use a truck apron. They they go over the uh the splitter island if it is and filled in. You know, we're not going to have grass on that one. I don't believe that that there'll be enough space to do grass. So, it'll be uh be concrete in the splitter islands. So, things like that would uh would be important. And of course, that has to be reviewed after the fact. They have to design it, right? I mean, this is just a template. I do have a question on 300 South that we just completed a much needed roundabout there and there are

We didn't That was That was Planefield playing field. I I do I do not want to take credit for that. I do not like the speed tables on their roundabout. Well, that was my question. They put speed tables on that roundabout. Is that a

There's a requirement that if you have a multi-lane roundabout, which this would would not be a multi-lane. If you have a multi-lane roundabout, you have to either have speed tables or RFBS. There's a third option, I forget, but I don't even consider that one. Uh, but I don't I personally don't like the speed tables in a roundabout because unless it's highly pedestrian traveled because you're making everyone slow down and and bump when there's nobody there. Well, then when there's somebody there, they're just bump and they're not looking for people. So, I don't like that. I like pushing a button, the lights come on, you know someone's there. Lights aren't on, nobody's there. So, we went That's why at at the 900 and by Costco, we have the RFBs there. And that's what we're going to have at Raceway and and 100 North as well. Uh, that'll be a multi-lane, but it'll have RFBs. It will not have the speed tables.

Okay. Thank you. More questions. How about Oh, yeah, Mr. Susan. Yeah. Regarding future growth and future improvements, we're doing it now on Dan Jones Road, right? We're doing it in phases.

Right. on Avon Avenue. We've uh made the improvements at 100 South and you've got right turn lane, left turn lanes, and you've you made that intersection bigger, I'm assuming. What are our plans then to continue that south down to 150? Is it to create four lanes? Is it just to make them wider, put a boulevard? What what are the plans? So our third federal plan shows as that as a primary arterial that's formerly state road 267 and at some prioritization of the uh city council that it may be widened to four lanes. Uh I think there are other areas that are probably um before that and so in my lifetime I don't think it'll happen but you know I could be I could live a long life and maybe it'll happen but um so I don't think it's going to happen soon. Now it's also traffic driven right. So now if you have a development here, maybe maybe that pushes it up in priority. I don't know and we have to wait and see, right? You know, it's all it's all a function of uh um how the mobility of the community, right? And so wherever we have the money and uh have the need, that's where we put it. And right now it's Stan Jones. Uh your guess is good as mine for the next one because you're on the council

for now. For now. So I do have a question then on truck traffic. So, and I'm assuming there's semis that go on or railway now to go to the high school.

So, the basic premise is you have to use the most direct route. So, we have rated roads. Avon Avenue used to be state road 267. So, that's that's one of our rated roads. US 36 is um portions of 100 south are raceway road um portions are and then um uh see what else 200 north some of that is. So we have limited um oh Dan Jones part partials of Dan Jones basically um from 36 to the railway uh CSX main road. So we have limited full access roads that are rated for truck traffic. Then the rule comes in you have to take the most direct route. Well what's the most direct route? Well it's whatever the GPS usually tells them, right? So if they're going to um a delivery uh in the middle of a neighborhood like you know maybe it's it's a moving van, right? It's a he heavy truck going in a neighborhood. They're supposed to take the most direct route. If people are cutting through neighborhoods and not even stopping that neighborhood, they're not supposed to do that because that's not going to be the most direct route. Hence, uh issues we have with the settlement and Amazon. So, um you know, there are going to be truck trucks going where they shouldn't go, but it's not it's not the majority. So my question is that you're going to have trucks. The intent is trucks coming from the north going south around the roundabout on the 150. So now we're going to increase the truck traffic for that distance to the driveway.

Right. I'm assuming, and help me on this, on Dan Jones, since it's four lane all the way down to 150, would that be truck capable all the way? It's truck capable and not truck desired. So, so let the truck driver know whether it's desire. Yeah, they do because we have weight limit signs. Okay. And and and yeah, so we do have weight limit signs, you know, let them know where they should go. Those signs actually are reflected in a lot of the truck software, you know, the driver software. They have different GPS than what we have. Perfect. And a lot of it that's reflected on there. Okay. So, there's no concern with additional truck traffic going into Walmart, which

the road's designed for it. I mean, yeah. I mean, I'm I'm just going to tell you from an engineering standpoint, the road's rated for When you say the road, you mean oral way or you mean oral way where that's when that roundabout was constructed that they didn't change the um construction um uh from the the north south to the east west and then going to the east to that first drive, I believe it's all the same pavement section. So, it's all rated for the for the heavy truck traffic.

Okay. Their question is what was brought up frequently is the queueing on Avon Avenue and or railway and sounds like there's a period of time in the morning and the evening. Um it don't I guess I'd appreciate your thoughts on that and experience. So I don't see it a lot. Um I do see in the afternoon more than the in the morning. I don't know why that is because the same guys going each way, right? You know, but for whatever reason I see it more in the afternoon than I do in the morning. Uh I do see instances with the signal at 100 uh 100 south adversely affecting northbound traffic. Actually all traffic. Um I have issues with uh with loops. I put all new loops in, put new uh new uh detectors in and put new um new controller in. Uh I don't know. I at this point um I'm not sure. I think I my next issue is maybe back loops. Um, but anyways, there's issues with the timing of on the on the the signal. My goal is to always have everybody make it through in one cycle, right? From either direction. I don't care which direction you're coming from. I don't care how much traffic is. I want everyone to clear in one cycle.

You think I have sometimes I win, sometimes I lose. Um, and and uh so we're figuring it out. Uh um there's going to be some some modernizations done that that's an old signal. And so I'm I've tried replacing a lot of equipment, but I got a lot of old wires, too. So I think the next step is I'm going to replace some wires and see if that helps. But uh anyway, yeah, the goal is everybody through in one cycle. It doesn't happen all the time, but it happens a lot. So will do you believe a development like any commercial development, let me just say that on that corner would add to the traffic and the queueing situation?

Well, I would imagine that, you know, more traffic is more queuing, right? you know, I mean, it just it just happens. And uh so I guess my goal and and my duty is then to make things work. You know, if that gets if you guys approve this, then it's my job to make it work on from a uh functional standpoint, right? So I just got to do what I got to do, right? Thank you. All right. work

discussion. I feel like this project

Thank you. is needs to be looked in a holistic way because it's not just I understand the concerns about the the residents of Turner Trace but the fact is from the beginning that property was det intended to be commercial whether it's going to be a Walmart or it was you know little retail boutique shops and restaurants whatever it's always been intended to be commercial so that is what it is Um, you can't just look at it as that space alone. You have to look at the fact that we have a high school, four elementary schools, and at least one middle school that contributes to that traffic in that area. It is highly residential. Avon Avenue, like I said earlier, from 100 South to I think two until we get down to 40 is two lanes with no shoulder. Um I'm not sure if uh and uh Mr. Dr. Taylor might be able to advise me if we're talking about the criteria that we're looking at. Safety is one of the criteria. Is increased traffic considered a safety thing? Part of a contribution to whether or not uh something is safe within the context of our ordinances because we have a lot of traffic on both of those roads right now. I live off of Avon Avenue across from two elementary schools. I do not turn left between turns. I just don't you know

the criteria is contained in chapter 8 of your code and it says the criteria for review are the arrangement of structures on the site with respect to and there's a list of allowing safe efficient use of the proposed development creating environments that enhance relationships of the development and the site compatibility with development in the on the adjacent property consideration of off-site utilities. Second criteria is the architectural style which I think has not been much of an issue. Three is the arrangement of open space and landscaping. Four is traffic circulation that creates conditions favorable to the health, safety, and harmonious development, including street and highway access points that minimize safety hazards in congestion by their design and location. I think those were the words you're thinking of.

Yes.

Uh the capacity of adjacent streets and highways is sufficient to safely and efficiently accept traffic. pedest pedestrian circulation and internal traffic circulation. As you know, we tend to look at the development plan then and say, "Well, how can we accomplish these things?" We've heard a lot of talk about use. I'm glad you said what you said because land use is not relevant. We're supposed to be looking at how it's designed. And so again, I think that um in this particular case, your staff has made recommendations requirements uh of these traffic uh that would would mitigate the traffic impacts. And Mr. Morris said that it's his position that um these were our staff's ideas, the town staff's ideas about how to best handle traffic. But the standard is not whether more traffic will be um will result because if that were true, there would be no development in the town at all. I just want to remind you that and um so just just I would just look at your criteria, but I think what you heard Mr. more say is that it wasn't Walmart's idea to do this roundabout. It was our idea to do the roundabout. They had a different place that they wanted the entrance. They also had that on the northwest or the northeast side, the truck entrance. And so the town has requested that they make several modifications to their development plan to address concerns that planning staff and the department of public works had. And so I would just try to keep that in mind that the conceptual plan that you see in terms of traffic management was suggested by us. It wasn't their idea. It's we you saw what they had in mind. What you see now

is much different. So if you're wondering where these ideas came from, they came from our Department of Public Works. And it is, as Steve said, his job to manage traffic. But, uh, I just wouldn't get caught up in the argument that, um, you know, if you allow this, there'll be more traffic. Of course, there will be. And if that were the rule, we would have we none of us would be here. There would be no there would be no development in the town of Avon. Never would have been. That's not the issue. The issue is the site plan and how it tries to address and mitigate those impacts. Okay. Thank you for that. So,

so I think one thing that I I think the fire chief brought up and I think is very true because I remember the discussion about the encroachment on the fire station property. Um, that was a very contentious discussion about trying to get enough impervious surface or minimizing impervious surface to try and get truck movement and things like that. And this cuts a huge portion off of what is only green space right now. And thus, if it was important then, shouldn't it be important now to keep that impervious space down to to a reduced area? Um, I I think my concern is yes, traffic is going to go up thousands of cars a day. That's going to happen. But I don't know if this design is the best design that will accommodate that. And I think there's lots of work that needs to be done to fit this design into this location. And so I my concern is while yes, they've met the staff's requirement, there's still a commission here that goes through and discusses whether this um development fits in this location and accommodates the concerns of the neighborhood, concerns in the community, and concerns of future growth going through that this new roundabout, which I don't know if it has been fully assessed if there was ever a plan to put a roundabout at Governor's Row in the in the long range thoroughfire plan. And when you do that, you change the whole flow of the entire area. And I don't know if that's been considered. Um, so I I don't know if there's enough information here. The the the list of conditions just keeps getting longer and longer without any additional design. And I I don't know if that meets the intent of understanding the facility that's going to go on this property. I agree with you about the the issue with going into into the fire station's property, especially like you said after

we had we really worked hard with the fire chief and the staff to to make that a workable project for them. And now we're talking about going in and just tearing it up. And you know, I'm sure that there are minds going, well, why' we even argue about this and if we were going to do that? I don't I'm not a building engineer, construction engineer, so I don't know. I'm assuming there's a way to make that roundabout work. I I don't know. Maybe not. But um I do prefer the idea of the roundabout there in Governor's Row instead of another entrance onto Avon Avenue. Um especially that close to the 15 to 150. Um, but there's just a lot of things about this that um,

so question for Paul is like if they right now there's a need to acquire property that's Washington Township to based off what we're looking at, but that would have to happen if nothing else happens. If they were were not able to acquire that space for whatever reason, what would be the next step? Well, I don't know that we can say what would or wouldn't have to be acquired until there's a final design that's approved by the Department of Public Works. Um, but if fitting that in there would require acquisition. Um, that would be up to the initially at least up to the petitioner to try to work out an arrangement to acquire that property. Um, obviously if the town believes that there is right-of-way required for a public street improvement, the town always has the option of trying to acquire property and has the power of eminent domain. Um, but I I I couldn't say I couldn't obligate the town that the town is going to take that action because that would be up to the town council

or Walmart could use could use their own property to make that entrance, right?

Thank you. Thank you. Brian Canon were here, he would tell you that it is not a foregone conclusion that Walmart has to acquire property from the fire station. I think they would also I think Mr. Canon would also tell you that if the acquisition of property from the township in any way disrupts its storm water plan that that would have to be worked out between those parties. If the town were to condemn property owned by the township and there was an impact on the township's drainage on that site, the town would have to take care of that. I think that it would be a fallacy to say that uh there is only one course of action here. There are still several. But as you know, if you look at your past history, uh the owner uh the proposed developer here would have options. They could move things so that they could um do that entrance on their own property. they could acquire land on the other side from the township or and and my guess would be that, you know, we don't we won't know for some time how that's all going to go, but all that's going to be monitored and and the town's going to be part of those discussions. But I think that to say that we know how that will work out would, you know, would not and it's not for us to say how it works out. We've just said you're, you know, we want these things done at that intersection and you're going to need space. And as Steve said, it's a template. And by that I mean I think he means, and correct me if I'm wrong, Steve, but it's a conceptual u drawing on an overlay that shows a roundabout. What is it going to look like when it's built? Probably not that because Steve's going to make them he's going to make them do it a certain way and the traffic engineers will figure out ex you know, all that. But we don't

know that um Walmart will acquire land from the township in order to make that intersection work. They may or they may not. And I think that's all we know. Well, they may also need to acquire land from the people on the west side of the road as well. Correct. Those people do not live in the town of Avon. They live in the township. That is also a possibility. You're right. You've been around a long time. You know, right? Yeah. So, you're correct. But I like the idea they should put it on their own property.

So, the roundabout would also require um if we approve this would require coordinating with Hendricks County since it would be in That's a Steve question. Oh, that's a Steve question. Where's Steve? If if this was to be approved, it would be can we put that in there subject to the roundabout being installed properly? I mean with a design and I mean this is all like you said conceptual today. Well, that that would

that's would be contained in our requested condition number one that they would be construct the roundabout would be constructed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy and that the design of that would need to be approved by both the planning administrator and the public works director. So would the roundabout building permit is even issued. Right. Well, it does need to be constructed. I'm not saying constructed, but the the plans approved. Yeah. Well, we said prior plans approved for the roundabout before we give them a building permit.

I'm sorry. To correct the the the record, what the condition actually requires is prior to issuance of a building permit, revised plan shall be submitted requiring approval of the administrator and the public works director which provide for the following public street improvements, all of which to be designed and constructed of the town standards with all improvements completed by the property owner prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. So yes, the designs would have to be um hashed out prior to a building permit being issued, but the construction would only have to be completed before the store would get a certificate of occupancy which would allow it to open. So constructing the roundabout because of its because one side of Avon Avenue is Hendricks County and the other side is

so where we're where sorry sorry so so the road right of way is one or the other and in this case where the town is developed and it's against a county um uh property the town has an entire right of way to maintain. So now we would be in coordination with and we always do like we're doing the roundabout at at 100 north and uh raceway. So we have the the city of Indianapolis on one side on two corners. We have Hers County on the on the northwest corner and then we we're the southwest corner. It's our project but we're quitting with all of them. But it is our project. So this would be our project. Okay. Thank you. And they're not contributing to the funding of that project. Is that correct?

They are not unfortunately. All right. I have a question for Paul on um is the comprehensive plan part of the criteria that we evaluate TPRs on. It's 0.1 on your staff report. Can you talk about that that because this was uh submitted prior to the approval of the 25 comp plan. So is this would it be kind of governed quote governed by the previous comp plan or is it governed by the current comp plan?

So, typically something at the time something is filed, we would consider the plan in effect at that time to be controlling um but we would also consider the newly adopted plan um for context as well. But as far as your criteria, we always mention the comprehensive plan recommendation um in our staff report, but as far as your criteria for review and 8.10F of the UDO, um I don't believe that there is any specific um requirement that it be in compliance with the comprehensive plan.

Okay. Okay. you know, and uh let me just address that. Let me remember the comp plan is not a law, it's a plan. And so the when a developer comes to you with a devel a DPR, they're trying to comply with your unified development ordinance, they're trying to comply with your laws and standards,

right? And and I think Paul did a good job in the staff report of describing this that you could look at the size and say is that neighborhood retail. Um but also this isn't the size of a regular Walmart. So I believe that's a smaller Walmart. So that's why I wanted to bring that up and just kind of understand that.

Yeah. As far as I mean, as it says in the staff report, um you know, the the comp plan in effect when this was filed recommended, um neighborhood retail and smallcale grocerers, as you said, are included in that. And um you could probably argue that like you said either way as to whether a 50,000 square foot is a smallcale ger. It probably um it probably wasn't, you know, 30 or 40 years ago for sure, but today you certainly don't see a lot of grocery stores under that size. They're typically more type your full Walmart or Meer, those type of stores. So, from that standpoint, this probably would be um in line with that recommendation.

Okay. So, we we've had cases proposals on this lot. This is a commercial lot. We've had proposal before that where we got commitments in 2022, you know, I I think any commercial development is going to add traffic and that's always going to be concerned. It's a commercial lot. So, it's going to add traffic at some point if commercials develop there in when when we look at the DPR because I I thought about this as we've had discussion if staff has recommended approval and all the conditions have been met which would make it ministerial. So if we don't there has to be something in the conditions that we say it doesn't meet for us to not approve it as a ministerial action

or the criteria

or the criteria. I mean so that that's where I'm like to remind us of if there's something that you feel that's not the case you know bring that up because I think we've been pretty thorough in asking all our questions and looking at is this going to be a case? I you know safety to me the traffic is I where I get concerned I get concerned about safety um the DPWs talked about the roads are are being proposed to meet those those concerns here. So I do have a question for staff. So in your report it talks about waiver A, waiver B and waiver C. Waiver A is is irrelevant now because they've agreed to withdraw. They've withdrawn. They've agreed to a roundabout instead of putting in that separate entrance. Waiver B was withdrawn. Waiver C was approved. So in the staff report, it says that um staff does not recommend approval of this. Um is that an error at what I'm reading?

Can I ask which page you're um looking at? Page 16. That would be part of the staff report that started on page seven under letter J which would be our initial report right so what we published for January of course January commission was cancelled um but that that was our recommendation at the time so we don't

we don't change the report that we've already published we want to be very clear that we don't publish one report in January and then come back to you in March and change our report that we've already published. So that's why we do the additional sections at the beginning for subsequent hearings. So while there's context and information under um row J from January 26 that obviously is important to consider. Um, you'll see on page three is where we indicate under the March 23rd update that if the petitioner agrees to all outstanding items, staff would recommend approval. And so you have those item conditions one through five, which we believe would um properly address um all of the outstanding items as well as condition number six, which we presented tonight. and petitioner has agreed to all six. Correct.

Okay. So, one point is the waiver C that was approved last month is that void with a new design plat coming in. The waiver C that was approved was for excessive light spillage across the parcel line into the rightway. um primarily at the entrance um point onto Governor's Row that would remain in effect. So there Okay. So it was only Governor's row with the problem. It wasn't farther down it. Well, I guess the those entrances are not changed. Correct. Correct.

The other entrance that would remain on 150 is has not changed. Okay. Well, I I have one more request on your roundabout on the um north side of the property. They're only going to make the improvements from the roundabout to the first entrance into the parking lot. Is that correct? That's correct. And well, can we request that the petitioner goes

even though I'll illustrate it as the second entrance that will be going away, make those improvements up to that entrance, which to me is the entrance into the subdivision. If you look at it now, this is retail. Across the street is a fire station and across the street is a daycare. Why are we just bandating the improvements that need to be made? just make them all the way up to the entrance.

So, what we had originally requested last month was that the four-lane crosssection continue east to the second driveway, which that would be needed to accommodate additional traffic coming out of that driveway, especially potential truck traffic, which would need more space. It's not really that there would be so much traffic volume between the driveways that it would merit four lanes, but that there would be additional width needed to accommodate those truck turning movements. So, after further discussion with Mr. Moore, we determined that if they would close that driveway, that that wouldn't be necessary. And I think he could speak more to that if you have remaining questions on that. But with that driveway going away, we don't anticipate any significant increase in traffic east of the remaining driveway.

We already have issues there now. We just p we just paved that section. So, it's all brand new asphalt and with repave it, I guess. No, it's already repaved all the way to that point. We We wouldn't want them to mess with it unless they were going to put heavy truck traffic on it. With that drive closed, that that concern goes away. in your mind. I'm looking at this the impact of the people that live there that has an impact to the people there. We're talking about not doing that because we closed the entrance so we won't have truck traffic. Well, there's still issues on that boulevard. In what regard?

We had people that asked us about no parking on the streets. So, so that that's different. I'm I'm looking from a structural standpoint, but I'm not looking at just this project. I'm looking at the impact of the neighborhood. Yeah, that's and they're always saying, "Well, this only affects our project." Well, there's a there's an impact to everybody. Understood. So, if we're going to do it right, let's do it right the first time. But I don't see a reason to repave a road that's just been repaved. So, you're you're going to take credit for those recommendations as they're giving you credit for the recommendations of the roundabout. Say it again.

They're giving you credit. Staff made the recommendations to put that roundabout there. Thus, they're putting it there. So, is staff making the recommendations then not to make that boulevard lane from the first entrance to the second entrance? Correct. I agree with it because because the stacking would never go past that as far as what what our traffic study shows and what they've shown as well. To me, it's no different. You got weight limits on 150 South. We've seen it on Lexington Woods and over there in those semiis are going to go by GPS and they're going to go down that road past the high school. So that's that may that may happen, Greg. I going to do I I can't tell you. I

Well, you can't tell me, but we can't be blind to the fact that it's not going to happen. It will happen if it happens on a regular basis. You know, we contact Walmart and Walmart contacts their the subdivision and electric their logistics company. I mean, this is what happens, Greg. They to they tore up their yards. We put blockades up there to keep them from doing it. Understood. The point is we can't be blind to the fact that it won't happen. Understood. It will happen. Understood. So fix it now or at least improve it now to minimize the impact later on down the road. That's my only request. Well, we'll look at it again and make sure that I can't improve it. We we'll look at it again. No, no, because because we have the final say over the final design

right now. We can't make any decisions approving one thing or another. This is about they're presenting a development to us. How the de how the details of that development and all of these improvements, which I appreciate Walmart accommodating us and accommodating the residents of Turner Trace, but you know, I think we're getting into the weeds here when we're talking about if there's parking on Governor's Road, they need to have lots of signs that say if you park here, you will be towed. and then tell them. I mean that I mean there's all kinds of ways to manage some of these problems, but right now we're just being asked to whether or not we are going to approve this. I have issues with this. I've never liked that that property was commercial from its inception. Avon, as I've said probably a hundred times, Avon Avenue from 100 South all the way down to 40 is two lanes with no shoulder. And eventually some if if it had been widened already, I would have much fewer fewer qualms. However, as my vice president reminded us and as uh c as our council also reminds us, this is a min ministerial thing. Um,

if I might. Yes, go ahead.

I mean, yes. And say I like that as a commercial corner. I think that's a a good area for commercial business, for a small neighborhood, for something that takes gives the the citizens a place to go that's not up on 36, a lot of traffic there. Um, but I think to the point Greg was making is like it comes back to traffic and safety and that's one of the criteria that if we don't feel like this is meeting that criteria that would be the reason that we would say we disagree with staff's recommendation and doing it right. I I see your point and I think that's something that the council ought to also talk about and I think Mr. more has indicated, yeah, that that is the intent to do it right, but are we concerned about traffic and safety? Um, and that that's the again, we keep going around on that. If that's the thing we don't agree with, then that's where we don't agree with Steph's recommendation,

but I think and count as Mr. Taylor pointed out to making sure, you know, it's always in the words. read the words and the words are not is this going to increase traffic which might cause safety problems because as he said if everything creates new traffic and which means there's more cars on the road there's if there's more schools there's more kids I mean everything creates additional reasons to be safety aware um but that's not a reason to say no it is are you doing I I mean, I was not happy with the traffic study that brought it to an F. I do have a question. What is the traffic grading with your new plan or do you have that?

With Yes, because it was the previous plan gave us an F which I the other intersection, which was my previous question. So, okay. Thank you.

Okay. So, we don't have enough information to truly understand what that roundabout's going to do because it's not just a localized roundabout. It is a transportation system around this area. Traffic will go up. True. But when you put in a facility like this with the amount of traffic, we need to understand the safety impact of that. And that roundabout hasn't been considered yet. According to all the data we have, that intersection is still an F. Yes, sir. Is that not correct?

I don't believe that's correct because I think what the staff is telling you is that they have analyzed the situation and made a determination that the roundabout has made a determination that with the roundabout it can handle the traffic much better and we have a traffic study that shows that you'll have to ask Mr. I'm I'm just I think he said earlier let's ask

Yeah, let's verify that. And I would just say Andrew that if you if you believe that you want to uh I think Mr. Bor said they contacted the traffic engineers who work for the town and it was their opinion, but you have not seen a traffic study from that traffic engineer. you do have the right to ask for that study and to review it and even have that traffic engineer come and talk to you, you know, come to this meeting. So, just keep that in mind if that's what you're saying.

So, the answer is we don't have the actual rating. We know that we're going to create gaps in traffic which would then improve that F to at least one up. So, it it' be at least a D. We think it'd be higher than that. So, if you want an actual study done, we can do that. it wouldn't take long. Um, but it's definitely not going to be an F now because what the F was was the delay due to not being able to get into the traffic, right? Well, now you're creating gaps with a with a roundabout. So, that that automatically lifts you one letter. And so, if you're if you're a B, you could be an A, right? You know, but um if you're an F, you're going to be you're going to be we anticipate at least a D.

Okay. And that doesn't that roundabout won't affect northbound traffic such that it those Oh, it's not a decrease. No, you're just saying that it will it will have a positive impact on flow.

It should have a positive impact on flow. Yes. Especially side street side street traffic always benefits greatly. Correct. Always. It might be helpful just to point out that the the level of service F create condition that would be created is only for the westbound governor's row left turn to go southbound on Avon Avenue because they need you know two gaps from both directions not to go um northbound and with the creation of the roundabout you only need to h you know have the gap from Steve I think is saying the one direction for that traffic to get out there. So, you know, it's pretty clear that it will um create a much favorable level of service for that specific condition. And that's the one condition that fails. Um so, when I yeah, as Steve said, shouldn't have any effect on northbound traffic because it's only going to have to yield to cars that are coming around to turn onto Governor's Row. Um is that correct?

Yeah. Yeah. So your points of conflict are you worry about safety your points of conflict get reduced significantly too. So um on a traditional intersection is 64 points of impact with T-bones and head-ons. Uh at a T you know off it's like like 40 it's like 40 something. It's like 40 something points of impact and it's reduced down to um like uh 12 or something like that. point is it's gonna be safer. Um it it's you know just the runabouts are

and and then you talked about geometry, you know, hey it's going to be on the on the Washington Township property. I've seen traffic ovals before that that saves, you know, certain um instead of being a traffic circle, it could be a traffic oval. They can change that, squeeze it some, pull it back some, change the center of the roundabout. We have highspeed. This is I was just at road school at Purdue this last week and we're we're now incorporating more high-speed roundabouts which are smaller centers which now you're going to still need the outside radius for the truck traffic and and vehicles to get around smoothly. You reduce the center so that reduces uh that gives us more room for fire trucks or whatever else to get through as well. So there there are things that they can do. Again, that was just a sample, you know, of of what could be done there. That's nowhere near like Dan said, Mr. Taylor, Dan, I mean Mr. Taylor to you. Um, it's uh it's what like you said, it it's not going to be anything like what you're seeing there. It's going to be just it's going to be round. It's going to have curves,

but we don't know what it's going to look like. Sorry. Any more thoughts? So, with all that conversation say we don't need a new traffic study then what what you were asking. I heard that public works believes this is an improvement to the F- rating and much more work needs to be design needs to be done to be able to analyze reduction in points of contact. Well, we know that there will be reductions in points of contact by this design without question. Yes. Yeah.

Do they also need to work with the fire station? What do they do when the fire station has a run? The yellow lights, red lights come on. It's got to be right in the middle of that traffic, that roundabout or just on the north side of it. What happens there? I mean, so I think Well, that's DPW would would I'm sure handle that part of it to make sure that northgoing if they need to go south that northrowing traffic. I I get I just want the fire department to tell us they're fine with it. And if they're not fine with it, then they need to tell them how to fix it or how they can work together.

One of the things we heard is like they're concerned about going north and east and west to go south. So it's lucky the fire department went in after the roundabout there at Oral Way. But that was only during construction. That was only during construction.

During construction. So it's like there the question is how does how does the t town handle construction at any time? Especially since we close intersections to develop roundabouts. There's always that that issue. I think it's a good question, but it's like I'm assume the town's had to answer it. Or maybe we just got lucky that we've never had any fire stations where we've done roundabouts, but sounds I bet it's going to happen more frequently with the number of roundabouts that we'll probably be putting in future. So I I'd be interested if we would permit to have chief if you'd be interested in commenting to that.

Chief, do you want to come forward? You were in support and against kind of. Thank you for coming to the meeting. Aren't you glad you came push the green button

comes with the territory. The biggest thing we were concerned about is the construction. to tell you how it's going to work as far as the roundabout itself. Um, that goes down to apparatus selection in the future, which is about 5 to seven years off, right? So, to get around roundabouts, what's the best way to do it? You put tillers in. That's what Caramel's done. Well, that's about a 5 to10 million investment depending on how many ladders we have. Right now, we have two, so it's going to be around 5 million plus. Uh, and that's a tomorrow problem. uh to to go in here and answer how it's going to impact us. I'm a little late to the game coming to this meeting now after you guys all have that information. So to stand up here and speak for or against. We support the community. We support the citizens. That's our job. So it may seem like a neutral Switzerland type answer, but that's that's our duty and that's what we're sworn to do. It doesn't matter who it is. If we pull out and there's a traffic jam, what happens is delayed response. The way we handle that radio. We ask them to start another apparatus from a different direction. What's that mean to you? That's up for you guys to determine.

Are you familiar with situations where there has been construction at a fire station that has required or made it more difficult to head in one direction or another? Yeah. In Brownsburg, they shut down station 131 right there on the corner of uh Green and 136. Gotcha.

They could only exit back back off Grant Street or whatever it was. uh and return there. My thing is there's going to be exceptions to the things we agreed to with you all for that station on how we get in and out of the station. There has to be depending on how the construction works. Our focus and our concern today was just during the construction we need to have a lot of talks on how we handle it. It's also the encroachment on the property and how that hand how that works. I just want to put that out in space for everybody today so it was out there for future discussion. So D once it's built the way we navigate it's like any other emergency. That's our job.

So during construction, it it would seem like it's going to be before like it is now when we don't have that station in service that anything south would have to be served by the stations at I think one's out Presswick or or they're on 36 like Yeah, you just have a delayed response. I call that area the that Fives is in and you're trying to address that by Neverland. It's an 8minute response, right? So when you look at Lexington Woods, we burned down two houses there. Uh we turned one we burned one down in in the area of turn of trace

and the reason is response time, right? That's all it is. Uh same thing with the lady that came and spoke uh at the last board meeting whenever we were trying to get approval. You know, it was a delayed response to her husband's cardiac arrest at 7 minutes. Time's of the essence. We'll navigate that when we get there during construction was our biggest concern today and the encroachment on the property. So the equipment that you're putting into that station will be able to navigate this. All of our equipment navigates all of the roundabouts now. Now, do we like them? No. It creates wear and tear. They already exist. I'm not going to complain about another one.

So, maintenance of traffic, we would probably recommend that we uh build it in stages. So, if we instead of a total shutdown for 60ome days, we would probably let take 90 days and build it half a time and maintain traffic for the fire department to be able to continue through. wouldn't be all for the general public, but mostly for the fire department. So, I think there's a way to do it. We just have to sit down and plan which way we want it to happen. But it's it's not something we can't do.

Well, I trust our staff, not only our staff that works with us here, but I trust our employees and everyone who works for our town to do what's in the best interest of the town and our fire departments and our communities. And I've I'm very grateful to live in this community because we have such a strong ethic of working together to solve problems and to make things work. Is there any more discussion that we need to have on this regarding traffic studies or commitments or anything else? I I do have a question about the motion. The motion refers to subject to the conditions and the additional six conditions. Should that should those be commitments or

I just had a question about that. No conditions should be sufficient.

Okay. Is there any um any more discussion? Otherwise, uh I think we probably should go ahead and entertain a motion. or more discussion or I can show you cute cat videos. I'll make a motion because I think that's our job is to take action on these and that's something we need to do and I think we've had very thorough discussion that's answered a lot of my questions I came in here with and with uh the petitioner being um agreeing to all the conditions um staff making recommendation we haven't identified anything that we don't feel like it meets any of the conditions therefore or it is a ministerial decision. So I I'm leading this. If anybody believes there's a condition that's not being met and doesn't make a ministerial, jump in here before I make this this motion.

Well, I think I think we've everybody this in this room has trouble with concerns with the safety impact of the roundabout and the area around it. And that is one of our goals. Now, we did we disagree with staff on that and that is perfectly okay, but I think there's too much impact of adding this kind of traffic without a more concerted traffic study. So, I would propose that we do ask for a a more detailed traffic study with the new design in there with um Department of Public Works asking for um you know, being involved that discussion. So maybe we have to add that as a condition if we're going to bring this through.

Would that be a condition or would we uh suggest a continuence to allow that to happen? So that's where I think it's we have the ability to do a continuence if we're asking for more information. That's that's our discretion. I think the petitioner's got a comment that they

think that was a joke. Um we we would just offer that We'd like to have the decision tonight obviously, but we'd be willing to enter into a seventh condition which would that the approval would be subject to a submission of a revised traffic study indicating um the impact of the roundabout. I'm happy with the subject two language with a rating of greater than C or what? What? I mean, see, that's a I I if you don't have any improved criteria, then there's no point in doing this stuff. I Yeah. Well, I I don't think

or Mr. Morgo stepped out. Typically, a level of service E or F is what would be considered unacceptable. So even though a D might not seem like a great grade, a D would be generally considered acceptable. Um so I don't think it would be I don't know that it would be incumbent on the petitioner to do something that brings it up to a higher level than what would be acceptable. So D would be a minimum. I believe that would be appropriate

with the um extra analysis of school traffic time zones and all directions around it, not just not just that intersection. So that would be my request. So I don't approve by the public works director of course. Were you going to add something Paul? No I just well I just wanted to be clear on when we say all the area around it.

So um you could study the intersection of Avon and 100. I think I mean the other the other adjacent intersections have all been included in the study. I think that would be the if you were looking at looking at an additional location that would probably be I that is my request would be Governor's Row Oral um Avan Avenue and Oral Way and the entrance to um the property on Oral Way. That would be

well it would also have to include 100 North and Dan Jones because that's where those schools are. We've got two elementary schools at 100 or 100 South rather. Um, and we've also got the middle school. Uh, there he is came straggling back in. So, the other

So, let let me verify as well that did the traffic study uh analyze overflow traffic going through Turner Trace subdivision. Oh, that'd be so Yeah, it it it uh it projected the the traffic that's going out there now, but I don't know if you or I mean you you captured the traffic going out of Turner Trace. Yeah, you know, that's how that's how we got the letter F, right? It it watched how the traffic was going right now. No, but what about the traffic like if there So, the scenario was there's a delay turning left. What about diverted traffic that that they're not going to wait to turn left. They going to go through uh turn a trace and come out that entrance.

Did Did it So you you you leave the property going north and turn leave the the property the Walmart property here going north and turn right to avoid turn right onto Governor's Row. Go through Turner Turner Trace property to avoid having to turn left onto Governor's Row. Governor Yeah. I don't see a lot of people doing that because it's the ease of getting into a roundabout. Well, and but that's be faster to go on the roundabout. Now it is. Yes. Yeah. And so but that's the question is can we incorporate the true traffic design and and flow all around the property. I'm not you're asking for circulation.

Okay. I'm going to defer you. You're asking for something that we have to guess. I mean that's with all de. Can you stand closer to the microphone? And if I if I might just jump in, Steve, because I've got the traffic um study in front of me. I think your question was the amount of traffic that would exit the site onto Governor's Row and turn right to go eastbound into the neighborhood. Exactly. And their study does indicate that there's typically um well, it looks like there would be it looks like a total of nine cars making that motion at the peak hour. and maybe their engineer can elaborate on that or correct me if I'm wrong.

And so if that's in included in the property because that I know that the um residents of turn trades are going to be most affected by this by by every stretch of the imagination both getting in and getting out speed humps and all that kind of stuff. So I want to make sure that that that interest is is considered in this traffic study. Yes.

Okay. So, so that yeah, that was already covered in the traffic study that we've reviewed. And I think Steve, correct me if I'm wrong, but that's why our recommendation includes um installation of speed humps, not bumps, but speed humps at two locations to the east along Governor's Row and then one on Turner Trace Place between Governor's Row and 150 to slightly slow down traffic to calm it if there is um impact from any significant amount of traffic cutting through to access to and from this development.

Yeah. The hope is that the traffic calming uh deters people from trying to take those routes that could go in other direction. So they would rather go um on uh Avon A and 150 than cut through and hit the bumps or humps. Got me saying that now. Yeah. So the idea unless you're resident then it's Well, the res going to have to. Yeah. I mean I mean that's the way they're going to go. But again, that also then helps with speed because we know residents will go faster than what they should too. So speed humps will help with speed for the residents and and help deter volume for people who can have another way of going. Doesn't the current condition already say that?

And if I can help just I'm sorry just just by trying to bring Steve up to speed because he was out of the room for a minute. There was discussion about adding an additional condition potentially that would require submittal of a revised traffic study that would show a minimum level of service D for the traffic the governor's row westbound traffic going into the roundabout in order to address some concerns from the commission that they believe they don't potentially don't have confidence that the roundabout that we're recommending would alleviate that failing condition.

I mean, I don't have a problem with that. I mean, that that's a that's pretty simple one to do. And uh yeah, I don't care. I just I think that it's um it's a foregone conclusion that it would be at least a D. So, I mean, if they want to see in black and white, I I don't have a problem with that. I'm thinking it might it would be better than that, but you know, I'm I'm being conservative when I say a D. I wouldn't say it at all if I didn't think it would be. So, um, but if they if they went in black and white, we could do that. Do you consider D acceptable? Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You you design a whole intersection trying to get to a D sometimes. Um, really?

Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Hey, hey, Mom, I got a D. Hey, look at me. You know, it's not it's not like that. Um, a D is acceptable. A a level of service that's acceptable. Um, it shows some delay, which right I I'm saying I think it's going to be much better than that, but I feel safe and confident in saying it's going to be a D at least. Would you say 100 South and Avon Avenue is a D? 100 South and Avon Avenue. I would say that uh um north certain times of day I think north and south would be an E. So, um and and east and west I think are do better. So they they're probably D or better, but north and south

trying to create a comparison. Yeah. North and south north and south could be enough at certain times, right? Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So, but no, I I I don't think this would ever get that low. That that movement coming out of Governor's Row would I don't even say what I really think it's going to be because you you know, I don't want to want you to hold me to it. But I'm just saying it'll be better than a D. What do you think, Andy? So, it's already an F in certain times, and we're going to add more traffic to it and slow the traffic down at a roundabout. It's going to get better.

Well, so that's the thing. That's one of the intersections that's on our list to improve. uh the 100 South and Avon Aab is is up for uh improvements for signalization and I think that's what it's going to take. We've already paved uh Avon Aav five years ago, something like that, six years ago. We paved uh 100 South to the east. Um and so, you know, we we have good infrastructure there, but the signal itself needs help. And so that's that's on our list of things to do. So I would ask if we add a condition to evaluate these this inter areas around this property such that they achieve a level D or better even at peak times during um during school entrance and exits.

I'm not sure that's reasonable to insist that it always be a D at all times. I I just don't think that's reasonable to ask of a developer. You know, I live very close to 100 South and Avon Avenue and there are times when it's just a wide open field and I can pull out and there's no problem. And there are times when I'm like, what was I thinking? Um, and it's just because of the flow of traffic. I'm it's cross it's there's two schools in a high school within a mile of me and or three four schools in a high school elementary. So, I don't think it's it's reasonable to for a developer or petitioner to hold them to that standard because there's going to be continue to be um development and especially I hope Avon Avenue gets widened sooner than what I'm hearing it might be. Um but which which you know wider

I I think we disagree on that. So, okay, I'm willing to that would be my proposal and the committee can choose what to do with that. Good enough.

So, if I might just weigh in, I think it would be reasonable to require a revised traffic study that shows, unless you're already, you know, convinced from Mr. more comments that the roundabout will work for Governor's Row, but that with the example of Avon and County Road 100, that intersection was not included in this study. And so if the concern is about accommodating additional traffic that will use that intersection, um I mean there can be a condition that um and I don't know if I think what what you can do is as a commission is require them to make improvements to conditions that they are worsening. But if that intersection is already operating a level service F at times you can't require them to fix the existing conditions. I mean you can only accommodate for what they're adding on to it.

That's fair. Okay. I understand that. Mr. Taylor, I see you scribbling furiously over there. Yeah, I agree with Paul. We can make them deal with their impacts they're causing and that's it. And that's all I'm going to say

on that point. Are you I think you're suggesting you proposes that the additional condition relate to that westbound governor's row movement which is the only one that uh is an F. I mean, I think the discussion that's been going on is yes, that, but also the concern, if I'm understanding correctly, that's been raised about the intersection of Avon Avenue and County Road 100, which I'm not sure why, but was not included in the study, and making sure that any additional traffic that potentially deteriorates conditions there would be accounted for in whatever way the public the department of public works and the town would deem appropriate if that's encompassing what

so you're proposing as a a seventh condition. The concern here is it's already bad and if the petitioner has to accommodate the conditions to to not make it worse adding 3,000 cars to that that intersection will make it worse. So, how do we prevent it getting worse? That's the question. Well, I mean, again, we we had our study area set. We didn't look that far. Okay.

Um, so I mean, you know, conceivably a lot of the traffic that would be dispersing that going to have a lesser impact as traffic. Uh, so and I would anticipate a lot more through traffic then turning traffic what really hinders the intersection turning traffic so we get further away from the site you know probably less traffic but also through a mixture of um I just don't know what this by looking that far side of our study is really that's going to tell you

I think the problem is that we have two elementary schools at 100 and Avon 100 South and Avon Avenue and a lot of that traffic heads south on Avon Avenue. Yeah. So that that will contribute to the traffic at the round the proposed roundabout at Governor's Row and some of those people will be move turning into Turner Trace. Not all of them, not most of them, but um

so I I guess I don't know how to address a concern that I think this area is not designed to have this level of traffic. And it's not not Walmart's fault that for that. It's just it's a bad spot to put a heavily increased row of traffic. And if I'm not sure the the system is designed for it and that's where my safety concern comes in that I don't think this design is appropriate for that location because it creates a safety hazard that cannot be prevented with the current infrastructure. And that's that's where I think as a plan commission we can we can bring in that concern and vote on how we think this design appre appreciates that. That's

Can can I just ask um can you speak in more detail to what the safety specific safety concerns would be that need to be addressed by this development? So, the safety concerns are uh folks walking through this area, the ne folks driving through the neighborhood in uh uh Turner Trace. It's about people trying to get in and out of this property and the adjoining properties and the adjoining neighborhoods as well as the people that live along Avon Avenue that have driveways on that street that then can't get out or can't um safely negotiate through this area because they increased traffic. I'd also add that it would seem that we're we are creating the potential I don't know but as traffic goes north from oral way if they're going to have to stop at the roundabout because traffic coming south is going through the roundabout and going into Governor's Road to go into Walmart that delays the traffic there. So they're going to queue up on Avon Avenue which will end up queuing up on oral way which is coming from the high school. So at that point in time

there there's a left turn lane from 150 into the development and so that

there I'm not talking about 150 is I'm coming from the high school going to Avon Avenue then going north on Avon Avenue but there's people coming south on Avon Avenue to go around the roundabout. They go into Governor's Row. They have the rideway and people are on Avon Avenue will have to wait for that. And I've been in situations if you aren't if you're not in the flow of traffic, you're going to be waiting for that. So, we just that's where coming back to the safety of the way this is designed here is that we're increasing the potential for safety issues, which I think more accidents as you get

more drivers that are trying to get through that roundabout because they're in a hurry. To me, that's the point that Andrew is making and I would agree with is like, so did I did you say that traffic coming south on Avon Avenue come around? No. As traffic comes south on Avon Avenue to Governor's Row. I want to go into Walmart. I'm going to go around the roundabout to Governor's Row and into Walmart. That's going to stop traffic going north on Avon Avenue because the rideway is the person going around the roundabout. But that's true of any roundabout.

So I mean I think we you know I think we have number you have numbers on that correct? Yeah. Yeah. Like I mean round is designed to circulate traffic. So let go.

So you know and again I understand design. I've been in Carmel. If you aren't in the direction of traffic flowing, you are waiting until that line of traffic has gone through that roundabout. Even though the design is allowed for interspersing, you can't break that line. So, I I'm not disputing what the design is supposed to be, but once that traffic starts flowing, you're at the mercy of the waiting for no traffic,

right? And what we estimated here worst case scenario say like the PMP government is about a par going through cutting south and turning around to go to governor's road. So I'm I'm kind of with Steve on this. If we do the analysis I think you'll find it's going to work a lot better than just a traditional uh two week stop. I think we're I think we're overestimating this isn't Lucas Oil Stadium where where we're people are going to be backed up for a mile to go into or Wawa to go into Walmart. I think there are going to I I mean 100 South and Dan Jones regularly I have to sit there for three or four minutes until the southbound traffic passes if I want to go south and or get on the the roundabout. I mean, that's just the nature of driving. That's if I was sitting at a stoplight, I may have to make two cycles. I mean, a um Avon Avenue and 36 comes to mind. Um so, I think I think that's we're we're focusing on just the problems with driving in an area that has a lot of traffic. And there's not a single intersection I would venture to say on any of our major arteries that at some point on some certain day it's an F. It just happens. So the question is is there always going to be so much traffic pulling into Walmart from coming south on Avon Avenue so consistently that we're going to have backed up traffic between Governor's Row and 150? I don't think it's going to be that much. We're talking about a limited period of time, which is going to be irksome to everybody who has to deal with it when the schools are being let out and when people are being dropped

off and nobody's going to like it and then the kids will be in their seats and things will flow fine again. Um, so focusing on there's going to be a few times when you have to wait 30 seconds or a minute to get into wherever you're trying to get to. um is missing the big picture. That's my opinion. So I'd ask is a commission to me adding a condition for an additional traffic study to get information. It doesn't require any action to be taken shouldn't be a condition. So, we either do a continuence to get a new traffic study to get additional information to determine if there's a safety issue or we don't add that as a condition. I was leaning towards what you were thinking, Andy, in terms of let's get another traffic study. But, you know, we've heard what Steve has had to say. We've heard what the traffic engineers had to say. I assume everyone who comes to speak to us comes in good faith. I think we're pretty good at weasling out the ones who aren't. And I don't feel like anybody who has spoken here has not spoken with good intentions. Um I'm not so sure we need a a new traffic study, but I wouldn't object to one. If if if the rest of the rest of the commission really would like to have one added, I would not object to that. I might it might be redundant or it might prove our worst fears were unnecessary. So, let's add the con the an additional analysis with that

roundabout and have it be subject to approval by DT DPW or Department of Public Works that that the traffic situation in this area is appropriate and because it we can guess, we can estimate and I'd love to see the data, but I'm not the traffic expert here. So I will let's get this get the study and let Department of Public Works determine whether it's acceptable levels of traffic. So that' be condition number seven. So I don't know if it already has it in there.

I mean it already seems

Bill. You've been awful quiet over there. Um, I've gone back and forth on this a lot tonight. Uh, Chief Brock's comments early on though as far as getting around. I do find that ironic on the one hand that the fire station is going in there to obviously uh with the intent of enhancing uh safety of the residents and yet this development again I understand you know what's come uh this evening that Walmart people have certainly done their uh due diligence as much as they can but uh you know certain issues that it seems to me could be kind of encroaching upon that safety and that's a concern of mine and I but also agree uh with the comments earlier that Greg made. We have to get this right. We have no we have no choice. I mean we all you know being residents of the town as many years as all of us have we're running out of spaces and even if we weren't I mean we still but you know that just uh underscores we've got to get this thing right. We can't think okay well what might happen in five years let's spin a wheel. We got to do better than that. We have to Well, the issue is also going to be if Walmart goes away, the next person that comes going to have the same issues. So, we need to understand what we're doing to get it right.

No matter what gets built on that property, they're going to want to ask for an entrance point into it. Whether it's a group of little shops and nail salons and restaurants or it's Walmart or whatever, there's going to need to be access. I mean, it's zoned for commercial. Someone comes in, doesn't want any waiverss, doesn't want any variances, boom, it's there. We can't do nothing about it. So, are you looking for a condition that is more explicit that addresses a I don't like I don't like it because it's location, location, location, location. Not and we're trying to put a roundabout into something that I'm not sold on. But this was decided years ago. Right.

So what's before? So you looking at I mean then are you against the people take their conversations outside please? Do you want a condition that imposes more? I mean getting it right is is what the Department of Public Works supposed to do is get it right. Is there something we should be doing as a plank commission that you think that that imposes that that we're not doing with that we should put and make it a condition? Yeah. Just add the the traffic study that Andrew wants to do.

Yeah. I don't think the traffic study needs to go down to 100 south, but if that's what you want, that's fine because that's that's controlled by a intersection, signalized intersection. As Steve said, we can fix the signalized intersection, right? They're working on that. Yeah. So, do you have do we have language for that second for that seventh condition proposed? So, so could I just propose that that would read um

prior to issuance of a building permit um an revised traffic study shall be submitted for the approval of the administrator and the director of the department of public works um analyzing the impacts of the proposed roundabout at Avon Avenue and Governor's Row and showing uh results that are satisfactory to the department of public works. Perfect. Perfect. Any further discussion? Can you also include conversation with the fire department?

I believe that uh the department of works will department of public works will be happy to to have discussions with them as the building. Y

excuse me. Okay. Does anybody want to make a motion? I move that we approve DPR 2518 Walmart Avenue development plan for building with the drive-through surface parks listed in the staff reports seventh and seventh conditions as presented at this hearing it has satisfied all the requirements for development interview.

Do we have a second? Second. Having had a motion and a second, we'll now take a vote. Kaufman four. Reed four. Rockabbrand against. Zusen against Genenberger

against. Ransburg for and we are tied. Mr. Taylor. The chair can entertain other motions. Okay. I vote is no action at all.

Is there any wiggle room on any of these votes? Our options are to send this to the town with a recommendation for a recommendation against or no action. It's not a it's not going to go. It's a DPR. This a DPR. You're the final word. And you might ask yourselves if this were a reszone, how would our questions have been different? Because we bled into that a little bit. So you either prove, you continue, or deny. Those are your three options. We'll see. Make sure we stay focused on that. Okay.

This is something that I understood we weren't allowed to speak through was the conditions of reszoning this that that's not part of the DPR discussion. So, where does that get addressed? Yeah. That's for the border zoning appeals. It's a commercial. It's C2. It's already zoned C2. Yes. But it's but it's not zoned for liquor store. It's not zone for convenience store. And it's not zone for drive-thru, which all of these are have. Well, there were commitments that not do a liquor store from 2022. Yeah. But if but let's talk about this and I talked about this in training and I there's a specific case that I talked about. Okay. And that is the courts say the commitments say what they say. Okay.

And so if it had been the intention of the town council to have a commitment that no commercial use was ever going to be on this site that sold alcohol, they could have said that. They did not.

Okay. It said liquor store and a liquor store is a liquor store and nothing would have prohibited the town council from saying any business that sells liquor or 18 other prohibitions. So that's not our job to rewrite those commitments or to reconsider zoning. That's just not our job. And I don't know why we keep talking about that. It's not our job. That's the town council's job. They determine zoning. They determine commitments and this was 2022. It wasn't 800 years ago. I mean it's 2022. Those commitments were modified. We cannot take the words in those commitments which are not allowed to and make them say whatever we want them to. And I I cover this in training every year. It's one of the cases I talk about. So we don't have to have this kind of conversation. And and we shouldn't be talking about commitments. That's land use. This is design. That's what we're just we need to talk about what we should be talking about,

right? Sure.

And even though we aren't supposed to talk about it, I mean I Paul did talk and indicate they reviewed those commitments and I went back and reviewed the language. I agree with Paul with the the evaluation that this doesn't have the same this doesn't interfere with those commitments. So, you know, it's own for commercial. there's going to be commercial development there unless somebody comes through and reszone at request a reszone but we're we're going to get something commercial and that's where I'm like okay I my is a safety issue that's where I'm kind of struggling with

so we asked for an extra condition to be added to the safety as it gets So, is there another condition that needs to be added? What What needs to happen?

I think we're getting caught up in and Mr. Taylor very kindly reminded me that the additional traffic is not in and of itself a safety issue. It is how we address the additional traffic. We have heard from our own DPW director who has said on more than one occasion that and from the traffic engineer that they fully expect that roundabout to actually make the introduction of 3,000 more cars safer than the original plan at our request. It is there's going like there's going to be something commercial there. The previous attempts to put something commercial there have failed for various reasons. I would like to see that property developed instead of just driving past an empty lot every day. Um like I said earlier, I think all the parties have come here with very good intentions. Walmart has tried to accommodate us as much as possible. And you know, the safety can't just be we want to make sure that there's no more traffic or that traffic doesn't change. It's going to change. Are we doing it in this in the most safe way possible? I believe that this roundabout and the and the new traffic study which you requested Andy um I'm going to trust them that this that this traffic study is going to confirm what they have told us. I'm a little perplexed as to you requested that seventh condition and voted against it. I that's perplexing to me. um it's your prerogative, but um

so I'll try a motion again because I think Dave made a point there and I don't disagree with that. So I'll make a motion. Okay. It's going to be the same motion Dave made. So unless you want the law to do it again. Um, I move we approve DPR 2518 Walmart Market Avenue Avon Avenue, a development plan review to provide for a approximately 50,000 square foot retail building with a drive-through, pharmacy service, parking, and related improvements subject to the conditions listed in staff report with the additional sixth and seventh condition as presented at this hearing since it has satisfied all the requirements for development plan review under state law and subject to the approval findings of act.

Do we hear a second? I'll second. Having heard a motion and a second, we'll now take a vote. Excuse me. Genenberger, four. Ransburg, four. Kaufman, Reed, for Rocke against Zusen against. Motion carries. DPR 25 13 passes. Okay, moving on to new business. We have no business. Do we have any other business? We do not.

No other business. Committee reports. We could ask everyone to keep it down as you exit.

Go ahead. uh redevelopment in addition to invoice approvals uh at resolution uh for 2026-01 Hendrick's uh regional health tip approving expenditures there uh plus a uh wrap up on financial reports and uh also a quote to clean the police substation and training pardon me facility. We did not have a BCA report or BCA meeting. Any other reports, committee reports, town council? We don't meet till this week. So, no.

Is there anything else for the good of the order? That case we are adjourned.