Advisory Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

so so

Good evening. First of all, I apologize to everybody for the slight tardiness. It's entirely my fault, so you're happy to stick pins into zombie voodoo dolls shaped like me if you want to. Thank you. Welcome to the Town of Avon Advisory Planning 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. All phone calls must 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, right over there. 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 present their case to the commission. Remonstrators will have 10 minutes to present objections to the commission. And persons in support of the petition other than the petitioner We'll have 10 minutes to present support for the petition. Finally, the petitioner will close the public hearing portion of the presentation with a five-minute rebuttal period. Once the public hearing is closed, no additional testimony will be heard unless it is solicited by the 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 by state law in the interest of transparency state law requires that a plan commission hold a public hearing even if the development proposal must be approved Responses to public comments and questions may be given once the public hearing portion is closed. We understand there may be several persons who wish to speak. 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. And again, welcome to our meeting. Please stand for the pledge.

and we will now do a roll call andrew rockebrand here bill reed here dave kaufman here katherine ransberg here paul guggenberger is absent greg susan absent and jennifer spencer absent

So we do have a quorum. However, I would let anyone who is here tonight to make a presentation know that if you would prefer to have your hearing or your proposal heard by the entire commission, you do have the ability to ask for a continuance. We have four. four four of the seven commissioners here tonight so that's something that you might want to think about okay approval of the meeting minutes i understand that everyone has received a copy of the revised meeting minutes is that correct that has both all the pages on it and does anybody have any edits corrections drafts anything like that If not, we'll take a motion to approve.

I will go ahead and make a motion to approve the June 22nd, 2026 meeting minutes as presented.

Okay, do we hear a second?

I'll second.

Having had a motion and a second, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Meeting minutes from May 26th are approved.

That's actually the June minutes.

Oh, the June minutes, I apologize. Yep, two minutes, thank you. We now come to the public comment portion of the meeting. This is the opportunity for anybody who is present to speak about anything else that is going on that you'd like the commission to hear other than what's on the agenda. If you want to speak about what's on the agenda, then just wait till that portion. But if there's something else you'd like to talk about, marching band is too good, anything like that, this is your time to come forward and speak to the commission. Is there anybody who'd like to step forward or is anybody signed up to come speak? In the public comment. Anybody who'd like to speak about something other than what's on the agenda? If not, then the public comment portion is closed. We now move on to the request for continuances or agenda modifications.

Thank you, President Randsburg. Staff will draw your attention to the item listed under Old Business, DPR 2609, Nirvana Sports. The petitioner is requesting a continuance to your September 28th hearing. As you may recall, you heard this at your June hearing and after hearing the case and having some concerns, the petitioner requested a continuance to your July hearing, and then you didn't meet in July, but staff administratively continued it to this date. And one of the concerns was regarding shared parking that this property would have would rely upon on adjacent properties. And after the June hearing, there was additional information submitted, which called into question whether or not they had any existing right to use adjacent properties for parking. At this time, the petitioners continue to negotiate with adjacent property owners to try to negotiate secure a shared parking agreement that would satisfy the parking requirement of the UDO. And so staff has no objection to this continuous request to September 28th. And we would suggest that that would likely be with additional legal notice required depending upon how they revise their request, but likely they will have a revised waiver request that would require additional notice.

So we heard this in June.

Correct.

and it was agreed that we would go ahead and continue this. Was that a request from the petitioner?

Yes.

Okay, so that was their first automatic request, and now this is a request for continuance subject to approval by the commission, correct?

Correct.

Okay, and staff has no objection to this?

Correct.

Okay. Are there any questions for staff regarding this request for continuance? This would be the second continuance, then.

Second continuance request from the petitioner.

From the petitioner, okay.

And just to, before you take a vote, I know there's an interested party here that wants to make some comment, even though it's a continuance request, so.

Okay. Does anybody object to the interested party speaking?

I did have a question in regards to moving on to September 28th. How much time is considered customary for the legal notice?

Legal notice needs to be both published and mailed 10 days prior to that hearing.

So there's still ample time. Good. Thank you. You're welcome.

Okay. Let's go ahead and take care of the continuance, and then we'll hear from the interested party. That works for everybody. for tonight yeah okay that's works for me i have no i have no feeling one way or the other okay could the person who signed up to speak about nirvana sports please step forward just make sure you push the button perfect

Hi, my name is Michael Sandy. I am a general manager at Regal Cinemas, which are partial butts up to Nirvana Sports. And we were the ones that discovered. And I just wanted to state that we are in negotiations with them. However, we haven't heard anything back from them since August. So. I just wanted to make sure you guys were aware that we have been talking with them. And it's a three-way conversation with us, our landlord who owns the property and Nirvana. And that's it.

It's because they were celebrating my birthday. So that's what it is.

There you go.

Apologize.

I'll remember that next year.

I'm kidding. I'm kidding. Court of Appeals. I'm kidding.

Yes.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Appreciate that input. Okay, any further discussion or questions about the motion to continue?

No, that's me.

If not, we'll hear a motion to approve the request for a continuance.

Yes, I move that we continue DPR 2609 at Nirvana Sports to the September 28, 2026 plan commission meeting with additional legal notice likely required to be determined by staff.

I'll second.

Having heard a motion and a second will now take a roll call vote.

Hi.

For for for motion carries and DPR 2609 is not continue to this September 28 plan Commission meeting. We now move on to new business beginning with DPR 2611 Misty Ice parking lot expansion. Cars for kitties.

Thank you, President Ransford, members of the commission. This is DPR 2611. The location is 616 South County Road 800 East, which is also known as Dan Jones Road, but they use a mailing address of 800 East. The parcel is 3.1 acres in size. It's zoned R2, and the use of the lot as an animal center was approved as a use variance, and that's why it's still zoned residentially. That use variance was granted in 2015. The variance was to have an animal center with adoption and education facility with no more than 50 cats and 50 dogs to be housed on site. Then in 2018, I'll show you the DPR, which is at the bottom there, was approved for three buildings, and I'll show you those on a site plan in a minute. They were a kitty city, a canine country, and then an education center. One of those buildings has been built, but not the other two. And then the special exception, and also in 2018, was to allow for a gravel parking lot for a period of three years. That was modified in 2021 to allow for the gravel to remain until six months after the completion of the Dan Jones widening project.

How long has... Misty Eyes been on that location?

I'm sorry, how long have they been on that location? They obtained their development plan review in 2018.

In 2018, okay.

So this is a general location of the site. At the bottom is 100 South, and then the railroad is to the north. And then this is Dan Jones or 800. So it's outlined here in white. This is a zoomed in shot of its same property with the eastern portion of the site as developed and then the western portion of the site is still undeveloped. This is I already went over this with the the 3 buildings were approved only one has been built which is kitty city and then I talked about the gravel parking lot. That it was what the last modification was to allow the gravel for 6 months following the completion of the Dan Jones widening project which was completed in 2023. is a little hard to see but this is the dpr site plan approved which is in your packet but it might be a little hard to see here but up in this area is the original home for the site which was converted for the animal shelter use then this building here is kitty city which has been constructed Then the long building would been canine country has not been constructed still in their future plans. And then the back of the site plan here is cut off and then started again down here, which was going to be an education center. This is the site plan that's in your packet. This is what is proposed. So again, kitty city is here, original buildings here. The gravel that's out there right now is not as large as what's seen here. It's simply on the south side of the original building in Kitty City. They are planning on paving that and then extending it further to the west and then north around the back of the Kitty City building. We've reviewed this in relation to the 2015 variance as well as the 2018 development plan review. The development plan review doesn't, the site plan's not exactly what this is and that's why it's coming back to you, but we'd still believe it is generally consistent with what was approved through the variance as well as the original development plan. And this would be satisfying the condition of the special exception that it be paved. Additionally, it is zoned R2, but most of the development standards that we look at such as parking, lighting, bicycle parking still apply even though it's a residential district and those have all been reviewed and it is compliant with those regulations. And so we are recommending approval with our standard three conditions, and I'd be happy to answer any questions you have.

So commercial property on residential land.

So it's commercial property in how it's used. with a use variance, but it's still zoned residentially and the zoning will not change until they ask for a change in zoning.

So all of this is within the residential zoning code to do 50 parking lot, multiple buildings.

So the residential zoning doesn't permit by right a commercial building with commercial parking. That's what the use variance allowed for. So it's essentially saying It's zoned R2, but you have permission to do this one additional commercial use. We've added that in.

If they wanted to do any- No matter how big the use is.

It has to be generally consistent with the original proposal that came in and then the DPR from 2018. And that's as administrator, what I determined that this is consistent enough with what was originally proposed, that it doesn't need a new use variance to expand. Okay.

So if they wanted to put a, hair salon on the property that would not be consistent with the original intent.

Correct. That variance applies to this use and this use only. So any different use would have to come before or they would have to rezone or attempt for another use variance.

This has been expected for a while now because we had the gravel parking lot, and then there was an extension of that because of the Dan Jones construction. So this has been on our radar for quite some time. Anybody else have any more questions for staff? If not, we'll have the petitioner come forward.

Dale, do you need the pointer?

Yeah, probably. Good evening. I'm Dale Cruz, Cruz Consulting, 7384 Business Center Drive in Avon. You can see me on behalf of Misty Eyes Animal Shelter. And to your point on the timing of this. So Misty Eyes came to me years ago and asked me if I could help them with this project. And I had no capacity. I didn't have time. There was not enough hours in the day. They hired another engineering company to to do this project for them whatever reason they were not able to get this project to the finish line so they hired another engineering company same situation they were not able to get the project to the finish line so they came back to me and i told them the same thing i don't have capacity for you guys right now they said i don't care we got to get this done you're here in avon we just need you to get this done so the timing of this the Yes, the project was done. The dangerous widening project was done in 2023. But there has been they have been through the ringer on engineer, engineer, engineer, and then waiting on me to get us to this point. So we're happy to be to this point and happy to have a plan in front of you that we feel like is in compliance with. substantial compliance with the original development plan. I think really the only difference between this plan and the one that was up there before is this parking lot right here. Originally the idea or the intent was for this parking lot right here to have parking spaces and a drive aisle and then parking spaces on the other side of the drive aisle, which would have made us not need to have these parking spaces right here to have our parking count be in compliance. But there isn't enough room there on the property to have the parking spaces on both sides of the drive aisle. So we only have parking spaces on one side of the drive aisle, which means we only get half the number of parking spaces along the east-west portion of the parking lot, which means we added this to the west end of the building to get our parking spaces to comply with the development standards. So that's really the reason what's different. That's really the reason why it's different. That's really all I have. This petition tonight is really just to ask for approval of the construction. That's all I have. I'll be happy to answer questions if you have any.

So this is still showing a gravel portion. Is it going to stay gravel or is it going to all be paved?

It's all going to be paved.

Okay.

That's probably what you're seeing is our plan that shows what is currently gravel and what is not. But the intent is for the whole thing to be paved. Okay.

And all of the parking is on the side. There's no parking out front, correct?

The only part in the front is they would use this occasionally to get people in and out of the building, but there's not parking spaces up there. The parking spaces are here.

So it's a drop-off kind of drop-in, okay. Any other questions for the petitioner? Okay, go ahead, have a seat. Thank you. Is there anybody here who would like to speak out to remonstrate against this proposal? No, is there anybody who would like to go ahead and come and speak in support of this proposal? I'm assuming you don't want to rebut the non, the lack of interest. Okay, very good. Discussion. I think this is, I was looking at the two, this also is contrary to the comprehensive plan as well, but this has been in place for quite some time. I don't think anybody after eight years thinks this is anything but a positive thing for the community and having a paved parking lot obviously is much better than having a gravel parking lot, so.

Yeah, it seems in line with what was originally proposed from the DPR and the variance, so.

Right.

I generally agree with you. The variance is quite old and I don't know if I can vote against this because it is compliant. I just think this is essentially a commercial property now. I don't disagree. The more buildings you have.

I don't disagree with you on that either. But so far, Ms. DEI has never approached anybody asking for them to be allowed to do anything other than what their mission is. I mean, I agree with you. Technically, this is now commercial property. And I don't know if at some point that needs to be addressed in the zoning or maybe it doesn't. Do you have any thoughts on that, Mr. Taylor?

When they obtain their use variance, you said, what you said or the BZA said is it can be used for that purpose. That's now permitted by right. This particular use is permitted by right. So even though it's zoned residential, they have a They've been granted the right to operate the business that they have. That's all they can do there, though. The nature of their business is commercial, but they have a specific grant from the town to do so. So essentially, when that happens, it operates exactly like it has been rezoned for that specific purpose. And so use variances are very rare. But once they have it, then this owner can use that and run with it as long as they can. So it does kind of change the nature of the use of the property without the formal rezoning, but it has the same effect, except that it only applies to this owner.

Well, and is it still bound by 50 cats and 50 dogs? I'm sorry? Is it still bound by no more than 50 cats and 50 dogs?

The conditions of the approval remain permanent unless they are changed permanently. And they haven't been. So yes, those are rich. There were many conditions put on it as again, use variances are rare, so it's not unusual to see those. And there were some very specific conditions put upon the scope of the business size of the business, the parking lot development and all of that. So, so in our, in our eyes, when we look at a DPR, the use is really not the issue at all. You know, the use is, if the use were not legal, then staff would come and tell us. But we look at the DPR, we're merely looking at whether or not the parking lot that Dale has submitted here on behalf of his client meets our development standards and any other requirements. there is a factor that it be consistent with the goals and purposes of the comp plan but remember because the use has already been approved it's really difficult to argue that's not true we of course want the parking lot to be paved you know we want that that's consistent but So that's why DPRs are ministerial in nature. If they can show they've designed it to meet our standards and the standards of any applicable ordinance other than our zoning ordinance and subdivision control ordinance, then it becomes a ministerial approval, which is what I think we have here.

And the use variance stays with the property, not the owner, correct?

Yeah, but it's only this use.

Correct. Yes. Yes. Yeah. So even if they sold it, it could still only be for this use.

Again, not really our concern.

I was just clarifying kind of the restrictions of use of variants that I'm not as familiar with. So that was my discussion today.

Yeah, it's not really what you guys do. It's what the BZA does, and then you're stuck with it. But, yeah, I just never want the Plain Commission to run too far afield on use because that issue has already been decided.

Any further discussion on this particular proposal? If not, we'll entertain a motion.

I move that we approve DPR 2611, Misty Eyes parking lot expansion, a development plan review to allow for a parking lot expansion subject to the conditions listed in the staff report, since it has satisfied all the requirements for a development plan review under state law and subject to the approved findings of fact. And I'll second.

Having heard a motion and a second, we'll now take a roll call vote.

Coffman. Four. Reed. Four. Rockerbrand. Four. Randsburg.

Four. And DPR 2611 is approved. Thank you.

Thank you.

And we now move to the last item on our agenda, which is MIP 2613 Radiant Bible Church.

Thank you. This is a minor plot that you're reviewing today for the Radiant Bible Church, which is located at 9870 East US Highway 36 and 420 Gable Crossing Drive. The actual church building is at the Gable Crossing Drive address. The subject site consists of two previously plotted lots in separate plots, and they are both lot one in each of those plots. Currently zone C2, which is the southern portion, R1, which is the northern portion, and there's a small sliver of not really developable R5 also on the site. And it does because the size of the property lies within all three tiers of US 36 overlay. It does have some history to it. The church itself was developed in 2012 and it was done along with a minor plot to create the lot for the church. And then there was a parking lot expansion in 16. And then in 18, there was another plot, which I'll show you an administrative plot to combine two lots for the lower portion of this plot. So here's the subject site. US 36 here, Gable Crossing Drive here. The church is located up here in the larger portion of the site. This is Walmart here. At Home is at this end of the shopping center. So the larger part was plotted as one lot, lot one for the development of the church. And then there were two residential lots located on this portion. So another lot or another plat was created later to combine those two lots into one lot. So now we have lot one up here for one plat and lot one down here for another plat. And the purpose of this plat is to combine these two parcels into one lot. The church is desirous of combining all the land that they own into one parcel. They've also indicated there's no development proposed at this time. And any new, I wanted to note that any new development in the future would be required to use the Gable Drive frontage and they would not have access to US 36, although there are remaining remnant residential drives there. I wanted to touch on the trail that goes through this property. The Avon Bicycle Pedestrian Plan notes that a multi-use trail should go through this portion of town following the Avon drain. I hope I've shown this map well enough. This is the northern portion of the property here. Already constructed trail as shown in red. So there's a red, the trail going through this property around their parking lot. And then there's a trail up here in the Brookstone subdivision that comes to this point here. The plot that's already been approved and recorded showed the future easement of this trail in white. And it only just dead ended into these condo units over here. So we would prefer to connect the red and the red. So they are adding an easement here and which shown in green for future connection of this trail. So we have a full connection. And that is shown on page one of your handout. I do want to note that we have had conversations with the property owner adjacent to this who lives in this area in this corner that's kind of tucked in here. And they have some concerns about survey stakes that they're seeing out in the field. They're concerned that they are accurately located. They were unable to be here tonight. And we've asked for clarification from the surveyor that those get rechecked and remarked if necessary. We've done the measurements on the plat. We've done the measurements on the plat related to adjacent property lines and adjacent plats. And we believe the plat is accurate. But what the adjacent property owner showed me in the field was the property line corner, which is specifically this one right here. look like it may have been off, but we don't know for sure until we get more details from a qualified surveyor to verify that with us. So, on my conditions here that I want this to get verified prior to the plat being recorded. So I've added, in addition to the three standard conditions that I usually recommend and that are in your staff report, I've added a fourth condition here that the approval will be subject to verification of those survey markers to the satisfaction of the administrator prior to plat recording. And I'd be happy to answer any questions you have.

Linda, can you go back to the slide that showed the trails? Uh-huh. It's been a minute since. So that, so Gable Crossing, what is it called? Gable Crossing Drive. Drive. basically kind of empties into the parking lot. Yeah.

And the red trail is installed. The white would remain and then now connect to the green instead of going due west and dead end.

So the white is also a pre-existing trail?

That is not constructed yet.

Okay.

But that easement would remain and then the green would be added.

Okay.

So we can get the connection through to Brookstone.

And would, I mean, they already own that. I guess this really doesn't have anything to do with the connecting, combining of the plats. This has to do with the trails. Okay.

I'm sorry if I missed it. So the white portion, there's already easement, but it's not developed? Is that what you said?

So the original plat, well, if you go way far back, there was an easement that they just generically put along the, But when the refinement of the building and where the trail was going to be, it got relocated up through here where the lower red portion is, and then a generic easement was just sent over due west and dead ended. None of this up here was developed yet. We didn't know where it was gonna go. We were still thinking along the ditch somehow. um getting through this area along the ditch in the floodplain and this is also county land here was not going to be the best route especially when brookstone came through and we were able to get this connection here so we're thankful that this plot has come along and it's able to we were able to make a good connection here for that trail system

On the conditions, you said you were adding one for the survey?

It's number four here on the screen.

It's different than our packet. That's what I was missing. I was like, I see three.

Is there any... So where Gable Crossing Drive connects to the drive going into the parking lot, that goes from being a public street to a private road?

The motor vehicle portion, yes.

Okay.

The multi-use trail has an access easement on it already.

Okay.

So the plat would cross part of the public road if we made it one plat?

No. One parcel rather. I guess if you look behind you, it's clearer than that one. Where this little strip here comes down would be added to this tree lot.

Right.

Essentially just eliminating that little property line right there.

Okay, gotcha. Yeah, this is easier to see. Yeah. Just harder on my neck.

Okay.

Are there any further questions for staff? If not, we'll have the petitioner come forward.

My name is Morgan Reese with Innovative Engineering Consulting, 3961 Perry Boulevard, Whitestown, Indiana. I don't have much more to add. If you'll see on the plot, it was previously named Harvest. And so that's why there's the two names on there. Now it's called Radiant Bible Church. And yeah, just an administrative combining of the two just for bookkeeping on the church's end. And yeah, any questions?

Okay.

Is there anybody present who'd like to come forward in remonstration against this proposal? There's anybody who'd like to come forward to support this proposal? I'm assuming that that means no. Rebuttal? Public comment is now closed. Discussion? I don't see why this, I mean, this seems like very, it's just, You answered my question. It's like, what is the purpose of bookkeeping? And the less bookkeeping anybody can do, the better. I would like less bookkeeping. But this seems pretty straightforward. And as long as the... I mean, this doesn't seem like it'll impact anything else we have with regards to trails and easements and anything else. I don't know that there's any legitimate... reason why we would not approve this, unless somebody else would like to speak.

All the zoning remains the same, no changes to any of that?

Correct, nothing changes with the zoning. Okay.

Not that we can do anything. All right.

Any further discussion? If not, we'll take a motion.

I move that we approve MIP 26-03, Radiant Bible Church, a replat of Harvest Bible Indy West section one and two, a request to combine two lots totaling 30.55 acres into one lot subject to the conditions listed in the staff report, including the additional number four subject of verification of the survey markers as presented this evening. since it has satisfied all the requirements for preliminary approval of a minor plot under state law and subject to the approved findings of fact.

I'll second. Having heard a motion and a second, we'll now take a vote.

Rockbrand. For. Reed. For. Kaufman. For. Ransberg.

For. MIP 2603 is approved. We now move on to Other business? If there is any other business? Any business for the good of the order? Committee reports.

Redevelopment from July and August. Approval of invoices in addition to that. We've also had a 2027 budget introduction. Avon logistics phase two bond discussion. structure point fee amendment and TIF pledging for HOPA two bonds. And also discussion regarding Avon Logistics TIF bond number two.

BTA? I know we had a meeting.

You did have a meeting. And you had one case on your agenda. And I believe it was approved, if I recall correctly.