Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone. I'd like to call the Cicero Jackson Township Planning Commission order at 7 o'clock p.m. With that, Mr. Zawadzki, would you do roll call, please?

Yes, sir. I'd be happy to. Dan Strong. Present. Wendy Gillespie.

Present.

Harrison Masani.

Present.

Dennis Schrumpf. Present. Dennis Johnson. Present. Jacob Everett. Present. Mark Dillard. Present. Mark Thomas.

Present.

We'll let the record show that Ford Hebner is absent. Let the record show that Aaron Culp, our legal counsel, is absent. I am Frank Zawadzki, plan director. I am present. And good evening, Mrs. Strong, recording from home.

Okay, we do have a quorum here this evening with eight of the nine members present. And thank you all for being here. So it's always nice when we can go ahead and conduct business, especially when we have petitioners here. With that, moving on, I would look for approval of the minutes from May 13th.

Mr. President, Dennis Rump, I move we approve the minutes from the May 13th, 2026 meeting.

Thank you, Mr. Rump. Thank you, Mrs. Gillespie. We have a motion and a second to approve our minutes from May the 13th. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Thank you. Moving on to public comment, this would be an opportunity for anyone that would like to speak on anything outside of the agenda items this evening. Thank you.

Let the record show, Ford Hebner has arrived.

So all nine members are present. Thank you, Mr. Hebner, for coming. With moving on, seeing no one from the public stepping forward to make any comments this evening, Mr. Zawadzki in the old business this evening. I show no old business. Thank you, Mr. Zawadzki. Moving on to new business, docket number PC-0626-13-C1. Petitioner is Nathan at Signage, Holmes Lawn Care, Landscaping, and Stanley Widows. Petitioner address is 369 East Jackson Street here in Cicero, Indiana. Petitioners here for a state review application for from article 5 aesthetic review overlay district for his signage Located at 369 East Jackson Street, Cicero, Indiana So if you would state your name and address for the records, we would appreciate it and then tell us what you're proposing, please How's it going?

My name is Nathan Lincoln with Sinorama in Greenfield, Indiana and the address I'll be representing is 369 East Jackson Street in Cicero, Indiana

Can you tell us a little bit about what you're proposing?

All right. So this is a Holmes Lawn Care and Landscape. A good buddy over here, Grant Holmes, just took ownership of this building over here from Stan Widows. Not ownership. He's renting the building. But Basically, there's no signage on that building as of now. He's got trucks parked out there. It's right as you pull into the town of Cicero. Right as you pull into the town of Cicero, you see Welcome to the Town of Cicero, you see that building out there. You don't see a sign out there. You see a blank white panel. It's really not a good look for the city. Moving forward, we'd like to put a sign out there. This would be a lit sign. It would be backlit and facelit. There would be a backer on there of an ACM material. Then there would be channel letters of that logo. out there on the sign. And that would be, like I said, backlit and facelit. And the dimensions are next to it along with the total elevation of that sign.

So can you tell us a little bit about the backlit and the facelit, how that works?

Yeah. So basically it's dual-lit channel letters. So the front of the faces are lit of that sign. So basically all of the lawn and landscape and then the homes would be lit. And then it's on standoffs and it's on, so it's on standoffs and then it's stud mounted. So it sticks off the building just a little bit, usually three quarters of an inch. up to an inch. And basically there's lights inside of those channel letters that protrude back onto that backer panel to then add a little bit of a glow effect. And I'm sure you guys have seen that on different businesses around the different cities.

Okay. Thank you. Question, comments, board members? And before we get started, this does not require a public hearing since it's a static review only. So comments or questions from board members?

The light above the sign, is that staying or going? That will be removed.

There's no existing signage on the property?

There is the blank. It's a blank panel. It may have been turned around from when MAG Auto Group was there previously. But as of right now, that is the only panel that's up there, and that will be taken off. It is actually a little bit smaller. Yep. It's a little bit wider in width at 101 inches, but it is a little bit smaller in total height.

It doesn't really matter. I'm just asking, but why is the sign one inch taller on the left side versus the right?

Sign one inch taller on the left side than the right.

By the dimensions that you show.

Yep.

It shows 4 feet 11 inches on the left, 4 feet 10 inches on the right. I'm just curious.

This one. And that one. OK, so that's just a measuring tool that I use. It's called a spike. It's an attachment that goes to my phone.

No, we all do gist and map stuff. I get it now.

So that was just an overall estimate of the previous panel size, rather than going up there on a ladder and having to tape measure it out.

So it's the intention of the sign to just be on during operating hours?

I would say the intention of the sign, it would only be on during at nighttime, so from dusk to dawn.

And can you explain the need for it being on dusk to dawn, other than just during your business hours or a shutoff time sometime in the evening?

I mean, it would really do no justice, it being on during the daytime, because you wouldn't be able to see the light at all. It would be, honestly, a waste of power, too. But it being on during the nighttime, as people drive down, you know, the main drag in Cicero, It being really that first building right there on the left side, it creates a good visual look for the overall town of Cicero, as there's not a lot of lighted signs through downtown Cicero. And as you can also see, a lot of signs need work. And me just driving down through here, I'm not from Cicero. I'm actually from Noblesville. But I'm not in Cicero very often. Me just driving down. downtown Cicero, I don't see very many lighted signs. I see a lot of signs and buildings that, you know, their signage could use some work. And us sprucing this building up and, you know, it being that building right when you pull in Cicero, it may make other businesses want to spruce their signage up to overall, you know, increase the overall look and aesthetic of Cicero.

Other comments, questions, board members?

Mr. Zawadzki, any ballpark on how many lighted signs we have along Jackson? Off the top of your head, if you don't know, that's okay.

There's several.

Okay.

Yeah, I'd have to think about that. That's all right.

It wasn't a fair question.

Okay.

I was just looking at it from aesthetics as if it was on all night, the potential of distracting from traffic coming into town, but also currently most of that corridor is a residential area, even though it is a neighborhood commercial and may develop in the future, but that was the reason I asked the question that could it be shut off at a certain time, put on a timer or something?

Totally. It could be on a timer. We can install it with a timer. We can install it with a photo cell. And the photo cell would just be basically when it's dark, it would shut off. Or when it's dark, it would turn on. When it's light, it would shut off. But it could also be on a timer on set hours as well.

What's the brightness of that light going to be? Is this a low-level LED?

Honestly, it could be anywhere from 5,000K to 7,000K. It really just depends on the client and the overall look they're going for. That is to be determined. It's quoted as a 7,000K light, which is standard in all LED signage.

Correct. That could be something, that could be an option, something that we could do.

I think I would like to see it at least on a photo cell or that it goes off maybe at 10 o'clock at night or something along that line where it's not on.

Not on all night long. Yep. Nope. And that's something that we do pretty standard on multiple different businesses, too. So where it's on from hours, you know, when it gets, say it starts at 7 p.m., you know, and it's not on all night from the hours like 2 a.m. to 6 a.m., you know, something like that. That way, you know, it's not a waste and, you know, it is still lit during the hours where traffic would be going by rather than in the direct nighttime so that it's not a nuisance to surrounding residents.

That was my comments, and that's strictly up to the board if they wanted to do that or not. Any other questions, comments? So with that being said, Do we want to not allow it to be on all night? If we do, we want to include that in the motion and then specify if we want it by a photo sale or whether we would want ours. Or if it's okay to leave in all night, if that's how the board wants to proceed, then we can do that as well.

Is the adjustability of it not only on a timer, but on a cell, photo cell too? It would either be a timer or a photo cell.

So a timer, it would be set during different set hours. And then a photo cell just operates off the overall light. So sometimes it gets dark at 7 p.m. Right now we're getting dark at about 9 o'clock, sometimes a little after. So it just would depend on when it does get dark. It's almost like solar lights. When you cover up that top thing, it would flip on. When it's uncovered and it does see the light, it would turn off.

So would the photocell work better since the fluctuation of time and then also?

It could, but I do worry that if you are wanting it off, say, the hours of like 3 a.m. to, you know, 6 a.m. or 2 a.m. to 6 a.m., something like that, that couldn't be done with a photocell because it operates off the light outside, if that makes sense. It would have to be on a timer.

So what's your standard operating hours? When do you get there and the latest that you think you might be there? So could you step up and state your name, address for the records, please?

Yes, I'm Grant Holmes. Address is 369 East Jackson Street. If there's any good reason on why it shouldn't be on all night, I'm sort of, why would I put the sign up to begin with, if you will? That's all I've got.

Well, I think you would put the sign up so it's visible that people know you are there, whether it's on 24-7 or not.

Yeah.

To identify your building and the business, I think is why you would put a sign up, whether it was lit or not lit.

Go.

By having that sign up and having it lit all night, would it...

in some ways be a Crime deterrent, I mean, because there's light there all night, it'd be less likely.

It could be as well, exactly. There's a previous light, like Harrison had mentioned, above the building, and that would be removed. And normal light on at all times does keep people away. And he does have expensive trucks out there, materials, equipment, and other things. And that would also be, it could prevent crime in that way as well.

So the nightlight would come down?

That nightlight would come down. Is that on the photo cell? That I do not know as of now.

It doesn't even work. Are there any lighting next door? Do you guys have lighting next door at the ?

I believe there's street lights down through there.

We do have lighting.

There's a street light in front of the property, too.

Yeah. And we have motion detector lighting.

At the town hall? Yeah.

At the utility office? That existing light, I believe, is on 24 hours a day nowadays.

What light?

The one in front of the property? No, it's on this building. That one right there, I have it up on the screen. But he said it doesn't work. Oh, that's a new thing then.

I'll check it tonight. I don't think I've ever seen that one.

Okay. It used to be on every morning when I showed up.

If he's taking it down, and that I think probably is on a photocell, I think you can see on top of it.

Yep.

The photocell. So if that's the case, I don't have any problem with it being on a photocell.

And lit all night?

No, because I don't think it would be any brighter than the night light. No.

It's not going to be super bright because it's also got green faces. If you think about a dark green face, it is going to be translucent vinyl, but a dark green compared to a white. If his logo were completely white, it would be way brighter. The dark green does tone down the brightness a lot. The brightness can be adjusted. It can be adjusted.

I'm okay with the photocell if it can be adjusted.

And this is a software because don't they usually become almost a glow around the logo?

Yeah, it is almost a glow.

It's not like the big light.

And it all depends on how it's spaced on the building too, so how far it sticks out. So if it's pushed farther back, like I said, three quarters of an inch, you get less of a glow. If it's sticked out an inch or an inch and a half, you get more of a glow around the logo.

And it is adjustable. So if they do find that there's complaints about it being too bright, it can't be adjusted. Correct. It can only be adjusted down so far. Yep. Yep.

Usually they range between like, you know, 4,000K between 8,000K. So it can be adjusted.

So are we ready to make a motion?

I'll make a motion, if I do this right, for Docket PC062613C1 to approve the signage based on a photocell with adjustability to the lightness.

I'll second that.

So we have a motion and a second for the aesthetic review for the docket that it would have a photo cell and is adjustable in case the light's too bright at some point and we get complaints about the lights. Okay. With that, then I'll do a roll call vote. Mr. Schrumer.

Approved.

Mr. Johnson.

Approved.

Mr. Ebert.

What does that mean?

Yes, sir. Approved. Mr. Dillon. Approved. Mr. Thomas.

Approved.

Mr. Hebner.

Approved.

Mr. Massani. Approved. Mrs. Scalispi.

Approved.

And I approve. So are you approved to move forward with your sign? If you'll continue to work with Mr. Zawadzki through the process, getting your sign permit and everything, he'll help you through that process. You got it. Okay, thank you, and welcome to the community, and we wish you much success in your business. Thank you all. Thank you. Okay, moving on to docket number PC-0626-05-AG, Tishner's Ryan Thompson at 27529 Salem Road. It's a minor subdivision application that has been submitted concerning Article 4 of the Cicero-Jackson Township subdivision control ordinance in order to subdivide a 9.25 acre parcel into three parcels of 5.5 acres, two acres, and 1.71 acres. Mr. Zawadzki, from what I understand, this needs to be tabled this evening?

Yes, sir. We would ask that the board consider tabling this. The notification process to the newspaper did not get done on time. Therefore, we cannot hear this tonight.

Thank you, Mr. Zawadzki. If the board's okay with that, I would look for a motion to table this petition.

So moved, Dennis Johnson.

Thank you, Mr. Johnson.

Second. Jacob Everett.

Thank you, Mr. Everett. We have a motion and a second to table this docket. All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Thank you. Next, moving on to docket number PC-0626-06-R3PD, petitioner's Estridge Homes. And it is a property address. I will read this. 78 acres of 100.3 acre parcel on the west side of Deming Road and one half mile south of East 236th Street in Ciswell. and 40 acre partial on the east side of Deming Road and one quarter mile south of East 236th Street in Cicero. A major subdivision application has been submitted concerning Article 5 of the Cicero Jackson Township Subdivision Control Ordinance in order to subdivide 78 acres of 100.3 acre partial on the west side of Deming Road and one mile south of East 236th Street into 84 lots, and to subdivide a 40-acre parcel on the east side of Deming Road and one quarter mile south of East 236th into 64 lots. So that being said, I'll just clarify something this evening just so everyone has a little understanding what the board will be looking at. So the petition tonight is Estridge Homes. And I think everyone here probably was at the previous meeting, so you know they were approved for a rezone request previously. And then they went through the PUD process and were approved by the town council for their PUD. So with that being said, they're here tonight to present their primary plat. And the PE ordinance and the previous approvals were established for the framework for the subdivision that will be reviewed this evening by the Planning Commission. The primary plat being presented this evening serves as the fundamental tool that will outline the proposed subdivision layout. and how the land will be subdivided. The primary plan, which the Board will be reviewing this evening, is a surveyed map which shows how the land will be divided, the exact boundaries, lot dimensions, street layout, drainage, other improvements, for the Board to review and they must align with the previous approved PUD ordinance as well as the R3 underlying zoning standards that were not included in that PUD ordinance. So with that being said, if this meets the approved PUD and underlying R3 zoning standards, then this Commission is required to approve this. for their primary plat, but we will review those to make sure that their plat meets what they had committed to and what was previously approved. It's not an opportunity for us to go back and revisit the PUD and try to amend the PUD since that was already approved. It's not an opportunity for us to go back and try to rezone the property. So we're strictly focused on the primary plat the night and that it conforms with the ordinances and the PUD ordinance that was before us previously. So with that being said, I will ask the petitioner to step forward. State your name and address for their records. And then tell us a little bit about what you're proposing this evening for your primary plant and your subdivision.

Good evening, members of the Plant Commission. For the record, my name is Matt Skelton with Church Church Headland Antrim with offices at 2 North 9th Street in Noblesville. With me this evening from my office is Cody Leach, a land use professional, recently joined our firm. And I know he's excited to be here this evening. And then with Estridge Homes, Clint Mitchell, Rob McGraw, Roger Foster, and Peyton Hartz are here. Also, our engineer with Kimley Horn, Brad Huff, has joined us as well in case there's any technical questions. As you may recall, it's been nearly a year. We were approved by the Cicero Town Council unanimously for the Hinkle Ridge PUD project in August of last year. We are before you this evening, as Mr. Strong pointed out, for a public hearing for the primary plat for Hinkle Ridge subdivision. Just to As a refresher, I think you probably already have all this information in front of you. I won't spend a lot of time on details unless there are questions. We are proposing 148 home sites. We were approved, I think, for 172, so there's been a reduction since the zoning was approved. We realize, of course, this has very little to do with the ministerial review that is before you this evening. but the homes are still the same high-level homes that we discussed, $750,000 to $2 million homes. The Hinkle Ridge subdivision has been designed. What I see that you have in front of you has been designed in compliance with the applicable zoning ordinance standards and the PUD ordinance. I think a determination has been made to that effect, or we would not have been docketed, and this hearing would not be occurring. We are not requesting any waivers. If approved here, the Estridge intends to initiate dirt work yet this year. We are happy to respond to any questions that you may have, and we would appreciate your positive consideration this evening.

Comments, questions by board members at this particular time?

What caused the reduction in the number of homes?

Well, so what was approved as part of the PUD was a concept plan. I mean, there's a lot of thoughtfully prepared concept plan, but once engineering took place, I mean, there were things that had to shift around a little bit, so it just resulted in the elimination of some lots, not the least of which are There's no longer any locks where the rear yard space 236. Okay.

The new number, sorry, what's the new number?

It's in your agenda. 148. Yeah, 148 total.

There was no reduction in the amenities that were planned? No. Just the number of houses?

Amenities are the same. The reductions that occurred were not the estate lots. It was the smaller lots, the 62s and the 70s. I forget what they are. The smaller. 77. At the north side of the

Not the really nice kind of circle thing. The other one.

Right here.

These guys, like the top of the H. I haven't seen those in practice. Is that like a modified circle or cul-de-sac or what is that?

You go to the first. Well, you can just go to the top page of this. Just out of curiosity. We're talking about the same thing. Clint Mitchell, the CEO of Estridge Homes at 865 West Carmel Drive.

Tell them about this page.

I'm on the very last page, if you want. This is like the overall site plan. Simplifies it, I would say. But all the other stuff.

This one.

No, keep going. One more right there. Oh, no.

This one here?

No.

All the way.

I've never seen those in practice.

Yeah, so this area is going up towards 236th Street. As you can kind of see, Matt pointed it out, but this is where we, kind of this entire area, if you look down the center, we eliminated quite a few homes, most of the smaller home sites. And 24 in total is what we eliminated from the previous plan. But everything that was along 236th Street, we knew those are always the toughest homes for us to sell, and that was what we probably got the most public feedback on. And so we just totally eliminated those. We've created there enough of a turnaround for fire, but it's not a full cul-de-sac or circle-type drive. If you can see, there's really three home sites past the main street there. So it's a limited number of homes. But it was a way to access that, but then to not have a complete circle coming around that would have homes on 236th Street. So we've left, it's a little hard to tell in this because it's not colorized, but kind of the entire center of that is all the wavy circles. Those are trails. And so we've left the center of it. It's going to be natural green space, kind of native prairie grass is the plan with trails going throughout. And so the question earlier about amenities, we definitely haven't reduced them. We've actually increased the green space pretty substantially by eliminating those homes. There'll be soft amenities, but if anything, there's a bit more in amenity and park area.

It's definitely noticed. I mean, when I looked through it, I started to do my best to count because I didn't see the total number. And I think it looks really good for the neighborhood personally. So that's my opinion. It's an improvement, I think. Thank you.

I mean, it's going to feel better to people driving by. I think everyone living there will have a little more open space. And we also eliminated some of the homes along Deming Road. Back to that. We still have some, but we eliminated about half of those. So I think it's going to have a better overall feel.

I did have one question. I can't remember. Is there a path going, and this maybe isn't for this discussion, is there a path going from the entry up to 236th Trail? Are we connecting from the entry of the main neighborhood up to the path?

There will be, we'll have a path along Deming Road. Okay, cool. On the west side of Deming, we'll have a path that entire way going to 236. Okay. And then I think we'll likely have one coming out of the neighborhood right there too, a direct access to the path that's currently there.

Yeah, it shows one. Okay.

No, we we that's not something we want and we also heard some strong feedback last time that there's really not a desire to have a another cut off a 236 those that's we prefer not to have it we've We've added an additional one on Deming Road, as you can see here, to improve traffic flow and life safety and just have a better flow from the two sides of the neighborhood as opposed to having everyone coming in and out of one place.

And you said those turnarounds are designed so that public safety can get in and out of there.

Yes, I don't know if we're at the maximum. There's a maximum length that you can do that type of a turnaround. You can't do it 20 homes deep. We've done it before in other neighborhoods.

Question on the property coming off of Anthony.

Yes.

That in and out where you have the median going down the middle. There was discussion before about that being approved. because of the second exit. And so the median was inlet and out, you're proposing as the two. And I had a discussion with the fire department that seemed to have a concern with that. Was that ever addressed?

Maybe you can, you've been part of the meeting. I will say the, I remember the previous discussion. I think it was that discussion we got into some detail on Deming Road and we had one entrance and we had a pretty wide median. But it applies here, too. And so you had the discussions. Do you want to? Sure.

I like what you've done on Deming. Yeah.

So I'm Roger Foster with Estridge Homes, 645 West Carmel Drive. Yeah, we discussed the west side. limited amount of home sites there what i remember from last discussion since there was the median we had committed to making sure there was no parking signs posted on either side of the inlet or the eastbound or the westbound so that way if there was a life safety emergency there would still always be one dedicated way to get out What was the buyer's review that would be worth your time? Buyer's review was that site, because of the amount of home sites we were at, we were below the threshold of what would typically require a second entrance.

Did you reduce any homes in that site?

Did not.

I think one.

I'm not sure that we changed that side. The changes were primarily in the center, maybe a couple of differences on the far right as we look at it here. You might be right on the exact count. I don't remember making changes to the estate section.

So, but the fire signed off on it?

Yeah, there was no commitments at the PUD when we went through our zoning. There was no commitments needed or no waivers requested at that point to get us through.

I think where my confusion was then, I think on the other, on the Deming Road, it was the number of houses that caused the issue. So thank you for addressing that. And it's possible that that just didn't meet the standard. So you're adapting that by signage and things like that. Okay.

And with that same concession for Anthony's, I'm sorry, but both sides of Deming Road, into both sides, whether going to the east or going to the west, there's two entrances there now to cover both of that.

Good.

So going back to in your PUD, just for clarification, so you were approved up to 172 homes. So you're at that 148, I believe it is. So you're definitely under that 172 that you were approved for at that initial PUD process. So you're well under that. That's right. Those are the numbers. Just wanted to clarify that it was up to. Okay.

Is that what it is? Other comments, questions by the board members at this particular time?

So before we open the meeting for public hearing, I'll make a few comments. I always do. But from that standpoint, as we mentioned earlier, you know, we're strictly looking at the primary plat tonight and what they're presenting for us. And that's what the board will review. And so you'll have an opportunity to, you know, make your comments and share your concerns or whatever might be with this board during the public hearing portion of it. But once we open the public hearing, if you would step forward, state your name and address for the records. And we'll allow probably this evening, we'll allow those two minutes for everyone. And hopefully that'll be enough so we're very consistent on that and we try to be consistent with that. We'd like for you to address all your comments to the board, not to each other. And if you have questions, we'll certainly get back to those questions and ask those of the petitioner at the particular time. Mr. Zawadzki will be our timekeeper over here. And with that being said, I would look for a motion to open the public hearing.

So moved, Harrison Masani.

Thank you, Mr. Masani.

Second, Dennis Johnson.

Thank you, Mr. Johnson. We have a motion and a second to open the public hearing. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, is there anyone from the public that would like to address the board this evening?

Hi, my name is Linda Hodgen. I reside at 3525 East 236th Street. My question is, how tall is the border going to be around me? Because they seem to be the closest to my house. And how close is the pond behind me on my property line also? And just to be correct, how many houses is to the east of me? And that's between my house and Deming Road.

Okay. Thank you. We'll get you some answers.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Any, would you, would you like to address that at this particular time? Mr. Mitchell or?

i'll address those and hopefully i can get some calculus on the pond distance because i don't know that one so we have directly east of your property there are six home sites previously it showed seven we eliminated one of those that would back up to this property we have a 30-foot wide buffer consistent with what we showed previously and what was approved i'm going to ask roger on any birming we will be doing landscaping we have the landscape plans have not been submitted here but we will be doing birming and maybe you can speak to the birming and then if you've calculated the distance of that pond that's behind the property

I think out of the TAC meeting, it was mentioned the potential of the Birmingham to give them a little extra protection and some additional buffing.

We're going to do as much as we can because that's kind of both property owners will want that. But maybe you can talk about what business we have to work with.

Yeah. So in that 30 foot, we could typically get anywhere from a five to an eight foot. tall berm if we're really pushing. We will, Estridge has a history of trying to get even more out of that if we can to get up taller. Obviously we'll have concerns to make sure that there's no drainage being dammed up at that berm for our neighbor and we will work through those while we're going through our construction drawings. making sure that all that's being looked at and addressed as far as the actual height of the berm i'd love to tell you i could give you a firm number now but that's more one of those things we get out there and build it doesn't do anybody good to put a berm that's super tall that can't be maintained and then just starts looking terrible so but typically i would say a five to eight foot firm with some undulation and then try to make it as pretty as possible okay

And then if there's any, and I don't know for sure, but if there's any existing trees, those get left, but then also you'll be planting numerous trees as well?

Correct, yeah. We have in numerous places called out in the primary plaque existing trees to remain where feasible. There will be infrastructure in some of these places that will come through, but our full intention as shown on the drawings, as well as when we get into landscape drawings at a construction drawing phase, is to maintain any existing trees.

And then I think the last piece of that was your pond. There was a question in regards to how close that was.

I can probably wing it if I can have a few minutes looking at a scale here. Okay.

You certainly don't need to answer it this second. We'll get back to you on that.

What's your setback from that property line? Did you say a 30 on all sides?

We're a 30 for the easement, and then the rear... Oh, for the buffer. Yeah, 30 for the buffer. And then the setback, the rear setback, oh boy, I should know this from the PUD. We've not changed it from the PUD, I know that. Let me get that answer dealt with the problem.

So the 30 feet would be to the new home's property line. Yeah. And then a further setback that will confirm the number of it. So you have these two numbers together.

Your rear is 20 feet, if I remember.

So 20 feet then from the property line, which is already a 30-foot buffer, which is where that in the buffer would be the landscaping, trees, and the firming that we'll do. And they'll also be berming in the back of the property in between the neighbor's property and the new pond that will be put in.

Thank you. You look like you want to say one more thing.

My only other thing I forgot to say is with the berm, as I was thinking, the higher the better because the good old county had to put my septic system out there. So the higher the trees, they wouldn't be fair with my septic system in the future.

Okay. Thank you. And that was discussed, you know, just so you know that trying to get you some extra buffering in there. So thank you. I appreciate that. Yes. Okay. Anyone else from the public that would like to speak to the board this evening? Step forward, sir. State your name and address for the records, please.

Sam Scott, 231st Street. It's actually 4004th, 231st Street, at the corner of Deming Road and 231st Street. Okay. Since they're not doing construction on 236th Street this year, we notice now at the morning, and it will be the same thing at night, a huge amount of traffic on 236th Street. We're adding 200 more homes, approximately, or 200 more people going out to that intersection every morning. And we know from about two years ago, a person was killed at that corner coming from Frankton. So traffic comes all the way from Frankton to this corner through that area. And there's more and more homes being built here in Cicero and all that. So traffic's going to get built. Right now, there's not even an extra lane to pull over to. Now, this may not be the issue of the board, but I probably need your help when I go to the county to get that corrected. And there's also not a street sign there at the corner of 236th and Deming Road. So suggestions from the board on how we approach that would be helpful.

So we'll have to get that passed along to the county. The county would have to make sure the sign got there and some of the things you're addressing. So in this project, there will be passing blisters and things as well. And there will be some upgrades to some of the roads in this project as well.

I assume.

So.

I hope they address the problem before it's too late.

Thank you. Just a second. Is there anyone else that would like to step forward at this particular point? Okay. Seeing no one, I would look for a motion to close the public hearing. I was going to let him address the rest of the comments, but step forward if you'd like to do it now. I was going to have you do it after a public comment, but that's fine.

Ballpark on the Waters and from your property line. Top of bank. the very top of the pond would be anywhere 50 to 60 feet from your property line. But then to the water, because the water's not at the top of the bank, the water's down, I'm getting around 100 to 125. Sorry, this is the scale I'm trying to do off the paper. Thank you.

Motion to close public comment.

Second, Dennis Johnson.

Okay, we have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Like sign. Okay, further discussion by board members. Before we do that, I will reach out to Mr. Zawadzki and ask him a question. Mr. Zawadzki, you've had an opportunity to review the PUD. I did. And from that standpoint, Does the primary plat, in your opinion, conform to the PUD and our underlying zoning of R3? It does. Thank you, Mr. Zawadzki. I appreciate that. Thank you. Okay. Further discussion by board members? So I do have a few questions. I'm going to guess you're going to phase this project. So it'll be in three phases, four phases, or do you know at this particular time?

Yes, it will be phased. I mean, the most critical and important one first is the reconstruction of the Rebus Carson drain. So that will start in the fall, go through the winter. So we have to do that before we can develop any of the sections. But the biggest center section will be our phase one. And then phase two would at least include the far right on the east side of Deming. We'll have to decide if we include the estate, the far left estate section in that phase two. So it's either, will be probably two or three phases. It'll depend a little bit on how sales take off and the pace that we have on phase one. But we'll, there are three different price points and product types, so it very well could work to bring kind of all of them in it at one time, but two to three phases after we get the reconstruction of the drain.

I was asking the question from, you know, being able to review your construction plans, we'll still need to do that for each of your phases, as well as your secondary plats. So I just wanted to make sure that sort of that we understood that a little bit more. And we do appreciate you adding the second entrance and exit there on Deming Road. I know that was a concern of the fire department. So for, thank you for taking a look at that as well. You're welcome. Question on the amenities, since that was brought up that you're still doing amenities. I know you made some commitments and I think you have a list of those commitments. And one of those was, if I'm not mistaken, that. those amenities would go in year 2027 or year number two. So based upon that, you, if you started in 2026, if I remember correctly.

So, yeah, we, um, We will be starting homes in 2026. There's been a lot of engineering and legal drain work that's been taking place over the last year to get to this point. So it's likely that year two is really 2028 when we would have the pool amenity. That's when we'll be developing that section, the east side of Deming. And so that is one of the amenities we showed in our zoning. There'll be a park there with a pool and kind of some sort of small pool house. And then we'll have further amenities that are built within the wooded area, the flood zone area that kind of splits the whole property in this central park area. So there'll be trails and we're building a pedestrian bridge and a lot of other points of interest that we consider a strong part of the amenities, but

as far as the the pool area specifically that's um still in what i'm considering year two i mean we may do a couple months this year of drain work but um really probably 2028 is when that will come okay i think the other thing that i had and i briefly i think we mentioned this attack meeting was your covenants and restrictions as far as that the maybe trying to get those so we could have a doc team to look at that through the construction plan process and then

Yeah, we have kind of templates for those every time we do, but we'll adjust for this neighborhood, but we'll be putting those together and can get those to you. Okay, very good.

And I think I mentioned to you a concern that I had there was how the sidewalks and trails are going to be maintained down the road because I know they'll need maintenance and who's going to be responsible for those. You never know. Somebody might annex that way. You know, Sheridan might annex that way. Cicero might annex that way or who knows. So just making sure that those are maintained in the future. Yeah. They would be responsibility to HOA, like all the amenities. Okay. Just would like to see those called out. As far as working with the county highway department, I know they were referencing and passing blister. And I'm not sure that you addressed it in this particular set of plans, but you will address that from that standpoint.

We will. Roger, is there anything you want to comment? I know we have a passing blister that we're planning on 236th Street and then improvements otherwise on Deming Road that we'll be doing kind of the length of our property. Okay.

Just to add on to that, for confirmation, the county will have to approve all the engineering of everything going on on Deming, right? Right, exactly.

Is there any passing lane at Anthony? Well... Or Blister?

Yeah, there's the A cell, B cell on the...

I think he's talking about our estate section entrance.

Yeah. We'll be working with County Highway and with our civil engineer. We're working to try to bring that A cell, B cell in and up on our side to hopefully avoid having to have a passenger disturb or anything on the west side of the entrance.

And I think that was one of your commitments out of the traffic study. I believe there was four items that were called out. And if I'm not mistaken, that was in those list of commitments that you committed to as part of your PUD process as well.

I think it was number two, road improvements will be installed by the developer consistent with the recommendations of a traffic study prepared by Coronado dated May 25. That's right.

because the orange and the current rain yes and you're picking that up just south of 236th street or are you addressing it on the east side we are so we're we're retaining everything that's from upstream onto our side we have

definitely more retention ponds than would be normal. So we're retaining the drain outlet from north of us, and then we're reconstructing everything through our property, and I think it goes close to a mile south that we're reconstructing.

I think you're close to 216th. 226th, sorry. Sorry. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

And from that perspective, you'll continue to work with the surveyor's office because I know they'll have sign-off on your project as well.

We're in the process of getting those approvals and getting permitting for that. It's ongoing, kind of in parallel with this, but getting those approvals.

Sure. Other comments, questions by board members?

Sure.

Your passing blister on 236 would probably be good for the community and yourselves as far as anything that's coming off 236 on the Denon Road is fair. Agreed.

We'll work with County Highway on that and make sure that we talk about possibility, not necessarily bringing that on from day one, especially if we might try to phase that in on maybe our second set of plans.

You guys aren't sure where that, but anybody who turns on Denton Road knows that for sure. 236 is definitely on Denton Road.

Well, it looks like that you've included everything that, you know, that you said you would include into it from your PUD and then from our standards. It looked like everything was incorporated in there, and we certainly appreciate you. You're doing that as well as, you know, your commitments, because I think those are some important things. I appreciate you putting those in writing and making those part of the PUD. So when we get down the road, there's no misunderstanding of what the expectations are, and that's one of the main reasons of going through the primary plat, as you know. plates the groundwork moving forward that will base those construction plans on, and then your secondary plat approval or final plat approval. So if no other questions or comments for the board, then all of our motions are done in an affirmative. It doesn't necessarily mean that's the way the motion would go, but anyway, I would look for a motion.

Mr. Chairman, Harrison signed moving to approve docket number PC-0626-06-R3PE. Mr. Chairman, I'll second that.

OK. And we're approving their subdividing of the property as well as their primary plant? OK. So we have a motion and a second. With that, I'll do a roll call vote. Mr. Thomas.

Approved.

Mr. Hebner.

Approved.

Mrs. Kowalski.

Approved.

Mr. Masani.

Approved.

Mr. Schrempf.

Approved.

Mr. Johnson. Approved. Mr. Everett. Approved. Mr. Dillard.

Approved.

And Dan Strong, I approve. So if you'll continue to work with Mr. Zawadzki through the rest of the process. We certainly appreciate it. And like I said earlier, welcome to the area. We look forward to seeing your development and how it gets done and continuing to work with you. So thank you very much. Give everyone a few seconds to leave if you want, or you're welcome to stay for the rest of the meeting. Thank you for all coming, though. Thank you for the comments. Moving on to plan director report, Mr. Zelotsky.

Yeah, good evening, plan commission. I have here in front of me the most recent version of the director's report. This is for May of 2026. Permanent revenue for the month of May 26 was $5,697. Brings us up to a year today to $47,708. At the same time last year, May of 25, we were at $4,629 for the month and $17,906 for the year. That's the difference for the month of May, a plus $1,068 and a plus for the year as well of $29,000. We issued a total of 34 building permits for May of 2026. 22 of those were for within the corporate limits, no new homes there though. And we issued another 12 out in Jackson Township, one new home out there. We had one right of way permit extension this month. Estimated cost of these projects permitted is $1,408,535. Let's see. The next BZA meeting is scheduled right here for June 21st, 2026. We do have items on the agenda, and we will meet. That's my report. Anybody have any questions for me?

I got a question on June 21st. I stopped on Sunday. I think you meant June 18th.

I did mean June 18th. Apologize for that. Next BZA meeting is scheduled for June 18th, 2026. Thank you for that, Mr. Thomas.

Just a quick question on the building permits. For this development, when do those come online when they start filing for building each of those homes?

That's correct. The first step in that process will be an improvement location permit, and that's for the site work, the streets, the utilities, the ponds, all that stuff. And then when they want to build the first house, they'll submit me those drawings. I will approve every one, or not, one by one.

And any idea of how many we did last year compared to where we might be if this comes online?

I can get you that information.

I don't have it right here in front of me though.

We're having a much better year this year, I'll tell you that.

I think the only thing you can say to that in regards to when you were working through Tamarack and Auburn estates that significantly increased your permits as well as your number of inspections and some of those things. And then as those developed out, that sort of went down. So now this will probably start that trend back up somewhat.

Yes, sir. That's exactly what we expect.

Any other questions, comments for Mr. Swatsky? Not moving on the president's report. I really don't have a lot this evening other than, uh, thank all of you for being here and, uh, working through the primary plat and continuing the process for Estridge Homes at this particular time. And I think in the near future, you know, we'll want to, everyone has the opportunity to look at the proposal that I put together for when we go out and look for a consulting firm sometime this fall to continue to look at that. If you have any thoughts, suggestions or anything, make notes on it, make sure we get it or send us an email with your thoughts and suggestions. We'd greatly appreciate it. Other than that, that's all I had. Moving on to legal counsel report.

I got nothing.

Thank you. Being Mr. Culp's not here this evening, we will move on to board member comments. Anything board member comments?

Yes.

Question on the next item, the next meeting. We're not meeting in July?

No, we will meet in July.

So that should be July 8th then?

That would be correct.

Okay. Just making sure. Because I don't want to show up if I didn't have to be here.

This is tough, you guys.

So any other board member comments? Seeing none, then our next planning commission meeting would be July 8th here at Town Hall at 7 o'clock p.m. And with that, I would look for a motion to adjourn.

Mr. President, Dennis Schrempf, I move we adjourn.

Thank you, Mr. Schrempf.

And Mr. President, Ford Heppner, I second that.

Thank you, Mr. Heppner. We have a motion and a second to adjourn our meeting. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed?