Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. Welcome to the Plan Commission, City of Franklin, Indiana. It is September the 15th, 2026 at 6 p.m. Let's begin with a roll call and determination of a quorum.

Bill Carson. Here. Michael Sponger.

Here. Suzanne Finley. Here.

John Kemski. Here.

Here.

Michelle Stringer.

Here.

Matt McElroy.

Here. Thank you. Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. Thank you. It is time to approve the minutes from the last meeting, which is August the 16th, 2026. Do we have any changes, errors, omissions, et cetera?

Good job, Rachel.

Great job.

Thank you. Seeing none, we'll entertain a motion to approve.

I make a motion to approve the minutes from 1826. Second.

Motion made and seconded. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

They are approved.

Okay, in order to save time tonight, we're going to do a swearing-in all together. Anybody who would like to speak either for or against one of the petitions tonight, please go ahead and stand and be sworn in together, and that'll save time later.

You solemnly swear, affirm any testimony you give tonight, be the truth, hold truth, and know that by the truth, self, you've got. Thank you, gentlemen.

Thank you. Time for a report of officers and committees. We have a technical review committee report from August the 20th. Joanna? Joanna?

We have had one technical review committee meeting since our last meeting. That was on August 20th. Actually, the entire agenda for that meeting is your entire agenda for this evening, so I will let them go ahead and introduce each of those separately.

Okay, thank you. Is there any old business tonight?

There's no old business.

Okay, moving on to new business then. I see PC2614, a primary platform, Wawa Subdivision 2026. Would you introduce us to that, please?

This is a request for a primary plat, is the Wawa subdivision 2026. The property is located at the northeast corner of Earlywood Drive in US 31 and is approximately 10.4 acres. The request before you is for commercial subdivision to do be divided with a maximum of four lots. If this looks familiar, it should, as this had been before you previously in January of 25. However, that primary plot was substantially different. It was a two-lot commercial subdivision, and this one will be a maximum of four. A couple of the modifications of that, is previously the entire south portion was for the Wawa Fuel Center and Market. The area immediately north of that was proposed to be the detention area, and then the area north of that was proposed to be Lot 2. With this request, the south lot is still proposed to be the Wawa Fuel Center and Market. The lot immediately north of there, we have had conversations on a proposed use. We have not seen an official site development plan for that particular piece. And then the detention pond is moved north of where it was previously proposed. And then that far north area is actually proposed as a block with the potential of being divided into no more than two lots. With blocks, those are not buildable until they are replatted. So if this is approved, the option for that north block would be either to be replatted as one piece and become lot 3 or it be platted into two pieces of lot 3 and 4. If they had a proposal of anything outside of that, it would have to come back before the Planning Commission for a revised primary plot. Um, there is a proposed right in only entrance, uh, from us 31 on lot two. And then no access easement along, um, every thoroughfare with the exception of the entrances. So there will be no additional curb cuts than the ones that are shown here. And there was coordination with the Franklin community school corporation with the development of the CUB Academy. So there is cross connectivity proposed on that. I believe that is all that's ready for the Board's consideration and action.

JoAnna, for clarification. Yes. If block A were then subdivided, I understand it has to come back, but if block A were then subdivided, the potential for the entire development would be five lots. Is that accurate? As proposed, it would be four lots. But as proposed, so block A could come back and be divided into two?

What they have marked as lot three is actually supposed to be a common area. Okay. Okay. Thank you for that clarification.

Because that's where the stormwater would be.

Correct. The detention systems, when they are shared, are required to be in common areas. They're not actually placed in lots. And then that is one of the recommendations that staff will provide at the end of clarifying that that lot three would need to be relabeled as common area. Okay. Thank you.

Obviously, it needs to be relabeled so we don't get confused. Thank you.

All right. I think it's ready to be heard. Who speaks for Wawa? Please tell us your name and we're ready for your presentation.

My name is Eric Boyd. I'm with CESO. And Joanna has done an excellent job of telling you about the site. Just some facts about Wawa. They started as a cast iron foundry in 1803. They transitioned into a textile factory in the mid-1800s and then moved into a dairy farm in 1902. and then they opened their first Wawa store in 1964 as a dairy products outlet for their farm. From there, they grew to over 1,200 stores currently. They started selling gasoline in the mid-1990s, and they currently have 950 stores that sell gasoline, but they were a convenience store before they were a gasoline sales place, so they feel like that gasoline is an add-on for them. They now have, like I said, approximately 1,200 convenience stores. They sell fresh food, built-to-order sandwiches they call hoagies, wraps, specialty beverages, pizza, et cetera. And then they have free air pumps at all the stores and free ATMs at their stores as well. So they provide... you know, convenient services at these stores above and beyond just quick food and gasoline. You can see the original Wawa Market, the store number one there, and the old foundry and example. Can we switch to the next slide, please? So as Joanna had mentioned, we're looking at three lots, which we will correct the common area to say common area instead of lot three. And our goal is that we will eventually be bringing in plans for car wash in the lot directly north of the C-Store lot as we're showing on there. We do have plans prepared for that that we're working on We should be getting those into the portal here by October 1st, I think. So be on the lookout for those. Next slide, please. So this is, again, these exterior elevations. They should look very familiar to you. This is with the same elevations that we showed the last time. There's the front and the back of the store. Next slide is the left and the right side of the store. And then I think we have one more that's three-dimensional rendering. And then next is what the fuel island would look like and the trash enclosure. So you can see that it matches up with what the building elevations look like. So they're and then we threw in an extra slide of what the car wash is going to be proposed to look like and it should be I think we've done our best effort to make it match what you guys have for your standards so but you'll get a chance to comment on that later when we actually officially submit that but just wanted you guys to see what it what we're proposing it to look like and I think the the criteria for decisions I think Joanna had mentioned those already so Any questions for us on this?

Other than it's fun to say Wawa, what's the origin of the name?

Wawa is Native American. I can't remember the tribe, but it's Native American for goose.

That's right. I think I asked you that the last time.

Okay, I think I remember that. That's right.

Okay, would anyone else in the audience like to speak either for or against the petition? Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing, and we'll go take questions from the board.

No questions?

Okay, I think we're ready to take action then. Oh, we need a staff recommendation, don't we?

Staff would recommend approval of the primary plat with ten conditions. One, the primary plat shall be signed and stamped either by a land surveyor or engineer registered in the State of Indiana. Two, half right of way of 35 feet shall be dedicated to the City of Franklin for Earlywood Drive. Three, no access easements shall be provided along US 31 Morton Street, Earlywood Drive and Sloan Drive frontages. with the exception of the location of the proposed entrance consisted with the plans received. Four, the entrance from US 31 Morton Street shall be restricted to write-in only. Five, access easement on lot two is to be extended south to the shared property line with lot one. Subset A, full access traffic patterns for lot two shall be reviewed and approved by the city engineer. Subset B, access easement to be modified to include entire area of improvements as approved by city engineer. Six, INDOT approval shall be provided for the proposed right-in entrance along US 31 Morton Street. Seven, final entrance locations along the interior access drives will be approved through the secondary plat and construction plan review process and site development plan. Eight, A written maintenance agreement is required for all access easements and must be approved by planning staff and the city attorney. The written agreement shall include but is not limited to the following items, maintenance, snow removal, ownership, and liability. Nine, the front setback along US 31 Morton Street shall be a minimum of 50 feet and along Sloan Drive a minimum of 20 feet. And ten, lot three to be labeled as common area.

Okay, and that's a lot of conditions. For the record, does the petitioner agree to all of the conditions as listed?

Yeah, I'm Pat Moon with Wawa. I just had one question for number eight. We should do an REA agreement. Is that sufficient for addressing that? It's recorded and tied to all the lots that are developed in the development, or you need a specific maintenance agreement?

If it includes the required Um, information on the maintenance, no removal and it's recorded.

Okay.

As long as we review it and approve it, you know, that review copy of that.

And if it's not sufficient, we'll come, we'll get that taken care of, but other than that, yeah, we're fine.

Whatever we call it is fine, but we wanna review it and approve it before, before it gets recorded. Yep. Not the other way around. We get a lot of people record and say, oh, here's what we did. And then we have to correct it. Oh, I know. Get it ahead of time, please.

I'll try to make sure we don't do that. Yeah.

I appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you. It's too late to ask questions, isn't it?

I'll take questions.

I just wondered, there won't be any trucks coming to this area?

It's not set for semi-traffic at all, no. There will be delivery vehicles. We have a grocery truck, and individual vendors will have their small box trucks and things like that you see for Pepsi and Coke. But we do have one semi-grocery delivery truck they serve. Uh, probably 20 different stores. So, but they'll come in with all the bakery goods, um, once a day.

Okay. Thank you.

Okay.

I think, uh, we're ready for a motion then I make a motion to approve PC 26, 14 with staff recommendations included.

Second.

Okay. Let's have a roll call vote then please. Rachel.

I have them. Georgiana Haltham.

Did you speak my name? Georgiana. Yeah. Yes.

Bill Carson.

Yes.

Michael Spalmer.

Yes.

Suzanne Finley. Yes. John Kennedy. Yes. Iris Mallon.

Yes.

Michelle Stringer.

Yes.

Matt McElroy.

Yes.

All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. We'll move on then to PC 2615 as an annexation and PC 2616, which is a zone map amendment. This is Harmony Group annexation and zone map amendment. Joanna, would you like to introduce us to that?

Sure. So the proposal before you from Harmony Group LLC is a request for annexation and zoning of approximately 38 or 34 acres. It is located on the south side of State Road 44 and east of 5549 East State Road 44 and 8189 Forest Road. That property has currently not been annexed, which is why it is before us this evening. The current zoning in Johnson County is agriculture and their proposed zoning is industrial light. As you can see on this vicinity map, Almost the entire property is currently encumbered by the regulated floodplain. So any development on the site would be required to meet federal state and local floodplain requirements. Um, the. Stream itself is the Amity open ditch, which is also a legal drain. So the Johnson county drainage board also has authority, um, regarding development on this site in regard to encroachments within their easement and also, um, outlet and drainage. When there are different drainage requirements between the jurisdictions, the drainage requirements that are the most restrictive are the ones that are enforced. Um, so something that might be permitted to be done per city of Franklin regulations may not meet the minimum standards of the Johnson county drainage board or vice versa. The property meets the contiguous requirements and 100% of the owners of the property are the petitioner. Also to note, the City of Franklin did install a sanitary sewer interceptor along the eastern portion of the subject site and then runs along the north side of the Amity ditch. Prior to that installation, This site was not served by sanitary sewer. There is public water on the South side of state road 44. However, it does terminate at the Northeast corner of 81 89 forest, which is that industrial building. Um, so that would need to be extended, which is about 660 feet. Um, Johnson county REMC has had a number of discussions with the city of Franklin, making us aware that there is limited available power for future development within this area. without the construction of a new substation. So that is one of the things that we need to take in consideration with developments that will obviously need power. In addition, as we're all familiar, properties on the east side of I-65 are located in the Needham Fire Protection District. Indiana code outlines that properties that are located within a fire protection district may not take effect until the 2nd January 1 following the date the ordinance is adopted. So if the ordinance is adopted by city council in 2026, the earliest it would take effect by state law would be January of 28. If it was adopted in 27, then that would be January of 29. However, if the petitioner requests from the need and fire protection district, um, to be removed and through the Johnson county commissioners. Um, that is something that can be done. That is a process that then has to be, um, time just right on when those things occur. Um, if the property is annexed and zoned in order to be developed, they would be required to go through the primary plat, secondary plat construction plan, and then individual site development plans for each of the lots. The petitioner did provide a concept plan. showing a development of three lots. Always want to note that with annexations and rezonings, we are not reviewing and improving that concept plan. We are only reviewing and approving or recommending approval of the annexation and rezoning. So there's no guarantee what was provided as a concept plan is actually what gets developed. So always want to make sure that that is out there. And it is ready for the board's consideration and action.

Thank you. Who speaks for Harmony Group? Tell us your name and we're ready for your presentation.

Thank you. For the record, my name is David Gilman. My address is 211 South River Avenue, Suite H, Indianapolis, Indiana, 46219. The request that we were putting before the plan commission and eventually or hopefully the city council is to annex and rezone this 34 acres for light industrial. Out of the 34 acres we will have a potential of three lots mostly focused on the western portion of the property outside of the floodway area that would consist of about 15.5 acres. The rest of the floodway property that abuts Amity Ditch will be protected with the common area. Any future development as Joanna mentioned will need to meet the city, county, state and federal requirements for floodplain management, drainage and environmental protection. Detailed engineering will need to occur during the subdivision plaque construction plan and development plan reviews and we are committed to working through that process with the TAC and all the review agencies. The annexation criteria, we think that supported by the Franklin Township comprehensive plan by directing employment focused development to a corridor identified for long term industrial growth and with the installation of the interceptor sewer. We think the light industrial district does provide compatible low impact uses that would be consistent with the city's vision for this area. The site is directly adjacent to city limits, making the annexation a logical and efficient extension of Franklin's jurisdiction. City utilities that are not readily available could be extended. We need to coordinate with the water service through NDOT applying or installing a water main through their right of way. And again, the engineering will occur during our subdivision and development plan review. We understand that fire service will require additional steps outside this process and we are committed to working through those requirements with the Needham Volunteer Fire Department and the county. In closing, our light industrial zoning we hope would strengthen the city's employment base and support the long-range economic goals for the city and we feel that if designed properly and following through with the requirements of the review by TAC in our various development stages and our plan reviews, that this request would promote orderly development. We think it would protect surrounding property values but not introducing incompatible land uses. And we think it would maintain compatibility with the nearby developed area and the area that's planned for this corridor. With that, I'll make myself available for questions.

Thank you. Uh, would anyone in the audience like to speak either for or against the petition this evening? Seeing none, we will close the public hearing and we are open for questions, comments from the board staff recommendation. I get, I have one bill. Yeah, go ahead.

Seems that power is going to be limited. Who's going to incur that cost? Is it going to be us, the City of Franklin? No.

I can answer that one real quick. No. The answer is no.

Same with water.

We do not own the water utility. We do not own the electric utility. So that will not be our responsibility or burden to run it. Yes, correct. and the sewer is there and still their responsibility to connect to it, if city council feel appropriate to annex. Because obviously, just looking at the map, there's certainly a lot of site limitations, so how that will ultimately be configured will be one of the challenges, I think, for the petitioner.

Anything else from the board? How about a staff recommendation, then?

This will be two different actions. The first one for annexation, staff would recommend a favorable recommendation be forwarded to City Council. In regard to the rezoning, if the Planning Commission finds that sufficient evidence has been provided by the petitioner in regard to the five decision criteria listed above, Staff would recommend a favorable recommendation be forwarded to the City Council to rezone the subject property to industrial light with the following land uses being prohibited due to the location of the amity ditch and regulated floodplain. There's seven that are proposed. One, contractor's warehouse and storage facility. Two, commercial dry cleaners. Three, animal shelter. Four, kennel. Five, truck stop and travel center. Six, truck freight terminal and trucking company. And seven, truck sales and service center.

And, Joanna, is that in relation to protecting the watershed area, the floodplain area, and those kinds of restrictions that we take a look at when you've got this kind of

Yes. In regard to the permitted uses in the industrial light, these are the ones that would have the most environmental impact if there was some sort of spill or catastrophe. So in order to protect our waterways, it would be best to keep these uses that are not compatible environmentally from this location.

And without the restrictions, if it was just If it was rezoned without restrictions, they could do those kinds of developments, correct?

If it was straight zoned industrial light without these conditions added, any of the permitted uses, which would include these, would be permitted. Okay, thank you.

Okay, let's address the annexation first. We're open to a motion on that annexation only at this time.

With the reminder that the motion is only to forward with either a favorable, unfavorable, or no recommendation. Correct.

Thank you.

I recommend that we send a favorable to the City Council for annexation of PC 2615.

Second.

Motion made and seconded. Can I have a roll call vote, please?

Yes.

Yes. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Okay. Motion carries. That is a favorable recommendation will be sent to city council. Now for the zone map amendment, uh, which carries with it the restrictions. We are open to a motion at this time.

I make a motion to approve the amendment along with the seven restrictions to forward to City Council.

Okay. Motion. You're forwarding a favorable recommendation to City Council?

Yes, with a favorable recommendation. Thank you.

Second.

Okay. Made in second. Let's have a roll call vote on that as well, please.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Okay. It is approved. Thank you, Mr. Gilman.

Joanna, do you have any idea when it next appear on the, I know it won't appear on Monday's, uh, council meeting. So when might it appear?

Um, no sooner than October 5th. Um, but most likely October 19th, the second meeting. Thank you.

Okay. Let's move on then to PC 26 dash 17, uh, primary platform, you know, industrial subdivision, Joanna, would you introduce us please?

Yes. This subject property is located at 1480 Graham street. It's approximately eight acres in size. is located on the west side of Graham Street and north of Arvin Road. The property is currently zoned industrial business development. Last year we did review and approve a site development plan for the entire eight acres that included the construction of one building, parking lot, and storage area for Arrow earth services. They are a contractor's warehouse, which is a permitted use in the zoning district. They are currently, um, in operation and have received their certificate of occupancy. Um, through the process of going through that site development plan, there was consideration that they were proposing to potentially divide this into two lots due to the fact that they did not need that full eight acres, um, for their use. So they are proceeding with that request. Um, when there is already site improvements within a proposed primary plot, one of the things that we have to review is that with the division of the property, that the site improvements are still consistent with all the site develop or with all the lot standards and zoning, uh, requirements, um, that has been confirmed. Um, because they had coordinated and had posed the question early on, it was a lot easier to make sure that all of those landscape requirements and setbacks were already planned. Um, so that does make it a lot easier and it is ready for the board's consideration and action.

Excellent. Thank you. Who speaks for arrow, uh, arrow land group. Tell us your name and we're ready for your presentation, please.

Good evening, Board. Joseph Heck with Projects Plus. Yes, like Joanna said, I represent Arrow Land Group, who is the owner of the eight acres. And like she mentioned, they had their building built in 2015. All their improvements are constructed and installed. And he's just looking to split his lot so he can, he's looking to sell that second lot. He doesn't have a buyer yet for it. He just looks to have it where we can sell off lot two. All the utilities are available at the site already, except lot two will have, lot one has its own drainage, lot two will have its own drainage, so there will be no shared common area between the two lots, and so it'll be all independent of each lot. Water and utilities are all along Graham Street. So we're just looking for board approval of the primary plot so we can submit our secondary plot.

Okay, thank you. Would anyone in the audience like to speak either for or against the petition? Going once, going twice, gone. Board, any questions, comments? How about a staff recommendation?

Staff recommends approval of the primary plat with two conditions. All landscaping requirements along with other development standards will be required to be met on both lots independent from one another to non-conforming site features cannot be created due to subdividing.

That's a nice recommendation, Joanna. I wouldn't know how to word it like you did. Thank you. That was a good one. Yeah, that was a good site feature.

And for the record, sir, you do agree to the two conditions as listed.

Yes, we agree.

Very good. I think we're ready to take action at this time.

I make a motion to approve PC26-17. Okay.

Motion made. Second.

Following the two staff recommendations for the separate to divide the two properties. Yep.

And your second accompanies that. Is that correct, John?

Yes. Thank you. Yep. Correct. Thank you.

One more time tonight, let's have a roll call vote. Yes.

He's switching it up. She's switching it up. Her channel almost went yes.

Thank you. Michelle Stringer. Yes. Irene Nally. Yes. John Kempke. Yes. Suzanne Finley. Yes. Michael Sponberg. Yes. Bill Carson.

Yes.

Morgana Haltham. Yes.

Very good. Motion carries. Thank you. Congratulations. Joanna, is there any other business tonight?

Yes, I did want to just mention, I'm not sure if I had mentioned previously in any of the meetings, but with House Bill 1001, there are requirements for additional reporting of building permits and land development and timing and all sorts of things that we previously didn't do nor track. Some of the items in that bill are actually things that we can't track. Correct. So there are A number of organizations including AIM and the Indiana Planning Association that have been working all together and trying to bring together an outline of how we are to respond and provide the information that the state has requested. And we are required to provide that information to the state at the beginning of the year. In addition to the reporting requirements, there is also the requirement that we are to review our zoning and subdivision ordinance and procedures and identify if there is anything in our current ordinances that restrict or prolong the review process of development. We are required to have a public hearing. My intention is to go ahead and have that public hearing at one of our original planned plan commission meetings. We do not have anything on this month's technical review committee. So we do not have, we would not be having the October meeting. So do anticipate that public meeting being either in November or December. If we don't have any other business, we will still need to have that meeting because we are required to have that public. So if you would, in your spare time and when you're on vacation, prop your feet up, look through the zoning ordinance and subdivision ordinance, see if there's anything that you can identify that the city of Franklin could do better and help streamline the development process in anticipation of that meeting.

Maintaining my objectivity, but to give you some context, and it I'm biting my tongue. You will recall that there was proposed legislation to remove local boards from having any zoning authority over residential development. That was the context by which which would mean we would have no ability to regulate residential development. The debate of that, that did not pass, but what it did, because the proponents of that said that would create more affordable housing for people. I will leave that alone. However, in response to it not passing, that's where the legislation came up with what we want you to do. and they put the burden on local municipalities and quite frankly local municipalities don't know how to answer their questions is why there's all this reporting and generally when they do reporting then they'll send it to committee and you can expect legislation to arise from it because the argument was that local regulation slows down the development of affordable housing. So I will leave that to the political debate but that's why we have this now requirement. So it is a very important thing if we wish to be able to control our own destiny.

I have a question. So based on what you both have said, it's to determine an assistant having more affordable housing. Is that correct?

No. The legislation was proposed to eliminate local zoning authority, period. So we could ‑‑ if it was residential, we had no authority over it. Anybody could develop it. Right. Proponents of that said that would create more affordable housing because the developers believed that local regulation drove up the cost of development. The proponents of that said, the opponents of that said that's not what drives up development costs. And so, hence, well, let's study it and see. There are certain fees, generally, what, $800,000? They're very low minimum fees that places have, but that is how it got resolved. Okay, we'll study this, but you folks need to give us the number of building permits that are made and that kind of thing. So I think it would be naive to think that there won't be another bill introduced removing local zoning authority from municipalities.

So they'll try it once more without a doubt?

I believe that will. And they will use this information to support. To build their case. That is correct. And that's why we're taking it very seriously.

So what can we do to prevent that from passing?

Everyone's free to contact their legislatures. I'm maintaining my objectivity to the extent that I can. But it is certainly something you would expect to see returned.

There is a housing committee that we're working with, Representative Teschke. There are a number of municipalities and jurisdictions that are included in that. I am actually a member of that, so the City of Franklin's voice and perspective is being heard. There are representatives from Jeffersonville, from Noblesville, I believe it is, And some, you know, the larger developed counties, the more rural counties, the different economic income of jurisdictions. So that has been one of the interesting things with the conversations of how drastically different development proposals, process, and results are across that gamut of needs, income, staffing. What's working in Jeffersonville doesn't work in the city of Franklin. We're very, very different. Or in the city of Carmel. Or the city of Carmel. So it's been a great committee.

Are they trying to put us all in one box? They're trying to eliminate local control. Okay.

I mean, to say it as bluntly as I can, they're trying to remove local control.

But we are fortunate to have a seat at that table of at least being on the forefront of that. So if there's anything that you have that you would like me to share with that committee, please get in touch and I will forward those comments on.

Yeah. And keep us posted.

And talk to your friends and neighbors if they're interested because, you know, there are times when we have rezonings that we get quite a few people out there and I would hate to be in a situation where we have to tell them nothing we can do about it. And that's the potential if action is not taken.

Okay. Any other business tonight?

I have no other good news. Nothing? On that happy note.

I'll just add two quick things. One, some of the members of the board were able to attend the ribbon cutting for the new Franklin Cub Academy, and wow, what a great example of what Franklin is capable of. It is really remarkable.

Yeah, unbelievable.

So great job to everybody that worked on that project. And we don't say it enough, but thank you to the staff. for you guys' hard work on that and all the things that you guys do. With that, Gigi, do you want to take us out?

I make a motion that we adjourn.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed, stay.