Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

in Lightland, Indiana, two nights ago.

The whole thing is just an interesting world.

I really don't. I do most of our financial tax credits, but I don't do all of our entitlements.

All right, everybody, should we get started? We're officially on the air, so seems like the time. This is our August 13th Planning Commission public hearing. Can I start with roll call, please? Jonathan Hayek.

Tess Williams.

Kalei Cruz.

Rich Levy. Brian Adams. Adria Summers. Lou Titor. Perfect. We don't have much of a public, but is there anybody? There's really nobody online either. I think we'll skip our public comment for things not on tonight's agenda. And we'll go into our first agenda item. So this is public hearing for recommendation three. PL 2026-0165, the Glenn subdivision rezoning. Bob, should I start with you since I don't think I have an option?

I think so, yeah. Happy to start. Yeah, Bob Keenan, Development Review Manager, City Planning Department. And tonight before you, we have an application for zone map amendment. It's to remove the entry corridor overlay zone designation from lots 1 through 45, 60, and 60 through 140. Okay. At this time, the subdivision has sold off and developed some of the lots. So this is a grouping of lots that are held by, I believe, two different entities. So it does not include the entire subdivision. I did have notes prepared, but they have vanished. So I'm winging it a bit, but that's going to be fine. So Glenn subdivision as previously known as the overlook subdivision was plotted about three or so years ago, and they started developing some lots over there. And through the recent development review process, it was discovered that the EC overlay designation applies to all of the lots within the subdivision. And that was likely, due to a couple of factors, but one, when the project was approved through a preliminary plat like 15 years ago, and within that time, since it was approved for a preliminary plat and zoning, we adopted the urban design standards, which adopted this entry corridor concept. So then at that time, the entry corridor concept was applied to all the lots that were in the entry corridor. So Lincoln Avenue, both and Elk River Road. It's all Ligonier Avenue and Elk River Road are subject to the entry corridor. Those lots that front on. So this property as a master property before it got final platted, frontage on Lincoln Avenue. But like way high up, you know, if you're familiar, if you drive by, like across from Snow Bowl, there's that big slope that goes up. And at the top of that is the start of that subdivision. And that was the frontage that applied there. So at any rate, so when the lots were platted, The EC just applied to every lot in that subdivision, not even the lots that were just fronting on that area. So with this application, the applicant is proposing to remove the EC overlay for those lots I specified. And staff finds that it's appropriate to do so. not only for the lots that aren't even fronting along Lincoln, but even those ones that are high up on that bluff because the purpose of the entry corridor is to establish additional limits certain uses that include like outdoor storage and and kind of those um outdoor storage type uses um as well as provide a higher level of landscape standards which has been changed to the updated landscape code but at any rate given how it's it doesn't really front um from the pedestrian aspect or from the street aspect, we find it's appropriate to remove the designation for those lots that do front. We've had no public comment on this item. We're recommending approval and I can answer any additional questions you might have.

Thank you, Bob. Any questions from commissioners?

I've got one. What is being in the entry corridor, being under this overlay doing to prevent development there?

It limits certain commercial uses.

So since it's all residential, is it?

Yeah, there's an exemption for single family, actually. Yeah, in the EC overlay applicability statement for the EC overlay zone, it does. It does not apply to single or one-family, two-family uses. However, those are the uses that are actually on the frontage, but there are a number of CN or commercial neighborhood lots that do allow for multifamily commercial development. That would be applicable.

So we're trying to take the entry corridor away so those can be developed more consistently with the neighborhood as planned and not respect them.

Right. And more to the point, the entry corridor was never intended to apply to lots that aren't on the entry corridor.

All right. Thank you. Yep.

Any other questions? Are you ready? Yeah, go ahead. The point you just made is the only kind of question I was wondering, trying to understand why it may have shown up to begin with. The development itself seems to front the highway, or at least the outlot for it, right, that separates the individual lots from the highway. So it... I guess maybe originally, like technically the original subdivision did touch it. And so maybe, maybe, and these are all, this is really the question is, was it intended to, apply as a blanket to make sure that there was some buffering between the highway and the residential use, at least in the landscape standards, which I know you've already said have kind of started to change a little bit. Was there kind of a buffering that should be happening on that outlot there in order to keep consistent with things along the highway?

Well, the buffering, the increased landscape category that we did have was... For multifamily and commercial development. So it wouldn't apply to these single family zone lots. Those are the ones on that edge there are the single family. The CN lots are up front on Gossard Parkway.

Right.

Yeah, so it wouldn't have mattered anyway.

It wouldn't have mattered anyways, yeah. Interesting.

Thank you. Other questions?

The lots that are excluded from this, I assume those are lots that have already been sold off. Right. And so it makes rezoning those more complicated. Will there be an effort to clean up the zoning on those lots as well?

I'm not familiar with any plans to gather up those neighborhood or those lot owners to co-sign to an application. And I'm not familiar with the applicant's efforts to reach out to those lot owners um but it's a possibility for them and it's a possibility if the city were to have the time and the resources to initiate a rezoning on their behalf we could do that but there is no plan are there any other i i'm trying to think again i think uh we i can double check here but i'm uh pretty sure that the They're not going to have an issue because they're the single family lot owners. The CM lots are covered by this effort here. So even if it stays on there, I mean, it's not ideal, but it's not going to require, it's not going to trigger any standards for them to adhere to.

It seems like this is largely a cleanup. Pretty much. Like a paperwork cleanup effort. Yeah. Are there any other developments where something similar has happened? I'm trying to think of other neighborhoods that might be in a similar position. Like I just keep thinking of West End Village, how it's also kind of elevated along Lincoln. Does that have a similar zoning or are there any other developments that we would anticipate something similar?

I don't know the answer to that question offhand. It wouldn't take me too long to look, but it was not something that I looked into as part of the review of this. But to answer your question, yeah, it's possible. Yeah.

I think I can answer that. So West End Village actually has some open space and there are some lots between those residential lots and Lincoln Avenue. So I don't think any of that property was ever included in the EC overlay to begin with.

Okay, thank you.

Yep.

Any other questions? Okay, we'll skip public comment again. Bob, unless we forgot anything. Then I'll close our public portion and come to commissioners for discussion and a motion.

I think this is pretty much just an administrative cleanup, I'd call it, more than anything else. I don't see it being applicable here. I have no problem approving pl 2026-0165 and i don't think there are any conditions here no conditions all right we have a motion do we have a second not good thanks any other discussion on that motion

No, I have one more thing. I'm just curious why they would even go through the process if it's not really applicable to all the single family lots. But I don't see any reason why we shouldn't clean this up. I mean, we want that commercial neighborhood to develop as planned. Yeah.

Yeah, it kind of seems like cleanup, you know, my only question was related to whether it's loophole potentially. Like, was there something that was supposed to happen that it happens along all the rest of the entry corridor that this is finding itself exempt from that might not be great for the rest of the entry corridor? It doesn't seem to be, but I kind of came at it from that lens instead. I still think it's very supportable. I don't think there's going to be any impact.

Yeah, well, I tend to agree. especially looking at where it is.

Unless there's any other discussion, I'll call for a vote. Aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. And that passes unanimously. Thank you, Bob. Thank you. Let's see. Do we have a director's report tonight?

I just wanted to welcome our new commissioner, Tess Williams. I think everyone was able to meet her before the meeting. She's our new alternate. Took David Box's alternate seat when he was appointed to the regular seat. So thank you, Tess, and welcome. And then also I'm just going to ask Bob to provide a brief update on the design standards update project for you all.

Great. OK. I don't have anything specific prepared, but I could share where we're at with the process and provide a little background for some of the newer commissioners. But we have contracted with a consultant to help us rewrite our urban design standards. So these are basically our architectural design standards for multifamily and commercial development throughout the city, including the base area, the Highway 40 corridor, downtown. and uh so uh we've had kickoff meetings we formed a stakeholder committee group we've um had a presentation to the planning commission and city council in june um we are currently have a tentative date for an open house community open house together public input from the community um and uh second week in september uh at um hollison hill olympian hall And I'm not going to announce the date because it's just tentative at the moment. But we've booked the room. We just actually met with the consultant team today to go over the materials we're going to present for that. And so we're just... just gotta make sure their schedule aligns and I think we'll be moving forward and we'll get the word out on that. And after we collect that community input, we'll also have an Engage Steamboat website uh up and running uh with those um basically those story boards or uh for lack of a better word um where people can comment online on on basically we're asking we're gonna be asking some questions from just big picture look and feel kind of community character type questions uh that'll inform the design standards and So we'll collect that information, and then the consultants will get to actually writing the design standards. And so, yeah, it's been a pretty interesting process so far. And, you know, this group, Code Studio, has extensive experience doing design standards across the country and in a variety of different types of communities from large to small. So it's been interesting getting some ideas from them and just... I don't think it's going to be vastly different, but we want to try and organize it a little bit more concisely in the code, clarify some of those issues that we've been bumping up against that some of you are familiar with. And so we'll have a draft and then it'll go out for review. We'll do a review with the planning commission. We'll do a review with the stakeholder group and then collect that feedback and then we'll go to adoption process. And so just looking at that timeline, looks like we'll be doing the draft review this fall and then right after um the holidays uh this and the christmas new year holiday we'll look at uh doing adoption so that's that's pretty much where we're at if you guys have any questions happy to oh that's great so once you you have a more certain date you'll share that with us probably too in case you want to go here yeah for sure yeah we'll get the word out to you that's great yeah anybody else have a thanks pop all right thank you

Anything else in our director's report?

I'll just also note that, let's see, August 4th, I presented some recommendations to city council for a linkage fee program, got some feedback from them and we are scheduling a second presentation or another presentation, I should say, on September 15th with some final recommendations, hoping to get, sort of consensus feedback from council on what direction they want to go, and then we'll move to writing the ordinance, drafting the ordinance, and bringing that through for public hearing and adoption. So more to come on that. I just kind of wanted to let you know in case you were following that process that we'll be presenting again on September 15th.

Cool. All right, thank you. We also have some public hearing minutes from, what is this, July 9th? Does anybody have any changes or is there a motion to approve?

Motion to approve.

Thank you. Is there a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. That pretty well does it for us. Is there a motion to adjourn?