City Council - Regular Meeting

Not nothing I'm aware of. Pete, no. I think everybody's busy with back to school. Pete, can you check your microphone? Yes, I can. Scott, thank you.

Uh, budget finance did not meet last Wednesday. We do have some meetings coming up. We start our first of uh number of budget meetings coming up starting Wednesday morning at 8:30. Certainly keep an eye out on our website for meetings that are coming up. Uh public certainly welcome to participate and be a part of this. That's it. Thanks, John. And then the health department report, just so everybody, I just received this from Monica just as I was walking in. The 2024 annual report is in the rest of the reports are online for anyone who'd like to read those. Uh consent agenda. Can I have a motion? So move motion by John. Second by Tiffany. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed or abstain? Abstain.

Okay. So see a couple abstains because she wasn't here last meeting. Uh moving on to the regular agenda. Resolution 081825A.

Turn that mic on. Um, the item before you follows resolution R072125 that was approved last month. If you'll recall, we previously identified surplus bond proceeds in the December 2024 issued general obligation bond and these bonds will be proceeds will be used to acquire and improve uh real estate for public purposes. So this next step is a legal and statutory step to transfer these proceeds to the town hall building corporation so they can in turn acquire the real estate. Happy to answer any questions. Thanks. Any questions for Lisa? Seeing none, I'll ask for a motion. So moved. Motion by John. Second.

Second by Todd. All those in favor, please say I. I. I. I. Any oppos? Oh, I'm sorry. That's right. We have we have one person online. Sorry, Selena. Um, okay. Moving on to a roll call vote. I guess we do have to do a roll call vote. Okay, Jen, you want to do that for me? Pete Peterson? Yes. John Deluchia? Yes. John Weingart? Hi. Cecilia Cobalt. Hi. Selena Stler. Hi. Todd Zimmerman. I Tiffany Diplon. Hi. The motion passes. Thanks, Jen. I'm sorry, Bill Stewart. Oh,

no, Bill. All right. Thank you, Jen. What happens if you sit on the end? Bill and you're little. Item number 90081825. Lindsay.

Good evening, council. Lindsay Bennett, Corporation Council. Um, I'm here tonight on an amendment to the property maintenance code. As you probably remember, last month uh you passed the property maintenance code and in that time there was a court of appeals case that came out that um kind of affected the violation section and essentially it said if you have a punitive section that you need to really be specific about what that uh punitive section says. So after we looked at it and we um went over our procedure internally, I felt like we probably need to flush this out a little bit just to make sure we don't get um crossways with that new case. So, um that's essentially what this is doing. Um it follows a little bit more closely what our internal procedure is and um that will be when we have a property maintenance violation, we'll start with a notice violation and give the property owner a time period to correct that violation. Uh we'll schedule that next inspection. We'll go out and inspect and then we will site for that violation. And we also wanted to be clear that it is a per day violation. Per Yeah, per day. Per violation. So you could have several different violations and you could have um that fine apply each day. So uh we just wanted to be a little bit more specific in that to make sure um everybody understood that that is a possibility to have a daily fine and also what that fine would be. Um and then if those fines are not paid, they do continue to accumulate each day. And if they go a period of um 30 days, then um the zoning administrator will send that to me for enforcement. So um again, just trying to kind of flush out that actual procedure to make sure we don't get crossways with that new case.

Sure. Thanks, Lindsay. Any questions for staff? I have a question. Yep. So um what happens if a citation is written in error? an error. An error. Yeah, it's incorrect. Yeah. So, if there's a citation that's an error, there is an ability for the person who receives a citation to go into the Ordinance Violations Bureau and deny it. And then it would be set for trial and then we would go to trial on that. And then we would bring in evidence that would say, "Yes, this person is in violation." And then they could bring in evidence, even if it's just their testimony, to say, "No, this wasn't actually in violation." and then a judge would determine from there.

So if um if an ordinance is if uh somebody receives a violation for high grass on a plot of land that is adjacent to their property but belongs to the HOA, they receive the violation and then they just wait and go to court. Um so hikers and grass are a little bit different. Um it's under a totally different statutory scheme. um requires different notices to be sent and um as you're probably aware, we do have the ability to go onto the property and actually remove the grass after a period of time and then build the owner for that. So um in that case um I would definitely encourage that property owner who's received the citation to reach out to our code enforcement office and then just provide evidence that they don't own that piece of property. And if they do get the bill, you know, that is certainly something that we can do internally to make sure that we make it right and that they're not receiving a voice for going uh that's not actually theirs. So, um you know, I feel like our enforcement office is pretty good about uh first of all getting the right property owner and then second, if for whatever reason it is the wrong property owner, we can certainly fix that. Um I never uh feel comfortable taking an ordinance violation against a without making sure we are going through all the proper steps to make sure that it is the person um that should be cited.

So I only bring it up because it happened right after our meeting last month. Uh property owner got a violation for high grass. The plot of land belonged to the HOA. Um the plum called the uh ordinance called the office. No one answered the phone or got back to them. So, I guess my concern is that whatever we write, it has um a little bit of common sense and kindness to it so that if somebody receives something and it's not their land, it's not their fault while the time is ticking on this ordinance and the fines that there's also kind of this backend to say, "Hey, this isn't my piece of land." You know, what is the corrective measure? Phone calls were made. um the the office didn't get back with them. Are there enough people in the enforcement office to answer the phones and reply to residents?

Well, I am not over the code enforcement office, but um this is not something that I hear a lot. Um and I would say if there are violations that come up or if there are issues with property owners, um the next step usually is to me to say, "Hey, you know, they directed me to you. What can I do?" Um and I don't get a whole lot of those, but that being said, you know, mistakes can be made. We certainly would remedy those so that we're not citing the wrong person or property owner.

So, Councilman Delison, I'm not familiar with the situation you're talking about, but if you could provide us the contact information, we'll sure look it up. And I certainly that's not indicative of how we plan to handle this process. If someone has an issue or concern, we want to make sure that we respond. And at any point leading up to a court hearing, if someone were to reach out and say, "Well, I have information that says that this isn't my property or that there was a misunderstanding, our people have the administrative ability to void out that violation if need be. They wouldn't have to wait for a judge. If they said, "Look, I don't own this property." And they could show that, it would be within the purview of our administration to be able to say, "Okay, we understand that we're not going to take this all the way to court." So, I don't I don't want to leave anyone with the impression here tonight that once a citation's written, the only relief that someone would have if there's a gross injustice would be that they have to go to court. Is that fair, Lindsay?

Yeah, that that is fair to say. Um and then with Highways and Grass, it does kind of follow a totally different uh statutory scheme and procedural scheme that um is not covered in these amendments here tonight. Um but it the code enforcement office to the mayor's point does have um the administrative ability to go in and you know void out any fines or um any fees that they may receive from the contractor that did the mowing. In this case um on these uh changes tonight uh kind of the same thing. If somebody gets a citation for um you know graffiti on the side of their wall and they're saying this isn't my building, this isn't my property. Well, we would certainly take a look at that before um we start probably even the site the citations. It would be part of the notice the initial notice of violation to say, "Hey, we see graffiti on your wall. Uh please uh remedy this by painting over it with a color that is similar to the other walls and please have that done within 30 days." And then we're going to come out and inspect at day 35. Um, and then if in that period of time they're saying this isn't even my building, you know, we certainly would go back and look at that and make sure we get the right person because really what we're trying to do is correct the violation, not get to the citations. We want um compliance, not to have to um go to court and find property owners.

I appreciate that because court is such a big word for a lot of people. So, thank you. Yeah, definitely. Any question? If seeing none, I'll take a motion to suspend the rules and approve on first reading. Make a motion spend the rules. Motion by John. Second. Second by Cecilia. Roll call vote. Please, John. Peterson. Yes. John Deluchia. Hi. John Wangard. Hi. Cecilia Cobalt. Hi. Selena Stler. Hi. Todd Zimmerman. I Tiffany Dlesson. I, Bill Stewart. I. Motion passes. Thank you. And now I'll take a motion to approve. Motion approve. Motion by John.

Second. Second by Todd. Jen. Pete Peterson. Yes. John Deluchia. Yes. John Wangart. Hi. Crisilia Cobalt. Hi. Selena Stler. Hi Todd Zimmerman. Hi, Tiffany Deon. I, Bill Stewart. I motion passes. Thanks, Jen. Moving on to item 10. Thanks, Lindsay. Item 10, 061625B. Ross.

Uh, good evening. For the record, Ross Hillary economic development. before you tonight is there we go ordinance 061625B. This is the weather type roofing reszone. This is the proposed final reading um for location. This is a consideration of 1.13 acres from RT residential to C1 commercial uh with conditions for an office, showroom, and shop for a local roofing company. The timeline before you was we had first reading back in June. We had a neighborhood meeting in July at the adjacent church which we did not have anyone come to that neighborhood meeting. We had a public hearing at plank commission um and final reading here tonight. Those days are dates are incorrect. Um this is located in our comprehensive plan under our neighborhood service center which does allow for commercial and retail use as a land use. I want to show you this site plan. This is within the ordinance. We are not approving any architecture tonight. So they would be required to meet all UDO um standards for architecture. Uh this is a site plan with the extension of 118th Street uh to the end of their second drive. Uh the conditions that staff has worked on with the con uh petitioner are included here. If it is not a roofing company, the uses that would be permitted are an office, medical office, beauty, hair salon, day spa or nail salon. We have lighting limitations which are similar to other adjacences. Uh the building and site plan would be uh substantially uh similar to what is included in the ordinance including parking. There is to be no outdoor storage of materials um from day one and they are required to annex into the city. Here is a visual um for assistance

but again this will have to meet all UDO requirements in regards to architecture. This did go before our plan commission um in August has a recommendation of 7 to zero. One of the items on there was a question about the extension of 118th Street to connect to the Kroger um stub right there. Uh engineering has said at the time of um the reconstruction of 118th Street when and if that happens that connection would be made, but it will not be made as part of this reszone. Um staff is happy to answer any questions. I do recommend approval um with C1 commercial with the conditions on the screen. Happy to answer any questions.

Any questions for Ross? Selena, did you have questions?

I just want to make sure that some of the issues that were brought up by one of the adjacent property owners that were people taking over [Music] there all the way the only you broke you broke up a bit there so maybe Ross can remember from planning commission.

Yeah. Uh thank you uh chair. Um so uh 11805 that adjacent or caddyy corner residential property um was in attendance and they did provide some public comments. Um one being that there is existing uh trespassing uh from their neighborhood to Kroger through this property. Um both those residents as well as the property owner have concerns with that. So there will be some fencing um and burming along the edge there. Uh another concern was their privacy of their pool. And so uh the property owner also wants to have good privacy. So um we require buffering a minimum of 10 feet with landscaping. There's a lot of existing landscaping that the petitioner also wants to keep. So those were the the two main concerns.

Okay. From the resident. Any other questions by council? Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion. Motion by John. Second by Tiffany. John Pete Peterson. Yes. John Deluchia. Yes. John Weingart. Hi. Cecilia Cobalt. Hi. Selena Stler. Hi. Todd Zimmerman. Hi. Tiffany Dipless. Hi. Bill Stewart. I. Motion passes. Thanks, John. Moving on to item 11.

Um, yes. Before you, Ross Hillary. Uh before you is resolution 081825B. This is for a special exception. Um we are taking this as a first reading in public hearing tonight. You guys have not had a special exception um before you. This um previously went before our board of zoning appeals, but in our UDO update, we moved um new schools and new churches before council. So this is the first iteration of that tonight. Um this is a consideration of a special exception to allow for preschool use on the property zoned RT residential uh known as Cornerstone Lutheran Church Fishers common address of 13450 East 716th Street. Um Cornerstone Lutheran Church is planning a 29,000 foot expansion and outdoor playground area uh to provide a preschool. Um this includes approximately 200 students. Before you tonight, we are requesting a first reading in public hearing and then we plan to come back with any questions you might have for a final reading in September. In the packet that was provided here is a a concept plan that shows where the church plans to expand on the west side of their building. And I'll get to this in a second. There's also a planned uh road connection again to 118th Street shown here in the council packet. Um there were two engineering memos, one from engineering. We went ahead and took the lead that there may be some concerns about traffic adding 200 students Monday through Friday uh where we did not have that before. So an ANF engineering has provided that memo for you for a level of service for the intersection on 116th Street. And then we also have a member from our engineering department um concerns with that southbound approach at 116th and is recommending that connection to 118th Street uh to be open um at all times.

Help me out with where this is located. Ross. Yes, sir. So this is uh that large building there is the same Kroger at Olio 116th Street. The reason that we just talked about Oh, okay. I gota I gota gotcha. Gotcha. Just so Okay. Do not have my petitioner here. I think they thought they were going to go a little bit later in the evening. Um, this does require a public hearing and again happy to answer any questions you might have. Any any questions for Ross. Thank you for the traffic report. It was really nice.

Seeing no questions, I'm going to open it up for public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak in it, please step forward to the mic. Give your name and address for the record. You have three minutes in which to speak. Seeing that I'll close the public hearing. Any other questions for staff or anybody? Well, we may want to I mean, so the petitioner is not here. Uh yes, Karen Collins. I I do not see her yet.

Okay. Um, so Pete and all we've had conversations and frustrated frustrated residents along 116th Street right there with regard to the salon that we approved by a narrow margin before and stuff. So I mean we need to take in consideration. I know there was discussion about kind of a uniform approach going forward with regard to development along that corridor. Now the church is obviously there, you know, already established, but adding um additional services and stuff I wouldn't normally be opposed to. It's just I know that that's going to be concerns. So

yeah, I I I echo your sentiments. I've got issues all along from a number of issues on it. It's only a first reading. If someone wants to give it a first reading, so be it. Karen Collins is here. If you mind giving her a couple minutes to debrief, be happy to give the petitioner some time. Sorry, I thought it was towards the end of the You guys are moving fast. Um, so Corer Lutheran, just go ahead and state your name and address for the record.

Sorry. Um, Karen Collins. I'm with CEC. my um address, Genie address as well or um 530 East Ohio Street, Sweet G in Indianapolis. And um I'm on behalf of the um petitioner for Cornerstone Lutheran. Um they are planning um or proposing a development for an early childhood development center at its property located at 13450 East 116th Street in Fisers, Indiana. The expansion will consist of approximately 29,000 square feet of the building on the west side of the existing church. Initially the church plans to enroll about 150 children um ages to 5 with the capacity to increase enrollment to 175. The preschool will operate from 6 to 6 Monday through Friday and it will feature a gymnasium that will be available for public use. um to ident concerns identified by officers engineering department. A new driveway off the east parking lot will be constructed and extend to 118th street and Cornerstone Lutheran is requesting a special exception to permit the preschool use on their property which is currently zoned RT.

Any questions for the petitioner? Thanks, Gar. Sure. Hey, do we know is 118th Street ours? Yes, it is now. Okay. All right. Well, it's open for a first reading if someone wants to give it a first reading. Okay. Bill gave a first reading, so we'll move on. I do think what we'll do as council member Zimmerman referred to, we'll pull back some of that information, some of those concerns that we didn't spend an awful lot of time on when that um hair salon came in and incorporate some of those thoughts and comments into the discussion about traffic here because

Yeah. I just don't want to go through Yeah. No, absolutely. You know, regurgitating everything that we went through before. Absolutely. Yeah. Okay, Ross. Item 12. Uh yes, Ross Hillary. For the record, uh this is ordinance 081825A, annexation for the property located at 10516 Callingswood Lane. It's a request to approve a voluntary annexation of 69 acres. This is a voluntary annexation uh for new home construction. Uh the timeline for this is first reading public hearing tonight and final reading and fiscal plan to you in September. Happy to answer. Are the adjacent properties already in the city?

The properties off of Tmont Circle are okay. The properties on Collingswood Lane are not. So the ones on Collings Lane that I'm looking at that's going down to this property are not. So we're jumping over those. Um this would be the first property along Collinswood Lane that would be annexed into the Have we talked to the other property owners? Not particularly. No. Okay. This is just uh new construction and we required it to right I get it just if those guys are sitting in uninc incorporated and I think it's worth at least a letter just ask them if they want to go ahead and annex themselves in correct at the same time. So just be my first thought, but it's only a first reading. It is a public hearing. Any questions for Ross?

Okay, seeing none, I'm going to open up the public hearing on this item. Anyone wishing to speak? From the microphone, state your name and address of record. You'll be given three minutes in which to speak. Seeing none, I'm going to close the public hearing. I wish you wouldn't, but that's okay. No, that's fine. I don't think so. No, because annexation law doesn't allow us to do that. So we can have a first reading on it and then we can come back with a fiscal plan and second reading. So those are statuto first reading. Y so we got first reading by Tom. All right. Moving on to any un Thank you, Ross. Any unfinished or new business?

No. Okay. I'll open it up for community comment. Please come to the microphone with your community comment. State your name and address of the record. You'll be given three minutes in which to speak. Good evening, council. Michael Colby, 7105 Cold Lake Drive here in Fisers. And I come before you tonight just to kind of bring something to your attention. Some of you may know I attended a election board meeting last week and the county is considering going to voting centers. Now, what that'll do is u voting centers will be dictated by the number of voters we have plus the ability of the county to get a location that can accommodate a large crowd. So, the building has to be available in the parking lot. Give you some figures. There's 278,990 registered voters in Hamilton County and active voters are 265,199. 13,791 are inactive. Now, what'll happen is currently um when you have election day, you must vote in your precinct. Um and so what this will do will be set up similar to what the early voting center is. They'll have ballots for all the precincts. they'll eliminate the precinct locations and then we'll have 52 vote centers. Um, and they'll be open primary election day and the general election from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Now, what this does is if someone shows up at a poll location, a lot of times they might get there quarter to 6 and they're in the wrong location. So, they don't get to vote. Whereas with a vote center, they show up, they can vote because they can go anywhere in the

county and the uh ballot will be um will be on the uh machine. There'll be 10 machines and four pole clerks. Um, now to give you an idea, the cost of doing the 2024 election salary, training, and meals and supplies was $156,590. That's what it cost. Um, cost of election day for workers if they use the voting centers would be $99, uh, 320. So, there's a significant savings. Uh as I said there'll be u in 2024 general election there was 111 inspectors 255 clerks 356 judges with 52 voting centers uh there'll be 52 inspectors or managers I'm now calling them managers uh 28 clerks 28 judges so you can see it'll be a reduction those of you who pulled together pulling locations before it. You know, sometimes it's like pulling pulling high teeth to get to get someone to come in and vote. I mean I mean work. Um so as I said at this point is really being considered. Uh anyone has any questions or wants any input, you can contact Kathy Richardson's office. Uh they had the meeting last week and I think it's a 30-day time period for anyone who has any questions or want to make make any inputs. I think I'm out of time.

Thank you, Mike. Anyone else wishing to speak? Sir,

name and address for the record.

Casey Crosby, 6611 Manchester Drive. Uh, Mr. Mayor, uh, Mr. City Manager, Mr. President, rest of the council. I appreciate your time. Um, I was here about five months ago when I first found out about this Fischer Agra Park West. As you can see, I've got an Aggra Park hat. First off, I want to say that I'm a very big supportive supporter of the Aggra Park. I think it's a great idea. I just think the location is wrong. As I mentioned to you guys five months ago, let me explain to you again one of the big reasons. Lead tainted soil is dangerous to the public. I live adjacent to this property and I know your first thought is nimi. It's not nimi because I'm okay with a park if I wasn't concerned about the lead contamination. Lead contamination in my backyard showed up. I had eight spots sampled. I sent the results into IU or sent the samples into IU Indianapolis nonprofit. One of those eight came back with 162 parts per million, which is considered moderate. And I don't even live close to the airport in my opinion. But that was concerning for me as an individual who's had kids grow up in our yard and never thinking about this before until this park and thinking more and more and more about the lead. I have not seen any results. We had a public uh neighborhood meeting shortly after we had that meeting city council back in April. They came out and did tests a few weeks later. I saw them doing the testing and I never saw any results. And at this point, I would question those results um based on my own results because I live farther away than where the property was being tested. So, as a result of that, I'm asking for a another testing done nonprofit. I'm asking for those results to be made public. the c the results back in the

April time period and the results whenever they do the testing again. I'm also wanted to mention to you some concerns I have with the fact that none of this has ever made the uh board of zoning appeals. None of this has made the planning commission. There's been no discussion at all. Even the current doesn't show the adjacent properties when they show the picture of the future Agra Park West is as if these people don't matter. They do matter. If they start turning up the dust every year and even when they first start up, I don't want that lead dust clouds headed towards my house. I'll be honest, I don't want that and I don't think anyone else in my street or any of the adjacent properties want that. But at this point, we don't have a say because there is no reasonzoning requirements at all. We're being left out. I looked under the land use code plans for 2040 and also for the allowances that properties still zone metropolitan airport. There was agreements made back eight years ago between the city and the airport authority to make changes to the zoning south of 106. Not

thank you sir. So we'll go ahead and the mayor's going to take this under adisement obviously work with the health department and someone will get back to you in due course.

Yeah absolutely Pete we certainly will. Just to uh for your awareness, sir, we are still going through the due diligence phase. We did have uh ANL Great Lakes Laboratories conduct a sample of lead and it came at 26.6 parts per million. Uh we're currently working on a traffic study to understand how it'll affect that roadway. Uh and still working through the lease uh with the airport authority, but more to come on this. Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak? Please come up and state your name and address for the record. Seeing none, I'm going to close co- close the public comment. Uh, can I get a motion to adjurnn? Motion by Todd. We're ajourned.