Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] Amanda, [Music] [Music] are we ready?

All set. Okay. Uh we'll call the uh regular monthly meeting of the Columbia City Plan Commission to order on October the 6th, 2025 at 700 p.m. and have roll call. Cha Hill here. John Kissenberg here. John Langlo here. Jennifer Romano here. Nikki Venal here. Dennis Warick here. Ian here. Barry Lee here. Patrick Cigarette here. Um, previous meeting minutes from May the 5th, 2025.

I move that be passed as second.

Motion in a second uh to approve the minutes from May to 5th. Those in favor, raise your right hand. Those opposed? Motion carry. At this time, we'll uh uh swear in any uh witnesses. So, if you care to speak at all tonight, you have any questions or any presentations, uh Greg will, our attorney will swear you in, please. So, you need to stand. Stand and raise your right hand, please. Do you swear or affirm under the penalties of perjury the testimony we're about to offer will be truth? If so, say I do.

Put your hands down. Thank you. Thank you. Full business. Uh, new business 25- C- SUVD-2 Walmart Real Estate Business Trust. One last subdivision, 402 West Plaza Drive. Nathan,

thank you, Mr. President. So, going to these slides. This is uh 25 C SUV D2 is a primary replat to be called the Walmart edition. as you said is 42 West Plaza Drive which is the address of Walmart itself consisting of lot one of the town and country plaza recorded in 1990 and a 2 and a half acre parcel uh adjacent parcel which was acquired by Walmart in 1996 to allow for their uh super Walmart expansion at that time. Uh what is being proposed tonight is to combine the platted lot and the unplatted parcel in order to create one unified lot. Doing so requires a planning process. That's why we're here. Uh in short, Walmart wants to do this for two reasons. One, to place the lot the building all on one lot uh just to avoid questions about whether there's a setback intervening and so on. It's not our policy to treat it as such, but uh the deal it would be better to place it all on one lot. Uh and a little bit more importantly, as I mentioned in the written staff report, it would relocate a utility easement that was platted with Town and Country Plaza, but not relocated back in 1996. There was an access easement that was coincident with the utility easement, which was relocated in 1996, but the utility easement wasn't. So, this uh proposed replat would uh serve to relocate that easement so it doesn't go underneath the building. Uh all of this was stemming from a planned uh building addition. They were doing due diligence and found out that they own two parcels and all of these different factors came into play. uh it's not related to the building edition in that the building edition could go on even without this plat but it is related in that it was

the uh reason for starting it. Uh so as you can see there the uh zoning code is met uh the minimum acreage and so on uh as is normal with a combined. So highlighted in blue are the two uh parcels that Walmart owns which would be combined and you can see the overall town country plaza as well as US30 and steroid 109 off to the right. Closer view. Uh you may note as well that Walton Drive uh as originally developed in 1990 only went up to this point. In 1996, uh when the unplatted parcel was acquired, uh Walmart or someone uh extended the pavement on north. Uh so the actual pavement of Walton Drive actually extends onto the adjacent property to the north. Uh which uh had been for a moment going to be potentially part of this or at least part of the discussion with this plan. However, because we have the second plat on the agenda tonight, coincidentally, it would dedicate that right away. So, it's kind of a moot point with this project, but wanted to point that out. Uh, this is the proposed plat as submitted. The area, the gray area there in the middle is that relocated utility easement as I mentioned. And you can barely see it, but this is the flat overlaid on top of the aerial. Uh do have a couple different proposed conditions. Uh pretty minor. Uh number one, there's a couple names to correct in the board of work signature block. Not a big deal. Uh number two and three are standard conditions to address any uh comments of the reviewing agencies, which uh there were a couple, but they

were not very substantive. And then number three, because this is a minor flat, uh, delegate secondary plat approval to staff. Any questions for me at this point? Uh, oh, one other note. Uh, we do, I believe, have a representative in the audience uh, for Walmart and then we also have a representative uh, the main contact uh, is online as well. So, just FYI. Questions for Nathan? Okay. Representative from Walmart. Hi, my name is Dave Nard. Can you come up come up to the podium and state your name and your address, please?

My name is David Narden. My address is 7068 Glo Wedge Common, Bartlett, Tennessee. Um, Nathan's kind of described everything, so I don't know. I don't know what I can add. Okay. Any questions? Thank you. Thank you.

Uh, anyone from the public wish to address uh this uh proposal? If not, we'll close that part and board. What's your pleasure? Make the motion to approve 25 C-SUBD-2 Walmart real estate business trust with the comments conditions

conditions. Second motion in a second. Any further discussion? Those in favor raise your right hand. Those opposed? Motion carried. Thank you. For the record, Don, were you opposed? It was just slow. Just you did. You did. I I did see your hand go up. It was just a little later. Just wanted to make sure we had that right. A picture of that. What the heck is your eyes?

Next. Next item on our agenda is 25- C-SUBD-3 Swehart Properties LLC 137 lot subdivision called the Bushy project northwest corner of Plaza Drive and Line Street State Road 109. Thank you.

Okay, moving on to this one. Uh this is a primary plat uh which comprised currently is comprised of two different uh pieces uh three actually I would say. Uh overall as a primary plat the name is the Bushy project. Uh I would expect that the individual pieces probably will have different marketing names as they come online. Uh, if this is proposed, uh, it is located on the west side of Line Street, north of, uh, Armstrong Drive and Walton Drive, north of Walmart and everything we just looked at. Uh, as proposed, uh, the subdivision would include, uh, part one would be the Collector Street connecting Armstrong Drive over to Steroid 109, uh, proposed to be called Adelain Lane. Uh along with that would be an extension of Walton Drive north to Adelene Lane. Uh part two would be 33 single family detached lots uh on the northwest side of Abelene Lane on the northwest side of the overall property. And then part three would be up to four 104 single family detached or possibly attached units located on the south side of Edin Lane or the southeast side of the curve. uh that area is still conceptual which you'll see in your packets and then on screen here in a second. Uh but as a primary plat uh this would set forth the maximum lot count. There would still be variation possibly. Uh there may still be uh other approvals needed including possibly special exception resoning variances or a plat revision depending on exactly how it's nailed down as they go through the

engineering. Again, um I feel that the concept is solid enough to present as part of the primary flat. Uh but still there's flexibility and things that need to be ironed out. So again, conceptual but a solid concept. Uh also included would be detention areas, a couple of which are a little bit more uh um preliminary than others. Uh and then additional future development areas on the east side, basically east of Walton Drive, uh which would be subject to additional plants. uh those might be commercial, they may be additional, residential, might be a mix, uh might be all three. So uh you can see there on the uh table uh the area of this plat is approximately 40 acres. Total number of lots would be up to 137. new street length uh just under 4500 of public that would be the Adelaine Lane, Walton Drive as well as the public street in the north northern uh residential area. As proposed, there would be about 3,500 ft of private street in the southern residential area. It's proposed to be private because of the rightway width being proposed to be uh narrower as well as a couple other reasons. uh if they can actually meet the code that may become public. Uh it may trigger the need for coming back for primary plat approval at that point. Uh but if that does occur, there would be additional things I'm sure that uh would have to be further refined. Uh the code minimums uh lot size in GB, this is old zone GB general business. Uh code minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet. Proposed minimum for the northern

area is 7200 square feet. Uh proposed unit size lot size per unit on the southern part would be 1,650 square ft. Uh that I believe is for a proposed couple forplexes. Those would be quad units. Again, our code does not really deal well with uh four unit attached dwellings. So how we actually deal with that may be a variance and so on. We'll have to further refine uh the lot widths uh 58 feet on the northern portion uh 54 feet for per unit on the southern. Again, some of those may actually be broken up a little narrower as you look at it. Lot frontage to be determined, which at this stage is not unusual uh for a major flat. And then common areas uh would also be to be to to be determined. Uh total area is what I usually put in there. Uh there would be some common areas as proposed though. So the reference aerial uh not all of this area would of course be uh included in the plat. The eastern most area uh would be subject to that future uh platting. So this is the proposed plant. This is the area that would be the 33 single family detached lots. This is the area that would be the 104 uh single family lots that are again conceptual. Uh but basically the access points and so on and maximum lot count would be there and then these areas would be for future platting as uh market dictates. uh plat overlaid on the aerial. This is a little easier to see than the Walmart plat.

Again, you can see how this connects in between Armstrong Drive, which uh dead ends approximately here on over to uh Steroid 109 Line Street and Walton Drive continuing up. uh because there is developable uh property to the north. I do have uh recommendation and the code does uh recommend that there be a substrate to the north. This side where you can see that there are ponds and rolling topography doesn't make sense. You've got wetlands here as well, but somewhere within that thousand feet uh on the eastern thousand feet of that common property line, there should be a stub street. Doesn't really necessarily figure into this plat, this primary plat other than potentially having a curb cut on Adelaine Lane. Uh but as again those future plat come forward, we would the petitioner really should figure on that and the planning commission should plan on that as well. And even if we put one substrate in there, it doesn't have to be necessarily at the exact location. They could move it at some time, right? Yes, that's a good point. Uh being a primary plat, it's subject to change. So what we put on here, if they show 850 ft, when it actually gets developed, it may be 900 feet away from Line Street or it may be 700. But needs to provide that uh connectivity between the properties is what the code uh is looking for. Uh so going through the proposed conditions from staff uh there are some comments from the reviewing agencies. I'm not going to uh reiterate what they've said. Uh I again a standard uh condition there of number one that uh anything that they have as comments need

to be addressed. Number two setting forth clearly that the unit count shall not exceed 137 as proposed. Uh if they do wish to exceed that it would trigger the need for coming back for uh second primary approval. Uh number three uh is a condition that we usually include when we have uh need for sidewalks and that would be that sidewalk shall be a minimum 5t width. Uh number four clearly states that the street width and pavement section are to comply with the subdivision code and or street department specifications. Uh number five I mentioned about the stub street. Uh number six, adjust the lot deficient the deficient lot areas to comply with the zoning code minimums uh and obtain additional approvals as may be necessary. That's the southern residential area. Uh number seven, uh this is a condition to require that a property owners association be mandated with covenants and restrictions which would also include funding mechanisms for the maintenance of any common areas and improvements. Uh as I said this is proposed to have at least some common areas. Uh the future commercial areas may not. So those may have other reasons to have a property owners association. There are some private streets involved which need to be funded and maintained. So uh making sure that we have that established and funded is going to be an important uh piece of this overall puzzle. Uh, number eight, covenants and restrictions would be reviewed by staff prior to recordation. Uh, sometimes you do have them submit to the plan commission for secondary plat approval. Uh, I leave that up to your discretion. I'm fine if we have very clear things that we're looking for reviewing it uh, administratively prior to recordation.

Uh, and then number nine, uh, this we have done before. or secondary plat approval be delegated to staff if it's administrative. However, if there are performance shies proposed uh or other issues that staff needs to send to the plan commission, then secretary plaque goes to the whole plan commission. Uh we've done that uh I believe we did that with timber's edge section two that is already proposed that you had to shift. Uh so with that um kind of a high level summary any questions for me? A question I have is on item number two where it says the lot quantity will not exceed 137. Um they they though would be allowed to reduce that if they want to make adjustments in that southern partly incorporate those streets to become public.

Correct. The general principle is that if you need to reduce the number of units, you can. This would set out the maximum units uh set forth. Okay.

Nathan, the private streets you said to reduce the width by any idea how much it would be reduced? uh the petitioner can give you more details, but it would not be reducing the pavement width. It would be reducing the ride ofway width in order to get more lot area in there. Um but that's where they felt the tradeoff would be uh but the actual pavement width would be what the city spec is. Again, petitioner can correct me with those details. Streets, would those be who? They would maintain those to clean the snow and all that good stuff.

That's what's being proposed, correct? Okay.

The few concerns I have with that is um that all sounds great being a private street starting out, but what happens in a couple three years like we had an example of Bluebird Drive um where it was a private street then oh well we don't want to maintain it anymore and then the city had to maintain it. Um I'm not so sure private streets are I mean that great of an idea at this point. Um I can understand the reasoning behind you know the rightway uh change but at the same time um we've had history where those streets become uh the city's responsibility after a few years um maybe a little longer than that but I'm not so sure a private private drive or private street um I know we would accept the responsibility of maintaining it. I get that and snow plowing and all that kind of stuff, but at the same time, I'm not so sure it's such a great idea to um have a private street while inevitably it's going to be a city street at some point. That's just up for discussion.

And when that happens, it's usually because a street's in bad need of repair. They don't have the funds to do it. Yeah. And then then it falls back on the city like Uber Drive did. So that I'm just open for discussion. I I just got some concerns because I've seen it happen before.

Um what's the addition that we had just had a modification to there off of Hannah Street uh that uh Don's group would they were developing it. Um and we allowed for some variance of the public street because of the uh um a smaller front lot set back or something.

So that was timmer's edge section two which had a waiver. Uh so a waiver is a variance of the subdivision code. Uh so that might be something that could be applied here. basically getting a waiver of the rightway width but not necessarily of the pavement specification, right?

Uh waivers have to be approved as part of the primary flat which is what we're talking about tonight. And if the petitioner is able to talk about that tonight, you can give them feedback on that. uh we're not prepared because it wasn't advertised. Waivers because they are essentially variances need to be part of what's publicly put out there ahead of the meeting. Uh but you can go into that detail. So that might be an avenue.

So could it be omitted? Could that that southside part be omitted? I mean, if we approve the the fundamental site development plan and exclude that if they want to pursue the the whole that that variance of modification. I think I'm getting what Greg's got. Sorry. So, that would be one option. Um, and I I would say you guys need to have the petitioner give you some feedback on on uh how that fits into their overall plans, but that could be an option. Yes. Okay.

So, just to verify, there'll be access to this subdivision through Walden Drive, Armstrong Drive, and in the future, State Road 109. currently stro 109 Armstrong Walton and in the future a stub street to the north.

Okay. One of the other concerns I have is the lot sizes. Um coming into this I mean it looks to me I couldn't read much from that blue that print there. I can't see where the building set back lines are. I couldn't see where much of anything because it was too small even when I windowed in on it. I'm concerned about the building line setbacks, um the easements that run through there. I I couldn't tell much of anything from except for the fact that some of those lots were 50 foot, 54 ft. Um to me, that's a lot too small. Um because what we deal with on city council and our police department and all that is the after after effect of uh when they get built because when you put houses that close together um people you'd love to say everybody gets along. Um but that doesn't happen all the time. You know from dogs barking to kids being yelled at and all that stuff. When you have a 50- foot lot and you build a house within five feet of the side set on the sidewalk side of the home, that's pretty tight. Um, we have two beautiful subdivisions already in place near Chase and the one on the east side of 109.

But anyways, those are fairly decentiz lots and it seems as though people are getting along in those areas. Well, I'll just flip back on that, Dan. Those lots to build today, I mean, you're probably looking at a half million dollar house. What we're what we're trying to get here is more starter homes, more homes for people. I mean, if you're coming out of college right now, you can't afford to buy a house. I mean, we've got, I'll say, six kids working for us that either live at home or rent apartments that would love to buy something. I mean, you're not getting anything out in your chase or equal. So, either

but I so I get that. I just, you know, I would just like to see a little bigger loss and then I like I said, I don't see how the building lines. I want to make sure we can get at least two cars in the driveway.

Um because that's an issue. Um because parking is an issue um with uh they're I get it if they're having parties or whatever. I mean, that happens, but I got to make sure we can get a MS or fire truck through there. Um, and I just don't want to see uh garden houses uh what we've had in on that east side where you couldn't even get a car in that driveway and it was over city sitting over the side of the sidewalk and that goes against the ordinance and a lot of stuff happened with that one and the houses were basically side by side in that area and I I just it created a lot of issues uh with people and so you know I get it from the developer side of stuff you know more lots more money, the more water, sewer. I mean, I know taxes, I get it. There's more money, more money, more money, but sometimes I think we need to look at uh the convenience for homeowners and how we can get along. And uh that there just looked like a everything jammed together for some reason. I guess I would like to see a little uh more space between lots, which would take I know it would cut it down uh for the de developer side of things. I I get that, but at the same time, we as a council have to deal with the public when the situations arise and I'm just trying to get away from some of that if we can make it more user friendly, so to speak. And like I say, I get what you're saying with housing cost.

Well, I mean, if you go to Allen County, it's it's very very common. And I mean this is a neo, you know, traditional development. And that's what I hate to say, but our planner was on day one almost invited into this. This is kind of what he wanted just just to bring a different a different, you know, place to live for people, you know, because our our community is diversifying and it's not going to be all, you know, major subdivisions or whatever. So, we've got to, you know, we were just trying to find a a different niche to

Well, like I said, I just looking when a home is built because everybody wants a big backyard and not so much a big front yard, but at the same time, we need to make sure we got space for people to park as the garage sits back and living rooms or whatever sits in front. I've seen that happen. That works. I just want to make sure we're not have to deal with parking issues. And, you know, that's why I was a little concerned. I didn't I can't hardly read where the lines are on that map. I would have liked to seen a little better map, a little bigger uh so I can actually understand what we're getting.

And for safety wise, are the and I'm sure that when the representative comes up and speaks, it'll probably speak to that just the sidewalking. Is it just through that that portion? Is it going all the way to Armstrong Drive? Is it going all the way down Walton Road? Is it going all the way to 109? Just just curious on that one. Sidewalks are required throughout. Yes. Just want to make sure what are the size of those lots right now on the

Mr. That was the previous slide here. Um so the northern area the minimum lot size is 7200 square ft with 58 ft wide. Uh the southern area is um to be determined. But the smallest that's shown, there's three or four forplex areas that are labeled as 1650 square ft each. So take those times four for the overall building and then lot width is 54t. Again, some of those are split. So, um,

well, we'll get a sample when they finally get to a point where they present it. Again, I was just curious where it is now. Is that what I'm saying?

So, for reference, um, Dear Chase is about 1.6 units per acre. Uh it has about 150 lots over about 94 acres. Uh for using that density on this project, 137 lots, it would be about 80ome. Uh let me bring that calculator back. About 85 acres. So basically the entire site would be 137 lots if we were developing it at Deer Chase's density. So you lose out on all of the proposed commercial area. Well, just for reference, I think you know, uh, Mr. Brooks, the Linglo back there worked with us really well on the site development of Timber's Edge where we was proposing some, uh, uh, differences for the driveways and location of the house. I mean, we all work together and I think we got a pretty successful subdivision going in there. So, we have a good example of, uh, what to follow there. So, um, you know, I just I don't know. I'm just thinking we got some we already seen something with smaller lots that I think we can u piggyback on, so to speak, from that from that example. So, um, I know it required a lot of discussion, but I think we got something going pretty well back on that on that subdivision. So, um, I don't know. I'm just, like I say, without being able to actually see the blueprint, it's really hard to tell what's going on. For sure. There.

Anything else for Nathan?

I have another question. Um, what is the plan for like exiting out of the addition? Is that a light? Is that stop? Like what is Because the existing roadway out of there is a mess. We had to do, if I can comment real quick, to tie in to 109, Mr. Bush, he had to to file for a uh traffic, sorry, lost my mind, traffic study. And so we are doing a traffic study at 109 and a connection way in Armstrong. We don't know what's going to come up because that intersection is bad, but that should show us if we need a roundabout, stop light, whatnot, make it a freeway and what it'll also tell us what's needed at 109.

But we wouldn't know that until after this would be approved. Yeah, we're waiting on it right now. That's why that's why the one drive is not going to 109 because we can't tie in. I just heard Yeah. Anything else for Nathan representing from Bushies.

Good evening. And I'm David Brown with DA Brown Engineering, 5491 County Road, 427 Auburn, Indiana. I'm here on behalf of the Sway Art Properties. We have a member at Fly Art Properties, Jerry Bushy here. Um, I'm sorry these aren't huge. I set it up for a 24 by 36, but I do have smaller ones. if you'd like to see those while I'm going through this process. Passing those down.

So, if you don't mind, I'd like to uh describe the project and then I would like to then go back. I think I wrote down all of your comments I'd like to address a little bit at a time. So, as you look at this uh primary plat of this property, it's uh you're all here from Columbia City. you know, this property has been sitting vacant for well, since 1990 when Walmart went in. So, this has been a um a very strong piece to Columbia City that needs to be developed. It's, you know, there's been great u planning done on this property. And so, that's why our properties was able to um start working on this. We actually have been looking at this since last fall, uh trying to come up with a plan for this. Um, and so what has been determined, what's needed in in Columbia City is affordable housing. Um, yes, everyone would like to live in a million-doll house, $2 million house, but the thing of it is we have a bunch of young kids that can't afford housing. So, we're trying to get affordable housing. So, that's what we are using at this point in time. So, we're meeting the um your zoning ordinance lays out says that you need to have a 50 foot wide lot. So, that's what we are meeting with that ordinance. Um, and just I'm going to sidet track really quick before I get back into the rest of this. In today's market, um, it doesn't matter where you're at. It used to be 20 years ago if you were in Fort Wayne, it were just more expensive. You could come to Columbia City, you could go to a villa, you could go to Warsaw, you could go to Ligonier, whatever, and you can get a much cheaper rate. That that those times are gone just because of uh the construction costs. Everything has gone up. So right now uh a lot they're being sold by the lineal foot. So it's not the size of your lot. It's not if you're buying an acre lot or halfacre lot. It's by the lineal foot of on your road because that's what it costs to construct it. It's your u the road cost, the infrastructure cost and the sanitary, the water, the gas, the

everything else that goes into it. And that's about $1,300 a lineal foot, excuse me, in today's world. So that 50 foot lot, if you do the math on that, it comes out to $65,000. That lot is $65,000. Now, the other little ratio you come in here is it's a 4:1 ratio. So if your lot costs $65,000, you need to times that times four. That's the final cost of your house. So if you do that math, that comes out to a $260,000 house. That may be shocking because 10 years ago to me, that was a 80 foot wide or a 90 foot wide lot. that that's not the case anymore. That's that's what it's running here in northeast Indiana. So that's on the small side. We we'll say it's the small side. That's the south side. The north side at that um 58 foot that comes out to 75,000 over $75,000 which you take that times four that puts it over 300,000 here at 301. So this isn't tiny. We're not trying to slave them in. We're just trying to get houses for our kids, our neighbors, our workers, which doesn't exist.

What kind of square footage are you looking at for So these uh on that size, and I'll get into that in a little bit more detail, but that size lot that we're looking at there at the south, you could get a house that's 1,200,800 square feet, believe it or not.

So, uh, sorry, I had to throw that out there. So, that's the whole reason behind this. So, that's why we split this off. We're working on the west end of the project at this point in time. the east end, we know there's a bunch of other, you know, there's balls up in the air and we're going to come back in with primary once we know exactly what's going to go on at that point. So, with like I said, we've been working on this for about a year. Um, and since we started on this, we knew that steroid 109 issue and the 30 issue is a major player in this game. So, we have uh started in May was our first meeting with INDOT uh to do a traffic impact study. You guys may be aware of the Propel US 3031 study that's been going on which has really made this complicated for our traffic impact study. That's not even something I'm doing. It's a firm out of Indianapolis that's doing it. They are doing models for INDOT out here with everything that INDOT can think of because they're in control. U I know this is on YouTube and they can hear it later, but what INDOT wants happens. So what they want is that's what we have to do. So there are we're modeling roundabouts and lights and bypasses and yada yada yada. So there there are a bunch of things that our consultant has been working on. In fact, we have another meeting. This will be virtual with INDOT tomorrow to discuss some other issues that they have with the traffic impact study. So it's still not done and we've been working on it for almost six months. So it's it's been a long time. So, with that being said, we know there's stuff on the east end. We're working on the west end. So, we we laid it out that we have a nice connection through. We're meeting the ordinance and all aspects that we can. We won't have sidewalks on both side for nice pedestrian access. That's a huge benefit. It's um it's an amenity to be able to go out and walk with your kids. You have or just walk by yourself. So, we want to have sidewalks, pedestrian

connectivity wherever we can. Uh, I'll start with the north side, uh, the more traditional subdivision at that point in time. Um, they are smaller lots, but we're trying to get, um, more affordable housing here that people can live. It still be a pretty subdivision. There's nice ground out there with low area and, uh, the woods. So, we're trying that's what we're that we figured it would work better there to have the slightly more expensive houses on that side. Those will have 25 foot setbacks. That'll be, you know, we're doing the standard rightway. So, this will answer somebody else's question. So, Columbia City has a 60 foot rideway. And then you have to go 25 ft on the outside of that. So, that's 110 ft from rightway to rightway. And that really starts eating up uh your lots and how dense you can get on it. So most virtually every other uh jurisdiction in northeast Indiana um and I added it up here recently. I've been in 23 different plane commissions in the last 10 years. So I' I've been in a few places. They're all virtually 50 feet instead of 60. And so that 10 feet doesn't seem like much, but it does help quite a bit uh in the ability to get more houses on the ground. And once again, yes, a developer is going to make money, but the the whole thing with this is to reduce the cost of the lot. And if you have bigger lots, those lots cost more. So, yes, it it works both ways in that sense. So, with that being said, we're going to meet 25 ft back. That's enough to keep the cars out of the sidewalks. Um, that's why the zoning code has it that way, and that's what we want to do because once again, if you can't have a if you can't walk on a sidewalk, then you don't have pedestrian connectivity. So then it's a work, you know, it's it's wasted. So that one's kind of simple on the north side. The south side, um, I had the benefit to work on a project that's

on Dupont Road in Lima in Allen County that's right near the Walmart. It's called Dupont Meadows. That is an apartment style. They are all single family residences, but it's apartments. They all rent them. And that's basically what these lot sizes are. that product um the last I looked is over 90% occupancy and those are this dense and that's because people can't find other places to live and so we looked at it and said this would be awesome to be able to get it denser and have people have home ownership

because that's the only way you you know these people the kids that are coming up now they need to have home ownership to keep their wealth going so it looks great um if you guys are ever over that direction I highly recommend to go through it. They did a great job. This was a firm out of Georgia. They've done several around the states now. Uh and so we kind of took that idea uh and they they kind of use the zoning code to their benefit where the houses, you know, the uh the house may be forward but the garage is back. So that means it's like an older 50s style house, you know, where you pull up the so that the the car can still be off of the road or off of the sidewalk and you can still have community because then you can walk through the sidewalks. So we saw that product. It it looks really nice. Um I have some clients that are builders um that build here, Granite Ridge, Lancia, um MBM Property, some other ones. And we had some preliminary conversations with this. And one of the first things every single one of them said within seconds of talking without doing this denser development, you got to have two cars. You got to have a two-car garage. You got to be able to get the cars off the street. That was their first comment. So, we wanted to make sure that we took this type of house product, but we made the garage bigger. you know, we put a two-car garage on it and we made sure that they could get, you know, so the lot sizes that we have on that south section, you can get two cars off of the street out of the sidewalk and you can still make this work. So, um, that was the thought process on that south lane. Now, there uh, as Nathan brought up, and I'm sorry, I should have started off. You did a great job presenting this and giving you all the background. I I should have said that. Sorry. So, um, with that being said, we know there's going to be some changes, uh, because this is new. This is brand new. Um, but we we want to come up with a solution

that we can get houses here that people can buy. And Columbia City is positioned perfectly. You guys are in between Fort Wayne and Warsaw. And, uh, my builder clients love this area, but they can't find they can't find lots. They can't found houses houses houses for these people that need to afford that house sub 300,000. It's a unicorn in today's world. You cannot find one in Allen County. So these kids are moving out and are trying to get it. Um so you this is what we think will work perfect in this location. So um I answered the rightway the HOA. We will have an HOA on this. Oh, let me get back to this. the home. We do want to have a homeowners association here because that's one of the best ways to make sure that the houses are all built appropriately and and maintained in the future. We proposed having private streets just because that 60 foot right away causing issues with the density. Um or the 60 we if we could get a 50 foot to work that would be great. We are not scrimping on the pavement section which is where the longevity of the pavement comes from. Um is you we need to have that depth. So that's all being built to to city specs. That's the exact same thing that we did here on that project. Those it's all built to city specs. It's got curb face walk. It's all we still had proof rolls. And you know, we made sure that this was done correctly. Um because this owner didn't want to have destroyed pavement. Uh and you can't sell houses when you have alligatored pavement and it just looks like garbage. So that's what they were moving for at that point. Uh lotsiz walks. uh the exit out of the site like I said we have been working with INDOT for near six months uh to come up with an adequate way and they have they have said that we will have an access we just don't know how what it's going to look like what

fashion but we are we are working that way so um I feel like I missed a whole bunch of points and comments on this thing we still uh this is a primary plat we still have to come back through and make sure all of our plans meet city specs and it, you know, goes, this is going to go to IDM for the sanitary and the water review and we have to have wetlands delineation detention couch and goes to the surveyor's office and drainage board and so there's there's a long road ahead of us yet. Um, but this is what we think would be a great addition to the city, Columbia City. So, is there any other questions I can answer while I'm up here? When you check that water I saw here there's a lot below the ground here and we we're building a building right there by almost nine and we still got dribbles and we got you put in places where if we get the right rain hard enough it'll say no two inches or something like that they'll But what we found out there's a thing underground called the tile.

Yes. So I mean we dug them up tried to replace as much as we could. But yeah.

Yeah. We So in this particular project all of the pink or the magenta color or storm sewer that we had planned. So that would be the tile that we're all putting in. And that's that's all in the range of three to seven feet 8 feet below ground. Um, and we've already done some preliminary design because we want to make sure that the detention basins, those are the ones in blue that we have to put in because we have to meet the restrictions of the the city that those are big enough and deep enough to accept the storm water from the upstream properties and make sure that we're encountering any, you know, this has been an old farm field that who knows what people have put in. So, um, with our sanitary and our storm lines, I assume that we're going to hit quite a few of those tiles to

maintain our groundwater. Yeah. I'm assuming the uh looks like common areas or wherever there's lines running where they're not lots. Does the HOA maintain that? Is we've had a couple issues where uh we had some common areas or whatnot. Nobody's maintaining them and it got the property owners a little excited I will say. So I'm just trying to say who maintains those.

Uh in the HOAs that I've been familiar with those are in the covenants who who maintains them. They're for the benefit enjoyment of the owners of that subdivision but they're then the homeowners association will have their annual dues and part of the things that they have to do is to maintain the common areas. So they'll be start to fall back on the city and it's like now we don't mow that area but we'll take care of it. But

no we will we will ensure uh and part of the secondary process um the review process is we have to provide restrictions and covenants and those will be reviewed by staff and they'll be able to say hey you missed this or please add this into it and we'll make sure that the covenants are robust. Well, secondly, I really appreciate your explanation on a lot of the stuff I was asking about. I do appreciate that. No, I appreciate, make sure that, you know, all answers are taken care of. Any further questions? So, Chip had mentioned that I kind of jumped on board with this project. Thanks, Chip.

Thank you. Uh so I want to toss out one thing that I showed to the petitioner uh that might help you guys understand where they're coming from as well. Um because I think it kind of picked their interest in in what they could do with the project. Uh so this is uh this is a project in Longmont, Colorado uh called Prospect. Um, take a guess how wide that lot is that this house sits on. Actually, any of these houses that you can s see in that eye shot. 30 ft. [Music]

Got a 30 foot. Any other guesses? 50. Right around 46 these lots. Um, now take a guess. And this is where we deviate. Take guess what the asking price of these houses are. In Colorado, this is this is Longmont, Colorado, but 650,000. Yeah, just keep going on up. Probably about 900.

Um, and importantly, these have a neotraditional component architecture to them. Uh, but the entire project uh is no more than 25 years old. I believe it was developed in um around 2001 or so. Uh so they're all relatively new homes. They have a very strong community. They have a very strong HOA. Uh they do have a commercial component. Uh it's not Walmart, but they do have a commercial component out front here uh for local use. They also do have this vacant area which is intended for more of a regional uh development. So many uh comparables to this. The overall acreage um David you remember what I told you the overall acreage was was about about the same as this about 40 acres.

Yeah. So a lot more units in this. They also have some apartments in this as well as apartments over commercial. Uh so again, that's not what being is being proposed tonight to be clear, but this is what wetted their appetite, got their gears going, I think. Correct me if I'm wrong on that one.

Without a doubt. Um, so again, trying to fit multiple things, price point, um, density, the fact that it is Columbia City, we can't support $900,000 houses, uh, at least not this many of them. But again, so you guys know where I was coming from in giving them some uh, some ideas at least. When you go back to the original picture that you showed, are there garages? There are garages. Um, they are alley bladed. So, they have an alley behind. Yeah, that's something they don't have here anymore. So, I'll give you what these alleys look like.

And you can even see how much closer these are, but again, difference here. You can see the amount of uh rear yard is a lot lower. They do have accessory dwelling units uh on several of the garages. These don't try and just burn. They're all gonna burn. They're so close. Um, they do have

fire rated walls because they are closer to the property line. But, uh, again, like this one has four four cars, four parking spaces, two in the garage, two outside, one in the portico, plus the entire width here. So, there's potentially eight parking spaces on this. Uh, this one's probably a 45 48 foot wide lot. So, again, not what's being proposed tonight to be clear, but something to give you to get your wheels turning as well.

Any other questions? Thank you very much. At this time, I'll open up uh for public comment uh those uh who would like to come up and uh in support of the project and then we'll do folks that are uno or opposed to the project. Anyone in favor?

Sure. That is I'm Jerry Bushy. Uh 9730 South 800 East. Don't know. Um I'm a manufacturer. This is out of my league, you know. So we're trying to get something here for this community. I got involved with this cuz we need workers. We need people. We need young people in these factories every day. We're trying to hire. And I'm not the only manufacturer doing it. That's why I got behind it. Nathan brought it to us. Seemed doable. That's why we're trying to do it. And I'm game for anything you guys want. We just want to get this moving. So you tell me what you want. We'll get it done. So any any questions, Mr. Bushy? Thank you.

I'll just interject something also just to kind of give reference to what we're dealing with. The Economic Development Commission has applied for a ready 2.0 grant to help with infrastructure. As Greg can also comment, we are planning on tiffing the area. So, it'll be a tax increment fund to help, you know, ease with some of the infrastructure cost and everything like that. So, you know, the city is behind it. I I hope if it goes this way, it turns out I have a vision. Well, like I say, I made I go to different conferences and uh the number one issue with all the cities is housing and the need of it. Um and because we are unique in our with us being between Fort Wayne and Warsaw, we have a unique opportunity to uh have people that want to live here and commute back and forth or like you said, we need them to work here. So, um I I understand the need for housing um after speaking with multiple cities and I I just like to say I had some concerns um with the size of loss and how we can best take care of our citizens. That's my my big issue right now is how we take care of them after after the effect.

I agree with you. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak in favor of this uh project? Brooks Langlow 818 North Newport Run, Columbia City. Uh, one question I have in the pictures that were up earlier, there was sidewalks right on the street. Is that what's proposed in your south section?

Could could be. Uh, which one were you? The very first one. So, that one. Yeah, that one. Uh, let me actually go to the aerial. Uh, the aerial it's not built yet. So, I can't tell you for sure whether that extends that way throughout the subdivision or if it's just this entrance. It may just be this entrance.

I just didn't know if that was planned. for these because I know there's been some issues in Heritage Place with those sidewalks right up. Yes, those being public snow plows. Where's the snow go? Right on the sidewalk.

That's place. Again, I'm not really I'm not I probably fit in better talking for this than against it, but I just had some concerns that I wanted to bring up and I said I didn't want to actually sit up here and speak against it. Um, and Dan had brought up again our subdivision we just put in. We were required to put 20 foot driveways in to accommodate the parking to get two vehicles off the street. I know there's no set ordinance on width of a driveway, but to be consistent, you know, if you're talking two-car garage, you know, we had to do 20 foot. I think that's and again, part of the reason we did that and we were willing to do it, we were planning to do it anyway. Again, the reason was in Chesapeake, a lot of those are 16 foot wide and some are 18, but cars still parked staggered and then block the sidewalk. And then I get I don't know if a concern or just to point out in the comprehensive plan for the city that is set for commercial. Uh, and I don't know if Jerry's got plans how much commercial is going in the front part of it, but to just keep in mind that if you look at the comprehensive plan again, there's not much space for business to go elsewhere. So, just keep in mind that we should probably keep some of that space, you know, for business in the future because we're going to end up pushing that somewhere else. that we may not want it because again in in the comprehensive plan that's pretty much that's the biggest area plan for

future commercial anywhere in the city limits. So again, just hopefully keep that in mind on the next phases. Keep as much of that commercial as possible, small businesses, whatever. And something for you guys to think about too, future wise on that, but no, I think I like the idea. Do need affordable housing. Now what that is, it's hard to say anymore, but thanks.

Thanks. Anyone else uh wishing to speak in favor? If not, uh, we'll move on. And anyone who is opposed to this project that would like to make comment, please come up, state your name and address. Okay. So, we'll go ahead and uh close the public input at this time. Board, what uh your discussion? It takes me back to the question again, Nathan, about as Brooks had just pointed out in his recent development that the conditions that we had made for those streets in that addition and and also that 20 foot driveway situation uh in there. that that's not something we shouldn't be considering in this lower section.

I I I agree. I'm not sure what you Yes. I mean, uh, are are you suggesting that you want to take more time on refining the southern section before moving forward? Well, can this be approved with that as a condition?

I don't see why not. If you want to restate it for the record, make sure Amanda gets it. Okay. Well, I guess when we get to a motion, we can uh add that in there. I'll let my other colleagues speak on what their concerns are.

I think my concerns were addressed. Um the gentleman speaking there, I I was I learned a little bit tonight. Plus, uh, uh, understanding, you know, like I said, I just want to take care of the people after they're there. That's my number one concern at this point. Um, because, uh, and the access or entrances and, you know, the added people to the intersection there in Walmart for the eightway stop, you know, I know they're at least looking at that. I hope. Um but um that was my other concern was the additional people coming in and out of that area because it's already kind of a mess and if we can figure out some way of making it a little more convenient. Other than that, I'm I was very impressed with explanations I heard tonight.

We have a continuation till the next time we meet. That is one of your options. Let me give them some chance and give us some chance to go back over back down here.

So, I'd make a recommendation that we wait. It's a good idea. It's nice. But there are some minor questions that we have written down that we can talk and come back in our next meeting and sit down. You know what we're looking at or what we think areas need to be looked at and just brought a little closer to. I think everybody would uh go ahead and make a see ahead.

I second Don's recommendation. Don, was that a motion? Was a motion. So motion to I don't want to say table, do I? Continue to continue uh to the next meeting. um approval or I guess address the concerns uh that we have tonight.

I also would like to just say that I appreciate this plan being brought forward into Windley County. There's a lot of individuals that are having issues with getting employees, especially those younger employees, and finding housing and for them to be close to where they work. Um, so they can work, play, and live in their community. Um, so I do appreciate this being done. This property has been vacant for a very long time and I just I just hope that this doesn't everyone votes to continue this that this doesn't discourage you. Nathan, a question. Isn't there a I don't want to say an I guess maybe an executive committee or something that looks at things like this and then comes back with recommendations. Um what you're thinking of is probably the technical review committee uh which uh is what looks at the uh development plans. So it's development plans are what actually gets built and then you look at it at secondary plat before it gets recorded. Uh, I'm not sure whether that's necessarily the uh if the same people are necessarily um going to be the same ones interested uh as this. But yeah, we could use those people or we could create an ad hoc committee specifically for working with petitioner to address some of these concerns over the next month. That was actually going to be my suggestion. Take some volunteers. Okay. So, we have a motion and a second on the floor to continue this uh subdivision proposal to the next meeting. Is there

any further discussion? Did you want to add this committee review or committee recommendation or negotiation? Um I I would suggest take the vote and then if it is continued we'll if you're agreeable we'll take volunteers to that ad hoc committee. Okay. What's what's the list of concerns I guess? So we're tableing it because we got concerns. What are the concerns? I think it was the driveway width, driveway length,

private streets, but we can make that as a the driveway width should be made as a uh yeah, we can make that as part of the part of the uh we can make that part recommendations the recommendations so we can get this thing going. I think we're kicking the can down the road just thinking about it for another month. you know, kind of what I was looking at cuz I think we could get They're not going to build on them. They have to come back to us to build to decide the, you know, driveway width and everything. And that's why I said if we can get it going now, um I don't know what extended time period is going to offer us. Um, so I would

that's amend what they usually amend the driveway if that's concern to add. Yeah. I think we've uh also put into that the size of everything, size of the rock, size of thing that they were talking about. And uh I think if you people want to think about that more but it should be gone over and made sure that hey this is

the only side of some of the lots put okay so that motion yeah I'm assuming we have to address that motion before we do anything well you discussion is fine regarding whether or not to continue it but you initial, you do have to take a vote, right? Yes. So, any further discussion on Don's uh motion? Okay. Hearing none. Those in favor of Don's uh motion, raise your right hand.

Those opposed, raise same sign. So it was uh two four and seven against. Okay. All right. So what are our concerns that we would like to have addressed? The driveway with one um

narrowness of streets and the being private streets. the the streets don't meet the criteria. It's a matter of them being private and the limitations of the rightway in the south section. Right. I think it was the construction industry that was being private. It doesn't have to meet. But he stated that they would need they be built for they would be built at at the city.

I think the private was supposed to be built like city specs, aren't they? That's uh the proposed condition number four. It clearly states that even private streets would be built to the subdivision specification. I think it was just the rightway width. Yeah. 60 to 50 larger back. So it's just the rightway. It was just the rightway. The payment went stayed the same. Yes. Yes, the right way was and next month if they want to go to 50 foot rideways, we can do a waiver for them, you know, and and go that way. Yeah. Or not

or not. The other qu the other concerns I have is something that was pointed out was this sidewalk budding with the curb and we've uh we've had our other developers have that separation between the curb and the sidewalk area and I think we need to maintain that type of scenario. I know uh we we had uh individual concern about how snow removal is going to be but at the same time I think we need to maintain that integrity of separation

which is a fiveT curve curve the sidewalk. Well the side the sidewalk itself is 5T right? You have a five foot from the back curve to the front edge of the sidewalk. Then you have another It wasn't very not very wide there. Uh the city street spec already calls out uh a planning strip there uh which is a variable width per the city specification. You're right. Typically it's five feet based upon the width of the pavement and the rightway width. But it even now that width does vary. So, I would unless you really feel like you want to nail something down, I would say fall back on what the current city spec is and allow it to be variable.

Placement of mailboxes. Um, I don't know. Um, if you don't have that space there, it's going to be a heck of a thing to put a mailbox in a sidewalk. Well, who says they might not have a one of them consolidated stations? Everybody just comes to one point to get their mail. They could do that, but I I know we dealt with side mailbox locations with post office. I know I dealt with that. That gets a little crazy. Anything else we want to put in here? Jen, did you have something earlier?

Uh, it was just the exiting going to 109 and what a mess that might be. I think that option possibly won't be discerned until probably later once the we have a chance later. Yeah. Indot study and no indust.

Yeah. All right. I'll make a motion for 25 C- SUVD-3 Swart Properties with staff conditions and the conditions stated by the plane commission. Second.

Motion by Chip, second by Nikki. Any further discussion? Could we go ahead and just clarify the conditions that the plan commission is concerned about for Amanda and for me and for Yes. for the record. Um street street to city specs with the tree gone and everything. Uh sidewalks sidewalks where they're at. Where they're at in reference to the tree line. Okay. any anything else that we're

and the initial considerations that were made by staff. Yes. And he said that. All right. Okay. I didn't hear. I'm sorry. Anything else? You have not. Those in favor of the motion, raise your right hand. Those post. Okay. We're good. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. Next item is 25- C-dev-alene instant oil change development plan review automotive service center 309 west drive. Nathan,

thank you. Uh we're just living it up on uh the Town and Country plaza area here. So, uh this is a development plan for 309 West Plaza Drives and DB General Business. It's just under a acre in total area comprised of lot F of the replat of lot five of town of Town Country Plaza uh aka the former Bob Evans restaurant. Uh what is being proposed is a new commercial building and parking. Uh more specifically approximately 2600 square foot one-story building with a basement uh quick oil change and auto repair more oil change but they do offer some repair services. Uh what is currently proposed is a structure that has two service bays. There is some room on the west side of the structure that additional bays could be added. You'll see that on the plan. Currently, there would be nine parking spaces, including one ADA successful, which meets the requirements for ADA uh and five stacking spaces per bay, which meets the requirement for uh stacking spaces of our parking code. Additionally, landscaping would be included. Uh there are other aspects uh that are in the set of plans that you receive. Uh but those were major components. So for everyone's reference, uh this is highlighted in blue is the subject site. Um

PS30 across the south part line street 109 Plaza Drive along the north side, frontage road going off to the east. Closer view. This is the site plan uh component of the development plan package. Uh you'll note that there is an existing uh access drive that goes along all of the different properties of lot five of County Country Plaza. So this is the eastern most in ties in there and then comes down into the parking area. This is the area that would be the five stacking spaces for the two bays. You can see that potentially if they desire they do have room for at least one additional space to the west uh bay to the west if not possibly two and again uh the additional stacking spaces if we uh follow the current parking code could still be accommodated. Uh the number of stacking spaces as we may look at parking code in future may be reduced uh for n uh services like this. Uh sometimes five spaces makes a lot of sense, sometimes it doesn't. Uh so this may be further evaluated. Uh dumpster enclosure located immediately north of the building located right here. This is the building. I forgot to point that out. Uh and then the employee parking primarily is located up here. The ADA space is located on the accessible route to the building itself. overlaid over the aerial that's hopefully fairly clear. Uh you can see where the Bob Evans restaurant used to be located right here. I believe virtually all of the hardcape is to be removed. However, the

landscaping uh a large portion of the landscaping that's on the site will be retained. Uh these are the south and east building ovations. The north and west are very similar. Uh ephus and uh thin brick masonry are the two primary components as well as glass for the doors. Floor plans. The lower level is on the upper view. The main level is on the lower view. Uh so you have oil storage, break I believe break room, uh overall workspace, the two service bays, office space, waiting area for those uh services that may take some time. Uh and then landscape plan. Landscape plan is pretty extensive for a site this size. I will say it does go above uh what we normally see. Uh the number of trees is pretty much spot on to the minimum uh required in terms of street trees, but the amount of uh shrubs and other landscaping. They do have a variety of perennials included uh is is beyond what we normally see. Does point out one question I do have for the petitioner to to clarify. The landscape plan shows a sign location here, which is the current Bob Evans sign location. However, the site plan shows a location over here. So, that would need to be refined. Uh, one one needs to be changed or the other or maybe there's a third location that they'll use, but in any case, signs do need to still meet the sign code uh if a new one is proposed.

Uh, let me jump back to the site plane real quick. Um you'll note that there is a sidewalk that is shown. Zoom in here. Sidewalk uh along Plaza Drive there. It winds up ending uh as it does currently uh just above where that S66 tag is. I unfortunately can't have the pointer when I'm zoomed in, but uh it's right there uh towards the east end of the site. Uh so right here is where the current sidewalk ends. And that's where the current uh site plan leaves it as well. There's no additional sidewalk proposed whatsoever. I'm going to suggest that the commission as part of this development plan require that this sidewalk at least be brought out to a ramp uh at the pavement. So at least it terminates in some sort of fashion that uh makes sense at the intersection. Uh if we were applying the overall standard of requiring front uh sidewalks on all front edges, all accessible front edges anyway, uh that would include coming down uh 109 and on out, you know, with US30 happening in 12 to 15 yearsish possibly. Um, this intersection will get redone. Uh, and US30 will get redone. So, the part that parallels road 109 Main Street, I have a hard time recommending to you guys. However, I also do see the argument that it's still 15 years of longevity on a on a sidewalk. So,

it it's kind of amazing the number of people that cross walking. That is another component of this. So when I get to the conditions, my my recommendation is to at minimum get the existing sidewalk out to the intersection to a ramp. You guys can talk amongst yourselves whether more is is uh warranted. Uh but again, as we've talked about before in other projects, we want to start pushing for sidewalks as much as possible and and while they may not lead to anywhere temporarily, eventually they will and start filling in gaps. Um let's see. So mentioned the landscaping your review criteria are there on the screen. uh staff's opinion is that uh everything is met with some conditions, relatively poor conditions. Uh number one, uh just a general statement that it would be approved as presented with any of these conditions. Number two, the standard address any outstanding commitments uh comments, excuse me. Uh number three, uh exterior lighting would be directed and/or shielded to prevent glare on the public rights way. This is all a commercial area. We don't have residential uh in the immediate area. So, uh the the main thing is is preventing glare. The phototric plan does show a few areas uh along the property line that exceed 1/2 foot candle, which is basically a good norm for residential property. But again, that's not a big deal. If you're putting more light onto a street in a commercial area, generally that's pretty okay. It's additional street lighting. Uh so the big thing though is making sure that we

don't have glare onto the adjacent streets. Uh number four I did not mention either. I'll go back to the site plan real quick as well. Uh north of the dumpster enclosure is a very large amount of pavement uh which at some point in the future if they do add that extra bay might be used for additional parking but it is extraneous pavement at the moment. uh basically accessing that dumpster enclosure, which could be done from either side if the enclosure was angled 45°. Uh so I hate to be nitpicky, but it just doesn't feel quite right to have that much pavement. Uh unless there's a a good cause, and I could not figure out what that would be. So that's why I'm suggesting uh that potentially that additional pavement be uh taken out with this plan or something else figured out uh to do with that area. Uh and then number five already mentioned uh discuss the additional sidewalk. So any questions for me? I have a very simple question. Uh and hopefully the petitioner, you know, we can consider something in this landscape plan. like you said was rather extensive and they're showing these trees along that east line of the black top and the other u the 10-ft bed in that and I was wondering the area that's east of that if it would be just as easy for them to

put those trees out in that grass area versus having along that edge that they could, you know, possibly have hampering at some point. Let's say a delivery truck or something, you know, three or five years down the road with branches and stuff. Just I mean, and still obtain the same effect. The problem I think would be if you put them out east of there, they're going to become larger and probably detract from the view of the intersection up there as you're looking as you're looking south at the at the road and still going on. You don't want to block the sight line.

Well, that's what I was going to bring up. if we put a sidewalk in there or ask them to put a sidewalk in. And mainly my opinion is we almost need to put a sidewalk in there because of all the people that are walking across 30 right now. At least they'd be able to get off that road and get onto a sidewalk instead of being walking along that intersection, which is crazy enough without adding bodies out there. Um I think we need to look at seriously putting a sidewalk along street there. Okay. that intersection, which again would possibly move those trees um one way or the other depending on how you how you look at it. I guess

if the sidewalk does come into existence, it you're you're actually saying it would be on his property and not on the state's rightway. Yeah. Oh, wait. We couldn't put it on the state right away. We'd have to put it Can we put it on the state? Okay. Well, then that's fine. I wasn't sure we had to get special permission to do that, but I just think we need to have a sideway sideways sidewalk along there just because I've witnessed a lot of people personally trying to get across there. And not just that, but it's being consistent with what we have been trying to go forward with.

Exactly. Uh, so it may help here. Um, bring up the Well, this is dated from 2019. Let me see if I can I know Google's This is 2023. So, this is the street view uh for reference. You can see the existing sidewalk, how it ends on Plaza Drive. You can see uh the lack thereof here. As proposed, the edge of pavement of the Valvvelene parking lot would actually be farther back than the existing Bob Evans parking. So, there would be a bit more green space in there. You do have a swale uh drainage ditch here that would help uh that would dictate where that sidewalk could go. probably more likely on devel's property than in the rightway because of that. Um

I mean it's unfortunate we're asking Valene to do it but we wasn't here and we didn't have the switch situation when Bob Evans was in other ways. We told Bob Evans to do the same thing I think you know but times have changed and when things come up like this we write what we didn't do right the first time. Yeah. Yeah. and the right of way, you do have quite a few road signs right here. So, almost definitely it would have to be uh closer to the either on their property or really close to the right. If that's the case, I guess the tree line stay where it's designed as long as the sidewalk is put in.

Okay. Let me know if you need that. Okay, sir. I just got a question. Sounds sales development plan review automobile service center. Service center gets awful big and all stuff laying around and whatever. It's an oil change place, right? Oil change. It's an oil change place. Y like a five minute oil change place. Well, you better find that up some way or something. He's going to tell you when he gets up here.

You are. Next question. Who Who maintains the entrance off of Plaza Drive? Okay. That is a nightmare. I walked got into Kentucky Fried Chicken. There heard like four huge potholes to get in there and it's always been that way. like who maintains that? I mean, I know that's not part of Ali's property, but that's a disaster trying to get in and out of there. So, who maintains that?

It is the obligation of the property owners in uh that lot five, so A through F. Uh there is an easement that was part of the overall replant that specifies and there's shares of maintenance that are allocated per lot. So it is the obligation of those individual land owners. Okay. I was going to say how do we get somebody to enforce that? I believe the mayor is already looking into that and sending a I I I'll say sending a letter. I'm not sure exactly what, but something along that sort.

Okay. Well, there was additional traffic coming in and out of there. Obviously, I mean, we had a lot of traffic with Bob Evans, but it's just that's a that's a heck of a thing to try to dodge around myself.

Okay. Yeah. Any any questions for Nathan? Okay. All right. Mr. Valvaline.

Well, good evening ladies and gentlemen. Um, I'm Mike Mahalik. I am um a project manager with CESO and we are working on behalf of Valvaline. Um, we we do the civil drawings, the architectural drawings, and the permitting for this project. So, we uh kind of got everything going on here, but um Nathan, Amanda, thank you guys so much for your help getting this all put together really thorough. um detailed overview there. I don't have a lot to add. Um we're excited to work with you guys to hopefully get this project moving forward. Um I know there's a couple concerns here that I'm definitely prepared to address. Um we also have I believe if they're still here um a couple representatives from Babbling on um virtually as well, a couple project managers for this this project as well. Um, so I can dive right into some of the items that were brought forth during discussion and then happy to talk those through and then answer any questions um you guys may still have. So I think regarding um Nathan first off the uh sidewalk extension along plaza I don't think that would be an issue to do at all. We kind of discussed that a little bit with val and that I think that's only 15 maybe 20 foot um building extension there bringing that to the to the intersection of Lion Street and Plaza along with the ADA ramp. I I certainly think that is something we we could definitely do. Um sidewalk along Line Street now that just looking kind of what we have in front of us. Are we looking to to have that on Valin's property or starting to get a little bit more clarity as far as expectations there? Because I know there's an existing swale which I assume is in INDOT's right of way.

Right. Um which I would then think we need to be inside of that. Um so kind of just looking forward to that would I guess would the intention be running that along Valin or within Valin's property line? My my suggestion is uh if you do want to make that condition, leave it open-ended. Okay. As and make the goal be that there be a sidewalk that parallels okay line street exact location could be determined. Okay.

Okay. Um yeah and and um the valin representation we have on the call here. I don't know if you guys can hear me, but would that be something val's willing to do Robin or Julie or John? um with that sidewalk along Lion Street. Yes, this is Robin Pack with and yes, we would be willing to do that. Perfect. Thank you, Robin. I was afraid no one was going to answer me. I was going to have a question for you and I don't know if you can answer this is you mentioned Mike and treat this. So, um we would have to find that out as well.

Absolutely. Yeah. And I'm in discussions right now. We're actually in for our drainage permit um with INDOT and they're reviewing it currently because we are tying into that existing uh storm pipe that they have that ultimately outlets into their drainage along US30. So we're more than happy to touch base with them, see what might be required there. Now, if it's something that they say, hey, you know, if you're you're on your property, we don't need to be involved and we have the room to do it. That seems like the most feasible option. But I think that's something that on our side we'll look into but ultimately bring forth some sort of proposed sidewalk along road. So um so I think that address

go ahead Julie. I have a followup question that um along 30 there's it's very weed. It looks like there's some great challenges there. Where exactly would that sidewalk terminate? Good question. Wouldn't it match up with the ex uh sidewalk extension? So that way it can you can go right from one to another one. No, she's talking about where it ends at 13. There's a guardrail there. Oh, okay. That's a great question.

Um, someone said that we actually already have people walking over here. Uh, and I don't remember who mentioned it to me earlier in the day. Oftentimes you'll take a sidewalk where the cow path is. So that might dictate it might wind up at the edge of pavement at that guard rail, which is not ideal. But again, putting the sidewalk where people are may be the the best solution if we can't figure out a different one. that works.

So, so when they cross, they they walk right along that guard rail. Yeah. Yeah. They go out straight to the grass

with his sidewalk at that location. That just seems so dangerous. If you put a sidewalk there, I know there's people walking there already, but

by putting a sidewalk there, are you encouraging more pedestrian traffic? And and is crossing those m that major intersection is that illegal? Well, the people that use that usually are work release people that u basically live in a old older hotel or whatnot. I don't it's not a common people. I I don't know how you say that nicely. Um it's it's mainly people that don't have a driver's license uh that work on work release that seem to be the ones walking across there. I agree with you that it's d well it's dangerous now.

I don't think it's unlawful. I don't think it's unlawful. Sure. But it's it's not ideal. I've seen the wheelchairs. Yeah. I Yeah. I think ultimately we're I guess we're trying to figure out too where to Robin's point where that sidewalk would ultimately meet the road. It would have to be where the guard rail ends. Okay. Okay. Oh, yeah. Ideally, that would be the case. Build a build a sidewalk bridge over the top of Turkey.

They could do that when they're building the overpass. Yeah. We wouldn't suggest it, but we'd love it if you would. And that may be too where where since that is within that that INDOT right away, they may perhaps dictate how that is installed. So, um, like I said, I'm happy to follow up with INDOT to see what options might be available for that.

Um, obviously running it within our property, we we can do that. We can look at how to best design that. But to your all point, if if we need to bring it to that guard rail, we are then in INDOT right ofway. Therefore, we would need to see what their thoughts would be on that. Um because they may make us do something entirely different or say that's a safety concern. I I'm not sure what they would say, but that's something that might be part of their new whatever they're going to do with the intersection improvements there. Exactly. Exactly.

Is there a sidewalk on the other side of the street for our business? No, there is not. It's an open and there's not on the south side either. Yeah, the Oh, on the east side um that is all that green area. Let me bring that up so you can see it. All that grass area is right of way for uh inter intersection improvement interchange. Um, so everything from Line Street over to Three Rivers is uh State Rightway. Honestly, you don't see people walking over there.

Walk along. Yeah, we walk along by Yeah, most most of the pedestrian traffic, I'm sure, is along the west side as Dan mentioned given where they're coming to and from.

And then they disperse. uh you have sidewalks starting uh right here and on down. So basically on the south side where the endot rideway stops is where the intersection rightway stops you have sidewalk starting I mean, we are happy to reach out to INDOT and see what their thoughts might be on that bringing that as close as possible to where these pedestrians are crossing and and kind of communicate that to to the city and work with you, Nathan, and see what our options might be.

Uh Chip and I would probably be tag teaming on this one. Okay. Right, Chip? Yes. Okay.

Thank you, Chip. All right. Um, and then kind of moving ahead to the pavement. Uh, Nathan, you had mentioned some additional pavement there north of the dumpster and our thought process is there. Um, we go as you pull that up. Thank you. So, um, Valing typically what they've seen with a lot of their past sites and they they kind of develop this prototypical um distance for, you know, the trash truck to enter, pick up the trash, back up safely, exit the site is about, I think it's 50 feet, if I don't have that, if I'm not mistaken on that. Thank you, Rob.

50 feet. And then for parking, the drive aisles typically you'll see there's 24 feet right behind those parking spaces. That allows ample room for those folks to back out of those parking spaces. So with that, you got about 90 ft there from the front of the dumpster to those spaces and you factor in that 50 ft and the 24, you're left with about 15 ft of potential extra pavement. Um, I do definitely understand what you're talking about as far as circulate possible confusion with circulation. Um, I think one item here that might might help with this is potentially striping in front of that dumpster, um, 50 ft, whatever it might be, to delineate that area separate from the rest. Um, because I think having some sort of floating island or eliminating that that smaller portion of pavement may lead to more issues. Um, so that's kind of our thought process here. I I just think getting rid of that may lead to more issues with circulation if that makes sense. I just wanted to clearly state kind of like what the defined and I know we can go a little bit smaller than prototypical minimums, but that seems to work really well with what's brought forth as far as the 50 ft for the dumpster and the 24 ft for backing out of those parking spaces.

I I brought it up because it just didn't seem quite right. Yeah. So, no, I understand yours to talk about.

No, I I I completely agree and I I see what you're looking at there and I had to break it down this morning actually to look what are these prototypical minimums and when I add it up I'm going well there's about 15 feet there and how do we address that and would it lead to more issues and I ultimately think it probably would especially if you look at potential queuing getting folks out and having to maneuver that turn and then up and out of the site. Um, again, along with the trash the trash truck as well, getting into that dumpster and safely being able to back out and exit the site as well. Um, so that's that's kind of what we're looking at there. Um, don't know if any any of you guys have any thoughts on that. Any questions? And I think going back to it sounded like the landscaping was we kind of arrived at a a solution there, but I think that'll probably be based off of where the sidewalk is laid out along Line Street. And I think we're happy to maneuver those trees on our property as needed. I don't there's not a specific, you know, they must stay with where they're shown right now. They could shift if needed, but again, if that sidewalk's going to be impacted by them, you my recommendation would be to keep them where they are shown. So, we're happy to revise that plan um with that sidewalk with that potential sidewalk. Um but yeah, willing to work with you guys on that as well. So,

so we're staying with the way the black the asphalt originally is, right? I I would say that's that's what's submitted. Stick to that unless it needs to change for another reason. All right. Oh, and I'm sorry, I forgot one more. This sign, this is our mistake and I apologize, is correct on all of the plans except the landscape plan. So, the sign will be located out of that existing easement where it's currently shown on the site plan. So, right there. Yes. So just to address that discrepancy adjusting our

you won't be obstructed by the chicken house sign in any way with I'm sorry with the what? You won't be obstructed by the KFC sign in any way. You'll be all right. I don't think so. Where's the KFC sign at? Well, it's on the next lot right beside you. Gotcha. I think we'll be okay. Oh yeah. There you go. Any other questions for Mike?

Well, thank you all for your time. I mean, I appreciate it. Happy to answer any more you might have. And uh we are in for our INDOT uh drainage permit like I mentioned, as well as IDHS, our state design release, which is coming along as well. So, we're we're making some progress and looking forward to continuing to work with you guys. Appreciate your time. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, at this time we'll open up a public comment. Um, you're in favor of the project or against the project, come to the podium.

Phil Hodgeges, uh, 157 North Lexican Drive, Columbia City. I think it's being a little bit shortsighted in requiring someone to put a sidewalk into nowhere. I know that that's something that you guys uh are pushing towards. It makes sense as a whole in general, but there's been other exceptions where you guys have said, "Hey, this doesn't make sense. This doesn't make sense to put a sidewalk into nowhere." That property that the sidewalk would be on doesn't even belong to them. If you look at um GIS, I think that property's state right away where they would have to put that sidewall. I think you're promoting a more dangerous situation than what you have there now. So, just sitting here and listen to the conversation. I think this is another one of these instances where um we all have all heard that if or when 30 does get changed, it's going to be an underpass or an overpass there. So there's not going to be an intersection. Be real easy to put sidewalks in at that point during that construction project. Um just doesn't make a lot of sense to put a sidewalk in that goes nowhere. I'm in favor of the project. I think it'd be great for your community.

Absolutely. Thanks, D. Anyone else?

At this time, we'll close the public comment section. I might offer one other uh going off of that. Um rather than actually constructing a sidewalk now for the reasons we've talked about potentially just having a sidewalk easement on the property so that it's very clear that there is intended to be a sidewalk at some point in the future even though it's not constructed right now. NDOT is if we have an easement there hopefully in terms of whatever the design for the overpass will be it gets incorporated even though it's not constructed there is an easement there uh for one in the future. So that might be kind of a a moderate compromise option as well.

I like that. That's a good idea. I could ask one question. Would that be I assume would then be on Val's property? I'm assuming I would take that one. Okay. I just want to clarify. I appreciate and then when they do their construction maybe they would put the side. I was thinking you guys I appreciate.

Yeah. Because after looking at the topography of that with that guardrail all the way up there and get so to speak I don't know how you'd pull one how you pull one in there honestly um after I thought maybe a sidewalk would be highly advisable for people walking through there but that guard rail goes up so far and then there's that the ditch that you've got to figure out how you're going to get across um that also I don't I don't know how you engineer that. It'd be interesting to see how that would work. Um I know we've just got to get people off of there as quick as possible because just people don't have much of a conscience driving through there sometimes, but um

I I don't know what the I don't know what the solution is quite honestly. I I like sidewalks, but how do you how do you do that at that location? I thought it was a little flatter than that, but uh so that's just my two cents. So for now, the sidewalk that runs would just extend out with an ADA ramp at the intersection. Okay. and a plotted sidewalk easement along the

right right east side of the building right away. Right away, sir.

Okay. Any other discussion?

Ready for a motion. Make a motion to accept with staff's recommendations. Second. Okay. Any further discussion? Uh would that include the provision of a sidewalk? Yes. Yes. In addition to number five. Yes. Those in favor of the motion, raise your right hand. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carried. Thank you very much. Welcome to the community. Thank you. Uh other business, Nathan,

I do have real quick the 2026 meeting calendar dates uh for your consideration. Um if you want to formally approve them, you can. or by consensus or if you want to digest them and look at your calendars for and bring it back for next month. Uh the only non-standard first Monday date would be September 14th as typical because we're avoiding Labor Day. Um all the others are first Mondays. And then fifth Monday training dates for everyone's reference. Uh March 30th in 2026 is spring break for all three school districts.

Uh so we are cancelling that one. You just have June 29th, August 31st, and November 30th. So like last week, there wasn't very many there anyway, unfortunately. [Music] Pat Pat gave me a couple suggestions before the meeting. We'll uh uh see if we can add that to next year's docket. Okay, that's what I had.

I we [Music] [Music]